21 May 2002
Rice Briefs on Bush Trip to Europe
(Bush to reaffirm transatlantic alliance, post-9/11 challenges) (7070)
On his upcoming trip to Europe, President Bush will talk about the
progress being made towards "a Europe, whole, free and at peace, in
which Russia finds its place," and will reaffirm the transatlantic
alliance and the need to meet post-9/11 challenges, says National
Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice.
"He will consult with some of our oldest friends and most important
allies," Rice told journalists during a May 20 briefing on the trip,
"and the president will help usher in a new relationship between the
United States and Russia based on increasingly common interests and
mutual trust."
The treaty Bush and Russian President Vladimir Putin are to sign she
termed "a historic treaty that codifies the most dramatic strategic
arms reductions in history."
The new NATO-Russia Council to be launched in Italy, Rice said, "can
usher in a new era of cooperation between Russia, the United States
and Europe."
The week-long presidential trip begins May 22 and includes stops in
Berlin, Moscow, St. Petersburg, Paris, Normandy, and Rome.
In Berlin, Bush will meet with German Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder and
address a special session of the German Bundestag. In Moscow, Bush
will meet not only with Putin but also leaders of community and
religious groups and non-government organizations. In St. Petersburg,
Bush and Putin will address students at St. Petersburg University and
take questions; this appearance will be broadcast on Russian
television.
Bush will then travel to Paris to meet with newly re-elected French
President Jacques Chirac and will go to Normandy to observe Memorial
Day, the holiday on which Americans remember their war dead.
In Rome, Bush will call on Italian President Carlo Ciampi, attend the
NATO-Russia Summit, and go to the Vatican for an audience with Pope
John Paul II.
During the briefing, Rice answered questions from reporters about the
Bush-Putin summit, Russia-Iran relationship, the arms reduction
agreement, missile defense cooperation and the broad U.S.-Russia
relationship; Bush's speech to the German Bundestag; CIA Director
George Tenet's possible return to the Middle East; post-9/11
challenges, the war on terrorism and U.S. homeland security;
India-Pakistan; U.S.-Europe trade disputes, including steel tariffs;
Cuba; and Bush's visit to Normandy.
[In the text, 1 trillion = 1,000,000 million]
Following is the White House transcript of the briefing:
(begin transcript)
The White House
Office of the Press Secretary
(Miami, Florida)
May 20, 2002
PRESS BRIEFING BY
NATIONAL SECURITY ADVISOR DR. CONDOLEEZZA RICE
ON THE PRESIDENT'S TRIP TO EUROPE AND RUSSIA
The James S. Brady Briefing Room
4:40 P.M. EDT
DR. RICE: Good afternoon. All right. I want to talk briefly about why
the President is making this trip, and then highlight the key events.
And then I'll be happy to take your questions.
Last year, the President spoke in Warsaw of his vision for a Europe,
whole, free and at peace, in which Russia finds its place. On this
trip, the President will talk to our Europe friends about the major
progress we've made toward that goal. He will reaffirm the
transatlantic alliance, and advance its adaptation to meet post-9/11
challenges.
He will consult with some of our oldest friends and most important
allies. And the President will help usher in a new relationship
between the United States and Russia, based on increasingly common
interests and mutual trust. He will advance that relationship with
President Putin by signing an historic treaty that codifies the most
dramatic strategic arms reductions in history, and by launching the
NATO-Russia Council in Italy, along with his NATO counterparts. And
that council can usher in a new era of cooperation between Russia, the
United States and Europe.
The President will leave for Europe Wednesday morning. His first stop
will be Berlin, where, Wednesday evening, he will meet Chancellor
Schroeder. Later the President will be joined by Mrs. Bush, who, as
you all know, has been in Europe since May 13th, and who will
accompany the President for the remainder of the trip.
Thursday morning, the President and Mrs. Bush will be guests of
President and First Lady of Germany, Mr. Johannes Rau and Mrs.
Christina Rau and Bellevue Palace. The President and Mrs. Bush will
then be welcomed by Chancellor Schroeder, and the President and the
Chancellor will hold a bilateral meeting to discuss Germany's
cooperation and assistance in the war on terror, NATO-Russian
cooperation, and bilateral issues. The meeting will be followed by a
working lunch, and the lunch will be followed by a joint press
availability.
Thursday afternoon, President Bush will address a special session of
the German Bundestag. He will outline his vision of a Europe, whole,
free and at peace, and discuss Europe's and the United States' hard
work and joint success in realizing the vision as we approach the NATO
summit in Prague. The President looks forward to conveying this
historic message from the united capital of a united Germany, at the
heart of a uniting Europe.
Later Thursday afternoon, President and Mrs. Bush will depart for
Moscow. He will first meet one-on-one with President Putin, and later
hold an expanded bilateral meeting with President Putin. After the
bilateral meeting, the two Presidents will sign an historic treaty
reducing U.S. and Russian strategic nuclear forces by roughly
two-thirds over 10 years. This agreement, which is a mere three pages
long, and took only six months to negotiate, signifies that the
vestiges of the Cold War are behind the two countries, and sets the
stage for a new era of cooperation and friendship.
After the signing ceremony, the two Presidents will hold a joint press
availability. Following the press availability, President and Mrs.
Putin will host President and Mrs. Bush for lunch at the Kremlin.
Friday afternoon, President and Mrs. Bush will take a walking tour of
the Kremlin and Cathedral Square. After the tour, they will meet the
leaders of community groups, religious groups, and non-governmental
organizations. That evening, President and Mrs. Putin will host
President and Mrs. Bush for dinner at the Putin's residence in Moscow.
Saturday morning, President and Mrs. Bush will depart Moscow for St.
Petersburg. The two Presidents will proceed to St. Petersburg
University, where they will each make remarks and jointly take
questions from students. This appearance will be broadcast on Russian
television.
Sunday morning, the President and Mrs. Bush will visit the Kazan
Cathedral and the Choral Synagogue, giving them the chance to witness
firsthand the right to freedom of worship, which is now thriving in
Russia.
After arriving in France, President Bush will meet one-on- one with
President Chirac, followed by an expanded bilateral meeting. The two
Presidents will talk about French cooperation in the war on terror,
the need to upgrade NATO capabilities, and the importance of
continuing to bring Russia West. The two Presidents will hold a joint
news conference, and later that evening will host -- will hold a
working dinner.
On Monday morning, Memorial Day, the President and Mrs. Bush will
travel to Normandy, where they will attend a service at the St. Marie
Eglise. After the service, they will tour the American cemetery at
Normandy, where they will also lay a wreath, and the Presidents will
make remarks.
Monday night, the President and Mrs. Bush will depart Normandy for
Rome. And that evening, the President will hold a bilateral meeting
and working dinner with Prime Minister Berlusconi. They will discuss
the NATO-Russia summit, the war on terror, and bilateral issues.
On Tuesday, the President will call on the President of Italy,
President Chiampi, before proceeding to the summit, where he will hold
a bilateral meeting with NATO Secretary General Lord Robertson. At the
summit, the President and his colleagues will sign the NATO-Russia
agreement. After the summit, the President will meet with the Holy
Father, before leaving Rome for Washington.
Happy to take your questions.
Q: Other than the arms treaty, what other agreements do you expect to
be signed in Moscow?
DR. RICE: Well, there will be a number of statements that talk about
the various broad aspects of the relationship. There will be a joint
political statement that puts in context this new era in U.S.-Russia
relations. There will be a statement on economic relations, a
statement on relationships between citizens. We expect a
counterterrorism statement. There are a number of others that are
being discussed. But these are all representative of the working
agenda that the United States and Russia are going to pursue over the
next several years.
And I should just mention that one of the important issues that they
will deal with are non-proliferation issues as a part of the bilateral
agenda.
Q: Russia has said that it would -- this cap on oil exports. Will
there be any talk of the United States purchasing Russian oil?
DR. RICE: I think we will talk about energy cooperation, but I don't
know whether they will talk about specifics. You know, oil is really a
commodity, it's not really purchased country to country. It's
purchased on world markets. And I assume that that would continue to
be the case.
Q: Jumping ahead, do you suspect the meeting with the Pope that there
will be any mention of the controversy here with the priests?
DR. RICE: We will talk about whatever the Holy Father would like to
talk about. And the President's view, of course, is that this is a
matter for the Catholic Church, the clergy, Catholics worldwide to
resolve.
Q: He won't bring it up, himself?
DR. RICE: I don't think he will.
Q: Will the President speak with President Putin at all about the
increasing steps toward democracy in Russia vis-a-vis more freedom of
the press, human rights, et cetera, et cetera?
DR. RICE: Yes. And in two ways. First of all, there will be a meeting
with non-governmental groups, members of the business community, civic
society. The President also has begun with the Russians something
called a media dialogue, which looks at the problems that confront a
free press in an emerging economy and a transitional state like
Russia. And he believes that this both gives some concrete support to
the thought of free media through talking about, for instance,
economic arrangements that might actually support the free press, how
laws might be put in place to protect the free press from unwanted
government interference.
But, yes, they talk about the free press, and the President is trying
to pursue an agenda that might actually help the free press, as well.
Q: When you mention that the President's Germany speech is going to
talk about the post-9/11 challenges and the changing relationship, can
you give us, if not -- some sort of preview or at least thematically,
what kinds of things he may be talking about?
DR. RICE: Well, quite clearly the President is going to lay out the
hopeful future that we and our transatlantic allies, and now with a
growing relationship with Russia, that that hopeful future for
bringing others into the community of democratic, market-oriented
states. In that context, he also notes that there are some threats to
the values and to the stability that makes that possible. And
terrorism is among those.
He will talk about the importance of the kinds of activities we've had
-- intelligence-sharing, law enforcement activities, freezing
terrorists' financing -- but also call on all of our allies, and in
fact, when we go to NATO we'll talk more about NATO itself beginning
to look at capabilities that might help in the fight against
terrorism.
The fact is that after 9/11, when NATO declared that an attack on one
is an attack on all, in Article 5, that was a very real step and a
real realization of exactly what the President's is going to be
saying.
Now, it took some adaptation, even on the part of the American Armed
Forces, to figure out how to fight a war in this terrorist haven,
marrying up horses with 21st century air power. It also took a while
to integrate NATO forces into that effort. But when you look at it,
member states of NATO, not as NATO qua-NATO, but member states of
NATO, now play an increasingly important role in the coalition's
efforts -- the Danes, the Germans, the British, the French. And you
would like, the next time around, just like the United States is
making a transformation of its own capabilities, to be able to deal
with the next time that we have to deal with a terrorist safe haven,
for NATO to have the same kind of conversation. And I think the
President will press that agenda.
Q: On the war on terror, coincidentally, can you boil down why you
think, based on changes that have been made, the administration is
now, after 9/11, in a better position to connect the dots of a
particular terror scheme, in a way that it was not able to do,
perhaps, before 9/11?
DR. RICE: David, as you might imagine, we have given this a lot of
thought. And there's been a lot of examination of how to achieve
better intelligence fusion between domestic and foreign intelligence,
how to make sure that information is getting shared with the
appropriate agencies. The fact is that we can never be certain that we
-- we can be certain that we will likely be target of an attack again.
We're still vulnerable. That's why it is important to keep assessing
the threats. That's also why it's important for the American people to
be vigilant. That's why it's important to have the threat alert system
that we have.
But from the very top, the fact that the FBI Director, the CIA
Director, the President, the Vice President, Tom Ridge and I sit there
together to look at the threat situation, to talk about what to do,
the fact that there is an Office of Homeland Security now that can
really pay attention to what the domestic agencies are doing in
response, the fact that there are new airport security measures that
are being put in place -- I might say, you know, airport security
measures that have been looked at for a long time, but really kind of
gained acceleration after 9/11 -- port security, border security,
broader intelligence worldwide network to try and bring to bear
liaison services and what they know -- there are a lot of activities.
But it will not just stop there. I think that both Bob Mueller and
George Tenet have talked about important organizational changes that
they want to make and need to make to make certain that the right kind
of analysis is done of intelligence information, so that we know when
something is actionable.
Q: Dr. Rice, once again India and Pakistan are at the brink of war.
This issue comes during the two Presidents' meetings in Moscow. What
do you think they are going to discuss, or what they are going to tell
India and Pakistan?
DR. RICE: Well, I might note, the Russians have been helpful in some
of the diplomacy in South Asia. During the high -- period of
heightened threat and concern after Christmas and in January, the
Russian Foreign Minister was also active. President Putin was also
active. And it is an example of how cooperation between Russia and the
United States can help in some of these regional crises that we face
from time to time.
Let me just say that there is a lot of active diplomacy on the
India-Pakistan front. We take the assurances and the commitments that
President Musharraf made to -- not just to the President, but in an
open speech, that they would end activity across the line of control
from the territory of Pakistan, that they would deal with the
infrastructure of terrorists, and we take those quite seriously,
expect them to be fulfilled.
We expect the Indian government to recognize that war will help no one
here, that neither side, Pakistan nor India is going to benefit from
war. And we recognize the statesmanlike stance that India has taken in
recent months, starting with the attack on the Indian Parliament. And
the President had a chance to communicate that to Prime Minister
Vajpayee just a few days ago.
Q: Can you tell us, Condi, on the non-proliferation element that you
mentioned, what does the President plan to say about Russia's
activities with Iran? And also, what, if anything, about Russia's
activities in South Asia?
DR. RICE: The President intends to talk a lot about the
Russian-Iranian relationship. It's been a problem for several years.
We intend to keep pressing that agenda. We also want to talk about
weapons of mass destruction, their control, controlling the materials
so that biological, chemical, nuclear leakage doesn't happen. I mean,
there's a big agenda there.
Q: Is that going to be the subject of a further agreement? Is it going
to be the subject of further --
DR. RICE: I think the way to think of it, David, is that in the
context of a relationship that has gotten much stronger in the
underlying notion of cooperative, common security threats, we need to
now put non-proliferation in that context. This is not saying to the
Russians, you've been doing these bad things -- stop. The reason that
we and the Russians need to address these kinds of activities, is that
as the President said, weapons of mass destruction are a -- one of the
two big threats to stability; the other being terrorism.
We've made a lot of progress with the Russians on the counterterrorism
mission. We're going to try to make progress on the non-proliferation
front. I will say we've had -- Spence Abraham has had more effective
discussions with his counterpart in recent months. And that gives us
some hope that we might be able to address these issues in a different
way.
Q: If I could, back on terrorism for a moment. The concerns that you
and the Vice President expressed over this weekend, is it the same
kind of information, the same generality, the same lack of specificity
that we had last summer? And did the administration feel obligated to
share I guess what you would say our your fears of because of the flap
last weekend about you knowing something that you didn't tell everyone
about?
DR. RICE: No, Jim, the President said all the way back just a few
days, frankly, after 9/11 that when he knew information he would share
it with the American people. And you have to recognize that we have
more in the way of sheer volume of information now. We have detainees
in custody. we have a kind of worldwide mobilization of the
intelligence network, so we're just getting a lot more information.
And some of it may be sheer volume. But we also understand better
through some of the systems that are in place, like the threat alert
system, that there are different kinds of information that need to be
communicated differently.
When we had information that, though it was general, was at least
specific to financial institutions, we communicated that to law
enforcement and they were able to act on that. When we had information
that was specific as to a place, we have gotten in touch with the law
enforcement officials of that place and said, look, it's a general
mention, but it is a mention. You have to always judge the credibility
of any such information. You, frankly, get a lot of information that
on the second day doesn't look nearly as credible as it looked on the
first day. You need to take the time to make that assessment.
We also believe, as the President and the Vice President and others
have done several times since 9/11, that we need to keep reminding the
American people of our vulnerability. Sunday was not the first time in
this period since 9/11 that the President, the Vice President, the
Secretary of Defense, Secretary of State, myself, have talked about
vulnerabilities. And we will continue to do that because we believe
that the American people are among best and most important
early-warning system as the -- or the people are, as they turned out
to be on that American Airlines flight.
Q: But the nature of the information was --
DR. RICE: The nature of the information is still pretty general. And
it is, again -- you know, it's a little difficult to judge -- is it
volume, is it we've got more sources. But we are on a higher state of
alert now than we were on 9/11. There is a lot more going on in terms
of port security, border security, airport security. So it would be
wrong to take this period and say, all right, if the information looks
the same as it did in 9/11, what does that say you should do. We're on
a higher state of alert than we were on 9/11, but we assess it every
day and we're going to continue to assess it every day. And when there
is more specific information, if it is credible, it will be passed
along.
Q: And my question from Miami.
DR. RICE: Oh, yes, there is a remote from Miami. So, who's there?
Hello?
Q: No questions from Miami. (Laughter.)
DR. RICE: Okay. (Laughter.) Yes.
Q: What is the strategic value -- each side may be going down to
two-thirds, but still is going to have 2,000 or so nuclear warheads
which are not going to be destroyed, but simply going into storage.
So, from your point of view, what is the value of this agreement?
DR. RICE: Well, I think that when you have far fewer operationally
deployed warheads it does say something about the readiness of the
forces. Even if they're stored or they're someplace else not on
launchers.
Let me just remind everybody, and it's a point that, frankly, we've
had trouble getting across, so let me just say it again -- there is no
arms control treaty in the history of the relationship between the
United States and Russia that destroyed warheads. Always the
reductions were achieved either by retiring platforms, by converting
platforms to other uses, by storing warheads, or by dismantling them.
Right? Now, some or all of that is going to happen, and some will be
stored as spares.
There is an asymmetry; the Russians are continuing to make warheads --
for good reasons. I mean, it's not an accusation, for good reasons. We
essentially don't do that, so there's some asymmetry. But your point
is a really good one, and it's a little bit like the point we kept
making about the ABM Treaty. What keeps Russia and the United States
from going to war today is not the number of nuclear weapons that they
have on either side, or the antiballistic missile treaty, or some
outdated notion of strategic stability. It's that they have nothing to
go to war about.
And in 1972, when the entire arms control regime really took off, you
were dealing with two implacably hostile enemies. The only thing they
agreed about was they didn't want to annihilate one another because it
meant committing suicide. So you needed highly articulated arms
control treaties that the two sides could be confident that the
interaction of their forces was not going to cause them to go to war.
You had Soviet forces deep into the heart of Europe that looked like
they were on a hair-trigger to attack Europe. With Poland in NATO,
with Germany unified, with Russia about to sign an historic "at 20"
agreement with NATO, you're right, it is not this arms reduction
treaty that brings stability; it's the political relationship. And the
treaty is, therefore, more emblematic of the underlying political
relationship than the other way around. That said, it's a good thing
to do. And I think everybody feels better with more numbers in the
world than higher.
Q: Can you confirm, is Director Tenet expected to go back to the
Mideast this week?
DR. RICE: We're still talking about the timing of where George goes
and when. He is committed to pulling together the parties, site to be
determined, when it looks like he can make progress on the
restructuring of the Palestinian security forces. But there's no fixed
date yet, John.
Q: Does this week look positive?
DR. RICE: I can't really answer that. There's no fixed date. But I
think he'll either go the region, or he'll meet them someplace
relatively soon.
Q: I haven't really heard you say anything about trade, and yet you
have real problems with the Europeans on the farm bill, on steel. I'm
wondering, does the President intend to bring those issues up in any
forums, and if so --
DR. RICE: Oh, I'm sure they'll come up. I don't have any doubt about
that. Look, we have over $2 trillion -- nearly $2 trillion in trade
with the Europeans, and a small amount of that trade is at dispute
here. Trade disputes, trade difficulties are not new in any
relationship. We -- the President believes that the steel decision
that he made was in accordance both with U.S. law and consistent with
WTO, and that he did it because he has to enforce America's trade
laws. And if he doesn't do that, he will never maintain the consensus
around free trade. And so he did what he did, for very good reason.
There is a mechanism to deal with disputes. And that's why we're all
members of the WTO. That's why there are WTO panels. And what we've
been saying is, if there is a dispute, let's do that. Let's take it to
the WTO panel. Let's not engage in high-wire accusations here. Let's
just resolve it in the way we have to resolve it. And so I think the
President will also talk about that. But let's always remember that
this is a small portion of what is a huge relationship in economic
terms with Europe.
Q: Dr. Rice, we've been given to understand there will be pretty
substantial demonstrations in Germany. I know you say the alliance is
-- the transatlantic alliance is as close as ever. To what extent do
you worry that the people of Europe and America might be drifting
apart?
DR. RICE: I don't worry that the people of Europe and America are
drifting apart. I think that, first of all, the right to express
yourself is not just known in Europe. We have demonstrations in the
United States that don't like American policy. So why shouldn't we
have them in Europe that don't like American policy?
I think the important thing here is that we are very strong allies,
and for one reason -- we share common values. And the common agenda
that we have now is to take this period of extraordinary success in
the spread of those values into places that nobody really ever thought
those values had a chance -- even in the transition that Russia is
going through, in Latin America, in parts of Africa -- and to take
this extraordinary success, and to bring as many people and countries
and leaders on board that platform of democratic values as we possibly
can. That's the historic chance.
And if we are too focused on what divides us, which is mostly policy
debates, or some small percentage of our trade, then we are going to
miss this extraordinary opportunity. What we expect to be talking
about is how the G-8 will help with the African development projects;
how the Millennium Challenge Account that the President put out, the
increases in American foreign assistance that are there also in
Europe, can spread this so that -- spread this wealth so that poverty
begins to recede and people have hope.
We have work to do together in the Middle East, to reform the
character of the Palestinian Authority and to try to bring peace to
the Middle East. There's a huge positive agenda there. And if we argue
once in a while, and if people don't like policies once in a while, I
don't think that's the headline. I think the headline is completing
this extraordinary project.
Q: What do you say to the substance of the demonstrators who say
America is increasingly riding roughshod over its European allies,
whether it's trade, global warming, axis of evil, things like that?
DR. RICE: Well, first of all, the axis of evil was not aimed at
Europe. It was aimed at three states, plus their friends, who, shall
we say, don't have the best interests of either the United States or
Europe at heart. And whether or not Europeans liked the way the
President said it, it is very hard to argue with the logic that states
that repress their own people, try to acquire weapons of mass
destruction and are not transparent, and have demonstrated their
willingness to violate and to completely shove aside all international
norms, those states are a danger. That's unassailable. And so I think
whatever one wants to say about the phrase, axis of evil, or the
Europeans may want to say about it, the underlying argument here is
pretty powerful.
When it comes to Kyoto, yes, we disagreed on this particular treaty.
We share the goal of doing something about global climate change. The
President has put out his own plan for that. And I would just remind
people that even after we were viciously attacked on 9/11, the United
States did not, in a caricature fashion, go shooting off cruise
missiles against whatever happened to be available. We were
deliberate, we took our time. The coalition was put together. We had
been attacked and attacked viciously. But the President took his time
to put this coalition together. And it has held. And this is a
President who speaks clearly, speaks firmly, acts decisively, but also
acts deliberately. And I think the Europeans can be assured.
Q: Does the administration consider Cuba to be part of the axis of
evil?
DR. RICE: Well, look, the Cubans -- let's just say, what the Cubans
are is badly out of step with everybody else in the hemisphere. And
whatever club you would like to put them in, it's a club that not too
many people belong to any longer. The Cuban people deserve better. And
what the President tried to do today was to lay out a way forward that
would allow smaller steps in Cuba, including steps that we require and
ask of every other country in the world -- free elections, economic
freedoms to begin to come to the Cuban people -- to change the nature
of the relationship. It is -- it's obvious, when you go the
Organization of American States that there is a Cuban flag there, but
nobody in the Cuban chair.
Q: Back to the steel trade issue. The European Union will now be
joined by Japan and many other countries in imposing high tariffs on
imports from the United States in retaliation for American tariffs, as
decided by the President in March. Is the President now concerned
about triggering a global trade war with his decision in March to
protect the domestic steel industry? They have only a month -- less
than a month to settle the issue before the Europeans and Japanese
will impose tariffs.
DR. RICE: Well, the President's view is and has remained since he met
with members of the European Union here just six weeks ago or so that
we have a mechanism for resolving trade disputes, it's the WTO. This
ought to be settled in the WTO. And he'll continue to press the case
that it is the WTO that is the proper forum for the resolution of this
dispute.
Q: -- which usually take time, much longer than the month you have
now.
DR. RICE: Well, I think that everybody should just step back, and we
should remember that we have a global trading system in place, and
that it provides for resolution of disputes. And after all, since we
believe that the steel decision was WTO compliant, there is every
reason that we should go to the WTO.
Q: I'd like to ask you a little bit about the new direction in our
relationship with Russia. You had talked about the treaty being
leaving the old vestiges, the last vestiges of the Cold War. But then
you also talked about how weapons of mass destruction are really
important to this President, aswell as the war on terrorism. And I'm
wondering, is our relationship still mostly concentrating in the
security realm, or are we taking a drastic turn and moving to some
other issues?
DR. RICE: It's a very important question, because I think we're all
hopeful that this is actually the last time that an arms reduction
treaty gets quite the attention that this one has gotten; that really
what this should be is the new relationship means a normal
relationship.
Now, because of the large military complex of Russia and the legacy of
the Soviet Union, there is still a lot of work to do on the
non-proliferation front. I mean, Russia is a big player in -- on the
non-proliferation front. So it's not surprising that that would be a
part of a forward-looking agenda with Russia. I think we would hope to
have a new attitude about non-proliferation, that we face a common
threat from WMD, and that we should talk about how each of us can
contribute to dealing with the proliferation problem of states that
are concerning us.
Counterterrorism is a big agenda item with every country in the world
right now for us. I mean, it is with our friends, Germany and France,
just as it is with Russia. And so that's also not surprising. But this
is an increasingly broad relationship. I mentioned the media dialogue.
There's a business dialogue. We're going to celebrate the relations
among citizens. We're going to celebrate the fact that we have a lot
of regional cooperation around the world. It's kind of a little known
fact that even though it's not come to fruition, for instance, the
United States, Russia and France have a very good collaboration to try
to bring a resolution of the Nagorno-Karabakh situation.
So we have a lot going on to bring about peace and stability. We
expect the economic relations to grow dramatically as Russia is making
better choices about the nature of its economy. But with any normal
relationship, a lot of this will no longer be in the government
sphere. And I can tell you from my own experience teaching at
Stanford, just the number of Russian students who are not here on
official exchanges any longer, they've simply managed to get
themselves into school in the United States. I think you'll see more
of that. There are an increasing number of Russians who work in -- may
remain Russian citizens, but work in American businesses. And you're
going to see a lot more of that, too. Not everything will be
government-to-government.
Q: Dr. Rice, following up on speaking clearly and acting decisively,
is the President going to raise Iraq?
DR. RICE: The President and President Putin will undoubtedly talk
about Iraq. I think we have one incredibly important step forward, in
that we and the Russians agreed on the goods review list, along with
the other members of the Perm 5. That's a very important step forward
in changing the nature of the sanctions, making them more robust, but
at the same time, having less effect on the Iraqi people. And, yes,
we'll talk about Iraq. But again, since the President hasn't made any
decisions on what to do about the status quo in Iraq, just that the
status quo is unacceptable, I think he will want to consult with Putin
on exactly that point.
Q: Dr. Rice, will there be any discussions in President Bush's meeting
with President Putin about missile defense cooperation? And is this
one of the items that possibly there will be some kind of a statement
of intent coming out of the --
DR. RICE: Well, we will see if there is a statement. But I think they
will talk about missile defense cooperation, and they may even talk
about -- you know, as a part of a non-proliferation agenda, as part of
dealing with the threats of mass destruction, it's a natural issue.
Q: On the issue of proliferation the Iran, you said the President
won't go in and make demands and tell the President of Russia to stop.
But what specific behavior troubles you that Russia is doing? And what
explicit --
DR. RICE: I didn't say he won't say, "stop." He will say, stop. Let me
be very clear; he will say stop.
Q: What will the "stop" be about?
DR. RICE: Well, we all know that the Russians are now engaged in the
construction of nuclear power plants in Iran, that there are concerns
about how those power plants might be diverted to other uses. It is
the case that there are a number of other issues that we have and want
to raise with the Russians about what their cooperation might look
like with Iran. We also have raised from time to time conventional
arms transfers of a certain character and of a certain sophistication
with Iranians, because some of the things the Iranians are trying to
acquire could only be aimed at American forces.
And so we will talk about that. I think we will also want to talk
about what the Iranians are doing in terms of support of terrorism in
the Middle East -- Hezbollah -- and to try to elicit Russian help and
support for trying to shut down those activities.
Q: In December 2000, you described Russia as a threat to the West in
general, and to the European allies in particular. I was wondering to
what extent the change and the improvement since then is being driven
by your own changing views about the relationship with Russia, and to
what extent it's changes in the genuine situation.
DR. RICE: I believe what I said was that Russia's non-proliferation
behavior was a threat to the West, in general, and a threat to the
world, more specifically. And it still is. And what is different,
though, is that we have a context now in which I think we have broader
cooperation on a variety of issues, and we can now try to deal with
this non-proliferation problem anew.
I can't promise you that we're going to get there. It's a hard issue.
We don't see the issue identically. We have to start to come to some
common understanding of how to deal with the non-proliferation
problem.
But let's give credit to the Russians here, as well. The Russians have
made a different choice in the last years to begin to turn their
orientation toward integration into Europe, integration into the
international economy, integration into the West. They have made clear
that WTO accession is important to them. They have made numerous
changes to their economic life at home that makes it look like a
different Russia from the point of view of investment and potential
trading partner. They have been a stalwart asset and friend in the war
on terrorism in intelligence cooperation. They saw -- Putin saw early
that an American presence of the kind that we have, not a permanent,
but an American presence in Central Asia to prosecute the war was not
a threat to Russian interests, but rather helpful to Russian interest.
All the way to the arming and equipping and training of Georgian
forces to fight in the Pankisi Gorge.
A lot has happened in this relationship in a very short period of
time. The President, I think in Ljubjana, determined to see if it was
possible to have a different kind of relationship with the Russians.
If you remember, there were those who, after the March expulsion of
counter-intelligence agents, said that this would be the start of a
new Cold War. The President was determined that that was old business
and it was time to move forward. I remember very well that he told
Putin, let's not be Nixon and Brezhnev, let's be Bush and Putin, and
make history ourselves. And the combination of the President's
openness and determination to try to do that, and I think of Putin's
strategic decision that his country's interests lay in this direction,
is an historic moment. And both Presidents are to be congratulated for
having seen that possibility.
Last question.
Q: Dr. Rice, is it the case that the President will be visiting an
American war cemetery in Normandy? And if so, is that in any sense
intended as a reminder to America's allies of the sacrifices that
Americans made on their behalf in the past? In the context of keeping
together the coalition against terror, which, you say is still intact,
but obviously needs shoring up.
DR. RICE: Well, the President will be in Europe on an important
American holiday, Memorial Day, and it is important to honor those who
fought and died for our freedom. And of course, American Presidents,
wherever they are -- and they usually are in the United States on that
day -- go and honor America's war dead in that way.
This is a unique opportunity to remind all of us of how hard we fought
together to defend freedom against tyranny in World War II. It reminds
us that there are still threats to freedom, both from weapons of mass
destruction and from terrorism. And it reminds us that what binds us
as allies is our common beliefs and our common values and our
willingness to defend them. And it reminds not us -- not just us, but
also our European allies, and it's gotten more expression since 9/11
in the way that our European allies have taken on that challenge.
Thank you very much.
Q: Have a good trip.
DR. RICE: Thank you. Thank you.
5:18 P.M. EDT
(end transcript)
(Distributed by the Office of International Information Programs, U.S.
Department of State. Web site: http://usinfo.state.gov)
|
NEWSLETTER
|
|
Join the GlobalSecurity.org mailing list
|
|
|
