• Military

• WMD Menu                           

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

• Intelligence
• Homeland Security
• Space

U.S. Department of State

Daily Press Briefing

MR. MCCLENNY: Back by popular demand. The Rolling Stones I'm not.

I have a skinny book, but I'm here to answer other questions if I can be helpful to you.

.............

QUESTION: A question on Iraq -- I know it's been covered but we never got a chance to ask Mr. Pickering this one. There's been a lot of talk about using the veto to block any easing of sanctions. Technically, what exactly is the procedure when these sanctions are renewed? Is it, in fact, feasible to use a veto to --

MR. MCCLENNY: I have to confess, Jonathan, I'm not certain. I will take the question, though, and I want to ask that we get you a written answer before the day is out. That's a perfectly legitimate question to ask, and I apologize for not having the answer right at my fingertips.

QUESTION: Because a lot of people talked about it. At a meeting at the White House today, people were saying we'd use the veto. But if it's a question - if it needs to be renewed by some kind of active process, then obviously a veto isn't enough to enforce - to renew them.

MR. MCCLENNY: I take the point entirely, and I should know the answer. I think I know the answer but, rather than potentially misspeak, particularly - how seldom I get a chance to come to the podium anyway. Rather than make a big mistake, let me get an absolutely correct answer for you and we'll get it to you in writing before the day is out. We'll post it before the day is out.

..................

QUESTION: Do you have any more since yesterday on the reports that missiles hit in Iran? Or did we communicate via the Swiss Embassy that we regretted that incident?

MR. MCCLENNY: No. We wouldn't, as a general rule, talk about diplomatic exchanges, whether they occurred or didn't occur. The question of whether US Defense Department missiles went awry or someplace astray is something you should, frankly, address to them.

Last time I looked - which was yesterday, when this came up - I understood that they were looking into these reports, trying to figure out what they were based on. And I haven't heard anything back, so I don't know whether they're true or false. But, really, it's a Defense Department issue.

QUESTION: On Iraq? Do we know if --

MR. MCCLENNY: I thought we did Iraq, but go ahead.

QUESTION: Oh, I think we did the periphery of Iraq, basically, but with the - the inspectors went out, did the U-2s stop flying?

MR. MCCLENNY: UNSCOM U-2s?

QUESTION: Hmm?

MR. MCCLENNY: UNSCOM U-2s?

QUESTION: The UNSCOM U-2, yes. When UNSCOM went out, did they stop flying? And has it now come to be - if that's the case, that they've stopped flying - has it now come to be that it's US reconnaissance only that we rely on, or that the UN relies on, or do you know?

MR. MCCLENNY: You'll have to ask UNSCOM the status of their information-gathering mechanisms, if you will, inside Iraq. I would doubt that they were flying, but I don't honestly know. The other half of your question deals with - and you used the word "reconnaissance," but the word you meant to use was "intelligence," and it's not something that I would discuss from this podium.

QUESTION: Well, it's a policy question, in this respect --

MR. MCCLENNY: We actually addressed this yesterday, Bill, in some depth -- that is to say, the depth that we're willing to address it, which is to say that we have means of discerning what is going on inside Iraq. Those means cannot be described here and would not be described here, and I'm just not going to get into it.

QUESTION: But I'm not asking about the means. I'm asking about what you do with the information in order to suppress weapons of mass destruction. You use --

MR. MCCLENNY: I don't follow your question.

QUESTION: Do you use your airpower in coordination with your eyes over Iraq, and is that how --

MR. MCCLENNY: You're asking an intelligence question, Bill.

QUESTION: Mmmm --

MR. MCCLENNY: Yes.

QUESTION: Well, I think it becomes a policy, too, but okay, I'll drop that.

..................

QUESTION: I want to return to Iraq once more.

MR. MCCLENNY: I'll do my best, but I doubt if I can be helpful to you.

QUESTION: The Under Secretary mentioned the possibility of expanding the oil-for-food program. Can you elaborate at all on that? Would it mean investment in the oil sector to raise production capacity?

MR. MCCLENNY: I really couldn't elaborate. I think this is at an early stage yet. He said about all that we're willing to say today on that subject. Sorry.

QUESTION: Can I go back to that question? I have another approach, maybe another angle. So it becomes known that there is some movement in the weapons of mass destruction field somewhere in Iraq. As the UNSCOM inspectors are not there to go and detect it and put monitors on it, then how is it that such would be regulated under these current circumstances?

MR. MCCLENNY: UNSCOM's not operational right now. We've made that very clear. UNSCOM's not on the ground; UNSCOM's not operating.

QUESTION: I understand, but would it come to US forces to use force to bomb these kinds of facilities and these kinds of activities?

MR. MCCLENNY: We've indicated that that would be one possibility.

QUESTION: Okay, one possibility; is there any other?

MR. MCCLENNY: There probably are, but I'm not here to lay out for you what we might do in a hypothetical situation.

Thank you very much.

QUESTION: Thank you, Lee.

(The briefing concluded at 1:25 P.M.)

[end of document]