Military

16 March 2005

State Department Briefing, March 16

India/Pakistan, Israel/Palestinians, Lebanon, Northern Ireland, Pakistan, Bolivia, Syria/Turkey, Syria/Lebanon, North Korea

State Department deputy spokesman Adam Ereli briefed the press March 16.

Following is the transcript of the State Department briefing:

(begin transcript)

U.S. Department of State
Daily Press Briefing Index
Wednesday, March 16, 2005
1:10 p.m. EST

Briefer:  Adam Ereli, Deputy Spokesman

INDIA/PAKISTAN
-- Query on Possible Sale of F-16s

ISRAEL/PALESTINIANS
-- Progress of Jericho Handover/U.S. View of Coordination and Engagement between
-- Israel and Palestinians
-- Query on Evenhandedness of U.S. between Israel and Palestinians
-- Reform of Palestinian Security Services
-- Hamas' Role in Palestinian Politics

LEBANON
-- Hezbollah's Role in Political Process/President's Comments

NORTHERN IRELAND
-- Ambassador Mitchell Reiss' Meetings with Robert McCartney's Sisters and Gerry Adams
-- Query on Whether there are any Restriction on Gerry Adams' Visa or Movements within U.S.

PAKISTAN
-- Look Ahead of Secretary Rice's Meeting President Musharraf
-- U.S. View of Democratization Process
-- President Musharraf's Military Role

BOLIVIA
-- President Mesa's Call for Early National and Constituent Assembly Elections

SYRIA/TURKEY
-- Turkish President Ahmet Necdet Sezer's Planned Visit to Syria

SYRIA/LEBANON
-- Movement of Syrian Military Forces and Intelligence Operatives/UN Resolution 1559

NORTH KOREA
-- Human Rights Conditions
-- Continued Refusal/Excuse for not Returning to Six Party Talks

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE
DAILY PRESS BRIEFING

WEDNESDAY, MARCH 16, 2005
(ON THE RECORD UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED)

1:10 p.m. EST

MR. ERELI:  Welcome, everybody.  I apologize for the slight delay.  Glad to see we have some guests here.  Hope you enjoy the show.  No announcements.  Happy to take your questions.

QUESTION:  Jet sales to India and Pakistan.  Should we try the Pentagon or can you elaborate on the buzz going on on the plane and in the Wall Street Journal?

MR. ERELI:  The buzz on the plane about the planes?

QUESTION:  Right.

MR. ERELI:  No, I have no --

QUESTION:  And the Wall Street Journal.  You haven't heard about it?

MR. ERELI:  No, no buzz to add.  The Secretary addressed it in a press availability with the Foreign Minister of India today.  I think she dealt with the subject as extensively as we're prepared to deal with it at this point.

QUESTION:  It must be strange because I'm being asked for details that none were given out there.

MR. ERELI:  I don't have any to add to the none that were given.

QUESTION:  Okay.

MR. ERELI:  Yes.

QUESTION:  Do you have any comment on the transfer of security between the Israelis and the Palestinians in Jericho?

MR. ERELI:  We are pleased at the coordination taking place between the Israelis and Palestinians.  The progress that has been made in the Jericho handover reflects the direct discussions that have been going on between the parties and is a -- that's the way to promote peace.  So we're encouraged by the progress they've made and we certainly would -- we certainly look forward to that kind of engagement, that kind of discussion, that kind of coordination continuing.

As far as the details of what's being done and when, I'd have to refer you to the parties.  But it clearly is a sign of positive engagement leading to positive movement.

QUESTION:  What do you mean, respects (inaudible)?  I don't understand.  Is it the fact that the handover was so amicably executed?  Is that what encourages you?  Or the fact that Israel is giving up one more thing?

MR. ERELI:  No, what's encouraging is that Israelis and Palestinians are engaging directly, talking to each other directly to resolve issues in mutually satisfactory ways and in ways that I think -- in ways that advance progress toward the ultimate objective, which is two states living side by side in peace and security.

QUESTION:  Or the ultimate objective of Israel continuing to pull back?  That's what you're encouraged by, isn't it?  That's --

MR. ERELI:  No, we're encouraged by --

QUESTION:  That Israel --

MR. ERELI:  We're encouraged by engagement between the parties toward -- in mutually beneficial ways that advance progress towards two states.  Israel is doing what Israel is doing because it's in Israel's interest and the Palestinians are doing what the Palestinians are doing because it's in their interest and they're both doing things consistent with commitments they've made to each other and in a way that is coordinated and mutually acceptable.  That's -- that is the definition of, I would think, a peace process.

QUESTION:  One more question.  What the Palestinians get is tangible?  It's a city.  Right?

MR. ERELI:  Yeah.

QUESTION:  What does Israel gain from this that --

MR. ERELI:  Barry, you're asking -- you're asking me to --

QUESTION:  Well, you say it's in both interests --

MR. ERELI:  You're asking me to --

QUESTION:  How is it in Israel's --

MR. ERELI:  -- define for you and comment for you and judge for you an agreement and an understanding that the parties have reached themselves in a way that each thinks that it's beneficial to itself.  So I'll let -- I think you should direct those questions to the Israelis or the Palestinians.  Ask the Israelis what they think they're getting, ask the Palestinians what they think they're getting and ask each whether they think that the deal is a good one.  We believe that they have worked this out among themselves, that it is something that they both support, that they both feel is beneficial, that they both feel helps move the process forward, and for that reason we welcome it and we're encouraged by it.

QUESTION:  That wasn't the reason I asked you the question.  If you had said they say it's in their interests, fine.  You were blessing it for the State Department and you for the State Department said it's in the interest of both sides to do this.

MR. ERELI:  Well, I don't think that --

QUESTION:  And I asked you, I said it's clear what's in the interest of the Palestinians, to take over Jericho.  And I asked you, since you, the State Department, said it's in Israel's interest, this agreement or surrender or whatever is in Israel's interest, I wondered what the State Department had found about it that is helpful to Israel.

MR. ERELI:  I don't think --

QUESTION:  And you're saying ask Israel.

MR. ERELI:  I don't think either party would have done this if it's not in their interest to do it.

QUESTION:  I know that.  But you might say it's in their interest.

MR. ERELI:  And so -- and I think that's just -- you know, it's the nature of negotiations and the nature of agreements and the nature of mutual steps, by definition, parties don't take them unless it's in their interest to do so.  So I think that's just a -- how should I put it -- a general proposition that is applicable to this specific case.

QUESTION:  As part of this agreement, Israel is still going to have two checkpoints.  Does the U.S. support this part of the agreement?

MR. ERELI:  You're asking me to get into a level of detail I'm just -- I'm not really prepared to get into.  I think what the United States supports is a process by which Israelis and Palestinians engage directly to work out the modalities of the commitments, to work out the modalities of following through on the commitments they've made under the roadmap, and we are acting in a capacity to help support them as they do that.  That's the way to view what General Ward is doing.  That's the way to view discussions we continue to have with Egyptians, with Jordanians, with the Quartet, with the international community.

As Prime Minister Abbas and -- I'm sorry -- President Abbas and Prime Minister Sharon move forward in, I think, an ambitious and far-reaching effort to withdraw from Gaza, abandon settlements, reform security forces, reform economic institutions, provide services and meet the social needs of the Palestinians, there is a lot of activity over a broad range of issues and there are no shortages of opportunities to -- for both sides to -- not shortage of opportunities -- shortage of necessities for both side to work together in ways that are required to help -- to make forward progress.  It's applicable to the Jericho situation.  It's applicable to the reform of the security forces for the Palestinians.  It's applicable to the settlements issue, the outposts issue.  So what we're seeing in Jericho is a dynamic -- I'll put it this way -- is a dynamic that we hope will infuse and guide the process in other areas.

Yes.

QUESTION:  Adam, part of the difficulty -- and, of course, President Bush just mentioned that at his press conference about two hours ago at the White House.  He was talking about Hezbollah, that they're wanting to go in to the government or into politics in Lebanon, and the same holds true -- Hamas is now angling to enter into politics in the Palestinian areas.  And if both sides were in willing agreement they would have worked together at community levels before.  You've got peace groups pushing them and you've got Hamas, in effect, saying no to all of this, ready to undermine this progress.  Is the United States still evenhanded in its dealings with both the PA and Israelis?

And next month, both Ariel Sharon and Mr. -- President Abbas are coming to the White House for talks and I would assume here, too, to the State Department.  Is the security that you're looking for adequately in place so that this doesn't unravel?

MR. ERELI:  First of all, we are evenhanded.  We are -- we have been, and I think remain, trusted by both sides and that's -- and accepted by both sides as a critical player in this and that's, I think, a testimony to the evenhandedness with which they view how we -- view our approach to the issue.

As far as the security situation, President Abbas has taken a number of important steps that we have recognized.  Clearly, the need for an end to violence and reform of the security services remains a top priority.  It's something that the Palestinians, I think, recognize and are acting on.  It's something that the friends of the Palestinian Authority -- Jordan, Egypt, us and others -- are doing their utmost to help and assist.

Certainly, that's the mission of General Ward, all of which is designed to help sustain the forward momentum we're seeing, with the recognition that ultimately this will require tough actions, decisive actions in the security area and -- how should I put it -- we're working to achieve that.

QUESTION:  In that long question, it started out with some reference to Hamas, which is not a bad observation.  You have a parallel situation.  Hezbollah does well politically in Lebanon.  Hamas does well politically in Gaza.  The President of the United States is willing to have a new look at Hezbollah with certain provisos.

Are you folks ready to have a new look at Hamas, too, and Party of God, Islamic Jihad, if they -- I mean, if they -- the only thing I heard the President qualify a statement with is lay down their arms.  If Hamas says it isn't (inaudible) and killing people anymore, does it have a future, as far as the U.S. is concerned, in Palestinian politics?

MR. ERELI:  In answering the question, I'd like to stick to -- I'd like to stick to the facts and where we are now and the present reality we're dealing with, as opposed to hypotheticals and possible future scenarios.  In both cases, whether you talk about Hamas or you talk about Hezbollah, these are -- the United States policy remains the same:  These are Foreign Terrorist Organizations.  We continue to consider them as such, we consider to deal with them as such.

In terms of, I would say, in terms of both Lebanon and the Palestinian Authority, there's a political process going underway.  We want to support that process.  We want to support democratic elections, democratic processes, help local authorities establish a climate where people are free to express their political opinion, whether it be through assembly, whether it be through freedom of speech, whether it be through other civil, non-violent means.  We want to help create that kind of environment.

In Lebanon, we want to see Syrians out and elections take place and a government selected that is a product of the desires of the Lebanese people untainted by foreign interference, foreign pressure, foreign intimidation.  We saw that in the Palestinian Authority in January when they selected their President.  And so that is a process that we think -- we think is to be encouraged and represents an important step forward in the -- for the region.

Your question and all questions sort of coming -- all questions related to that sort of are premised on what are the results of these elections, what's going to happen after these elections, how's the United States going to deal with the political reality that is a result of the changing political dynamic in the region.  The simple question is, I don't -- I don't know.

QUESTION:  Now isn't the --

MR. ERELI:  The other question is, you know, what are we going to do?  I don't know.  It depends what happens.  The first step for us is, and what we're dealing with now is, creating conditions in Lebanon where the people can vote, the people can choose their government.

QUESTION:  I understand the President, but that's not -- that wasn't my question.  I understand what you'd like to see happen in Lebanon.  But as part of the process, there's a political party called Hezbollah.  It's very popular.  It's the largest Shiite concentration in Lebanon.  It's done very well.  Equally, in Gaza, Hamas did better than the Abbas group.

MR. ERELI:  I don't think so.

QUESTION:  In the voting.

MR. ERELI:  I don't think so.  Not in the --

QUESTION:  In Gaza.  The Gaza.

MR. ERELI:  In the local elections in Gaza?

QUESTION:  The local elections in Gaza.  All right.  I think they did.  But in any event, they're a political force so all I'm asking is, the day after the President says Hezbollah he could see being part of the political process in Lebanon --

MR. ERELI:  You're miss -- you're mischaracterizing the President's comments.

QUESTION:  Let me finish the question.

MR. ERELI:  The President said there's no change to our policy on Hezbollah.

QUESTION:  You can keep saying there's no changed policy as long as you want and you can -- you said that -- the State Department said that until you shook Arafat's hand.  The point is that in Lebanon, the President recognizes Hezbollah as a political force and says if they behave themselves -- he was more explicit than that -- they could be part of the political process, we're willing to look at them as part -- and I'm asking if the same would apply to Hamas.

MR. ERELI:  I don't --

QUESTION:  And if not, why not?

MR. ERELI:  I don't -- Barry, I don't think you're being accurate in your characterizations of the President's comments.  I would refer you to the President's comments.  They're on the record for everybody to see.  And I think our policy on this is clear, that our policy -- and we've been saying it for over a week and I'll repeat it again -- our policy on Hezbollah hasn't changed.

As far as the future goes, what we want to see in the future is free and fair elections in Lebanon untainted by foreign interference that result in a leadership that reflects the views of the Lebanese people.  And what that political landscape looks like afterwards, I'm not in the position to tell you.  I don't think anybody is.

And Hezbollah, like any other political party in Lebanon, is going to -- has a choice to make.  Do you -- do you be -- are you part of the -- are you part of the system or are you outside the system?  Do you practice violence or do you practice --

QUESTION:  Of course.

MR. ERELI:   -- do you practice peaceful political participation?  All right, that's a choice that everybody has to make.  Do we want to see Hezbollah out of the terrorism game?  You bet we do.  Do we want to see Hezbollah and Hamas and other terrorist organizations renounce violence, end the use of terror?  You bet we do.  Are they going to do it?  What will we do if they do do it?  I don't know.

QUESTION:  The President wasn't the first person to draw this line.  Now, this is -- Satterfield did this in Lebanese Broadcasting.  Okay?  He said -- he drew a distinction, which Mr. Powell did once or twice, between Hezbollah's military activities and its political activities, and specifically said he wasn't excluding them from the political process.

MR. ERELI:  It's not for us to exclude somebody from a political process.

QUESTION:  Well, it's --

MR. ERELI:  The United States is not -- the United States is not the arbiter of every domestic political process.  In fact, we don't get involved in domestic political processes.  Hezbollah has members of parliament, elected to the parliament.  That's, again, an internal Lebanese decision.

QUESTION:  So stop (inaudible).

QUESTION:  Adam, I have questions on two subjects and I'd like if, to be so bold as to (a) preclude you from using the dreaded non-word "modalities" in the answer and I'd also like to -- (laughter) - (inaudible) Barry from asking any of my follow-ups or answering them.  (Laughter.)

First, just a very quick thing on the McCartney sisters and Gerry Adams.  Can you confirm that they are both coming here today for meetings?  Both of those groups?

MR. ERELI:  Yes, I can.  I'll try to give you a modality-free answer.

QUESTION:  You just blew it.

(Laughter.)

MR. ERELI:  Sorry.  Our Ambassador, Mitchell Reiss, this morning met with the sisters of Robert McCartney, who, as you know, was murdered in Belfast in January this year.  Ambassador Reiss will also meet with Sinn Fein President Gerry Adams separately at 4:30 this afternoon.

In both meetings, he's going to be stressing the theme of what we can do to advance -- help advance the peace process and the rule of law in Northern Ireland.  In his meeting with the sisters of Robert McCartney, Ambassador Reiss made the point and conveyed to the sisters that everybody in this country stands with them in grieving for their loss and in calling for the need for justice and accountability.

It's our view that justice in this case and justice for the sisters of Robert McCartney means justice for everybody in Northern Ireland.  In his meeting with Mr. Adams, Ambassador Reiss will, I think, review events over the last couple of months in Northern Ireland, with a particular focus on the robbery of the Northern Bank in Belfast, the brutal murder of Robert McCartney and, you know, make the point simply that the time for the IRA to disband has come.  This is really a timely thing.

QUESTION:  All right.  And if I may move to the other subject.

QUESTION:  May I ask one of your follow-up?

QUESTION:  Sure.

QUESTION:  Thank you.

QUESTION:  You only get six though.  (Laughter.)

QUESTION:  I'll do my best.  Was there any kind of drop-by by Deputy Secretary Zoellick to the Reiss meeting with the McCartney sisters this morning?

MR. ERELI:  I'm not aware that there was.  Let me check and if --

QUESTION:  Thank you.

MR. ERELI:  -- if there is anything to report, I'll -- we'll let you know.

QUESTION:  Thanks.

QUESTION:  Can you tell me what Secretary Rice hopes to achieve in her meetings that may already be over at this point, given the time change, with President Musharraf?

MR. ERELI:  I don't want to really do too much by way of preview.  I think the Secretary addressed this in a briefing in the plane on the way over.

We have a number of issues to discuss.  Obviously, Pakistan is a key ally in the global war on terror, continue to talk about how we can work together to take the fight to the bad guys, how Pakistan and the United States have a shared interest and a shared -- or have common cause in this.

Obviously, we have a full range of bilateral issues to discuss.  We've talked about it a number of times from this podium.  Democratization, economic relations, regional security issues.   And I expect those will figure prominently in their discussions.  Nonproliferation.

QUESTION:  What is the battleground, if you will, where democratization is concerned?  What are we seeking?  What have we gotten so far?  What haven't we gotten?

MR. ERELI:  I wouldn't use the word "battleground."  I think that's --

QUESTION:  Agreed.

MR. ERELI:  -- unnecessarily confrontational.

QUESTION:  (Inaudible.)

MR. ERELI:  The theme is moving forward in a way that expands -- that, I guess, develops institutions, (inaudible) practices, develops enfranchisement in a positive way.  I think the Government of Pakistan, it's certainly -- as I said before, it's certainly a direction the Government of Pakistan is moving in.  It's certainly a -- I think an issue and a cause and a process that the leadership of Pakistan has embraced.

So I would simply suggest to you that this is not a question of pressure or persuasion, but it's rather a question of working with a country that has taken and continues to take and has every intention of taking positive steps to open up the political process.

QUESTION:  Was it a positive step that President Musharraf broke his word last year and refused to give up his military role?

MR. ERELI:  I think that this is an issue that we've spoken to extensively, that President Musharraf has said that they are going to be moving in that direction, and the timing of that is something that I think the Pakistanis and the Pakistani Government and the Pakistani institutions are going to have to develop something that they are comfortable with.

QUESTION:  Well, he said he was going to do it.  He said that in the context of a debate with members of parliament so as to enact certain constitutional changes and then he broke his word.

MR. ERELI:  I don't really have anything new to say on that.

QUESTION:  Okay, one last question.  You said that it was their intention to move in this direction.  How do you know that it is their intention when at least the senior-most political, or at least powerful figure in the country, has broken his word once on his intentions?  How do you know that he actually is going to --?

MR. ERELI:  In discussions with the Government of Pakistan and in observing measures that the Government of Pakistan has taken, I think we are comfortable that they are committed and moving in the right direction.

QUESTION:  Could you roll back on Adams for a moment and tell us if you know whether there are any restrictions on his visa?  Is he -- there are any restrictions on his movements in this country?

MR. ERELI:  We don't comment on individual visa cases.  I don't have any details on his, therefore I can't speak about details on his visa.  I'm not aware of any -- well, for that visa, I don't -- I'm not aware of any -- I'm not aware that Mr. Adams can't go anywhere he wants to go.  QUESTION:  Okay.

MR. ERELI:  Yeah.

QUESTION:  I have a question concerning Ecuador.  It appears that there have been widespread protests with -- against President Gutierrez and he's actually gone and dumped the supreme court there.  Is the United States going to work with both he and his opposition to straighten out that matter?

MR. ERELI:  Let me see if we have an opinion to share with you on that development.

QUESTION:  Bolivia -- do you have any comment to say on events there, particularly the President's putting forward a law to have early presidential elections and the opposition, I think, opposing that?

QUESTION:  I'm sorry, I couldn't hear the question.

MR. ERELI:  A comment on developments in Bolivia, and particularly --

QUESTION:  Bolivia.

MR. ERELI:  Bolivia.  Am I right?  Bolivia?

QUESTION:  Yes, Bolivia.

MR. ERELI:  Okay, Bolivia.  President Mesa has called for early national and constituent assembly elections.  The United States encourages all leaders in Bolivia to seek consensus for the common good through open dialogue and within a democratic framework.  We will be watching this process evolve and we will be supporting the people of Bolivia as they work through it in a peaceful and democratic way.  And that's, frankly, how -- approach we're taking to these developments.

QUESTION:  You think leftist trends there will be continued --

MR. ERELI:  I don't --

QUESTION:  I don't mean in Bolivia.  There have been leftist trends in Uruguay, in Venezuela and of course Cuba's leftist government.  Are you fearful that it's catching?

MR. ERELI:  No.

QUESTION:  No?

MR. ERELI:  I wouldn't characterize developments that way.

QUESTION:  So you take no position on the question of when or whether they should hold elections; you just want them all to work it out in a nice, happy way?

MR. ERELI:  Yes.  Dialogue and consensus.

In the back.

QUESTION:  (Inaudible) that is going to Syria.  What is your comment about the situation?

MR. ERELI:  About the Turkish Foreign Minister's visit to Syria?

QUESTION:  The President's.

MR. ERELI:  The President.  Sorry.

QUESTION:  Yeah.

MR. ERELI:  No real comment.  I mean, this is -- if the President of Turkey wants to go to Syria, that's between the President of Turkey and Syria.  Our views on Syria, I think, are well known.  We would certainly hope that Turkey as well as others send Syria a clear message that the international community is of one mind in wanting and calling on Syria to get all its forces and intelligence operatives out of Lebanon.  But as far as the visit goes, that's a decision between the Turks and the Syrians.

Yes.

QUESTION:  Speaking of Syria and intelligence agents, are you encouraged that Syria appears to have removed at least many of its intelligence agents from Beirut?

MR. ERELI:  To where?  (Inaudible) question.

There's a lot of movement going on in Lebanon.  I would say there's a certain lack of clarity, which we continue to look for from the Government of Syria.  The lack of clarity is where are they going and when will they leave and will it be all of them.  1559 calls for all Syrian troops to be out of -- to be out of Lebanon.  Until now, we have not -- we have not heard a clear and unequivocal commitment from the Government of Syria to do that.  We've seen movements, some from within Lebanon to Syria, some from within parts of Lebanon to other parts of Lebanon, all of which, I guess, are a change from previous circumstances, but it's still not what 1559 calls for.  So let's be clear:  What we're looking for is, again, all Syrian troops and intelligence operatives out of Lebanon and back in Syria, and in a way that allows for elections to take place in May untainted by foreign interference and presence of foreign troops in Lebanon.

QUESTION:  You said that you are looking for clarity from Syria.  How are you doing that?  Is the Chargé going in every day and --

MR. ERELI:  Well, when I say "we" I'm speaking not just for the United States but -- I'm speaking for the United States as part of an international consensus on this issue.  "We" meaning those who support 1559 and those in the region, frankly, who have called for Syria to leave.  So this isn't, you know, just about our Chargé going to Damascus and saying you need to do this.  This is a question of all those on the Security Council and all those in the region who have voiced support for 1559, making it clear to the Syrians that they need to -- they need to answer these questions and fill in the details that are still lacking.

QUESTION:  Let me -- can I follow that just quickly?

QUESTION:  Yeah, go ahead.

QUESTION:  Do you have reason to believe that the intelligence agents that are at least reported to have left the headquarters in Beirut are still in Lebanon?  Do you think they're still in Lebanon or you just don't know?

MR. ERELI:  I just -- just don't know.  I mean, and absent -- frankly, absent a -- and this is where I use the word clarity.  Absent a clear indication from Syria that we are taking them out of Lebanon, all of them out of Lebanon and moving them to Syria, it's kind of hard to know.

QUESTION:  But that's exactly what they said they are prepared to do.  There was only one --

MR. ERELI:  I haven't heard that.

QUESTION:  Well, I heard that yesterday from the Syrian Ambassador.  And you don't have to take my word for it, but he does make the point that they don't want to leave a vacuum; once an agreement is -- arrangements are worked out with the Lebanese military to move in where the Syrians are now, they're gone, they're out of the country, goodbye Lebanon.  Is that -- have you -- is that commitment by the way you measure commitments?

MR. ERELI:  Well, I haven't heard --

QUESTION:  They don't say immediately --

MR. ERELI:  (A)  We haven't the Syrian Government say that publicly; (B) we've also made clear that 1559 does not say the Syrian foreign forces should move out once they have agreements and once they've worked out the details with military commissions.  It doesn't say that.

QUESTION:  Okay.

MR. ERELI:  It says, you know, "fully and urgently out of Lebanon," and we still have not heard Syria say they're going to do that.

QUESTION:  So you -- for instance, the arrangements is (inaudible) they should move out?

MR. ERELI:  Yes, simple like that.

QUESTION:  Right.

MR. ERELI:  Yes, ma'am.

QUESTION:  Can we change to another subject?

MR. ERELI:  Can we change the subject?  Yes.

QUESTION:  Yeah.  It's on North Korea.  We at Nippon TV have obtained the footage of public execution on the -- that were held on the 1st and 2nd of this month in North Korea/China border town, and we understand the State Department released the report detailing the North Korean human rights abuses.  But what do you make of this new hard evidence?  And what are your thoughts on North Korea long record of abuse and what can you do?

MR. ERELI:  I've seen reports of the video.  I am not aware that we've actually seen the video.

With regard to the human rights conditions in North Korea, we -- with North Korea, as with every country, we have a very extensive and sustained effort to document human rights practices.  Those findings are contained in our Annual Country Report on Human Rights Practices.  And the issue that you're referring to is contained in that and I'd just refer you to that report for more details on what our assessment is on current practices in North Korea.

QUESTION:  So could you please (inaudible) on the U.S. view of North Korea's human rights abuses?

MR. ERELI:  No, I'd just refer you to the report for -- it's on the web.  It's got more expounding than I could possibly do from here.

Yes, Louie.

QUESTION:  Also on North Korea.  A North Korea spokesman today said, referring to the Secretary's refusal to apologize over the weekend for her statement of labeling North Korea as an outpost of tyranny, they said that that indicates that she is completely lacking in any political abilities and inferred that she is not a person that could be dealt with as an excuse not to go back to the six-party talks.  Any comments on that?

MR. ERELI:  I would focus on the word "excuse."  This is not about conditions.  This is not about words that we say or don't say.  This is about making strategic choices.  Do you join the international community in a negotiating process to deal with a threat that we collectively are concerned about, or do you persist in throwing up smokescreens and finding ways to further your international isolation and your isolation from the international community?

That's the issue.  We don't have any preconditions.  We've said we're ready to come back to talks without preconditions.  We've said we have no intention of attacking or invading.  And we've put a proposal out on the table to discuss and five out of the six members of the six-party talks want to come back to talks, are ready to come back to talks; there's one that keeps throwing up excuses or smokescreens not to do it.  They have a strategic choice.

QUESTION:  Do you have anything though on the particular comment that --

MR. ERELI:  No.

Yes.

QUESTION:  Adam, change of subject.  From the White House, former, I guess, he's been an Ambassador to Indonesia but he's currently Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz has been nominated by President Bush to be the next incoming President of the World Bank.

Do you have -- what are your thoughts concerning that and will, do you think, effectively be able to work with NGOs and work in development at the World Bank has as its mission?

MR. ERELI:  I think the President announced his intention to -- I don't know if nominate is the right word, but has put forward the candidacy of Paul Wolfowitz as head of the World Bank.  It's a great choice and he'll do a great job.

Yes.

QUESTION:  Referring to (inaudible) have seen this news that by today there are more than 300,000 Chinese both inside China and outside China announce publicly that they quit the Communist -- Chinese Communist Party following the publication of a series of commentary on this Communist Party by a newspaper based in New York, (inaudible) commentaries on the Communist Party.  Have you heard about this and --

MR. ERELI:  I haven't heard.

QUESTION:  So -- all right.

QUESTION:  Thank you.

MR. ERELI:  Thank you.

(The briefing was concluded at 1:50 p.m.)

(end transcript)

(Distributed by the Bureau of International Information Programs, U.S. Department of State. Web site: http://usinfo.state.gov)