Text 501, 633 rader
Skriven 2005-02-17 23:33:00 av Whitehouse Press (1:3634/12.0)
Ärende: Press Release (0502172) for Thu, 2005 Feb 17
====================================================
===========================================================================
President Holds Press Conference
===========================================================================

For Immediate Release
Office of the Press Secretary
February 17, 2005

President Holds Press Conference
Room 450
Dwight D. Eisenhower Executive Office Building

President's Remarks
"); //--> view

˙˙˙˙˙In Focus: National Security

10:00 A.M. EST

THE PRESIDENT: Thank you very much. I appreciate you're here -- coming
here. I'm pleased to announce my decision to nominate Ambassador John
Negroponte as Director of National Intelligence. The Director's
responsibility is straightforward and demanding. John will make sure that
those whose duty it is to defend America have the information we need to
make the right decisions. John understands America's global intelligence
needs because he spent the better part of his life in our foreign service,
and is now serving with distinction in the sensitive post of our nation's
first Ambassador to a free Iraq.

John's nomination comes at an historic moment for our intelligence
services. In the war against terrorists who target innocent civilians and
continue to seek weapons of mass murder, intelligence is our first line of
defense. If we're going to stop the terrorists before they strike, we must
ensure that our intelligence agencies work as a single, unified enterprise.
And that's why I supported, and Congress passed, reform legislation
creating the job of Director of National Intelligence.

As DNI, John will lead a unified intelligence community, and will serve as
the principle advisor to the President on intelligence matters. He will
have the authority to order the collection of new intelligence, to ensure
the sharing of information among agencies, and to establish common
standards for the intelligence community's personnel. It will be John's
responsibility to determine the annual budgets for all national
intelligence agencies and offices and to direct how these funds are spent.
Vesting these authorities in a single official who reports directly to me
will make our intelligence efforts better coordinated, more efficient, and
more effective.

The Director of the CIA will report to John. The CIA will retain its core
of responsibilities for collecting human intelligence, analyzing
intelligence from all sources, and supporting American interests abroad at
the direction of the President.

The law establishing John's position preserves the existing chain of
command and leaves all our intelligence agencies, organizations and offices
in their current departments. Our military commanders will continue to have
quick access to the intelligence they need to achieve victory on the
battlefield. And the new structure will help ensure greater information-
sharing among federal departments and agencies and also with appropriate
state and local authorities.

John brings a unique set of skills to these challenges. Over the course of
a long career, John Negroponte has served his nation in eight countries
spanning three continents. He's held important leadership posts at both the
State Department and the White House. As my representative to the United
Nations, John defended our interests vigorously and spoke eloquently about
America's intention to spread freedom and peace throughout the world.

And his service in Iraq during these past few historic months has given him
something that will prove an incalculable advantage for an intelligence
chief: an unvarnished and up-close look at a deadly enemy.

Today I'm pleased, as well, to announce that joining John as his Deputy
will be Lt. General Michael Hayden. As a career Air Force intelligence
officer, General Hayden now serves as Director of the National Security
Agency, America's largest intelligence service, and Chief of the Central
Security Service. In these critical roles, Mike has already demonstrated an
ability to adapt our intelligence services to meet the new threats of a new
century.

I appreciate the willingness of these men to take on these tough new
assignments in an extraordinary moment in our nation's history. I'd like to
thank the thousands of men and women already serving in our intelligence
services. These are people who go to work each day to keep Americans safe.
We live in a dangerous world, and oftentimes, they take great risk to their
own lives. These men and women are going to be pleased to have leaders such
as Ambassador John Negroponte and General Mike Hayden.

John, I want to thank you for being here today. Congratulations. Godspeed.

AMBASSADOR NEGROPONTE: Thank you, sir.

Thank you, Mr. President. I'm honored that you would select me to be the
first Director of National Intelligence.

Providing timely and objective national intelligence to you, the Congress,
the departments and agencies, and to our uniformed military services is a
critical national task -- critical to our international posture, critical
to the prevention of international terrorism, and critical to our homeland
security. Equally important will be the reform of the intelligence
community in ways designed to best meet the intelligence needs of the 21st
century.

If confirmed, I look forward to support you, Mr. President, in working to
the best of my ability towards achievement of these objectives, so vital to
the protection of our country. I appreciate your confidence in choosing me
for what will no doubt be the most challenging assignment I have undertaken
in more than 40 years of government service.

Thank you very much. Thank you, Mr. President.

THE PRESIDENT: I'll be glad to take some questions. Jennifer.

Q Thank you, Mr. President. Can you tell us if you believe that Syria is
linked to the assassination of Mr. Hariri? And further, how far are you
willing to go to expel Syria from Lebanon and stop its involvement in Iraq?

THE PRESIDENT: First, we support the international investigation that is --
will be going on to determine the killers of Mr. Hariri. We've recalled our
ambassador, which indicates that the relationship is not moving forward,
that Syria is out of step with the progress being made in a greater Middle
East, that democracy is on the move. And this is a country that isn't
moving with the democratic movement.

And we've talked clearly to Syria about, one, making sure that their
territory is not used by former Iraqi Baathists to spread havoc and kill
innocent lives. We expect them to find and turn over former regime --
Saddam regime supporters, send them back to Iraq. We've made it very clear
from the beginning of my administration that Syria should not use its
territory to support international terrorist groups. We expect them to
adhere to 1559 -- U.N. Security Council Resolution 1559, which calls for
the removal of troops from Lebanon. And we expect them to help free and
fair elections to take place in Lebanon.

These are very reasonable requests, the requests all aimed at making the
world more peaceful. I look forward to working with our European friends on
my upcoming trip to talk about how we can work together to convince the
Syrians to make rational decisions.

Q Thank you, Mr. President. The Europeans want more support from the U.S.
in their negotiations with Iran. Would the U.S. consider joining these
talks?

THE PRESIDENT: Well, first, a couple of points. One, we are a party to the
talks -- or a party to the process, as a result of being a member of the
IAEA. In other words, we're on the IAEA board, one of some 30-odd nations.
So we've been very much involved with working with the Iranians and the
world to achieve a goal that we share with the Europeans, and that is for
Iran not to develop a nuclear weapon.

I look forward to, again, on this trip, to discussing strategies, ways
forward with the Europeans to make sure we continue to speak with one
voice, and that is, Iran should not have a nuclear weapon, and how to work
together to make sure they don't.

Wendell.

Q Mr. President, in your answer to Jennifer's question, I heard several
reasons for recalling the Ambassador from Syria, but not an indication of
whether you believe Syria bears some responsibility for the assassination.

THE PRESIDENT: I can't tell you that. I don't know yet, because the
investigation is ongoing. And so I'm going to withhold judgment until we
find out what the facts are. Hopefully by the time I get overseas, we'll
have a clearer understanding of who killed Mr. Hariri, and it will be an
opportune time to talk with our friends, to determine what to do about it.

But it's important that this investigation go on in a thoughtful way, and
I'm convinced it will. We supported the international --

Q Would you like it to be an international investigation, sir?

THE PRESIDENT: Yes, we support the -- we support the international
investigation.

Yes, John.

Q Mr. President, I recall a conversation a small group of us with a very
senior administration official about a year ago, and in that conversation,
the subject of Iran and Israel came up. And I'm just wondering, what's your
level of concern that if Iran does go down the road to building a nuclear
weapon, that Israel will attack Iran to try to prevent that from happening?

THE PRESIDENT: Well, of course the -- well, first of all, Iran has made it
clear they -- that they don't like Israel, to put it bluntly. And the
Israelis are concerned about whether or not Iran develops a nuclear weapon,
as are we, as should everybody.

And so the objective is to solve this issue diplomatically, is to work with
friends, like we're doing with France, Europe, and -- I mean, France,
Germany, and Great Britain, to continue making it clear to the Iranians
that developing a nuclear weapon will be unacceptable.

But clearly, if I was the leader of Israel, and I listened to some of the
statements by the Iranian ayatollahs about -- that regarded my security of
my country, I'd be concerned about Iran having a nuclear weapon, as well.
And in that Israel is our ally, and in that we've made a very strong
commitment to support Israel, we will support Israel if -- if there's a --
if their security is threatened.

Q Do you believe there's a real possibility Israel could attack?

THE PRESIDENT: Oh, I -- John, I think that there's a -- the need for us to
work together to convince the Iranians not to develop a nuclear weapon. And
we will work with Europeans and the Israelis to develop a strategy and a
plan that is effective. And that's one of the reasons I'm going to Europe.

Let's see here. I've got to make sure I go to the TV people. Norah.

Q Mr. President, you've made clear that Social Security reform is your top
legislative priority. The top Republican leader in the House has said you
cannot jam change down people's throats. And in your interviews with the
regional newspapers, you made very clear that you would not rule out
raising the cap on payroll taxes. If you were to do that, why would that
not be seen as going back on your pledge not to raise taxes?

THE PRESIDENT: Well, I -- a couple of questions there. One, I agree, you
can't cram an issue down people's throats. As a matter of fact, the best
way to get this issue addressed in the halls of Congress is for the
American people to say, why don't we come together and do something. And so
the first priority of mine is to convince the people we have a problem. And
I'm going to do that a lot. As a matter of fact, I enjoy traveling the
country, and I hope you do, too, because I'm going to be doing a lot of it.
I fully understand, Norah, that nothing will happen if the members of
Congress don't believe there's a problem that needs to be solved. And so
you'll see a lot of travel.

And the problem is plain to me: You've got baby boomers getting ready to
retire -- they've been promised greater benefits than the current
generation, they're living longer, and there's fewer people paying into the
system. And the system goes negative starting in 2018 and continues to do
so. There's the problem. Nothing will happen, I repeat, unless the Congress
thinks there's a problem.

Once the Congress -- once the people say to Congress, there's a problem,
fix it, then I have a duty to say to members of Congress, bring forth your
ideas. And I clarified a variety of ideas that people should be encouraged
to bring forth, without political retribution. It used to be, in the past,
people would step and say, well, here's an interesting idea, and then they
would take that idea and clobber the person politically.

What I'm saying to members of Congress is that we have a problem -- come
together and let's fix it, and bring your ideas forward, and I'm willing to
discuss them with you. And so that's why I said what I said, and will
continue to say it. And it's not -- I've got some ideas of my own.
Obviously, I think personal accounts are an important part of the mix and
want to continue working with members of Congress to understand the wisdom
of why personal accounts makes sense for the long-term, to be a part of a
long-term solution for Social Security.

John.

Q Sir, thank you. Regarding the Director of National Intelligence, in this
town power is often measured in a couple of ways, by who controls the money
and how close that person is to the President, sometimes physically. So let
me ask you about that. You said that Mr. Negroponte will determine the
budgets for all intelligence agencies. A lot of people feel the Pentagon is
going to fight that, that the Pentagon wants to control its intelligence
money. Would you address that? And also, where is Mr. Negroponte going to
work? Will he be in the White House complex, close to you? Will he give you
your intelligence briefings every day?

THE PRESIDENT: I think your assessment is right; people that can control
the money, people who have got access to the President generally have a lot
of influence. And that's why John Negroponte is going to have a lot of
influence. He will set the budgets.

Listen, this is going to take a while to get a new culture in place, a
different way of approaching the budget process. That's why I selected
John. He's a diplomat. He understands the -- and he's an experienced
person; he understands the power centers in Washington. He's been a
consumer of intelligence in the past, and so he's got a good feel for how
to move this process forward in a way that addresses the different
interests.

Now, as to where his office is, I don't know. It's not going to be in the
White House. Remember the early debate about, should this man be a -- or
person -- be a member of the Cabinet. I said, no, I didn't think so. I
thought it was very important for the DNI to be apart from the White House.
Nevertheless, he will have access on a daily basis in that he'll be my
primary briefer. In other words, when the intelligence briefings start in
the morning, John will be there. And John and I will work to determine how
much exposure the CIA will have in the Oval Office. I would hope more
rather than less. The relationship between John and the CIA Director is
going to be a vital relationship; the relationship between the CIA and the
White House is a vital relationship.

John and I both know that change can be unsettling, and so, therefore, I'm
sure there's some people out there wondering right now what this means for
their jobs and the influence of a particular agency into the White House.
And the answer is, everybody will be given fair access, and everybody's
ideas will be given a chance to make it to John's office. And if he thinks
it's appropriate I see it, I'll see it. And if he thinks it's a waste of my
time, I won't see it. And obviously -- therefore, the conclusion is, I
trust his judgment. And I'm looking forward to working with him. It's going
to be an interesting opportunity.

Yes, John.

Q Will you back him if he goes up against Don Rumsfeld, Rumsfeld wants a
certain amount of money for his intelligence budget and Negroponte says, I
don't think so?

THE PRESIDENT: I don't think it necessarily works -- I know that's how the
press sometimes likes to play discussions inside the White House -- X
versus Y, and butting of heads and sharp elbows. Generally, it works a
little more civilly than that. People make their case, there's a
discussion, but ultimately John will make the decisions on the budget.

"Backing" means it's kind of zero-sum; that's not the way our team works.
It's not a zero-sum attitude in the White House, it is -- people have
strong opinions, by the way, around here, which is, I would hope you'd want
your President to have people around who have got strong opinions, people
who are willing to stand up for what they believe, people who say, here's
what I think is right and it may not be what so-and-so thinks is right;
then the question is, do I have the capacity to pick the right answer, to
be able to make a decision. I think people have seen that I'm capable of
making decisions. And one reason why I feel comfortable making them is
because I get good advice. And John is going to be a great advisor.

Suzanne.

Q A top European Union official said that Dr. Rice's trip, Secretary Rice's
trip to Europe was very positive. He described it as "romance blossoms once
two are determined to get married." (Laughter.) He also said that he did
not expect that there would be any kind of substantive differences in U.S.
policy on your own trip to Europe, but he hoped that it would help increase
the sense of trust between the United States and European allies. What do
you have to offer or say to European allies to help restore that trust,
particularly the trust in U.S. intelligence?

THE PRESIDENT: Yes, you know, my first goal is to remind both Americans and
Europeans that the transatlantic relationship is very important for our
mutual security and for peace, and that we have differences sometimes, but
we don't differ on values, that we share this great love and respect for
freedom.

September the 11th was an interesting phenomenon in terms of our relations.
For some in Europe, it was just a passing terrible moment. And for us, it
was a change of -- it caused us to change our foreign policy -- in other
words, a permanent part of our foreign policy. And that -- those
differences, at times, frankly, caused us to talk past each other. And I
recognize that, and I want to make sure the Europeans understand I know
that, and that as we move beyond the differences of the past, that we can
work a lot together to achieve big objectives.

There's also a concern in Europe, I suspect, that the only thing I care
about is our national security. And, clearly, since we have been attacked
-- I fear there's a terrorist group out there thinking about us again, or
would like to -- that national security is at the top of my agenda. That's
what you'd expect from the President of the United States. But we also care
deeply about hunger and disease. And I look forward to working with the
Europeans on hunger and disease.

We care about the climate. Obviously, the Kyoto Protocol had been a problem
in the past. They thought the treaty made sense; I didn't. And neither did
the United States Senate when it rejected the -- rejected the Kyoto
concept, 95 to nothing. And so there's an opportunity now to work together
to talk about new technologies that will help us both achieve a common
objective, which is a better environment for generations to come. And the
methanes to markets project is an interesting opportunity. I spoke to my
friend Tony Blair the other day, and I reminded him that here at home,
we're spending billions on clean coal technology where we could have --
it's conceivable and hopeful we'll have a zero-emissions coal plan, which
will be not only good for the United States, but it would be good for the
world. This isn't a question on environment, but I was hoping somebody
would ask it. I asked myself.

Anyway, let me -- so I'm looking forward -- (laughter) --thank you,
Dickerson -- I'm looking forward to discussing issues that not only relate
to our security, that not only relate to how we work together to spread
freedom, how we continue to embrace the values we believe in, but also how
we deal with hunger and disease and environmental concerns.

Let's see, have I gone through all the TV personalities yet?

Q Yes. (Laughter.)

THE PRESIDENT: Herman.

Q Mr. President, good morning.

THE PRESIDENT: A face made for radio, I might add.

Q Thank you. My mother appreciates it. (Laughter.) You offer a long list of
things you expect Syrian leaders to do. What are the consequences if they
don't do those things?

THE PRESIDENT: The idea is to continue to work with the world to remind
Syria it's not in their interest to be isolated.

Mark.

Q Mr. President, if I could go back to Social Security.

THE PRESIDENT: Sure.

Q You spoke about your desire to have a plan that includes private
retirement accounts. Chairman Greenspan yesterday, although supportive of
those accounts, expressed two concerns: that he was worried about rushing
something into print, if you will, and also about the borrowing, the
transition costs that would be required, trillions. He was especially
worried about the latter. What is your response to that?

THE PRESIDENT: Well, I presume the reason he was talking about Social
Security at all is because he understands that we've got about $11 trillion
of debt owed to future generations of Americans. Therefore, we've got to do
something about it now. And the longer we wait, the more difficult the
solution becomes.

The -- you asked about the transition cost, and what was the other?

Q And that he wanted to do it slowly.

THE PRESIDENT: Oh, slowly. Well, as you might remember in my State of the
Union, when I expressed my desire that Congress ought to think about
personal accounts, I did say they ought to be phased in.

And so -- and that's part of the transition cost issue. And we look forward
to working with Congress to come up with ways to make sure that the
personal accounts, if Congress so chooses, and I hope they do, can be
financed. And that's part of the issue. And that's part of the -- part of
the dialogue that is going to be needed once Congress understands we have a
problem.

Let me repeat what I said before -- and I fully understand this -- that
this idea is going nowhere if the Congress does not believe there is a
problem. Why should somebody take the hard path if they don't believe
there's a problem? And so I'm going to spend a lot of time reminding people
there is a problem.

Once the people figure out there's a problem -- and I think they're
beginning to understand that -- then the question to ask to those of us who
have been elected is, what are you going to do about it? And that's an
important question. And when people start answering that question, I have
said, bring your ideas forward. We welcome any idea -- except running up
the payroll tax rate, which I've been consistent on. And so bring them up.
And I look forward to hearing their ideas.

And part of the ideas is going to be to, one, understand the benefits of
personal accounts, as well as how to pay for the transition costs. We've
started that process, Mark, by talking about a phase-in program. And one of
the reasons we do is because we -- we wanted to indicate to the Congress we
understand there's an issue. We want to work with you on it.

Let's see here, let's see here, John.

Q Sir, can you talk a little bit --

THE PRESIDENT: If you don't raise your hand, does that mean you don't have
a question?

Q Not necessarily, sir.

THE PRESIDENT: Okay, good, because you didn't raise your hand.

Q Could you talk a little bit about how you would like to see the landscape
of the Middle East change over the next year? Can you talk about the
specific changes you'd like to see across the region?

THE PRESIDENT: Yes. You know, a year is a really short period of time when
it comes to working on -- working with nations to encourage democracy. So
there's not a kind of a universal answer. But let me try -- let me try to
answer it this way, because it's not -- in other words, you can't apply the
same standard for every country as they move toward democracy, I guess, is
what I'm saying. In other words, there's kind of not a blanket answer.

I'll give you kind of a general thought. I would like to see the following
things happen: we make progress on the development of a Palestinian state,
so there can be peace with Israel. And notice I put it that way: There
needs to progress for democracy to take -- firmly take hold in the
Palestinian Territory. It is my belief that that -- when that happens, that
we've got a very good chance for peace. That's why I said in my State of
the Union, it's within reach. What's in reach is to work with leadership
that appears committed to fighting terror to develop the institutions
necessary for democracy.

That's why the conference Tony Blair has called is an important conference.
It's a conference that we'll be working with the world, with countries from
around the world to say, how can we help you develop a democracy. And so
I'd like to see that move forward.

Obviously, I'd like to see the Iraqi government continue to make the
progress it is making toward providing its own security, as well as begin
the process of writing the constitution. We will continue to work with the
international community to make it clear that some of the behavior in the
Middle East is unacceptable. The development of a nuclear weapon is
unacceptable. Harboring terrorists, or providing safe haven for terrorists
is unacceptable. And so there's a lot of progress that can be made.

I was pleased to see that Saudi had municipal elections. And I think Crown
Prince Abdallah's vision of moving toward reform is coming to be. Every
speech I've given on democracy is -- I fully recognize that democracy will
advance at a pace that may be different from our own expectations and
obviously reflect the cultures of the countries in which democracy is
moving. But there's progress being made, and so it's kind of hard to have a
summary because there's different countries, different places. But if I try
to come up with one, I'd like to see more advance toward a free and -- free
and democratic states.

What's interesting -- and surely hasn't crept into your writing or
reporting -- but for a while there was a period that people said, it's an
impossible mission to have freedom take hold; I mean, what was he doing,
how can he possibly think that these people can possibly accept democracy?
I don't know if you remember that period of reporting or not. I vaguely do.
And then look what's happening. And that's why I can say, John, that I'd
like to see more progress because progress is being made. Afghanistan
elections were a remarkable achievement in the march of history.

The elections that John was involved in Iraq, and was -- it must have been
fantastic to be there. It was -- to think of the millions who defied the
terrorists. And you remember the reporting that went on -- first of all,
democracy may not be the kind of system that people agree to in Iraq, it's
kind of a foreign concept to them, and coupled with the fact there's a lot
of terrorists there who are getting ready to blow anybody up who goes and
votes. And yet, millions -- I think it's over eight million now, I think,
we've calculated -- went to the polls.

And what's interesting to me in Iraq is to see the posturing that's going
on, kind of the positioning. It's not exactly like the Social Security
debate, but it's posturing, it's politics. People are jockeying for
position. And I say it's not like the Social Security debate because their,
obviously, democracy isn't as advanced as ours. But nevertheless, there's
-- people are making moves here and there. And you hear about the
conferences and the discussions. To me, that's healthy. It's inspiring to
see a fledgling democracy begin to take -- take wing right here in the 21st
century in a part of the world where people didn't think there could be
progress. I think there can be progress, and we'll continue to work that
progress.

Part of my reason I'm going to Europe is to share my sense of optimism and
enthusiasm about what's taking place and remind people that that's -- that
those values of human rights, human dignity, and freedom are the core of
our very being as nations. And it's going to be a great experience to go
there.

Let's see, Hillman.

Q Yes --

THE PRESIDENT: I had to call on Hillman, because -- to balance the thing
here with the competing Texas newspapers.

Q Yes, Mr. President, have you, by any chance, received any sort of interim
or preliminary report from the Robb Commission that's investigating
intelligence failures? And did you seek the Commission's counsel on the
scope of the duties for the new Intelligence Director?

THE PRESIDENT: I haven't -- that's -- no, I have not had an interim report.
Maybe the national security people have -- or not. Hadley said he hasn't
either. We have -- our people have gone to talk to the Robb-Silberman
Commission when asked. But I've got great confidence in both those leaders
to bring forth a very solid report. And so we haven't been involved in the
process other than when asked to share opinion.

Q When might they report back?

THE PRESIDENT: Don't know -- don't know yet. Do we have any idea?

MR. HADLEY: Sometime next month.

THE PRESIDENT: Yes, Hadley said, "Try to work me in the press conference,"
and I did. (Laughter.) Congratulations. Sometimes [sic] next month, he
said.

It's an important report. And it's a relevant question today because of the
announcement of Ambassador Negroponte. He will take, and I will take, the
findings of the Robb-Silberman Commission very seriously. And I look
forward to their conclusions, and look forward to working with the leaders
and the Commission members to not only deal with the conclusions, but to
address whatever conclusions they have in concrete action. And I appreciate
the work.

But in terms -- no, and then I did not consult with either person and/or
members as to whether or not -- the nature of the pick. I did it
independently from the Commission.

Yes, sir. Mark.

Q Thank you, Mr. President. If, as you say, the development of nuclear
weapons is unacceptable, and if the administration's concern for weapons of
mass destruction in Iraq, which proved out to be unfounded, drove an
invasion to seek regime change, how concerned should Americans and, for
that matter, the world be that the true identification of weapons in Iran
or North Korea might not lead to the same sort of attack?

THE PRESIDENT: Well, first, Iran is different from Iraq -- very different.
The international community was convinced that Saddam Hussein had weapons
of mass destruction -- not just the United States, but the international
community -- and had passed some 16 resolutions. In other words, diplomacy
had -- they tried diplomacy over and over and over and over again. John was
at the United Nations during this period. And finally, the world, in 1441
-- U.N. Resolution 1441 -- said, disclose, disarm, or face serious
consequences. This was not a declaration by the United States of America,
it was a declaration by the United Nations Security Council -- and a
15-to-nothing vote, as I recall. And we took that resolution very
seriously.

As you know, the Iranian issue hasn't even gone up to the Security Council
yet. And so there's more diplomacy, in my judgment, to be done. And we'll
work very closely with our European friends and other nations. As I
mentioned before, we're an active member of the IAEA board, which will give
us an opportunity to continue -- to continue to say to the Iranians, you've
got to be transparent with your program and adhere to -- adhere to
protocols that you have signed.

Remember, this all started when they -- we found them enriching uranium in
an undeclared fashion. And it happened because somebody told on them. There
was an Iranian group that brought forth the information and it was clear
that they were enriching. And yet, they hadn't told anybody, which leads
you to wonder, why they hadn't told anybody. And so you can understand our
suspicions.

And we'll work with nations. And in terms of Korea, North Korea, again,
it's not Iraq. It's a different situation. But I'm -- I remember being with
Jiang Zemin in Crawford, and as a result of that meeting, we issued a joint
declaration that said that the Korean Peninsula should be nuclear
weapons-free. Since then I've -- that policy has been confirmed by
President Hu Jintao. And the other day the leader of North Korea declared
they had a nuclear weapon, which, obviously, means that if he is -- if he's
correct, that the peninsula is not nuclear weapons-free. So now is the time
for us to work with friends and allies who have agreed to be a part of the
process to determine what we're jointly going to do about it. And that's
where we are in the process right now.

Thank you all very much for your attention and questions. Appreciate it.

END 10:37 A.M. EST
===========================================================================
Return to this article at:
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2005/02/20050217-2.html

 * Origin: (1:3634/12)