25 May 2002
Transcript: Powell Says Moscow Treaty Consistent with Previous Treaties
(Briefs May 25 on Bush trip to Russia, signing of arms treaty) (5080)
Secretary of State Colin Powell says the Treaty of Moscow -- the
strategic offensive reduction treaty signed by President George W.
Bush and Russian President Vladimir Putin during their Moscow summit
May 24 -- is consistent with previous treaties such as START I and II
in that it deals with warheads on launchers but not warheads in
storage.
"All previous arms control treaties were of the same type -- they
didn't deal with the stockpile elimination, they dealt with either
launchers or systems. And so this is consistent with those previous
treaties -- SALT I, SALT II, START I, START II, and the INF treaty,"
Powell said during a briefing on the President's stop in Russia as
part of a week-long visit to Europe.
"The important point is that warheads are coming off of launchers."
The Moscow Treaty "serves the interest of both nations, both peoples,
and makes it a safer world, as we reduce the number of launchers that
are sitting there with warheads on them, and as we then turn our
attention to how do we get rid of those weapons in stockpiles that are
really not necessary," Powell said. "Over time, I think you will see
that happen."
Once weapons are stockpiled, he said, "then you can make judgments as
to whether you retain some as operational spares, or whether you use
some to modernize systems, or whether you destroy them," he pointed
out, adding that "both sides are also limited as to how many they can
destroy in any given year because it is a very technical process."
The United States is "interested in helping the Russians not only to
get rid of their excess stockpile warheads, but also their no longer
necessary chemical weapons stockpiles and whatever other chemical,
biological or radiological stockpiles they may have. And that's why we
put close to a billion [1,000 million] dollars a year into these
cooperative programs with the Russians, and will continue to maintain
that level of investment."
The Bush-Putin meetings in Moscow and St. Petersburg also focused on
the broad U.S.-Russia relationship, Powell said, including "laying out
new ways that we can cooperate economically, new opportunities for
cooperation in energy, the advocacy of multiple pipelines to bring out
oil from this part of the world to where it is needed, the discussion
of accession to the World Trade Organization on the part of Russia,"
increasing U.S. business investment in Russia and people-to-people
exchanges.
"The President is very pleased with the trip," Powell said.
During the briefing he answered reporters' questions about tensions
between India and Pakistan; Bush's next stops in France and Italy; the
new NATO-Russia Council; U.S.-Russia friendship; non-proliferation
issues including Russian exports to Iran, unsecured fissile material
in Russia, and tactical nuclear weapons; and U.S.-Russia cooperation
on ballistic missile defense systems and on the war against terrorism.
Following is a White House transcript of his briefing in Moscow:
(begin transcript)
THE WHITE HOUSE
Office of the Press Secretary
(St. Petersburg, Russia)
May 25, 2002
PRESS BRIEFING BY SECRETARY OF STATE COLIN POWELL ON PRESIDENT'S TRIP
TO RUSSIA
The Grand Europa Hotel
St. Petersburg, Russia
5:00 P.M. (Local)
SECRETARY POWELL: Well, good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen. We're
coming to the end of our trip here in Russia, so I thought it might be
useful to take a few moments and summarize the last couple of days and
answer any questions you might have.
The President is very pleased with the trip, as you might well
imagine, and we all are. We think it's been quite successful, as
highlighted yesterday morning by a signing of the two documents -- the
Treaty of Moscow, as we now call it, as well as the political
declaration and other statements that went along with the treaty that
the President and President Putin also signed.
I think I might say a word about the Treaty of Moscow, the strategic
offensive reduction treaty. And let me say a word about the treaty by
taking you back to the 1st of May of last year, when at the National
Defense University, President Bush gave a vision of where he wanted to
go with respect to a strategic framework with Russia; where he wanted
to go with respect to missile defense and with respect to the ABM
Treaty and what we had to do about the ABM Treaty to move into a new
future strategic relationship with Russia.
The President has acted on every one of the elements of that speech at
the National Defense University, in a way that did not cause a
disruption in our relationship -- we moved beyond the ABM Treaty. At
the time we did that, we had also announced our intention to reduce
our strategic offensive arsenal down to 1,700 to 2,200 deployed
warheads. And President Putin, when responding to our notification
that we were leaving the treaty, made a similar statement with respect
to the reduction that he would be undertaking. So, rather than leaving
the ABM Treaty and causing an arms race, did quite the opposite.
And then after a period of intense discussion and negotiation, we came
up with the treaty that was signed yesterday, which moves
operationally deployed warheads down from their levels of roughly
5,000 to 6,000 now, down to 1,700 to 2,200. We believe, and I think I
can speak for the Russian side, as well, because they said as much --
believe that this is an historic achievement.
There has been some commentary as to, well, it doesn't deal with the
actual warheads once they're in storage, it deals with the warheads on
their launchers. I might point out that all previous arms control
treaties were of the same type -- they didn't deal with the stockpile
elimination, they dealt with either launchers or systems. And so this
is consistent with those previous treaties -- SALT I, SALT II, START
I, START II and the INF treaty.
The important point is that warheads are coming off of launchers. And
if you were interested in reducing the number of warheads in the world
on both sides and destroying these warheads, you start with taking
them off a launcher. And once you have them into your stockpile, then
you can make judgments as to whether you retain some as operational
spares, or whether you use some to modernize systems, or whether you
destroy them.
I think both sides have it in their interests to destroy as many as
possible. Both sides are also limited as to how many they can destroy
in any given year because it is a very technical process. We are
limited to how many we can do; so are they, just by the nature of our
nuclear infrastructure.
We are interested in helping the Russians not only to get rid of their
excess stockpile warheads, but also their no longer necessary chemical
weapons stockpiles and whatever other chemical, biological or
radiological stockpiles they may have. And that's why we put close to
a billion dollars a year into these cooperative programs with the
Russians, and will continue to maintain that level of investment. It
is also why we are looking at new creative ways of finding the means
by which Russia can accelerate the elimination of these kinds of
stockpiles.
So I think it is an historic treaty which serves the interest of both
nations, both peoples, and makes it a safer world, as we reduce the
number of launchers that are sitting there with warheads on them, and
as we then turn our attention to how do we get rid of those weapons in
stockpiles that are really not necessary, they're excess to anyone
else's needs. And over time, I think you will see that happen. Nothing
in this treaty keeps anybody from destroying warheads that they no
longer need which are in stockpiles.
But the activities of the last two days went beyond just the strategic
treaty and the strategic framework. It went into laying out new ways
that we can cooperate economically, new opportunities for cooperation
in energy, the advocacy of multiple pipelines to bring out oil from
this part of the world to where it is needed, the discussion of
accession to the World Trade Organization on the part of Russia -- the
United States supports this, and we'll be doing everything possible to
prepare Russia for accession into the World Trading Organization. Our
continued efforts to remove the Jackson-Vanik amendment, which is a
vestige of the 1970s, and you've heard the President speak to this.
And we are also hopeful that, within the next couple of weeks,
Secretary Evans will be making a determination on designating Russia
-- whether or not he will designate it as a market economy. That is in
his authority; it's a regulatory action.
We also met yesterday -- the President met with a number of business
leaders, both Russian and American business leaders, to explore what
additional opportunities that exist in Russia for investment. And I
think as you read through the statement, you also saw there was a
commitment to increase the level of our people-to-people exchanges,
because as you have heard President Bush say many, many times, we are
anxious to show the Russian people that we are their friends, and we
are going to be their partners. And I think that this fifth meeting
between the two Presidents builds on the foundation that was
established in Slovenia over a year ago. And the President is quite
pleased with everything that has transpired, as well as the deepening
of the personal relationship between President Putin and President
Bush.
And so with those few introductory remarks, let me move on from
Russia, just to say that we're looking forward to discussions with the
French leaders tomorrow, and President Chirac. And then we will also
have an opportunity to meet with Mr. Berlusconi in Rome. And that all
leads up to Tuesday, when we will again be with President Putin and
the other leaders of NATO to sign another historic document. This will
be setting up the NATO-Russia Council, which will have important work
to do on areas of mutual interest.
So it's been a successful trip so far, and we look to another -- look
forward to another several successful days.
Questions. Ron?
Q: Yes, sir. The President today urged President Musharraf to keep his
promises and stop the insurgency. And President Putin announced his
conference -- that he's going to have one-on-one sideline meetings,
and also said that the missile tests by Pakistan are not helpful, are
aggravating the situation.
SECRETARY POWELL: Yes.
Q: When will -- what is the United States' position on the missile
test? Do you agree that they're aggravating the situation, and will we
have any role in the sideline discussions?
SECRETARY POWELL: Let me start from the beginning, of course. We do
expect President Musharraf to stick with the commitments that he has
publicly made. He began making them very publicly in his January 12th
speech, to stop cross-border activity. That is very destabilizing and
is a source of tension and has contributed to the situation we find
ourselves in.
I spoke to President Musharraf twice the day before yesterday, and I
spoke to Foreign Minister Singh of India yesterday, to keep the
dialogue going. I'm pleased that my European Union colleague, Chris
Patton, is in the region now; and Jack Straw, the Foreign Secretary of
the United Kingdom, will be going in early next week; and then Deputy
Secretary Armitage is planning a trip toward the end of next week, the
beginning of the following week. So we're going to stay very actively
engaged in trying to find a solution to this very, very difficult
situation.
Anytime you have two armies that close to one another and this level
of tension, there is the likelihood of an outbreak of hostilities; and
when both are nuclear armed, that should cause us all concern. And
this is a time for both sides to reflect on the actions that they
taken, reflect on the current situation, and let the international
community help them in finding a political way to resolve the
situation.
The conference in Almaty [Kazakhstan] that was referenced by President
Putin. I don't think he was so much announcing it as he was
acknowledging what many of you may not have known, that such a
conference is scheduled for early June. And it's a conference that was
called by President Nazarbayev some time ago. It's not a conference
that's suddenly being called. And a number of regional leaders are
coming to the conference. And two of the regional leaders who have
been invited are President Musharraf and Prime Minister Vajpayee.
I don't know if they are going. As President Putin indicated, they
have been invited. But should they attend, that would open up
opportunities for political dialogue, not necessarily with each other,
but with other leaders who will be there. President Putin will be
attending that conference. We won't be at that conference, because it
is a regional grouping that we are not a part of.
With respect to the missile tests by the Pakistanis, as we said at the
Department yesterday, we are disappointed. The tests were announced
publicly and the Pakistanis did notify the Indians that they were
routine tests, and the Indians received them in that manner, and
described them in a way they chose to describe them. I'll let them
describe it. But I don't think it was a particularly useful thing to
do right now, even though I don't think it causes us to get any closer
to a conflict. But I don't think it was a terribly useful thing to do
right now. And, as the Department noted yesterday, we were
disappointed that the Pakistanis took this time to perform routine
tests which, if they were routine, could have been performed at some
other time.
Q: Why do you think President Musharraf has been unable to follow
through on his pledge, his January 12th pledge?
SECRETARY POWELL: Well, I can't speak for President Musharraf. I do
know that we have spoken to him on a number of occasions and he has
assured us that he is taking action. But we do not believe that that
action is yet complete or has totally satisfied the statement that he
made earlier, that all activity would be stopped. So we will continue
to encourage him to do it in such a way and to give instructions and
orders in such a way that there can be no mistaking his intention and
his actual actions, and that his deeds and the deeds of the Pakistani
forces will match the words of their President.
Q: Mr. Secretary, what do you expect on your visit to France --
SECRETARY POWELL: I beg your pardon?
Q: What do you expect, Mr. Secretary, from your visit in France
tomorrow, and after tomorrow, with President Chirac and in Normandy?
SECRETARY POWELL: Well, Normandy -- let me start with Normandy.
Normandy will be an opportunity to remember the brave soldiers who
lost their lives in that invasion in 1944, on the 6th of June. And
it's always a moving ceremony for Americans, and for the French, as
well. And it will give us an opportunity to reflect on the strength of
our relationship with France and with the French people. We have been
through many things together over the last 220-odd years. And we
shared an experience in World War II, which will be commemorated on
the Normandy beaches once again.
And it also gives an opportunity for President Bush to exchange views
with Mr. Chirac on a number of issues. And I think they'll be
discussing the Middle East. I'm sure they'll be discussing the future
of NATO and other issues of interest to Europe and to the bilateral
relationship between our two sides.
There are very few outstanding issues between France and the United
States bilaterally. There are occasional disagreements and areas of
discussion in multilateral or regional forum. And I've already had the
opportunity to meet with my new French colleague once, and I look
forward to seeing him again on -- tomorrow.
Q: Sir, building up on this, will the new Russian role in NATO be
close to what the French role used to be? And in general, how will the
new Russia-NATO Council help define the future evolution of the
alliance?
SECRETARY POWELL: I don't think it can compare to the French role,
because France was always a member of the political alliance -- if not
always -- not part of the integrated military component of that
alliance. Russia's role with NATO is new and unique, and that's why it
is being given this prominence. And the fact that all of the leaders
elected to come together in Rome on Tuesday to sign this gives it
added impetus -- emphasis -- added emphasis.
The test of it all, though, is what will we do in this NATO-Russia
Council? And several areas of cooperation have already been spelled
out in rather specific terms: To look at threat assessments in the
area of terrorism; to examine how we can do search and rescue
activities together; what kind of air control plans we might look at
that could be integrated with respect to control of air space. And
there were several other areas. And I look forward to exploring with
my Russian colleagues and my other NATO colleagues other areas where
it makes sense for us to operate "at-20," all the way from North
America, across Western Europe, old Eastern Europe and into Russia.
And so this new arrangement as opposed to, say, the arrangement that
existed since 1997, I think will have greater specificity to it and
more energy in it. And we look forward this fall to showing the
results of our initial efforts.
Q: What do you expect from the Ukrainian effort to join NATO?
SECRETARY POWELL: Ukraine has recently expressed an interest in
joining NATO at some point in the future. And, of course, we are
anxious to hear more about Ukraine's efforts to prepare themselves. I
think they're -- we're quite a distance away from starting Ukraine on
the formal process toward membership.
Q: If we can get back to India and Pakistan for a moment. In January
there were tensions, of course. In hindsight, many people believe the
two countries came very close to war, that it was a very critical
moment. Is it your assessment that we're at that level of tension and
danger now? Can you put it in some sort of comparative context for us?
SECRETARY POWELL: I don't know that I could give you a direct
comparison. I can tell yo that I'm as concerned now as I was then. And
we devoted a lot of time and energy to it then, and we're doing it
now. We have been trying to find a way to bridge the differences
between the two sides. There was an idea to exchange lists of
individuals -- that didn't quite work out.
The key thing that we're looking for now is to shut down the action
across the Line of Control, and hopefully that will give us a basis
for seeing de-escalation on the part of the Indians. And from that
point on -- if we can get to that point, that first set of steps, then
I think there will be opportunities for many other things to happen
after that. And we are poised diplomatically to encourage other steps
beyond that. But that is the first step that we have to reach, or else
it gets -- it's difficult to go beyond, of course.
Q: Secretary Powell, on yesterday's meetings with President Putin, can
you be a little more specific about what kind of commitments he made
in relation to the exports to Iran?
And also what your assessment is, now that you've had a chance to talk
with him, about how much loose nuclear material remains unsecured in
Russia, the degree to which that is an existing concern. We know you
set up a commission, so there has to be some concern. But we don't
really have a quantitative sense of what you think is out there.
SECRETARY POWELL: With respect to Iran, I would answer the question
this way. Both nations are agreed that we don't want to contribute to
proliferation of nuclear weapons technology, and that includes nuclear
weapons technology to Iran. Both nations are committed to the
proposition that this would not be a good thing for any one of them to
be involved in.
There is a disagreement between we and the Russians about the nature
of some of their activities. It's a disagreement that's gone on for
some time. We believe that some of the activities they are
participating in can be seen as helping Iran in the direction of
proliferation. They disagree with our assessment. They say that they
are as sensitive to this issue as we are, they are closer to Iran than
we are and, therefore, that's why they are more sensitive, and that
their activities do not assist Iran in that direction.
We disagree with that, and the groups that have been set up, plus our
continuing bilateral dialogue that's been going on for quite a while
will continue to explore this. There are some areas that I look
forward to taking up with Foreign Minister Ivanov to see if he can
assure me, or I can convince him who has the right side of this
argument. The good news is that we've had candid discussions about
this, and I hope we'll be able to solve this going forward, just as we
have solved some of the other difficult issues that we have faced over
the past year.
With respect to fissile material, I can't tell you how much is
unaccounted for, if any. I just don't have that data. That's why we're
working with them, and we're investing in our comprehensive threat
reduction efforts. And we want to have a broader dialogue with them,
to get a better understanding of what they have done over the years,
what they have produced over the years, how can we be more effective
in capturing that material, recycling it to be used as fuel, or for
other purposes, or getting it under solid accountability, so that the
whole world can be more comfortable with the knowledge that it is
under solid accountability.
Q: Have they been reluctant to give you that data?
SECRETARY POWELL: We have not gotten all the intimation on not just
that type of technology, but other technology -- chemical activities,
biological activities that they've had ongoing over the years. And the
group that has been set up consisting of the four ministers -- the two
Ivanovs, Rumsfeld and Powell, these are some of the areas we'll be
exploring with them.
Q: Secretary Powell, from what we've seen on this trip so far, the
reception has been much warmer than in a traditional -- here in Russia
versus in Europe. Can you talk a little bit about the differences in
the public perception that we see in the two places, and also if
there's any --
SECRETARY POWELL: Much warmer in Russia than in Western Europe?
Q: Well, on the streets. I don't know, you're in a bubble, but
certainly -- (laughter.)
SECRETARY POWELL: My bubble isn't as big as the President's bubble.
(Laughter.)
Q: -- any color, any anecdotes from the meetings that we haven't been
privy to?
SECRETARY POWELL: There is -- with respect to the two Presidents,
obviously, you can see it. I don't need to give you too much
tick-tock. There is a great deal of respect and personal affection.
And it now includes the family members. All family members have now
met one another. And a very moving evening last night at President
Putin's home, we were all privileged -- some of us were privileged to
be a part of.
So I think the respect between the two leaders, the understanding of
each other's position, the understanding of the needs of each other,
give us a more solid foundation upon which to build and to move
forward. And President Bush spoke to that earlier.
With each one of these meetings, and with the meetings that I have
with Igor Ivanov or Don has with Sergei Ivanov, or Condi [Condoleezza
Rice] has with her counterparts, we get to understand their positions
better, they get to understand where we're coming from better. We get
the better understanding that they have a public opinion, just as we
have a public opinion. They have news media and a Duma that's on them,
just as we have a news media that is never on us, but a Congress that
occasionally is. (Laughter.)
And so mutual understanding is increased. And my experience in this
work for many, many years is that when you have that level of respect,
understanding and friendship, you can get a lot of things done that
you can't get done, unless you have built those relationships and put
them in place.
We have those same relationships with our friends in Europe. You saw
it with Chancellor Schroeder the other day; you will see it, I'm quite
sure, with President Chirac; and I know you'll see it, for sure, with
Mr. Berlusconi -- Prime Minister Berlusconi -- and with the other NATO
leaders. But does that mean that there is no opportunity for
disagreement or no opportunity for protest of certain policies of the
United States government? Of course there will be protest; of course
there will be demonstrations. As President Bush said, that's what
makes them democracies. And that's why we treasure democracy as a form
of government.
But I must say we're pleased by the reception that the President and
all of us received in Moscow and, especially here in St. Petersburg,
where it also coincided with the birthday of the city, which made it
an even warmer atmosphere with a gorgeous day in an absolutely
beautiful city.
Enough? One more.
Q: Mr. Secretary, can you tell us in the context of the
nonproliferation efforts, give us your assessment of how concerned you
are with level of danger presented by the tactical nuclear weapons
that remain in Russia?
SECRETARY POWELL: Yes. This is an area we will have to pursue in the
future. Secretary Rumsfeld makes a particular point of it every time
we're together. This agreement yesterday dealt with strategic weapons,
but both sides have tactical nuclear weapons. We have much fewer than
they do. We made a more deliberate effort to get rid of them back in
1991 when, frankly, I was Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and we
did it. And they have a larger inventory.
They are short- and medium-range weapons that don't present the same
kind of threat to us as the strategic systems do. But nevertheless,
they're nuclear weapons. And we believe that, as we move forward, we
should discuss these weapons, discuss inventory levels. Have you met
the unilateral commitments you made 10 years ago to get rid of these?
Because at that time, President Gorbachev, I think it was, made the
same commitment that President Bush 41 did to get rid of these kinds
of systems or bring them down to a much, much lower level. We still
have a few or some -- we still have some. They have many more.
And so we do want to explore with them theater nuclear weapons, as to
how we can get a better handle on this kind of weapons system, and
we'll be discussing that with them as we move forward.
Q: Can I just follow up quickly? President Putin mentioned earlier
today that there had been quite a bit of discussion about cooperation
on missile technology. Is there any discussion related to ballistic
missile defense systems and cooperation with Russia's technology?
SECRETARY POWELL: Yes. And if you'll look in the joint statements we
put out, you'll see a reference to our willingness to discuss with the
Russians cooperative efforts in missile defense. They have technology,
we have technology. We have ideas, they have ideas. So we're looking
forward to pursuing that, as has been U.S. policy for many years, ever
since President Reagan first put it out there, a different kind of
missile defense, when he was talking about the Strategic Defense
Initiative. But we've always been willing to make this defensive
technology available to others and cooperate with others, within
reasons of -- within reason and with respect to certain classification
issues, of course.
But, for the most part, try to be as forthcoming as we can with our
plans, with what we're planning to do. Share it with the Russians,
tell them, show them, so they don't see it as a threat to them, but
they do see missile defense as something they may want to be involved
in as a way of protecting them from the kinds of threats that will
come from these irresponsible states that keep moving in this
direction. And that's what our missile defense programs are all about.
Thank you.
Q: Mr. Secretary, can you talk about Russia's role as an ally in the
war against terrorism, and how that has changed the dynamic of the
relationship?
SECRETARY POWELL: Well, after 9/11, President Putin gave a very
powerful statement that aligned Russia fully with the campaign against
terrorism. And he has acted on his -- the commitments he made that
day. And they have become a strong partner in the campaign against
terrorism. They have supported our efforts in Afghanistan, as the
President noted yesterday. They have been very forthcoming in a number
of other areas.
And we have been operating in Central Asia in close coordination and
cooperation with the Russians in a way that would have been
unthinkable just a year, year and a half ago. And so we are very
pleased with the support we have gotten and we also want to operate in
Central Asia in a way that is mindful of their interest in the region,
as well.
Thank you.
END 5:25 p.m. (Local)
(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
|
|
|
