Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD)

In other travel news, I would like to note that Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage will be visiting the Asia Pacific region.  He is going to travel to Japan, South Korea, China and Australia December 8th through 14th as part of our continuing consultation with friends and allies on Iraq and efforts to ensure that Iraq complies with the UN Security Council Resolution 1441 and other relevant UN resolutions.  His meetings in all four capitals will be with senior officials and will, of course, include discussions of other bilateral and regional and global issues of concern.  More specifically, because there was a lot of interest, he expects to be in Japan December 8th through 10th, South Korea December 10th through 11th, China the 11th to 12th, and in Australia from the 13th through the 14th of December.

(...)

QUESTION:  Let me flip back because the Armitage question might be a quick one, an easily answered question.  Will he in his stops in Japan and elsewhere be soliciting support -- I realize it is said the President hasn't decided whether to use force against Iraq, but will he be asking for their cooperation financially, logistically or otherwise on this trip?

MR. REEKER:  Well, you are absolutely right, Barry, that the President has not made any decision about military action against Iraq.  In fact, the President has said many times that that is the least desired option.  The goal is to see the disarmament of Iraq, as required under the UN Security Council resolution.

But as we have said, we have been having discussions through diplomatic channels with a number of countries around the world.  We believe that the United Nations will want to see its resolution carried out in full and we believe it's important to look at all the possibilities, to be prepared for all eventualities as we watch the process unfold and see if Iraq has made a commitment to change its approach to the international community and to live up to its obligations under the Security Council resolution.

So those discussions are continuing in a variety of different fora, including visits by senior officials.  We have discussed the Deputy Secretary of Defense who is traveling along with our Under Secretary for Political Affairs Ambassador Grossman.  Obviously, that type of discussion took place at the highest levels when, before Thanksgiving, the President met with many of his counterparts at the NATO summit in Prague.

So this is a discussion that takes place.  We have been quite clear that we think our experience shows that to keep the pressure on Iraq, to show Saddam Hussein what he must do, that we have to be prepared for all eventualities.  And so that is the type of discussion we are undertaking and Deputy Secretary Armitage will have that opportunity to discuss in person with leaders from those four countries in the Asia Pacific region when he travels there next week.

QUESTION:  When he has that discussion, since there is a contingency, there is an option for using force, will he ask for their support logistically, financially or otherwise should the President choose to use force, or is it too early to ask? 

MR. REEKER:  We'll just be a discussing a variety of things with them, Barry.  I'm not going to go into the details of our diplomatic conversations, particularly conversations that haven't taken place yet.  But we believe that there is a strong consensus, as evidenced by the unanimous UN Security Council resolution, that Iraq must be held to account. 

The ball is in Saddam's court and he has an opportunity now to demonstrate to the world that Iraq wishes to change, make a strategic decision and change its approach to the international community and disarm, as required under the UN Security Council resolutions, to eliminate the weapons of mass destruction that are a threat not only to his own people but to the region and to world peace as a whole.

QUESTION:  So, really, we're not saying -- the State Department isn't saying whether this trip has among its purposes soliciting support in the event the US decides that it needs to use force against Iraq?

MR. REEKER:  I think I will stick with the language I used, Barry, and that is that we are continuing consultations with friends and allies about Iraq and efforts to ensure that Iraq complies with Resolution 1441.  And so Deputy Secretary Armitage's meetings in the region will reflect that as well as other topics of interest in a regional and global context.

QUESTION:  One more, if I may, on Iraq.  I was not at work yesterday, but I noticed the White House, the Vice President's Office, the Pentagon, all joined in very critical statements about Iraq.  Could I ask -- I don't know if State was part of that, but today is a new day.  Is there any assessment you wish to offer at this interim stage in the search for illicit weapons as to how Iraq is behaving?

MR. REEKER:  Well, I think you have to look at all of the statements, Barry.  We did discuss this to a degree yesterday.  This is a process that is five or six days old in terms of the inspections process.  As you know, we are very committed to doing all we can to support and help the inspectors from the United Nations and the International Atomic Energy Agency.

I think it is premature to make any particular comment on that exact process as we see, first of all, what Iraq will provide under the declaration that they are required to give by the 8th of this month under the resolution.  The President, yesterday, pointed to the Iraqi regime's continuing firing on American and British pilots, the letters that Iraq has sent filled with protests and falsehoods, as indications that perhaps Iraq does not appear to be taking the path of compliance.

And let me remind you that Resolution 1441 gives Iraqis an opportunity to signal to the world a strategic shift in their approach.  The burden is on them to do this and Resolution 1441 requires active and full cooperation.  This means every single day demonstrating active cooperation by Iraq, signaling a strategic shift.  And I think the Secretary General himself said this morning this is only the beginning.  So we will keep watching that very closely and we will also be watching closely the declaration that Iraq is required to provide, a declaration that we believe must be credible and complete.

(...)

QUESTION:  Iraq.  At the Pentagon yesterday, the President said the situation in Iraq doesn't look very encouraging, but the weapons inspectors seem to be getting cooperation.  Is the US goal disarmament or is it regime change?

MR. REEKER:  I think all of those questions have been answered before, most of them in my responses to your colleagues questions earlier.  What we're focused on right now, as the President reiterated again yesterday at the Pentagon, is Iraqi compliance with Security Council Resolution 1441; this, of course, being their opportunity to show that they have made a strategic choice, they've made a decision to change the way they approach their role in the international community, that they will cooperate with the Security Council, that they will cooperate with inspectors, that they have fundamentally changed the way the way that regime operates. 

That remains to be seen, and the President pointed out that Iraq has continued to fire on coalition aircraft patrolling the no-fly zones.  They've sent letters of protest espousing falsehoods, and one has to question if Iraq is taking the path to compliance.  But we're watching this in total and we're going to see if Iraq has full active cooperations every day and is demonstrating their active cooperation and any sort of signal that Iraq is giving that they have made a strategic shift in their approach.  So we're going to keep watching that obviously very closely.

Arshad.

QUESTION:  Related to a lighter-hearted question, what can you tell us about the repairs to the roof of the old Iraqi Embassy, and does that have any implications for your expectations of a new Ambassador there under this or any other regime?

MR. REEKER:  Contrary to the suggestions in some gossip columns around the city, as we have told others that have inquired on the subject, since 1991 when relations were severed between the United States and Iraq, the residence of the Iraqi Ambassador, or the Iraqi mission to the United States, their residence has been vacant and, under the standard international agreements, falls under the custody of the Department of State. 

The roof of that residence is leaking badly, and we hired a contractor to replace the roof and stop further water damage -- part of our responsibility to see to the upkeep of that.  The cost of those repairs comes from frozen Iraqi assets, and I don't have a final dollar figure on that because it's still an ongoing project. 

So I don't think anyone should read anything into or out of it other than the fact that we're living up to our responsibilities to protect the structural soundness of this building, which is under our care pursuant to international agreements.

Yes, Eli.

QUESTION:  On Iraq, and I think this has slipped through the cracks because this is in reference to a news story last week.  It was asked about yesterday at the White House briefing.  But did the State Department have any role at all in vetting any of these inspectors in the regime?

MR. REEKER:  I'm missing --

QUESTION:  Did the State Department -- the UN weapons inspectors, did the State Department have any role in recommending Americans?  Did the State Department --

MR. REEKER:  We referred resumes that came to us as part of the call that Mr. Blix put out when he created -- when, under the Security Council auspices, obviously, he established the UN Mission for Verification.  I think it was about two years ago in the year 2000 that that took place.  There was a public call put out looking for people with appropriate experience, and as a member-nation, just as many other nations, we could also be a pass-through point for that. 

So people did contact us.  We also tried to spread the word.  I think there was a letter from Dr. Blix asking all member countries to try to get people to apply to meet their hiring needs, and so in a number of cases we forwarded curriculum vitae to the United Nations for that purpose.

QUESTION:  When you -- so, if I could just get this straight.  People sent their curricula vitae to -- curriculum vitae to the State Department and you just simply sent them in the fax machine or did you --

MR. REEKER:  Some people --

QUESTION:  Or did you evaluate them and then pass on those candidates that you thought were --

MR. REEKER:  I think there would be a general review to see if they met the requirements generally of that, somebody that the UNMOVIC organization would want to take a look at.  And those were forwarded up, I don't believe they were necessarily faxed, but they may have been, or sent through the US Postal Service or through some other form.  I couldn't tell you, but I know that we did forward some resumes to them for their consideration.  The decisions are obviously made by UNMOVIC and I think they've addressed that question fairly thoroughly themselves.

QUESTION:  Well, yeah.  But I'm just trying to -- I mean, I'm sure you know where this is going.  There's this poor fellow in Virginia who happens to be a weapons inspector that's the head of some S & M club.

MR. REEKER:  Your point?

QUESTION:  Well, I'm just saying, was that part of this process?

MR. REEKER:  Was what part of what process?

QUESTION:  So, did you check the resumes?  I'm saying you forwarded names of people.  Matt's saying to me, "Would you put the S & M stuff on the resume?"  And I'm asking you, though, was there a check --

MR. REEKER:  Eli, I haven't read your resume, and I don't -- (laughter) --

QUESTION:  It's not my resume.  It's The Washington Post story.

MR. REEKER:  We review generally a resume, a curriculum vitae, to see if it meets the broad needs as specified by the UN Mission.  Dr. Blix's letter outlined what he was looking for in terms of the technical expertise.  For instance, a munitions expert could be someone that would be of great value.  Someone that might have 20 or more years of experience, someone who may be well known to the media in terms of using their expertise to help the media in discussions on camera and off for those subjects. 

So that would be the kind of person, and if that were reflected in their resume, that resume would be referred to the UN for their consideration and evaluation and their decision.  And I think the UN has been quite clear in their process of doing that and I'd just refer you up to them if you have any further questions. 

Yes, ma'am.

QUESTION:  What I think he's asking is, were there no background checks done by the State Department?  These resumes came into you.  You said you did a broad, general look to make sure they --

MR. REEKER:  No, we wouldn't do background checks on people we're not hiring.  We're simply referring them to the United Nations.

QUESTION:  But isn't there an implication that if the State Department passes on a resume, that there's some implication that it's approved or --

MR. REEKER:  No, I don't believe there is.  I think you could ask the UN Mission that.  We were asked in their letter, and many other countries were as well, if we could forward on any people, get the word out, and we certainly did that.  And so professionals who have experience in that realm, I think many of them probably went directly to the UN pursuant to the letters and I presume advertisements in appropriate publications or through appropriate job search firms to find the right people.  We forward those up.  We aren't hiring people so we wouldn't be doing a particular background check.

QUESTION:  Based on this incident, would you think in the future it might be more realistic if you are going to on-pass people's resumes that there be some sort of brief background check to make sure that again, based on, I think, the public's perception if the State Department passes on someone's resume, there is some indication of compliance with --

MR. REEKER:  I think what the State Department looks for at that level of passing on information is the professional experience of the individual.  Does he or she meet the basic requests --

QUESTION:  Do you check what the person puts down on the resume? If they wrote down they had --

MR. REEKER:  Again, you're just driving at something that -- we aren't hiring people.  We are passing along resumes with professional -- that list professional experience.  And that's what was passed to the UN.  The UN has addressed this subject, I think quite extensively, and you really have to talk to them about it.  It's their hiring process. 

We, as well as, as I said, many other countries, I think help the process by referring for their consideration.  And I've seen the cover letters that go with these resumes that said specifically I forward to you 2, 3, X number of curricula vitae for your consideration without any implication of recommendation or any commentary other than based on this curricula vitae, it would suggest this person has qualifications that may meet your needs.  And it's up to Dr. Blix or his team to make those determinations in terms of contracts they award and hiring they carry out, and I'll just have to refer you to him on that process, because it's his process.

QUESTION:  You're not vetting them?

MR. REEKER:  No, Eli.

QUESTION:  Okay.

MR. REEKER:  I've answered it about, I don't know how many times now.  I've been quite clear on what the process was, so why don't we stick with that? 

(...)

QUESTION:  There was a report today -- you may or may not be prepared for this -- the International Crisis Group out of Brussels, a report that Serbia/Yugoslavia's defense cooperation with Iraq is extensive, somewhat ingrained, exacerbated by the administrative problems --

MR. REEKER:  We've talked about that at great length here from this podium many times before.  I don't have anything on this particular report from an independent group.  We have made quite clear our views on the matter and we have praised some of the steps that the Government of Yugoslavia, as well as the Government of Serbia and the Government of Bosnia-Herzegovina, steps they've taken to look into this and to make sure that this type of cooperation, which is in violation of UN Security Council resolutions, that that does not take place.  I don't have anything to add further and I haven't seen the specific report you mention.

(...)

Thank you.