Military

Nina.

QUESTION: Reaction to the Saudi terror sweep?

MR. CASEY: Well, we've seen the press accounts of this. I don't have a lot of information to give you on it. Certainly, I'd refer you to the Saudi authorities for the specifics of this arrest, but I think this shows that the Saudis are continuing their efforts to be a good partner with us in the war on terror.

It's important that they and other countries continue to do everything they can not only to try and deal with those who are responsible for acts of violence, but to break up those cells and break up those individuals who are intending to commit acts of violence or who, in any other way, whether through financial means or otherwise, are supporting terror networks. So we welcome the arrests by the Saudis today and certainly, again, I think it shows their strength and commitment to the war on terror.

QUESTION: Amongst these 172, some foreign nationals were mentioned. Were there any American citizens, do you know?

MR. CASEY: I don't have any reason at this point to believe that there were any American citizens involved. Certainly, we will be checking in with Saudi authorities to verify the details of this.

QUESTION: Tom, is there concern that the expansive nature of this plot -- I mean, it's millions of dollars, weapons, does that reflect on the stability of Saudi Arabia?

MR. CASEY: Well, David, I think we're still gathering information from the Saudis on this, so I don't want to try and do an analysis of the significance of this. I think they'd be in the best place to do it. But look, it's certainly clear that terrorism represents a threat to many countries throughout the world, Saudi Arabia included, as well as other countries in the Middle East.

One thing I think that at times gets lost in the discussion about the fight against terrorism is the fact that most of the innocent people who lose their lives in terrorist incidents -- certainly, if you look at what's going on in Iraq right now, if you look at what's happening in Afghanistan, if you look at what's happening in other places in the world, most of the victims of these attacks often are the Arab and Muslim citizens of those countries themselves. And so it's important not only for the United States; it's important for all countries in the world to be able to take actions against these kinds of groups and these kinds of plots.

We've spoken out, as you know, about the importance of political reforms in the Broader Middle East and other parts of the world as well. But everyone certainly understands that as each country moves forward with its own individual political process that that process needs to be nonviolent and that process needs to be one in which the rights of individuals are respected and there can't be any place in any civilized society for terrorism and for indiscriminate acts of violence. So again I think what the Saudis have done here is taken a step forward in terms of their own ability and their own responsibilities for dealing with the issues of terrorism and certainly we'll be continuing to talk with them about this issue and we'll be continuing to work and cooperate with them and other of our partners throughout the world.

QUESTION: Just to follow-up.

MR. CASEY: Yeah.

QUESTION: But most of the Muslim and Arab countries, including Saudi Arabia, they have not come out publicly denouncing terrorism and also they have they not sent their troops to die for their freedom. And at the same time, they are providing billions of dollars in the name of charity throughout the globe, including in the U.S., and that money is being used to support terrorism.

MR. CASEY: Well Goyal, as I mentioned in my earlier answer dealing not only with those who are actually committing acts of violence or intending to commit acts of violence is important, but it's important as well to deal with those who finance terror, to deal with those who provide its ideological underpinnings. And certainly there have been problems in terms of funding going through charities or so-called charities that are actually efforts to finance terrorist organizations. The Saudi Government has taken actions in a number of these instances, but all of us agree that whether it's the United States or Saudi Arabia or any other country that more needs to be done because being able to cut off the funding for terrorist organizations is an important part of being able ultimately to deal with this problem.

QUESTION: May I have another question in relation to this?

MR. CASEY: Sure.

QUESTION: Because of all the fundings in the name of terrorism and also the dictatorial policies of the General Musharraf in Pakistan, the Pakistani Community here is suffering because not all Pakistanis are Muslim terrorists here or in Pakistan. They are suffering here because they are targets of suspicion and all that, and every day they are being arrested and they are saying that they are good citizens here, Americans (inaudible), but because of being a Pakistani because of Talibans in Pakistan or Usama bin Laden is still there, everything is related to Pakistan.

What message do you think Secretary have for those Pakistanis who are good citizens but they are suffering in this country?

MR. CASEY: Well, first of all, I think that the best place to address questions about U.S. law enforcement is the Department of Justice and the FBI and other agencies that do that. But let me be clear that the United States is a country that welcomes citizens from all backgrounds, from all countries around the world. No one in this country should be -- nor is it acceptable nor is it the policy of this government to discriminate against anyone or to place someone under suspicion simply because of their ethnicity or the country they come from. So certainly every American citizen and every person living in the United States has the right to pursue their business freely and in their own way and in accordance with U.S. laws, and the only people who should have anything to fear from U.S. law enforcement are those people that violate the laws or try and support terrorism or otherwise engage in behavior that's unacceptable.

QUESTION: My question really quickly, one more related. What they are saying is that wherever they are living in the U.S. in the neighborhoods there are some mosques and those mosques are run by the mullahs and those are the one who came from Pakistan with the training or some maybe terrorist-related people visiting from Pakistan into those mosques, but everybody else in the community are then targeted or suspicious of. How can you have some kind of education for those mosques and places of worship here that they are not being used for the activities against the United States?

MR. CASEY: Well, again, I think this really touches on issues that go beyond the brief here at the State Department. But I think all American citizens, again, regardless of their national origin or their ethnicity or any other aspects of their personal history, are committed to living in a peaceful society, are committed to living in a society under the rule of law.

And certainly, I know that U.S. law enforcement as well as other parts of the government are doing what they can to help educate people as to potential dangers that are there. Yeah, we certainly want to make sure that, for example, when American citizens wish to contribute to the well-being of people overseas that they do so through charities that actually get money to the people in need rather than having it diverted for use by terrorist organizations.

So I think there are a lot of efforts out there that are underway in terms of what's going on here domestically. Obviously, that's largely done by other agencies of government. But we are committed to making sure that all our citizens are protected from terrorism and the terrorist threat, and we're also committed to making sure that all our citizens have the right to freely express themselves, to exercise their freedom of religion and freedom of expression, and can do so in a way that's safe and secure.

Mr. Lambros.

QUESTION: On Greece. Mr. Casey, the CIA in its Factbook revised April the 17th is claiming that there is a Turkish minority in Greece of 2 percent. Do you agree?

MR. CASEY: I agree that there's something in the CIA Factbook about Greece. What's in it, you'd have to go ask the CIA. I haven't looked at it.

QUESTION: But it's -- excuse me, that's reflecting U.S. foreign policy. It's not something with intelligence matter. That's why (inaudible), your friend, the spokesman, reacted and stated, inter alia, today that the CIA data does not reflect the truth and are against the (inaudible). How do you respond?

MR. CASEY: I respond that the CIA has a Factbook; it is accurate to the best of the CIA's ability and knowledge. If you have questions about anything that is in that Factbook, I am sure that my friends in the CIA Public Affairs office would be happy to talk to you about it. It's a question that --

QUESTION: (Inaudible).

MR. CASEY: I agree that the CIA has a Factbook. I haven't looked at what's in it, Mr. Lambros, but I'm sure whatever's in there is accurate to the best of their knowledge.

QUESTION: May I go to Kosovo for a minute?

MR. CASEY: Oh, sure.

QUESTION: Okay. According to Under Secretary Nicholas Burns and the Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary Kurt Volker, Kosovo will be independent under international supervision and for a limited period of time, as I told you the other day. Question: Is the U.S. now favoring the creation of a new model of a world actor by placing the regions under the auspices of world organization or we simply revive the protectorate system? If such a model is good, Mr. Casey, for Kosovo, why not offer it for Republika Srpska as well and the confederated state of Bosnia and Herzegovina?

MR. CASEY: Thank you for that editorial comment.

QUESTION: Yes.

MR. CASEY: Look, Mr. Lambros, we've said repeatedly that Kosovo is not a precedent or a model for any other place around the world. Kosovo is its own unique situation. The process that we are going through now was outlined in Resolution 1244 at the beginning of the conflict. And again, this is a unique situation. It is proceeding in a unique way and I think is going to be a unique solution as well.

Let's go, Samir.

QUESTION: Do you have any comment on the terrorist act in Lebanon that aimed to create a big conflict in the country?

MR. CASEY: Samir, I actually don't right now. I'll try and get you something a little later.

Let's go back here.

QUESTION: Yeah, a question I asked about yesterday about the arms sales to Saudi Arabia as well as the Gulf and Israeli objections, this was also mentioned in the -- I think on the 5th of April in the Times and in Haaretz. Can you at least confirm for me that there is this arms deal in the works on behalf of the U.S. towards --

MR. CASEY: Well, we've talked about the fact that we are examining ways that we can strengthen defense cooperation with a number of the Gulf states, but the basic policy of the Administration is not to discuss arms sales until they have been approved and briefed to Congress. And I don't have anything new to offer you beyond what's already out there.

QUESTION: When do you plan to notify Congress about this deal?

MR. CASEY: Well, presumably, we would notify Congress once there was a deal.

QUESTION: Okay. So it's not that you present it and then Congress --

MR. CASEY: No. Look, the way this works is once an arms sale has gone through the internal approval process, it's notified to Congress. The fact that we haven't notified Congress yet means that there's been no new sales approved.

QUESTION: Thank you.

MR. CASEY: Nina.

QUESTION: Tom, do you mind if we go on to the New York Times report today on the front page about this book by George Tenet? Apparently, he's very, very critical of Administration officials, including Secretary Rice in her then-capacity as national security advisor about -- he basically says there was no serious debate whatsoever about going to war in Iraq. Do you have any comment or reaction to this?

MR. CASEY: Well, look, I haven't seen the book yet, obviously, because it hasn't come out yet. I think most of this reporting is either based on some sort of advanced versions of an interview that Mr. Tenet's going to be doing. But again, I haven't seen it, so I don't think it's appropriate to try and comment on a book that hasn't been released yet. I do think, as the White House has said repeatedly, that the President made his decision based on the full breadth and scope of information available to him. And as far as I know, there's been no change in that view nor has anyone contended anything to the contrary. So I certainly will see what the book actually contains when it comes out. But I just don't think it's appropriate at this point to try and talk about reports about what it may or may not contain.

QUESTION: Can I just ask a couple of questions about Putin, please?

MR. CASEY: Sure.

QUESTION: What's he's been saying about this missile defense system you're proposing. He's using the phrase mutually destruction. He's talking about pulling out of the CFE. I mean this rhetoric kind of has echoes of the Cold War. What would you make of his comments?

MR. CASEY: Look, first of all, I think there's a tremendous difference between the situation in 2007 versus the situation in, say, 1987. We cooperate with the Russian Government on a broad range of issues. We are working with them very successfully right now in the six-party talks to try and deal with North Korea's nuclear threat. We're doing so with them as part of the P-5+1 and our efforts to keep Iran from developing a nuclear weapon. We're cooperative members of the Security Council and certainly there are areas where differences exist, but where they are we have a good, frank discussion of those issues.

The Secretary, in fact, met yesterday with Foreign Minister Lavrov on the margins of the NATO-Russia Council. And the NATO-Russia Council itself is indicative of how very different things are now than they were many years ago. That Council was established so that there would be a relationship between Russia and the broader swath of Western Europe and the countries involved in NATO. Because everyone understands that Russia has a very significant and important role to play in the world today and that cooperation between NATO and Russia, between the United States and Russia, is in all of our interests. So certainly we understand that there's a difference between us on the question of missile defense. I think that that is ultimately an issue that is quite resolvable without any major problems or conflicts. And I certainly wouldn't see the placement of ten inceptors and a radar system, which are designed ultimately to be able to protect all the countries in Europe from the limited threat posed by a rogue nation like Iran launching a missile, as anything that can conceivably be seen as altering the strategic balance or changing the fundamental nature of the relationship between Russia and the West.

QUESTION: Thanks.

QUESTION: Tom.

MR. CASEY: Yes, David.

QUESTION: President Putin said today that this radar would have -- would extend to the Urals that -- again, that there's more than an innocent regional missile defense. Is he being hyperbolic? What are the -- what do you see in his motives here because he seems very convinced of this threat and he says it every day that it threatens --

MR. CASEY: Well, look, I'll let -- I'm certainly not going to try and speak on behalf of President Putin or speak on behalf of the Russian Government. And as you point out, they're pretty well capable of speaking for themselves on this and other issues.

But again, let's deal with what the facts are. What we're talking about are ten inceptors with a limited capacity to intercept a very limited number of missiles. The Russian deterrent is many thousand missiles. It certainly, more importantly, is not a deterrent that is directed at the United States or at the West or at any place in particular. It's there to meet Russia's defensive needs. But I think it's hard for anyone to understand when you look at the facts what it is about ten inceptors that is perceived as a threat to multiple -- to a multiple thousand missile and warhead deterrent. So this is something we're going to continue to discuss with the Russians. It's something that was discussed yesterday out at NATO and I think there was a fairly uniform and unified position on the party of the allies about what the facts are on this issue. So it's an area where clearly we have a difference. But again, it's not an insurmountable difference and I think ultimately we can find a way to do this, such that the Russian concerns can be addressed.

QUESTION: And again, have they communicated their intention to stop participating in the CFE?

MR. CASEY: No. As far as I know, there's been no formal communications of any kind indicating a willingness or a desire to remove themselves from existing treaty commitments.

Goyal.

QUESTION: Tom, do you have a loud and clear message for the army men in Pakistan and Bangladesh because four of their prime ministers, two each, are living now in exile and they're not allowed to return home to run for the office? And also my question is that as far as human rights and rule of law is concerning free and fair elections like in other democracies like in India, what message do you have for those countries?

MR. CASEY: Well --

QUESTION: And if you need to -- I'm sorry -- if you need any of those prime ministers, they are in exile. They keep visiting the U.S., London and other places.

MR. CASEY: Goyal, I think on any of those specific individuals and questions, people have spoken to it before. And I don't have anything particularly new to add to it. Obviously what we want to see happen in both those countries is a continued development of democracy there. That includes free and fair elections. That includes certainly upholding people's rights and whether that's freedom of expression or other human rights, certainly it includes upholding the constitution and the rule of law in those countries. But let's also understand that these are countries that are in a process of transition and the important thing is that these are decisions that the people of Pakistan and the people of Bangladesh are discussing themselves and are going to be working through. But the United States is certainly committed to doing what it can to help them as they seek to advance their own democratic process.

QUESTION: Mr. Casey.

MR. CASEY: Let's -- Nina, did you have something else?

QUESTION: (Inaudible.)

MR. CASEY: Sorry. Just hold on. Hold on one second, Mr. Lambros. Let's go to Nina first and then we'll get back to you.

QUESTION: Any Levinson updates? Have you heard from the Iranians at all?

MR. CASEY: No. Unfortunately, we still do not have an answer to our additional request to the Iranian Government for information about Mr. Levinson. We continue to seek those answers and we also continue to have discussions with some of our friends and allies who we've asked to go out as well and knock on some doors and see what they can do to help us try and ascertain his whereabouts.

QUESTION: And following on Iran, please?

QUESTION: Okay. Can I just ask have you expanded the efforts at all diplomatically or is it still these countries?

MR. CASEY: It's still the three countries right now, although certainly, you know, if we think it's useful we will expand that effort out.

QUESTION: Mr. Casey.

MR. CASEY: Okay, Mr. Lambros. Last one.

QUESTION: Why you are agreeing with the CIA data since there are no ethnic divisions in Greece?

MR. CASEY: Mr. Lambros, I'm not agreeing with the CIA data. I'm telling you that the CIA data is the CIA data and you can ask the CIA why they have their data the way they do.

QUESTION: (Inaudible) when I asked do you agree about the data of 2 percent, you said yes.

MR. CASEY: No, I actually told you I agree that there's a CIA Factbook with data in it and that the CIA, I'm sure, believes it's correct, but you can go ask them about it.

QUESTION: One question on FYROM and --

MR. CASEY: This is your last one. (Laughter.)

QUESTION: Yes. Okay. The (inaudible) in the letter sent by the Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice to Skopje authorities last week we discussed here presume that she has convinced Congress -- excuse me -- all NATO members and that no one is expected to object to the so-called name Macedonia. Did she consult with all interested NATO members in the matter? And did the Secretary seek assurances or she just takes everyone for granted not to use their veto power?

MR. CASEY: I guess you and I are thinking about different letters, Mr. Lambros, because the one I'm familiar with is one that reiterated standing U.S. policy concerning Macedonia and particularly considering the name issue means that we continue to support the efforts under UN auspices for Greece and Macedonia to come to a resolution on the name question.

Okay.

QUESTION: On Iran.

MR. CASEY: Last one, Goyal.

QUESTION: On Iran, please. Tom, the reports are saying again that Iran is now developing nuclear weapons and al-Qaida and other terrorists may have a hand because of their policies supporting terrorism in Iraq, in Afghanistan now and elsewhere around the globe. And now
Al-Fayyad said (inaudible) if any Iranian will come and talk, she will talk to them. Is she going to have a really clear and strong message as far as their support for terrorism and also their nuclear program or they're going to with some kind of soft --

MR. CASEY: Well, let's deal with a couple of things. I assume part of your reference is to the upcoming neighbors conference next week in Sharm el-Sheikh.

QUESTION: Yes. Yes, sir.

MR. CASEY: We'll see whether in fact the Iranians attend and if so at what level. Certainly Secretary Rice will be there, as will representatives of Iraq's neighbors and the other members of the G-8 and the Permanent Five at the Security Council. And again, let's remember the purpose of this is to help advance Iraqi efforts at political reform, at economic reform at enhancing security. And certainly we want to see all the countries that are there come to the table with not only positive words, but with a willingness to take positive actions to help Iraq deal with its very difficult situation right now. And unfortunately, from what we've seen in the past from both the Syrians and Iranians, their actions have never met the positive rhetoric that they've used.

And we have been very frank in the previous round, at the envoy level, in airing our concerns both about Iranian support for militias, about their provision of some of these very deadly IEDs that are having a serious impact on our troops. And I certainly expect that under discussions of those kinds of issues, the Secretary will be equally forceful in making our case on those and I expect that others will also raise their concerns with Iranian behavior as well as Syrian behavior when it comes to Iraq.

Thanks, guys.

(The briefing was concluded at 12:42 p.m.)

DPB # 75