Following is a transcript of Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage's April 13 interview on The News Hour with Jim Lehrer:

INTERVIEW OF
DEPUTY SECRETARY OF STATE RICHARD ARMITAGE
ON THE NEWS HOUR WITH JIM LEHRER

April 13, 2001

Washington, D.C.

MR. LEHRER: Mr. Secretary, welcome.

DEPUTY SECRETARY ARMITAGE: Thank you.

MR. LEHRER: The meeting next Wednesday with the Chinese -- has the time and the place been agreed upon?

DEPUTY SECRETARY ARMITAGE: Well, roughly the time is going to be Wednesday. The place is still a little up in the air, probably Beijing, but it's not nailed down.

MR. LEHRER: Who is going to represent the United States?

DEPUTY SECRETARY ARMITAGE: We'll have a delegation of seven or eight people, and it will be a State and Defense delegation. It is our intention to have the Defense Department lead it.

MR. LEHRER: I see. But will it be Cabinet officers, or will it be -- or what?

DEPUTY SECRETARY ARMITAGE: No, no. This is a working delegation. It will be a Deputy Assistant Secretary, perhaps.

MR. LEHRER: Yes.

DEPUTY SECRETARY ARMITAGE: No more than that.

MR. LEHRER: But you won't be going?

DEPUTY SECRETARY ARMITAGE: I certainly won't.

MR. LEHRER: Okay. Now, what will be the number one priority of the United States when they sit down at that table?

DEPUTY SECRETARY ARMITAGE: Well, I think first of all we will want an explanation from our point of view of why the Chinese have been engaged in aggressive flying in international air space when we have our reconnaissance runs.

Secondarily, we believe the Chinese have an aircraft that belongs to us, and that they have a responsibility to return it.

And third, I think we will want to see if there is a way we can talk about the recent problems we have had in a non-polemical setting, to try to make sure we don't conflict in the future.

MR. LEHRER: Meaning work out some kind of rules of non-engagement for the surveillance flight, that kind of thing?

DEPUTY SECRETARY ARMITAGE: Well, that might be a little strong. I think we want to get an understanding to the Chinese that our flights are going to continue -- we are in international air space; after all, they fly reconnaissance in Asia as well -- and see if we can agree not to be as aggressive, at least on our part, as they have been.

MR. LEHRER: Aggressive -- define aggressive? What have they been doing, besides this particular incident? This is part of a pattern from your point of view, right?

DEPUTY SECRETARY ARMITAGE: It was indeed a pattern, and we have demarched in Beijing, both in Washington and in Beijing, about what we considered aggressive, dangerous flying, where they repeatedly pass within 20, sometimes 10 feet of our aircraft.

MR. LEHRER: Now, going back to the first point, there is going to be a specific discussion about what happened in this incident, correct, up there in the air?

DEPUTY SECRETARY ARMITAGE: Yes, indeed.

MR. LEHRER: And is the United States prepared to prove its position as to what happened?

DEPUTY SECRETARY ARMITAGE: I think we feel quite confident that we know what happened. We will be even more confident when we finish our debriefings of the pilots. We have the past history, at least on film, of some of the Chinese fighter behavior. So I think we feel quite confident. Whether those facts will be persuasive to the Chinese, we will have to see.

MR. LEHRER: Is something -- should we expect some kind of statement after the meeting about, hey, we agree on this, that this happened, or that didn't happen, or is that even the point of the meeting?

DEPUTY SECRETARY ARMITAGE: No, I think I don't expect a statement -- a joint statement. We haven't gotten that far along in the planning, actually.

I would hope, however, that at a minimum, the talks could be held in a businesslike straightforward manner, and if that is the case, I think that will indicate something about the Chinese desire of getting on with our relationship.

If on the other hand they want to engage in shrillness or polemics, then it might indicate that the Chinese haven't quite made up their mind what sort of relationship they want with the United States.

MR. LEHRER: How would you characterize their position thus far, in terms of those two categories?

DEPUTY SECRETARY ARMITAGE: Well, holding our citizens for 11 days, demanding apologies before an investigation was even held, doesn't seem to be the way that one would move forward to establish a good relation. I hope it's a one-off situation and that we can get back on track. But we'll see.

MR. LEHRER: Now, getting the airplane back. I assume that we have asked before to get the airplane back, have we not?

DEPUTY SECRETARY ARMITAGE: We have been asking steadily in our negotiations. Our point of view is that it is an $80 million aircraft, it's ours, and that the Chinese have a responsibility to return it to us.

MR. LEHRER: Now, what has been their response?

DEPUTY SECRETARY ARMITAGE: They have been quite quiet thus far on the question of the aircraft, except to say that they had to conduct their investigation.

MR. LEHRER: But they haven't said, no, no, no, it's now Chinese property and you can't have it back?

DEPUTY SECRETARY ARMITAGE: To my knowledge they haven't said that.

MR. LEHRER: Do we have any leverage if they do take that position?

DEPUTY SECRETARY ARMITAGE: Well, I think the leverage of a relationship. We want to have at least worthwhile, workable relationship with the People's Republic of China. If they decide to be obstinate to these talks, one of the ways that we would know that is if they absolutely refuse to discuss the return of the aircraft, and then it may indicate that they are not so concerned about a workmanlike relationship.

MR. LEHRER: So the return of the airplane is a serious issue to us, is that right?

DEPUTY SECRETARY ARMITAGE: Well, I think it is a serious issue, particularly as it might be one of the measures on which we would judge their intent to move forward in the future with us.

MR. LEHRER: Now, you said the surveillance flights are going to continue. Why?

DEPUTY SECRETARY ARMITAGE: Well, the President yesterday spoke and said that reconnaissance flights are part of the fabric of our national security, and by the way, the national security fabric of our allies. So we are absolutely going to continue reconnaissance flights in the international air and so that we can guard our national security and that of our allies.

MR. LEHRER: Have you considered the possibility of trying to get that information from other sources in order to avoid this kind of annoyance, or this kind of confrontation?

DEPUTY SECRETARY ARMITAGE: Well, I must say, we are flying in international air space. We have a right. Six other countries in Asia, including the Chinese, fly reconnaissance flights in international air space. So I think we have every right to do what we do.

Regarding other methods of collecting information, et cetera, I would refer you to the Pentagon for that, Mr. Lehrer.

MR. LEHRER: But as far as the negotiations, the idea of our stopping these kinds of surveillance flights close to China, that is not a negotiable item?

DEPUTY SECRETARY ARMITAGE: It is not as far as I understand it. I think our President was quite eloquent on this point yesterday.

MR. LEHRER: Now, the President also said yesterday that this incident with China did damage our relations with China. How will that damage be felt, do you think?

DEPUTY SECRETARY ARMITAGE: Well, in the near term, as has been well publicized, many congressional delegations, both Senate and House, decided not to visit China during this recess. Many businessmen have contacted the Department of State, the Secretary of State himself, asking if China was a stable place to do business, should they engage in business, et cetera.

I think in the minds of many of the American public there is a question about a nation which holds our service men, who are innocent, for 11 days, as to whether we want to move forward -- and how much -- in a relationship with the People's Republic of China.

So there has been damage. Now, whether that damage can be repaired, I think it can, and so does the President and the Secretary of State, but we have to see that the Chinese want to have a good relationship before we can make a solid judgment.

MR. LEHRER: You were involved in many of the negotiations or the discussions with the Chinese over these last 12 days. Can you characterize them for us? I mean, were they hostile, were they open, were they friendly, were they -- what words would you use?

DEPUTY SECRETARY ARMITAGE: I would describe the discussions I was involved in as brisk and businesslike. I think Admiral Prueher in Beijing may have other words. His were somewhat more arduous, some quite lengthy, and some relatively short. At the end of the day, things got quite businesslike as we were close to an end.

MR. LEHRER: Where did this term "very sorry" come from?

DEPUTY SECRETARY ARMITAGE: As I recall, it came between April 6th and April 8th. We had initially suggested that we regretted this incident, and it seemed that the word "sorry" was a natural progression. Our President had drawn a very firm line in the sand on several items, one of which was we were not going to accept the use of the word "apology", because to do so would indicate that we felt we bore some responsibility. We didn't bear responsibility for this accident; hence, we settled on the term "very sorry".

MR. LEHRER: And was that part of the negotiation? I mean, does the word "sorry" and does the word "very" -- did you negotiate "sorry" and then negotiate "very"?

DEPUTY SECRETARY ARMITAGE: Yes, we did.

MR. LEHRER: Okay. And was that as far as the United States was prepared to go?

DEPUTY SECRETARY ARMITAGE: Yes, the President was quite clear on several items, one of which was we were not going to apologize for something that we felt we bore no responsibility.

MR. LEHRER: Just for the record, can you tell us "very sorry" was arrived at, who said it, whose idea was it, or anything like that?

DEPUTY SECRETARY ARMITAGE: Success has a thousand fathers, Mr. Lehrer, and I'm not quite sure who is going to claim exact paternity for this.

MR. LEHRER: Okay. But do you happen to know who is the father of it?

DEPUTY SECRETARY ARMITAGE: I think we'll leave it with the national security team.

MR. LEHRER: Okay. Did China at any time during these negotiations ask for reparations?

DEPUTY SECRETARY ARMITAGE: Early on, both publicly and privately, there was a suggestion of compensation, but laterally, it dropped out of the Chinese talking points, to my recollection.

MR. LEHRER: So it never got to be a serious issue about resolution?

DEPUTY SECRETARY ARMITAGE: No, it didn't, sir.

MR. LEHRER: All right. Throughout the discussions, did the United States continue to say what its position was on what happened, and then the Chinese say what their position was on what happened?

DEPUTY SECRETARY ARMITAGE: Well, in this case we were very fortunate to have Admiral Prueher as our Ambassador in Beijing. He, after all, is a pilot, and he was able, we think, to explain rather graphically our view how impossible or improbable it would be for a relatively slow-moving four-propeller aircraft to make the sort of turn that the Chinese were describing as being responsible for the accident.

I can't say that the Chinese were persuaded. We were quite persuaded by Admiral Prueher's arguments.

MR. LEHRER: Okay. Now, is it -- do you believe that this was a fair and just conclusion for the United States, Mr. Secretary?

DEPUTY SECRETARY ARMITAGE: Well, I think we have still got questions about why our people were detained for 11 days, and why apologies were demanded before an investigation. But I think it is a very good outcome for the United States. We handled this diplomatically with the full involvement of the new Bush team. The President was very much in charge of setting out both our objectives and the parameters in which we could deal. And I think the American public should be quite satisfied. Most importantly of all, we saw 24 Americans, men and women, return home, and this Easter they will be in the bosom of their family. That is a good outcome.

MR. LEHRER: What do you say to those who say, why in those first few hours did not the Secretary of State call the Foreign Secretary of China, or even the President of the United States get on the phone with the President of China and get this thing resolved at the highest levels?

DEPUTY SECRETARY ARMITAGE: Perhaps it wasn't ready to be resolved at the highest levels in China. There were some attempts made to contact the Chinese at a high level. It was unsuccessful. You will remember at the time of Tiananmen, it was very difficult to find the Chinese leadership when we wanted to try to bring calm to that very terrible tragedy.

It seems to be the case that when very, very difficult issues arise, it is sometimes hard to get the Chinese to answer the phone. We worked it out over time, we were able to communicate -- the Secretary -- to the Vice Premier, Qian Qichen, and eventually a successful conclusion was brought.

MR. LEHRER: But Secretary Powell was prepared to get involved, if the opportunity had been there from the other side, is that what you're saying?

DEPUTY SECRETARY ARMITAGE: Well, sure, the President had directed the Secretary to resolve the issue, and the Secretary was doing it. He was quite hands-on, as you know, in this negotiation.

MR. LEHRER: Robert Kagan and Bill Kristol, two conservative writers, wrote this morning on the op-ed page of The Washington Post, "We can kid ourselves all we want, but we have suffered a blow to our prestige and reputation, a loss that will reverberate throughout the world if we do not begin immediately to repair the damage."

Are they right about that, Mr. Secretary?

DEPUTY SECRETARY ARMITAGE: Mr. Lehrer, I'm from Georgia, and we've got an eight-letter word for that in Georgia.

MR. LEHRER: Eight-letter word. Okay. In other words, you disagree?

DEPUTY SECRETARY ARMITAGE: Well, nonsense was of course the word I was thinking of. I think what the Vice President said on the Sunday shows is applicable. They were absurd comments which Mr. Kristol and Mr. Kagan insist on repeating, and I don't think it has much resonance with anyone.

MR. LEHRER: What about the additional line here that "so far the lesson is all too clear: when you bully the United States, the United States searches for a way to apologize"?

DEPUTY SECRETARY ARMITAGE: I don't recognize that we have accepted any responsibility in this accident, and hence, we haven't apologized, and they certainly are interpreting the letter in a way that seems to me to leave them alone.

MR. LEHRER: No American should have any reason to be ashamed or to be the least bit upset about this whole incident?

DEPUTY SECRETARY ARMITAGE: I think Americans have every right to be upset about the incident, and I think Americans equally have every right to be satisfied with the outcome. We have our 24 service men and women home for these holidays. That is a good outcome.

MR. LEHRER: And what we also want now is that airplane, number one, right?

DEPUTY SECRETARY ARMITAGE: Yes, indeed.

MR. LEHRER: Then what will mend it from the United States point of view?

DEPUTY SECRETARY ARMITAGE: Well, I think a speedy resolution of this, including the aircraft, would help. I think an indication on the part of the Chinese that they are at least satisfied that there was one blessing in this terrible incident, and that is that 24 more lives weren't added to the loss of the one Chinese airman.

MR. LEHRER: But you as a high official of the United States Government involved in this resolution, do you feel that you have kind of had an opportunity, through adversity, to kind of get their measure and for them to kind of get measure, too? In other words, could there be a silver lining here in the long run?

DEPUTY SECRETARY ARMITAGE: Well, I think certainly there could be. If we have exhausted ourselves rhetorically, perhaps we can get down to business. There is certainly a good silver lining, I think, for the Bush Administration, the President, and his security team was tested early. I believe we came out all right, and I'll leave it up to the judgment of the American people. But that seems to be the case, so that is not a bad thing, either.

MR. LEHRER: But do you feel that the ability to communicate with China is better now than before because you went through this terrible incident?

DEPUTY SECRETARY ARMITAGE: You would have to ask that in Beijing. I think we are pretty -- we are more confident, even than before, that we are on the right track. We have got a good team who is able to resolve issues.

MR. LEHRER: All right. Well, Mr. Secretary, thank you very much.

DEPUTY SECRETARY ARMITAGE: Thank you, Mr. Lehrer.