• Military Menu                       

• Introduction
• Systems
• Facilities
• Agencies
• Industry
• Operations
• Countries
• Hot Documents
• News
• Reports
• Policy
• Budget
• Congress
• Links

• WMD
• Intelligence
• Homeland Security
• Space

Transcript: Powell Says U.S. Interested in Comprehensive Mideast Settlement

(On NBC, secretary discusses Syria, Iraq, Iran, North Korea, Cuba)
(5590)
Given the new situation in the Middle East, Secretary of State Colin
Powell said on NBC's Face the Nation May 4, the United States will be
looking for action by Syria on a number of issues, and is interested
in a comprehensive Middle East settlement that takes into account the
interests of Syria and Lebanon, as well as those of Israel and the
Palestinians.
Powell appeared on the program shortly after returning to Washington
from talks in Damascus and Beirut.
Powell said the United States will be looking at Syrian actions to
shut down operations of organizations that support terrorism, to end
transshipment of weapons , to end any development of weapons of mass
destruction, and to avoid harboring persons from the Saddam Hussein
regime in Iraq. Failure in these areas "will tell us that he [Syrian
President Bashar Assad] is not yet ready to move into a more promising
future relationship with the United States," Powell said.
The secretary also discussed the recently released roadmap to Middle
East peace, the search for Iraqi weapons of mass destruction, Iran,
North Korea and Cuba.
Following is a State Department transcript of the interview:
(begin transcript)
Interview on NBC's Meet the Press With Tim Russert
Secretary Colin L. Powell
Washington, DC
May 4, 2003
MR. RUSSERT: First, he arrived home from Syria late last night, but he
is here this morning to talk to the nation about his trip. The
Secretary of State Colin Powell. Welcome.
SECRETARY POWELL: Thank you, Tim. Good morning.
QUESTION: Syria. There are reports on the wires that you sat down with
the leader of Syria and said to him he had to close down the offices
of terrorist organizations in Damascus, Syria. This morning, Mr.
Secretary, on the wires, the head of Hamas says, "We have not been
informed of any such thing. Our office is to remain open."
SECRETARY POWELL: It's very clear that there's a new strategic
situation in the region, and this is what I said to President Bashar
Assad. With the end of the regime in Baghdad of Saddam Hussein, and
with a new government that's going to be rising in Iraq that will be
looking for better relations with its neighbors, Syria has to realize
that things have changed there. Things are also going to change with
respect to the Palestinian Authority, with the new Prime Minister and
a roadmap put down.
And my clear message to President Bashar Assad is that some of the
policies you've been following in the past will not take you anywhere
in the future. Support of terrorist activities, the presence in
Damascus of organizations that continue to cause terrorist activity to
take place which makes it hard to move forward on the Middle East
peace process, these things have to come to the end. The offices have
to be closed. He said he was closing offices. He also indicated that
he would constrain their activities, and we had some other suggestions
for him.
But it is not what he says or what he said to me or what he professes;
it's what he actually does. So it's performance that we'll be looking
at in the days and weeks and months ahead, and he knows that.
Performance not only with respect to these kinds of organizations, but
in any way allowing Syria to be a place where weapons can be
transshipped to other organizations, such as Hezbollah, that cause
destabilizing actions -- let me put it as mildly as that -- to take
place in the occupied territories or elsewhere or threaten Israel. Any
continued development of weapons of mass destruction or in any way
harboring individuals who are still trying to get out of Iraq of the
Saddam Hussein regime, or any of that kind of activity, will tell us
that he is not yet ready to move into a more promising future
relationship with the United States.
At the same time, I went there to listen to him. And he, of course, is
interested in making sure that any progress in the Middle East peace
process includes the interests of Syria and their interests in the
Golan, and also the interest of the Lebanese Government as well. And
so we had a good, candid exchange of views, and there are no illusions
in his mind as to what we are looking for from Syria.
I also made it well known to him, or made it known to him, which was
already well known to him, that Congress is following this closely;
Members of Congress are interested in a Syrian Accountability Act,
which will hurt them if such an act passed in the absence of
performance on their part, and also, the Patriot Act has some
consequences for them if they don't shut down certain financial
transactional activities that might be taking place in their country.
And so there was, as we put it in diplomatic terms, a candid exchange
of views. But it is not promises that we are interested in, or
assurances; it is action. And we will see what happens in the days and
weeks and months ahead.
MR. RUSSERT: But you have no doubt as we speak this morning that Syria
is harboring terrorists and weapons of mass destruction?
SECRETARY POWELL: I can't say that they are harboring weapons of mass
destruction. We have made it clear to them that this would be not in
their interest. They say they are not. We will continue to look at our
intelligence holdings and any other information that comes into our
possession that we think would be useful to resolve this question.
With respect to individuals from the former Hussein regime who might
be there, some have come back across, shall we say, into the hands of
the coalition to receive justice from the Iraqi people. And we have
made it clear to the Syrians that as we learn of individuals who might
be in Syria of this type, we would pass that information to them and
expect them to be turned over. And, if the Syrians find individuals
who might have an association with the regime or might have a
scientific background which would help us in the search for weapons of
mass destruction, we would expect Syria to turn it over as part of the
new positive relationship with the United States.
MR. RUSSERT: The President says any country that is harboring
terrorists will be "confronted." That's his word. If, months from now,
Hamas, Hezbollah, still have offices in Damascus, how will we
"confront" Syria?
SECRETARY POWELL: There are many ways to confront a nation. You can do
it diplomatically, you can do it economically, you can do it
militarily, you can do it politically, you can isolate them. There are
sanctions. There are many ways to confront a nation and the President
has all of his options on the table. And the reason he sent me to
Syria was to convey to President Bashar Assad that the United States
hopes that in this new environment where we are looking for peace in
the Middle East, not further incitements to violence, and when we're
trying to empower and help the new Prime Minister of the Palestinian
Authority, Abu Mazen, this is the time for Syria to review its
policies and to end those policies that do not contribute to the peace
process in that part of the world.
And also, Syria had considerable commercial activity with Iraq. It's
been shut off now. The oil has been shut off, the oil they were
receiving on a concessional free basis. The other trade that was going
back and forth across the border. That's been shut off for now. If
they seal that border so that nothing is going into Iraq that would be
destabilizing or people finding haven out of Iraq in Syria, if they
keep that border sealed and if they operate in a positive way with
respect to what the coalition is doing in Iraq and with respect to the
creation of a new democratic government in Iraq, then that tells us
one thing about Syria's decision to move forward: that they're looking
for a better relationship with the United States. If they do not, then
there will be consequences.
MR. RUSSERT: As you well know, being Secretary of State means that
you'll be criticized from a lot of different quarters. Here at home,
the former Speaker of the House of Representatives, Newt Gingrich,
questioned whether you should even go to Syria. Let's watch and get
your reaction:
"The concept of the American Secretary of State going to Damascus to
meet with a terrorist-supporting secret police-wielding dictator is
ludicrous. The United States military has created an opportunity to
apply genuine economic diplomatic and political pressure on Syria."
Ludicrous.
SECRETARY POWELL: Well, he is accusing the President of a ludicrous
act. He is accusing not only the President, me and my other colleagues
in the administration, who discussed this subject fully, and we all
agreed, as a team, that it was in the interests of the United States
as we moved forward in this new strategic environment to have a
straight, candid conversation with the President of Syria. That's what
I did for three hours, and I did it with the blessings of my
colleagues in government, and, of course, with the specific blessing
from the President of the United States, and I did it with his
instructions.
So Mr. Gingrich was taking a broad swipe and a shot at the policies of
the President of the United States. He was allegedly doing it because
he had some dissatisfaction with the way the State Department runs,
but he missed the State Department and hit the President.
MR. RUSSERT: He went on to say the State Department was ineffective,
incoherent. Your top Deputy --
SECRETARY POWELL: First of all, that's -- go ahead, Tim.
MR. RUSSERT: Your top Deputy, Richard Armitage, had this to say: "It's
clear that Mr. Gingrich is off his meds and out of therapy."
SECRETARY POWELL: Well, that's your wimpy, pinstriped State Department
responding. The fact of the matter is that if Mr. Gingrich has
constructive comments that he wishes to provide us that would help us
reform the Department, we'd be delighted to receive them. I received
five reports when I became Secretary of State of changes that ought to
be made within the State Department. We're doing all of that.
But this was a blunderbuss attack that was an attack against the
President's policies and against me, and he used as his training aid
the wonderful men and women of the Department of State who work hard
on the front line of offense throughout the world, putting themselves
at risk, putting their families at risk, going in harm's way, being
the subject of terrorist attacks, who are doing everything they can to
support the people of the United States.
If Mr. Gingrich wishes to participate in a constructive debate as to
how they can do their job better or how we can reform the Department
in a better way, I'd be more than delighted to listen to him. We are
transforming. We've been transforming this Department for two-plus
years -- not talking about it, doing it. If he wishes to participate
in that process, fine. If he wishes to attack the President, he ought
to do it directly.
MR. RUSSERT: "Off his meds and out of therapy." Did you authorize that
statement?
SECRETARY POWELL: I knew that Mr. Armitage had said it and was going
to say it.
MR. RUSSERT: You approve of it?
SECRETARY POWELL: I think it was a pretty fair counterpunch.
MR. RUSSERT: As you know, Speaker Gingrich is on the Defense Policy
Board. He's an advisor to Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld. Do you
believe that Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld should repudiate Mr.
Gingrich?
SECRETARY POWELL: I leave that to Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld to
make his own choices in that. Mr. Gingrich is on the Defense Policy
Board, but he is also a private citizen able to make any statements he
wishes to make or chooses to make. And I don't think he was making the
statement representing the Defense Policy Board or Don Rumsfeld or
anybody else but Newt Gingrich.
MR. RUSSERT: Do you think Mr. Rumsfeld knew that Mr. Gingrich was
going to make these speeches?
SECRETARY POWELL: I have no idea.
MR. RUSSERT: Let me turn to the President's comments. This is what he
said Thursday evening. Let's watch:
"Any person, organization or government that supports, protects or
harbors terrorists is complicit in the murder of the innocent and
equally guilty of terrorist crimes. Any outlaw regime that has ties to
terrorist groups and seeks or possesses weapons of mass destruction is
a grave danger to the civilized world and will be confronted."
"Will be confronted." This is the State Department report out last
week on global terrorism. Let me bring you inside the book and share
with our viewers: "Cuba and Sudan continued to provide support to
designated Foreign Terrorist Organizations."
Will we tell the Cubans stop harboring terrorists, or else?
SECRETARY POWELL: We have told the Cubans via that report, and we've
told the Sudanese via that report, that we still consider them to be
organizations which support terrorist activity. The world is changing.
The President has taken a strong leadership role in this changing
world to say that this is no longer tolerable activity on the part of
any nation. Any nation that continues to believe that its political
purposes can be achieved by supporting terrorist activity has to know
that the civilized world is now speaking out and will act against that
kind of behavior. We did it in Afghanistan. We did it in Iraq. We are
confronting other nations around the world, and there are ways to
confront them, many different ways to confront them. Sometimes, no
other solution is appropriate but military force, but there are a
broad array of tools that are available to the President and available
to the international community to deal with these kinds of regimes --
isolation, sanctions, pressure, economic activity, many tools that
should be used. You don't always reach immediately for the military
tool.
In the case of Cuba, we pushed for a resolution in the Human Rights
Commission. We finger them. We have been speaking out very strongly
with respect to Cuba's actions, not only with respect to terrorist
activity, but the way in which they are treating their own people. I
mean, they have been throwing people who choose to speak their own
mind and who have been dissidents and throwing them in jail for 12,
15, 20 years. Cuba is an anachronism in our hemisphere, an anachronism
on the face of the earth, and the whole international community should
be condemning Cuba.
Similarly with other regimes, in the Sudan we not only condemn this
kind of activity, but, at the same time, we have diplomatic efforts
underway to resolve the civil war that has killed so many lives and
destroyed so many families in the Sudan, and we are making it clear to
the Sudanese that if they are looking for a better place in the world,
a better life for their people, it's time to end this kind of support
of terrorist activity. And we have seen improvement over the years.
MR. RUSSERT: You mentioned criticism of Castro. In fact, some artists
and writers from the United States of America, led by Harry Belafonte,
said that the United States has been guilty of harassment of Cuba, and
this is a pretext for invasion.
SECRETARY POWELL: This is absolute nonsense, but we've gotten used to
absolute nonsense coming from Mr. Belafonte. This isn't the first time
that he has praised the Cuban regime and its outrageous --
MR. RUSSERT: Why wouldn't we think about liberating the people of Cuba
the way we liberated the people of Iraq?
SECRETARY POWELL: Well, we do not believe that it is appropriate at
this time to consider, if you're talking of military force, to use
military force for this particular purpose. We believe that Cuba is
isolated. Cuba is the anachronism that I mentioned a few moments ago.
I remember 15 years ago when I was National Security Advisor and Cuba
was fomenting revolution and communist ideology and theology all over
the hemisphere. Fifteen years later, every nation in the hemisphere
has rejected that point of view. They are all finding their own way
down a democratic path with market reforms. They want to be part of a
community of democracies of the Americas. They want to be part of the
Free Trade Area of the Americas. They are having different levels of
difficulty with respect to practicing democracy. Democracy isn't an
easy system. But Cuba sits there isolated, getting poorer, getting
broker, more irrelevant on the world stage, and sooner or later this
regime will pass. It is an anachronism and history will catch up with
it.
MR. RUSSERT: Iran. Let me show you what your global terrorism book has
to say about Iran: "...remained the most active state sponsor during
2002; provided funding, training, weapons to Central Asian and
anti-Israeli terrorist groups. In addition, some members of these
groups, as well as al-Qaida, have found safe haven in Iran."
Again, using the President's words, how will we "confront" Iran and
force them to stop that?
SECRETARY POWELL: We have made it clear to Iran that they cannot
expect a better relationship with the United States or to be included
more fully in the international community as long as they continue to
support terrorism and as long as they continue to move in a direction
with their nuclear development programs that suggests they are still
interested in developing a nuclear bomb.
And in this case, there is a great deal of turmoil within Iran between
the aspirations of a youthful population and the political leadership
that exists and the presidency, and the religious leadership that
exists among the ayatollahs. And we believe there are ways to
communicate with the people of Iran to convince them that the policies
their leaders have been following have been inappropriate. Meanwhile,
we will continue to isolate Iran as best we can.
But there are opportunities for cooperation with respect to al-Qaida.
Al-Qaida is a threat to Iran, to everyone else. They should not allow
any al-Qaida activity to take place in Iran; and if there are al-Qaida
individuals in Iran, they should be turned over to people who know how
to deal with al-Qaida individuals. So we have ways of communicating
with Iran on what we think they ought to be doing with respect to
going forward to a better relationship with us and the rest of the
world. And also, we have been in touch with Iran with respect to
activities that they may be contemplating in the southern part of Iraq
among the Shia community.
MR. RUSSERT: But if you look at Iran, the weapons of mass destruction,
nuclear development program, harboring terrorists, al-Qaida presence,
how does it differ from Iraq, and why wouldn't we try to liberate the
people of Iran the way we liberated the people of Iraq?
SECRETARY POWELL: We went into Iraq in response to 12 years of
violation of specific UN resolutions dealing with weapons of mass
destruction, and we went in with the full authority of the United
Nations. Whether people agree with that assessment or not, 1441 made
it clear that we had a basis to do this. Military force is not
necessarily the first option in every one of these situations. I
believe that Iraq was a more real and present danger in terms of its
weapons of mass destruction, which will be uncovered in due course,
and because they had demonstrated that they are prepared to invade
their neighbors and they have demonstrated they are prepared to use
these kinds of weapons outside their own borders and on their own
citizens. So I think this was a different case, a clear case, and we
acted on that case, as we did in Afghanistan.
MR. RUSSERT: North Korea. This is what the Patterns of Global
Terrorism has to say about North Korea: "... continued to sell
ballistic missile technology to countries designated by the United
States as state sponsors of terrorism, including Syria and Libya." We
now believe that North Korea has one or two nuclear bombs, could be
producing five or six more by mid-summer. Will we allow that?
SECRETARY POWELL: We, I think, have had some success in recent months
in convincing all of North Korea's neighbors that the problem
presented to the region and to the world by North Korea is not just a
problem between North Korea and the United States, but with all of the
nations in the region. And as a result, we got China to take a more
active role in sponsoring a multilateral meeting that included China,
the United States and North Korea. South Korea and Japan were not in
the meeting, but their interests were certainly represented in that
meeting by the United States.
And everybody has now made it clear to North Korea that they will not
find any assistance coming to them from the region in terms of
economic development, in terms of helping them with their serious
economic problems and problems of poverty, unless they abandon their
nuclear weapons programs.
They say they have a couple of nuclear weapons. They've admitted that.
They are always ambiguous in their statements, masters of ambiguity.
They say they have completely reprocessed all of the cells that would
- the rods that would give rise to a sufficient amount of plutonium to
develop five or six weapons. We can't confirm that with our
intelligence, but that's what they say.
And what they have gotten in response to these statements is nothing
from us except condemnation. All of their neighbors have now said to
them this is not going to get you anywhere, we will not be
blackmailed, we will not be intimidated; you do not want to go in this
direction because all it will do is further isolate you. And it takes
time for the North Koreans to hear these kinds of messages. They are
masters of saying all we have to do is keep threatening people, hold
our breath, throw tantrums, and they'll come our way. Not going to
happen this time. We are not going to be frightened into doing
something. We're not going to be intimidated into doing something or
blackmailed into doing something that we do not believe will solve
this problem once and for all. The Agreed Framework of 1994 dealt with
one aspect of their nuclear weapons capability, but while it dealt
with that, temporarily it left the capacity in place for that program
to come back. And at the same time we thought we had dealt with that,
they started working on another program to develop nuclear weapons.
We're not going to fall for that game again.
MR. RUSSERT: If we wake up six, seven months from now and they have
more nuclear weapons, then what happens?
SECRETARY POWELL: They have a bigger problem than they have now. Their
nuclear weapons are not going to purchase them any political standing
that will cause us to be frightened or to think that somehow we now
have to march to their tune, march to their drummer.
MR. RUSSERT: We would never let them sell or transfer those weapons.
SECRETARY POWELL: Absolutely not.
MR. RUSSERT: Talking about Iraq, you said in due time you believe we
will find weapons of mass destruction. Let me go back to your
presentation in February at the United Nations and talk about it:
"The gravity of this moment is matched by the gravity of the threat
that Iraq's weapons of mass destruction pose to the world. Let me now
turn to those deadly weapons programs and describe why they are real
and present dangers to the region and to the world. Let me turn now to
nuclear weapons. We have no indication that Saddam Hussein has ever
abandoned his nuclear weapons program."
And Vice President Cheney said Saddam Hussein had reconstituted his
nuclear program. So we have the Vice President and the Secretary of
State. Is there any evidence of a reconstituted nuclear program in
Iraq that we have found thus far?
SECRETARY POWELL: We haven't found any evidence of nuclear weapons in
Iraq as a result of what we have been able to see so far. But a
program is more than just a weapon. We didn't think he had a weapon at
the time I made that statement or the time the Vice President made his
statements or any of the other of my colleagues who made statements.
But what he did keep intact were the scientific wherewithal. And by
that, I mean he not only had people with the know-how, but he kept
them together so that the know-how could be exploited at a time that
he chose. He kept in place the infrastructure. And so he never lost
the infrastructure or the brainpower assembled in a way to use that
infrastructure if he was ever given a chance to do so because the
international community had turned its attention in another direction.
And so it is still our judgment, and it is still my judgment, that if
he was given the opportunity and if the international community said
fine, you're okay, we're not going to bother you anymore, he would
still have pursued that objective. He never lost, in my judgment, and
the judgment of the intelligence community, the intent to develop a
nuclear weapon, and he kept in place the scientific brainpower and the
infrastructure that would have allowed that to happen in due course.
MR. RUSSERT: How important is it to the credibility of the United
States and your own personal credibility that we find weapons of mass
destruction?
SECRETARY POWELL: Oh, I think we will find weapons of mass
destruction. I'm the one who presented the case, and proud to have
done so. And let me tell you, Tim, we spent a lot of time on that
presentation. It was about five straight days and nights of work with
the most senior experts of the intelligence community. And with a
smile on my face, I would like to point out that over my right
shoulder was the Director of Central Intelligence in that picture,
George Tenet. We all stood behind that presentation.
And keep in mind that the whole Security Council acknowledged that
Saddam Hussein had these weapons of mass destruction when they voted
15-0 for the basic resolution, 1441. It begins with a statement that
Saddam Hussein is in material breach of his obligations to account for
all of the anthrax and botulinum toxin and all the other things that
previous inspectors said he either has and hasn't accounted for, or he
won't tell us what happened to this material if he no longer has it.
And that was the basis upon which 1441 rested.
And it may well be that as we continue our work with the many teams
that are now about the countryside we will find that some of the gaps
that were there that he wouldn't account for, we can now account for;
even if we don't find weapons, we can find out what happened to that
material, I am confident.
MR. RUSSERT: But it is important.
SECRETARY POWELL: Sure, it's important. I am confident that we will
find evidence that makes it clear he had weapons of mass destruction.
MR. RUSSERT: There was a story coming out of Newsweek and it's been
widely reported in the press now. This is the headline: "The State
Department wins one." And that's Ambassador Paul Bremer will become
the civilian administrator in Iraq, on top of General Jay Garner. Is
that accurate?
SECRETARY POWELL: Well, no announcements have been made, to the best
of my knowledge. General Garner is doing a tremendous job and we
should be very privileged and pleased that he was willing to return to
serve his nation in this way under the most difficult of
circumstances. My department, the State Department, a number of other
departments of government are cooperating with Jay. I have at least
five -- I lose count every day -- at least five, maybe up to six
ambassadors who are there working in Jay's organization to help him.
In due course, it will be necessary to change things as you go forward
as the situation changes, and when changes are made they will be duly
announced. But nothing has been announced yet.
MR. RUSSERT: If Paul Bremer becomes the civilian administrator, who
would he report to?
SECRETARY POWELL: Let's look at it this way, without talking about
Jerry Bremer. This is a military operation. It has to be under the
direction, command and control of General Tommy Franks and his
subordinates. We were in a hostile environment. No other Department of
Government could handle this initial phase.
What I see happening in that, as stability is gained throughout the
country and that security is obtained, and as the various ministries
come back up online, more and more other sorts of organizations will
come in -- UN organizations, nongovernmental organizations. Lots of
our friends and allies will be sending in peacekeeping forces. It will
start to take more of a civilian coloration. And in due course, I
don't know how long it will take, but in due course, General Franks
and his colleagues will turn it over to the Iraqi people when they
stand up a government, and at that point the U.S. presence will be in
the form of a United States ambassador and a mission, just as it is in
cases all over the world.
So there is a transition taking place, but there can be no doubt that
this initial phase has to be firmly under military authority, and
that's why General Franks has all of that authority and General Garner
has to work for General Franks, and anyone else coming into the
theater at this point has to be subordinate to Secretary Rumsfeld, and
Secretary Rumsfeld reporting to the President.
MR. RUSSERT: Before you go, the roadmap for peace in the Middle East.
Discussion of settlements. There are now 70 new outposts, new
settlements, if you will, developed by the Israeli Government. There
are 400,000 Israelis living outside the '67 borders. How many
settlements will have to be closed down? What will Israel have to do
in terms of settlements, in your mind, in order to achieve a lasting
peace?
SECRETARY POWELL: Our position has been that settlement activity must
come to an end for us to find a solution to this problem. Once that
activity comes to an end, as we proceed down the roadmap, then some
very difficult discussions will have to take place between the two
sides, and with the assistance of the United States and other
interested parties, to determine what a Palestinian state will
actually look like initially with provisional borders, and then final
borders.
And as part of that process, agreements will have to be arrived at
between the two sides as to settlements that are currently in
existence -- which go away, which stay, how do you deal with those
that might have to remain in place. There are some who will want to
see all settlements go, all Israelis to be outside of the new
Palestinian state. But this will be a subject of the most intense
negotiations as we go forward, and we understand that it will be one
of the most difficult issues to resolve, along with final status of
the city of Jerusalem and the right of return.
MR. RUSSERT: What will the Palestinians have to do?
SECRETARY POWELL: Right now, the most important thing for the
Palestinians do is what Prime Minister Abu Mazen said at the time of
his inauguration. They have to get the violence under control. We
can't move forward with the roadmap, just as we haven't been able to
move forward with other plans and ideas, in the presence of continuing
violence and terrorism.
What he has to do is keep speaking out against it, not just to the
international community and international audiences, but to his own
people, to say to them this must end, we are not getting close to our
dream of our own state in the presence of this kind of terrorist
activity and violence. And then he, working with his minister for
security matters, Mr. Dahlan, and others in the new Palestinian
leadership, the transformed leadership, have to bring these elements
under control who are still committed to terrorism.
And they have to work closely with Israel in a cooperative way to
bring security and stability to the area so that both sides together,
in confidence and with renewed trust, can move forward. And the United
States stands ready with our Quartet partners and other members of the
international community to help them in every way that we can.
MR. RUSSERT: Mr. Secretary, we thank you for your views.
SECRETARY POWELL: Thank you.
(end transcript)
(Distributed by the Office of International Information Programs, U.S.
Department of State. Web site: http://usinfo.state.gov)