For Immediate Release
Office of the Press Secretary
December 2, 2002
Press Briefing by Ari Fleischer
James S. Brady Press Briefing Room
12:19 P.M. EST
MR. FLEISCHER: Good afternoon. Let me give you a report on the
President's day, and then I have several announcements for you. The
President began early this morning with a call to Kenyan President
Daniel Arap Moi. He expressed his condolences to President Moi and to
the Kenyan people about the tragic terrorist attacks in Mombasa, Kenya
last Thursday, and he offered United States assistance in their
investigation. The leaders share their commitment to bring to justice
those responsible for the attack. The President expressed his
appreciation for the cooperation of President Moi and the Kenyan
government in the global fight against terrorism.
Following that, the President signed into law the reauthorization
of the North American Wetlands Conservation Act. And later today, the
President will sign into law the National Defense Authorization Act in
an event over at the Pentagon, at which the President will also give an
update on the war against terror and discuss the significance of the
upcoming December 8th deadline vis-a-vis Iraq and the United Nations.
The President will also welcome to the White House today Tony
Stewart, the 2002 NASCAR Winston Cup Series champion. He will also
sign into law a resolution concerning John Adams Commemorative Work
bill, and the Paul and Sheila Wellstone Center for Community Act.
In other announcements, you had this on the week ahead, but I want
to give this to you at the briefing, as well. The President will
welcome Kenyan President Daniel Arab Moi and Ethiopian President Meles
Zenawi to the White House this Thursday, December 5th. The President
looks forward to discussing issues affecting common interests of the
United States and the East Africa region, particularly our continued
cooperation in the global war on terrorism, regional stability,
humanitarian development efforts, and efforts to combat HIV-AIDS.
Two other announcements for you. One, the President will be
issuing a statement about the passing of George Christian. The
statement will read as follows: George Christian was an honorable,
decent and kind man who represented the best of public service. He was
devoted to his family. He was a statesman of the highest integrity.
He also was a great Texan whose wise counsel was sought by generations
of leaders.
Laura joins me in offering our most heartfelt condolences to the
Christian family. We are grateful for the life he lived and the many
positive contributions he made to his country and his state.
That will be going out shortly.
And finally, the President would like to take this occasion to
congratulate and praise the workers of the Transportation Security
Administration for the excellent job they did over the busy
Thanksgiving weekend. This was TSA's first time in Thanksgiving and
the holiday season, and I think the traveling public recognizes that
there are many dedicated professionals who performed their job ably to
protect the American people, and did so politely and did so with great
care and great security in mind.
And with that, I'm happy to take your questions.
Q Ari, Professor DiIulio, who was the head of the faith-based
office, made some comments that have been getting a lot of attention in
Esquire Magazine about how political the White House operation was.
And he has since issued an apology today, a statement of apology.
What's your reaction in general to his comments, and then to the
apology?
MR. FLEISCHER: Well, I think that any suggestion that the White
House makes decisions that are not based on sound policy reasons is
baseless and groundless.
Q What about his apology? Have you had any contact with him
directly, or has he called Rove or any of the people involved?
MR. FLEISCHER: I know he has spoken with officials in the office
-- the faith-based office, and talked with them. And I think his
statement speaks for itself. He did issue an apology.
Q Did he retract his --
MR. FLEISCHER: He issued an apology, Helen, and I think you can
read what he had to write.
Q What is he apologizing for?
MR. FLEISCHER: I think you'd have to ask Mr. DiIulio.
Q Weapons inspectors in Iraq have now visited a couple of sites
that both the President and Prime Minister Blair pointed to
specifically as possible sources of new construction and new
development of Iraqi weapons programs. It doesn't seem they found
anything. What's the President's assessment of Iraqi cooperation --
MR. FLEISCHER: The President's assessment of Iraqi cooperation is
that it is far, far too soon to say. The regime is just beginning --
the inspection regime is just beginning. They will continue to
increase their numbers and their efforts. And the President has not
reached any conclusions; it's too early to reach any conclusions.
Q Does it undermine the President's credibility at all that
these sites were pointed to by him and by Prime Minister Blair as very
suspicious, and inspectors and reporters went there and didn't seem to
find anything?
MR. FLEISCHER: No, I think there's widespread agreement that those
sites were the sites in which Iraq previously violated United Nations
accords, and it underscores the President's concern about Iraq moving
things around and the fact that in the '90s they did say they weren't
in violation of the United Nations charters, they were living up to the
United Nations charters. And everyone recognizes that they violated
the U.N. resolutions at those sites. Just because they're not
violating it at the same site today doesn't mean that Iraq can be taken
at its word.
Q That's not what the President said. But let me raise a
broader question here. Back in August, the Vice President said that
there was a danger in weapons inspectors going back into Iraq because
it would perhaps convince the world that Saddam was back in the box, as
he put it. Is that possibly what we're seeing here, as the inspectors
show up at sites and don't find anything?
MR. FLEISCHER: Well, I would encourage you, one, to listen to the
President's speech this afternoon. The President is going to talk
about the inspections in Iraq and what they mean and the importance of
the December 8th deadline for Iraq to provide the United Nations, and
therefore, the world, with a list of its weapons programs in violation
of the United Nations resolutions.
Two, I don't think that it's fair to compare one week's worth of
preliminary work to four years worth of the absence of inspectors.
That's why the President's conclusion is it's much too soon to make any
judgments.
Q Does the President hope that there will be no weapons there?
MR. FLEISCHER: The President wants --
Q I mean, everything you say is so negative. It doesn't sound
you people really want to not find anything there.
MR. FLEISCHER: I think everything Saddam Hussein has done has been
so negative that this President is accurately and realistically
describing facts to the world. And as a result of the President
accurately describing facts to the world --
Q But you're going in with such a negative attitude.
MR. FLEISCHER: Well, I think it's fair to say the President has
gone into this with a can-do attitude to preserve the peace, and if it
hadn't been for the President's efforts and leadership and willing to
state facts realistically, there would be no inspectors inside Iraq,
would there be? There wouldn't have. It was the President who caused
this to happen.
Q Have they ever threatened the United States? Has Iraq ever
threatened the United States?
MR. FLEISCHER: Only when they shoot at our pilots. Only when they
attack their neighbors and America's interests abroad.
Q During the Gulf War when we were shooting at them.
MR. FLEISCHER: They were shooting at our pilots just recently.
Q You continue to tell us that the President is very skeptical
that the Iraqis will cooperate. So in the event that they do, as they
have so far, do you have a plan B? What happens if this actually
doesn't turn up anything? Then what do you do?
MR. FLEISCHER: I urge you to wait until the President's speech
this afternoon, and we will see precisely what the President says. And
then there is also this interesting question about what will Iraq do
when they have to honor the United Nations resolution and provide a
list of their weapons that they hold in violation of United Nations
resolutions. It's up to Saddam Hussein to produce that list.
Q You're assuming in your answer that they have weapons of mass
destruction which they are hiding. They say they do not; you say that
they do.
MR. FLEISCHER: I think the history of people who accept Saddam
Hussein at face value and take his word for accurate is one of
disappointment because they have been deceived. Saddam Hussein does
not exactly have a track record of telling the world the truth. So he,
on December 8th, has to indicate whether or not he has weapons. Let's
see what he says. If he declares he has none, then we will know that
Saddam Hussein is once again misleading the world.
Q How will you know?
MR. FLEISCHER: We have intelligence information about what Saddam
Hussein possesses.
Q So you say that you do have information that he has these
weapons.
MR. FLEISCHER: It's no secret. We've said many times -- you've
heard the President say repeatedly that he has chemical and biological
weapons, and he has missiles that can reach an access of 150
kilometers, all three of which are violations of his sworn commitments
to the United Nations.
Q One quick follow. What happens on December 8th?
MR. FLEISCHER: December 8th will mark the beginning of a process,
a process of verification to find out whether or not Saddam Hussein is
indeed telling the truth, and whether or not he has indeed disarmed.
That will mark the beginning of that process. If Saddam Hussein
indicates that he has weapons of mass destruction and that he is
violating United Nations resolutions, then we will know that Saddam
Hussein again deceived the world. If he said he doesn't have any, then
I think that we will find out whether or not Saddam Hussein is saying
something that we believe will be verifiably false.
Q It's a process -- what do you mean?
MR. FLEISCHER: Well, it's a process of verification. That's the
purpose of the President going to the United Nations and asking the
world to support the effort to put the inspectors back into Iraq. And
that process is now, as you know, underway and just beginning. So the
inspectors will then begin, and increase their efforts to find weapons
of mass destruction and obtain information.
But I want to remind you that much of this depends on Saddam
Hussein's cooperation. The inspection regime cannot work on its own,
without the cooperation of the Iraqi government. Iraq is a country the
size of France. If they desire to hide things or move things, they
have the means and the ability and the history of doing so. The
inspection regime substantially depends on the cooperation of Iraqi
officials.
Q I'm curious about why you're saying it's just the beginning
of the process on Sunday. If Iraq, as you say, using your
hypothetical, if Iraq declares Sunday it has no weapons of mass
destruction, why should that begin a process? Why should that not end
it? Why don't you stand up and verify that they're lying and have them
suffer the consequences?
MR. FLEISCHER: Well, I think the timing, if there's anything that
goes beyond that, will be determined by the President, and Saddam
Hussein will have to figure out what the timing is. But I share with
you the President's approach that this is the beginning of the process,
and I make no statements to you about how long that process will be.
Q In terms of moving the process forward after the 8th, is
there a mechanism that's in place for the President to share the
broader intelligence that he's -- with specifics that he knows about
-- to compare that against the Iraqi statements?
MR. FLEISCHER: Well, the President has shared much information
with the American people in many of his speeches, including his speech
in Cincinnati, for example, where he is trying to find the appropriate
level of information that can be shared without endangering sources or
methods. But suffice it to say the inspectors, of course, as is
well-known, will have access to intelligence information from not only
our government, from other governments, and that means they will be in
the strongest position to do their job so that we can know if the
Iraqis are telling the truth, or not; we can know whether or not he has
disarmed.
Q The theory would then be that you have the statement from
Iraq on the 8th of what they have and what they don't have. Then
information, if it hasn't already been, would be transmitted to the
inspectors on the ground so that they could then go to cross-check,
basically, against the Iraqi declarations, and at that point,
presumably there would be some sort of unveiling of further
information? Or would it all be kept at the classified or background
level with the inspectors?
MR. FLEISCHER: Under the U.N. resolution, the report that Saddam
Hussein must file on December 8th is to be filed with the United
Nations Security Council. They will be the recipient of Saddam
Hussein's cataloging of what weapons of mass destruction he has, or
perhaps he will say he has none. This is up to Saddam Hussein. That
will get filed with United Nations Security Council, and of course,
that will provide some level of information -- or maybe no
information for the inspectors to proceed and to do their jobs. And
beyond that, I'm not prepared to say what type of information may or
may not be declassified. I can't guess.
Q -- reports are circulated and then member countries comment
on them, is that right?
MR. FLEISCHER: I'd have to take a look at the exact resolution.
As a practical matter, this would become -- depending on what Saddam
Hussein says or lists, this will become information then for the
inspectors to use to fulfill their mission to make certain that he
disarms.
Q Ari, if the Iraqis were to declare they have no weapons of
mass destruction, would the President require proof from the inspectors
to the negative, or does he already have indications that would
disprove that claim?
MR. FLEISCHER: Well, I don't want to say with specificity what
every potential hypothetical could or could not be.
Q But does he have enough information now to act if Iraq claims
they don't?
MR. FLEISCHER: It was President Bush who made the determination to
go to the United Nations and ask for the inspectors to be put back into
Iraq. And the President successfully urged the world to take this
action after four years of the inspectors being absent. And I think
the world is pleased now that the inspectors are going in. The
President wants to allow the inspectors to do their jobs, and that's
what the President's approach will begin with.
Q Is he confident they can, they could find --
MR. FLEISCHER: Well, we'll find out. We'll find out.
Q Ari, what information does the administration have, what
evidence have you compiled about the attacks in Kenya that suggests
that al Qaeda is involved?
MR. FLEISCHER: Well, we are looking into it. There is nothing
conclusive to report. There are suspicions that al Qaeda is involved,
but I cannot go beyond that. It remains at the beginning of the
investigative process. We have offered assistance to the Kenyan
government and this is at the beginning of the investigative process.
Q What about the shoulder-fired missiles, one of which was also
allegedly fired at a U.S. plane in Afghanistan? So what do we make of
that? You have two very similar incidents and in both cases, the
casings were left behind. Is there anything to tie the two together?
MR. FLEISCHER: I have received nothing that I can pass along on
that topic.
Q Just one other thing for you if I may. Has the
administration concluded that some sort of economic stimulus is, in
fact, necessary for the economy?
MR. FLEISCHER: The President is continuing to review a number of
economic options. He continues to study the economy every day, to
receive the latest reports about the strength of the economy. And in
the event the President has something further to add, he will add it.
It remains an issue that he monitors.
Q I know you're always wary to talk about what he might
propose, but I'm just asking the basic question, which is, have they
even concluded that a stimulus is now necessary?
MR. FLEISCHER: Well, the President would be the one to make any
determination about whether a stimulus is necessary.
Q Has he made that determination?
MR. FLEISCHER: He continues to review the economic data, and if he
has something to indicate on that he would be the one to do it.
Q Ari, when did the President decide to give this speech today
to the nation? It wasn't on the week ahead. It seems to have come up
awfully suddenly.
MR. FLEISCHER: It wasn't on the week ahead, the signing of the
Defense Authorization bill? Then that's a -- that was an oversight.
I think a corrected version of the week ahead went out that had it on
there, if I recall. I think there was something where it wasn't on
there.
Q Yes, this morning.
MR. FLEISCHER: This morning? Teach me to go away for
Thanksgiving. (Laughter.)
Q So this has been in the works for a while?
MR. FLEISCHER: I'd have to take a look at it. Presumably, yes.
With Thanksgiving, I'd have to go back and take an actual look at it.
Q Ari, two on the Iraq question. Has the administration given
already the head of the inspections teams its most sensitive
intelligence about suspected weapons sites, or has the administration
deliberately held back some of that information to let Saddam go first,
to let him file on December 8th?
MR. FLEISCHER: I don't know. I don't know the sequence in which
that information gets provided. Suffice it to say that all nations
want to work with the inspectors; the inspectors want to be able to
have the best information to help them to do their jobs. The exact
sequencing or the exact nature of any information that is passed on to
them, I don't have that information.
Q We are quoting a source within the inspections saying that
Iraq has admitted to the inspectors that it did try to buy those
aluminum tubes that the President, the administration made an issue of
some months back, and that Iraq is saying that they were for
conventional rockets, not for nuclear weapons, as the administration
has alleged. A, have you received such reports from the inspectors?
B, do you accept that on its face and is that, in and of itself, a
violation worthy of moving to the next level?
MR. FLEISCHER: I'm aware of the report that CNN aired ont his
topic and I will say this is something that the President has said
publicly, that Iraq did, in fact, seek to buy these tubes for the
purpose of producing, not as Iraq now claims conventional forces, but
for the purpose of trying to produce nuclear weapons. And so it's, on
the one hand, mildly encouraging that Iraq would now admit to what it's
been doing. But on the other hand, a lie is still a lie, because
these -- they sought to produce these for the purpose of production
of nuclear weapons, not conventional.
And I remind you that conventional weapons, missiles that have a
range in access of 150 kilometers, are prohibited to Iraq under its
agreements with the United Nations.
Q Do you have any concern that they may be deliberately
pleading guilty to misdemeanors, if you will -- okay, we violated the
past regime here, we tried to buy these tubes, we did this -- so that
people would say -- the administration might say, see, he's lying,
but others might say, see, he's getting religion, let's let all this
play out for months?
MR. FLEISCHER: I think the President has one point in mind. This
is about disarming Saddam Hussein. He plays games. He's done this for
a decade. He has a way of finding half-truths that try to get him off
the hook with the world. And the President went to the United Nations
to make the point that this has been a decade of defiance by Saddam
Hussein who is very good and very clever at finding ways to deceive the
world, including the inspectors. And the inspectors' task is a very
difficult task, given the ease and the nature of what you can move
around, weapons, thanks to mobile laboratories and hiding things
underground and putting things in places that are hard to find.
This is one of the reasons why the President insisted on strong
language in the resolution, so that people who might have information
inside Iraq could leave the country to provide that information to the
inspectors. Very often the inspectors are able to do their best work
as a result of information they receive from sources inside Iraq, who
then worry about their own safety and protection. The President wants
to make certain the inspectors have every tool available so they can do
their job because the history of Saddam Hussein is he will do
everything in his power to lie, to deceive, to deny and to hide.
Q One more quick one if I can. Can you help us at all
understand why the administration is so certain Iraq wanted to buy
these tubes for nuclear weapons, not as the Iraqis are apparently
saying now, for conventional rockets?
MR. FLEISCHER: I'm not a technical expert, John, but I think if
you talk to the people who are versed in the exact methodology for the
production of nuclear weapons, what you will find is there are
different issues involving the size of the various aluminum tubes that
is an indication of the type of weaponry in which they are seeking to
develop.
Q Ari, I know you don't want to speculate, but I just want to
ask, does the President feel that when he does make the determination
about his economic stimulus plan that he wants to do it quickly in the
holiday season to make sure it gives the most time, I guess, for --
MR. FLEISCHER: No, I make no predictions on this. If the
President has something to indicate, he will indicate it.
Q So he doesn't feel like it's important to get something out
there as soon as possible --
MR. FLEISCHER: Again, I didn't say that. I said I make no
predictions about the potential timing of this. And so if there's
something further to be discussed, the President will be the one to do
it.
Q Ari, The Washington Post reports that Harvey John McGeorge of
Woodbridge, Virginia, is one of the Americans on the United Nations
inspection team in Iraq, despite what the Post reports -- and this is
a quote -- "he played a leadership role in sado-masochist sex clubs
like the Leather Leadership Conference, where he teaches courses on sex
slaves and techniques including knives, ropes and choking devices."
And my question is, does the President believe it is good for the
United States to be represented by this sado-masochist?
MR. FLEISCHER: Lester, I think any questions about the composition
of the inspection team need to be addressed to the United Nations --
Q I just want to know, how does the President feel. You
obviously, and he read The Washington Post, you know about this. How
does he feel? Does he think it's a good idea for America to be
represented on this inspection team by this man?
MR. FLEISCHER: The President feels as I indicated, that the
question of the selection of the inspectors is something that needs to
be addressed to the United Nations.
Q The Washington post quotes Paul Weyrich as writing, "Islam is
at war against us. The Bush administration's promotion of Islam as a
religion of peace and tolerance, just like Judaism or Christianity, it
is neither." And Ken Adelman said, calling Islam a peaceful religion
is an increasingly hard argument to make. Does the President believe
that Weyrich and Adelman and others are wicked or ignorant or what?
MR. FLEISCHER: Lester, the President is proud to stand up for
America's longstanding traditions of tolerance and openness and to
welcome people who practice the religion of Islam in the United States
and around the world. The President knows that Islam is a religion of
peace. And like many religions, and like many beliefs, there can be
individuals within a certain religion who distort its meaning and
divert from the peaceful intentions of a religion, having nothing to do
with the religion. They themselves are the ones who violate and twist
a religion, and Islam is a religion of peace.
Q Can I come back to the aluminum tubes, Ari? Has the
administration been told of any Iraqi admission on this score, or are
you just --
MR. FLEISCHER: I said I was aware of the media report. I'd have
to take a look specifically at whether the inspectors have conveyed
that to the United States government.
Q Have we gotten any sort of reports back from the inspectors
along the way yet of any sort?
MR. FLEISCHER: The reports from the inspectors go to the United
Nations and then there are regular channels so that the United States
and other nations that are on the Security Council that authorize the
mission of the inspectors, so they can be informed about the progress
of the inspectors.
Q Have we gotten at least -- you said that it's too soon to
tell whether there has been any sort of compliance. Are we at least
getting a preliminary report from the inspectors?
MR. FLEISCHER: As I indicated, there is a routine channel for the
administration to receive information as the reports are filed with the
United Nations, and we do that. The President's conclusion is, it's
too soon to make any conclusions.
Q So there's at least preliminary information passed along?
MR. FLEISCHER: Surely. The inspectors, as they do their job, keep
in touch with the United Nations Security Council. The United States,
as a member of the Security Council, will monitor all the reports and
pay very close attention to them.
Q Ari, Dr. Kissinger has said that he'll sever all ties with
any clients that may become a subject of the September 11th
investigation that he's heading up. Is this something that the White
House looked into, the possibility that Kissinger may have a potential
conflict of interest here and it's something to be concerned about?
MR. FLEISCHER: I think it's fair to say for all 10 commissioners,
they all are covered by the same ethics provisions. And ethics
provisions make clear that you cannot have, even on a part-time
commission, a conflict of interest. And so all commissioners are going
to be bound by those ethical standards, and we expect all commissioners
to live up to them. And, of course, Senator Mitchell and Dr. Kissinger
indicated that they would.
Q If he does have a client, if this is determined, isn't this
something that could potentially taint the investigation, considering
that this is the man who's heading it up?
MR. FLEISCHER: Well, I think all 10 are bound by that same
provision; we expect all 10 to honor all the ethics laws. We have
every reason to believe that they will; we have no reason to believe
that they wouldn't.
Q Ari, the British government is putting out a list of human
rights violations by the government of Saddam Hussein. Amnesty
International is saying that this has been known for a long time and
Britain has looked the other way, probably the U.S. also. Now they're
coming up with this argument and, according to Amnesty this is a way of
preparing for war.
MR. FLEISCHER: Well, I would hope that Amnesty International would
welcome a dialogue around the world about human rights abuses, and that
when a nation puts out a report, even if it's a report that
characterizes or catalogues information that was previously discussed,
Amnesty International would treat this as a serious document that
describes accurately -- and there's no dispute by Amnesty
International about the accuracy of the document -- the facts on the
ground in Iraq.
Q Can I have a follow-up? It has to do with the President of
Colombia. Secretary of State Powell is going to be traveling to
Colombia and President Uribe has initiated a dialogue with the ultra
military -- ultra right wing groups, trying to find a way to bring
peace also to Colombia. Does the White House have any opinion on this
negotiation between the President of Colombia and the paramilitary
groups?
MR. FLEISCHER: Let me take a look at that. There's nothing that's
been provided to me on that. So, if there's anything, I'll try to
share it.
Q How long is the White House willing to go along with this
whole inspection regime and diplomatic efforts at the U.N.? Is there a
weeks or months or time limit to --
MR. FLEISCHER: Well, again, President Bush is the one who sought
the inspections. President Bush is the one, I think, more than anybody
else around the world, who made them happen again after the absence of
inspectors.
Saddam Hussein will have to figure out how long the United States
intends to go along until we find out what Saddam Hussein is really
doing. And the President has made certain -- wants to make certain
that the inspections are effective and that the inspectors have every
resource they need to do their job. And that's what the President
wants to see happen. The President wants the inspectors to be
successful.
And the key to the success of the inspectors really rests with
Iraq. As much help as the world can give to the inspectors, as many
resources as inspectors can have, it remains a daunting challenge to
find everything in a country the size of Iraq. And without cooperation
from the Iraqis, the
chances for the inspectors to be successful is very, very limited.
And so the President will continue to very closely monitor Iraq's
behavior because what is at stake here is the disarmament of Iraq, so
that peace can be preserved.
Q Is there any time limit he's willing to wait out for this
thing?
MR. FLEISCHER: That's something Saddam Hussein will have to figure
out.
Q The critics of Henry Kissinger's appointment say that he was
not exactly an avatar of openness in government during his public
service. And they say that that makes him an inappropriate choice to
lead a commission whose job it is to get to the bottom of some of the
most secretive agencies in government. Would you respond to that?
MR. FLEISCHER: I've noticed a few editorials that seem to be
fighting old wars. And the President and I think much of the American
people recognize that Dr. Kissinger is an outstanding leader of
unparalleled integrity who is very expert in the ways and the means of
the various agencies that are involved in the whole review of 9/11, in
addition to the congressional role. It's important, too, for Congress
to be examined as the commission proceeds. The legislation creating
the commission includes the oversight of the decisions that Congress
made. And the President thinks that Dr. Kissinger is very expert and
will be a leader for the nation in bringing this group together to do
it.
Q Well, they may be old wars, but the critics say they're
relevant if they bear upon contemporary service.
MR. FLEISCHER: Obviously, the President differs with these
critics.
Q Ari, were any members of the Wellstone family invited to the
bill signing today and are any representatives -- is anybody going to
be here for that?
MR. FLEISCHER: Yes. Indeed, I listed them this morning. They
have been invited and they will be here. It's on the list I
distributed this morning or I announced this morning.
Q Correct me if I misstate what you're saying, but what I heard
you say is if Iraq comes forward and says, yes, it has weapons of mass
destruction, it proves they were lying. If they come forward and say
they don't have weapons of mass destruction, they're lying. And
that's -- if that's accurate, what course does the United States
really have if the inspectors come up with no evidence that there's any
weapons there?
MR. FLEISCHER: Well, we'll find out, won't we? And I think it's
all premature until we see what Saddam Hussein lists on December 8th,
and that's why the President will address that today.
Q Ari, last week in response to a question, you talked about
America's foreign aid to allies and to friends. Egypt is on of the
largest recipients, several billion dollars a year. But there has been
a virulent anti-Israeli and anti-Jewish campaign in Israel -- I'm
sorry, in Egypt, which the government doesn't seem to discourage. Is
the U.S. reevaluating its aid to Egypt?
MR. FLEISCHER: The United States, when it provides aid to a
nation, looks at aid from a totality of relations with that nation and,
in terms of, in this case, the interests of peace in the Middle East.
Egypt, of course, has a signed peace treaty with Israel. And even
though the peace treaty has not developed to the full, robust nature
that both Egypt and Israel had hoped it would develop to, Egypt remains
a very important partner for peace in the Middle East and we are
pleased to provide aid to the nation of Egypt.
Q But is there any concern about the tenor of these
statements?
MR. FLEISCHER: Well, the President addressed this earlier this
year when the President talked about some of the hateful things that
are in the media in some of these Mideastern nations, and this remains
an issue that is commonly discussed between the United States and these
nations, particularly through diplomatic channels.
Q As recently as a week ago, the Business Roundtable
recommended that the Social Security payroll tax be temporarily cut.
And a few more lawmakers have also come on board in support of this
idea. Is this among the options the President would be willing to
consider in terms of stimulus for tax relief to low-income and
moderate-income --
MR. FLEISCHER: Well, I'm really not going to be in a position to
start to say what may or may not be in anything the President may or
may not announce, because then you'll know what he may have already
announced before he announces it. So I just can't go down the line.
Of course, anything dealing with payroll taxes would have an impact on
the Social Security trust fund balances at a time when the President is
concerned about preserving Social Security for current and future
generations.
Q John Howard, the Australian Prime Minister, has said that
Australia intended to take preemptive military action to fight
terrorists in the wake of the Bali attack. Does the President support
the use of preemptive military action against terrorists in Asia?
MR. FLEISCHER: The President of course supports preemptive
action. The President has said that is part of America's doctrine
because of the different nature of terrorism.
Let me try to step back on this point, too, and remind you of what
the President said. September 11th changed everything, and nations
must respond and change their doctrines to face new and different
threats. That's the way of the world; it always has been. And a
nation that remains in the status quo after an event like September
11th can only endanger its own people.
And that is why the President did announce a new doctrine that
recognizes the threats we face are no longer from known enemies,
nations that have fleets or missiles or bombers that we can see come to
the United States, nations that can be deterred through previous
nations such as mutually assured destruction or any other previous
defense notions. It requires a fresh approach to protect the country.
Other nations think it through, as well, and come to similar
conclusions. Australia has been a stalwart ally of the United States
in the war on terror.
Q So it's a universal principle then that all nations are
encouraged or entitled to rethink that position, and all nations are
entitled to take a preemptive view of military action against
terrorism?
MR. FLEISCHER: In the shadowy war against terror. As I indicated,
doctrines must recognize the nature of the threat, and mutually assured
destruction, of course, worked because you were dealing with
nation-states. The point I made about the shadowy nature of terrorism,
which the President reflected on after September 11th, and it was a
change in doctrine reflecting that threat, not all threats.
Q The General Accounting Office estimates it would cost $200
billion to fight a war in Iraq. Can the economy stand such an
expenditure?
MR. FLEISCHER: Well, number one, I don't think anybody can know
with certainty what expenses would be incurred in a potential war with
Iraq. It all depends on the nature of the war and how events unfold.
And I have not seen anything in the White House that's any type of
reliable estimate.
Too, I think the question in the President's mind is, what is the
price of failure to act if, indeed, Saddam Hussein has the weapons that
we fear he has and we know he does have them, what is the price of
failure to act in terms of protecting the American people. And that's
how the President approaches this.
Q Why did the President decide to cut pay increases to most
federal workers? And if the President is happy with that decision, why
was it made on the Friday night after Thanksgiving?
MR. FLEISCHER: Well, number one, the federal workers will be
receiving a pay increase and, as has happened many times in the past
with many different administrations, the nature of the statute
governing pay increases and its locality pay has often involved
alternative pay plans that President Clinton proposed, for example,
that President Bush has proposed, much along the lines of what was
announced by the President this week. So this is not surprising, this
is not anything new. This has happened many times before, as federal
managers deal with the various intricacies of the laws that govern the
pay increases and the alternative pay plans that are available.
Q Ari, two quick questions. One, last week -- State
Department issued -- last week in the world press that Saudi Arabia
and this money trail and all this, terrorism and also Pakistan link.
The question at the State Department clearly angered them, we were
asking on Saudi Arabia and Pakistan -- basically not to ask any
questions on Saudi Arabia and Pakistan, go to the White House and ask
them, which we have been doing. I have not seen anybody getting angry
or -- anyone else like you and Richard when asking on any topic, on
any issue. My question here today then is, how much President is
bothered or concerned about the reports that appear in world press that
one day he hears from his intelligence reports and General Musharraf
that Osama bin Laden is dead; next day there is a tape and there's a
report that he's alive, and now CIA is saying that the tape is real and
he's alive and a Pakistan doctor even admitted meeting and treating
him? So what the President thinks now --
MR. FLEISCHER: He thinks, just as he said publicly on numerous
occasions, that this war is about more than any one person, and that
the United States is working with our allies and working very
diligently ourselves to bring everybody responsible for the 9/11
attacks to justice, and to dismantle the terrorist network worldwide.
And it will indeed be a long fight. And it's a fight that the
President is going to continue to wage.
Q The Russian leader and the Chinese leader issued a
declaration yesterday urging to resolve the Iraqi question through
political and diplomatic means. Is that being considered? And
secondly, they also urged America and North Korea to resume relations.
What's your comment on that?
MR. FLEISCHER: Well, certainly it is being pursued -- resolved
differences with Iraq through diplomatic and political means. This is
the purpose of the President going to the United Nations and seeking a
tough inspection regime. Whether or not Saddam Hussein is willing to
settle this through diplomatic and political means remains to be seen.
And I noticed that the Chinese-Russian statement vis-a-vis North
Korea continued to call for North Korea to make certain it does not
engage in the nuclearization of the Korean Peninsula, and we'll
continue to work with our allies on achieving that goal.
Q Thank you.
MR. FLEISCHER: Thank you.
END 12:55 P.M. EST
|