For Immediate Release
Office of the Press Secretary
January 27, 2004
Press Briefing by Scott McClellan
1:46 P.M. EST
R. McCLELLAN: Good afternoon. A couple of scheduling matters I'd like
to update you on, and then one announcement, and then we'll go on to
questions.
The President was very pleased to welcome President Kwasniewski back
to the White House. President Kwasniewski is a great ally and a close
friend, and the President very much appreciates his strong leadership.
Poland stands with America in the war on terrorism, including in Iraq.
Poland has shown great strength and they are now playing a major role
in helping to build security and democracy in Iraq. And we are grateful
to the Polish people and the brave Polish soldiers serving alongside
their American allies in the field.
Under President Kwasniewski's leadership, Poland has become a secure,
sovereign, democratic nation, embracing the path to prosperity, helping
its neighbors, and playing a major role in Europe and on the world
stage like never before.
We are committed to developing a new level of relations between Poland
and the United States. We are working together on a broad range of
issues from Europe and the transatlantic alliance to the greater Middle
East, to the Ukraine, the Russia, the counterproliferation. The two
leaders today agreed on several concrete initiatives. In particular,
they agreed to strengthen Poland's capacity to respond to global
threats, and to strengthen our defense cooperation with new military
assistance to continue to modernize the Polish armed forces.
The President is grateful for courageous friends like President
Kwasniewski, who can join us in tackling common challenges. And we'll
have a joint statement out here shortly to discuss some of what they
agreed to.
And the President this afternoon looks forward to welcoming a
bipartisan group of House and Senate leaders to the White House. The
President will remind these leaders that while it is an election year,
it is important that we continue to work together and move forward on
important priorities, particularly our highest priorities, from winning
the war on terrorism to protecting the homeland, to strengthening our
economy even more and creating a robust environment for job creation.
And I expect that the President will discuss a number of important
legislative priorities, many of which he touched on in his State of the
Union address.
Finally, I want to address some press reports that you all may be
seeing. As you are aware, the United States and the United Kingdom team
is now assisting Libya in the elimination of its weapons of mass
destruction programs, consistent with the announcement made by Libya on
December 19th, 2003, that it would voluntarily give up these programs.
To date, cooperation between all parties in this effort has been
excellent.
As part of that effort, and in close partnership with the Libyan
government, a transport plane left Tripoli last night and landed at
8:37 a.m. this morning at McGee-Tyson Airport outside of Knoxville,
Tennessee. Included on this plane were critical materials related to
Libya's nuclear weapons program and ballistic missile capabilities.
This shipment is estimated to be about 55,000 pounds of equipment.
These materials include both sensitive documentation and equipment.
On the flight was UF-6 uranium-hexafluoride, which is used for
feedstock to enrich uranium. Also included on the flight were
centrifuge parts which are used to enrich uranium. Finally, the
shipment contains ballistic missile guidance sets for longer-range
missiles, which Libya has voluntarily agreed to eliminate. This
shipment is now at a secure facility in Tennessee.
Prior to this shipment, another plane last week brought out the most
sensitive documentation associated with the Libyan nuclear weapons
program. It is also important to note the destruction of Libya's
unfilled chemical munitions has also already begun on the ground.
While these shipments are only the beginning of the elimination of
Libya's weapons, these shipments, as well as the close cooperation on
the ground in Libya, reflect real progress in Libya meeting its
commitments. Colonel Qadhafi made a courageous decision to give up his
weapons, and through this transparent process, the world can see that
Colonel Qadhafi is keeping his commitment.
As the President said on December 19th, as the Libyan government takes
these essential steps and demonstrates its seriousness, its good faith
will be returned. Libya can regain a secure and respected place among
the nations, and over time, achieve far better relations with the
United States. As Libya becomes a more peaceful nation, it can be a
source of stability in Africa and the Middle East.
As the President also said, he hopes other leaders will find an
example in Libya's announcement. When leaders make the wise and
responsible choice, when they renounce terror and weapons of mass
destruction, as Colonel Qadhafi has now done, they serve the interests
of their own people and they add to the security of all nations.
And with that, I will be glad to go to questions. Terry.
Q Scott, is there any concrete reward at this point for Libya's
action? Is the United States willing to take any steps?
MR. McCLELLAN: We are on the road -- Libya is on the road. They're
moving in the right direction. This reflects real progress, but there
is more to do, as well. And I would refer you back to the President's
comments I just mentioned from December in terms of that.
Q So there's nothing -- the United States is not going to respond with
any type of lifting sanctions or anything like that?
MR. McCLELLAN: No, we said, as they take these essential steps and
demonstrate its seriousness, its good faith will be returned, and Libya
can regain a secure and respected place among the nations, as I pointed
out and over time -- and over time, achieve far better relations with
the United States. We're pleased with the progress being made.
Obviously, there's more to do, but we're making real progress at this
point.
Q Scott, since you brought up the subject of weapons, a question that
has been nagging me all morning --
MR. McCLELLAN: I don't want you to be nagged. (Laughter.)
Q Stipulating the fact that the Iraq Survey Group still has a lot of
work to do there, does the President believe that David Kay was correct
or incorrect when he said that the evidence that America went to war on
was inaccurate and wrong?
MR. McCLELLAN: Well, the decision that the President of the United
States made was based on the fact that Saddam Hussein was a gathering
threat. That was well-documented. It was something that was based on
not only a decade of intelligence by our own government, but
intelligence agencies around the world, the United Nations, all
concluded that Saddam Hussein was a threat. That's why there were some
-- for 12 years and some 17 resolutions, he continued to defy the
international community. And 1441 gave him one final opportunity to
comply or face serious consequences. He chose defiance. And September
11th taught us that we must confront gathering threats before it is too
late.
Now, in terms of your question, there is a Iraq Survey Group whose
mission is to look at all those issues and to find the truth as the
President directed the team to do. He wants to find the truth. Then, at
that point, when they complete their work, and draw as complete a
picture as possible, we can compare what we knew before the war with
what we know now. But it's important to let them finish their work, and
it's important to gather all the facts. I think, as a reporter, you
want to gather all the facts and get all the facts you can. Then you
can look at what was known -- what we knew before, compare that with
what we know now.
Q It's true enough that the President said on several occasions that
Iraq and Saddam were a grave and gathering threat, but that was based
on the intelligence that David Kay now says was inaccurate and wrong.
MR. McCLELLAN: I think it was based on several reasons that he
outlined. We knew that Saddam Hussein had weapons. We knew that he had
used weapons on his own people, as well as his neighbors. We knew that
he had weapons programs. We knew that he failed to account for his
weapons and weapons programs. He failed to comply for some 12 years and
some 17 resolutions with the international community's demands. This
was a decision that was made by Saddam Hussein. Even after he was given
one final opportunity to come clean, he continued to defy the
international community. And Resolution 1441 was very clear. It said,
this is one final opportunity to comply, or face serious consequences.
Q But the President was always demanding that Saddam Hussein disarm,
saying if he doesn't disarm, we'll disarm him.
MR. McCLELLAN: I think the international community was looking into
that. A unanimous Security Council resolution called for Saddam Hussein
to come clean.
Q It now appears, though, based on David Kay's statements, that the
President and/or the international community were asking Iraq to do an
impossible task. There was nothing to disarm.
MR. McCLELLAN: Well, no, I would remind you of the progress report by
Dr. Kay and the Iraq Survey Group. And Dr. Kay has made it very clear
in his media interviews that I've seen that Iraq was a very dangerous
place. The President pointed out in his remarks earlier that Saddam
Hussein was a dangerous man in a dangerous part of the world. In a
post-September 11th era, we cannot rely on the good intentions of
someone like Saddam Hussein. It's important to confront gathering
threats before it's too late. And the decision that the President of
the United States made was the right decision then and, based on what
we've learned today, it's the right decision today.
Q Scott, can I ask a question back on Libya for a second? Having noted
the progress you're describing in this particular arena, why should any
government that was--that had a hand in a terrorist action be able to
get into the good graces of the United States, no matter what it does,
when it's the same leader at the helm of the country?
MR. McCLELLAN: Well, I think that, one, we addressed this when the
President came out here and made the announcement of the agreement that
was reached after several months between Libya and the United Kingdom
and the United States. They recognize that our word is something that
is credible, that we mean what we say. And they are now taking steps to
move away from their past, their past that included WMD programs, that
included support for terrorism. They're recognizing that if they move
away from that, and take the steps that we've agreed to, then they can
realize far better relations in this world. And I think that's the
message that other countries should heed, as well.
Q My question is, if it's the same leader who had a hand in Pan Am 103
as the one who's apparently converting now --
MR. McCLELLAN: And I would point out that there was an agreement
reached between the families of the victims in that incident and the
government of Libya.
Q I know. But it's the same question, which is -- I know what
your--what the position is about the progress they're making on WMD.
But I'm asking you, why should anybody be able to get back in the good
graces--
MR. McCLELLAN: This is taking steps to make the world a safer and
better place. The actions that they are taking will make the world--
Q And that overrides what he did previously?
MR. McCLELLAN: -- will make the world a safer and better place in
which to live. And they are taking steps to move away from that past.
Q So that can make up for the past?
MR. McCLELLAN: Well, again, I think that those issues, some of the
specific issues that you mentioned -- in terms of Pan Am 103, there was
an agreement reached and they --
Q It was a civil lawsuit --
MR. McCLELLAN: -- and they put--no, they made it very clear their
responsibility when they reached that agreement in that effort.
Q Why are we flying back parts of their nuclear program to the United
States?
MR. McCLELLAN: I'm sorry?
Q Why are we flying back parts of their nuclear program--
MR. McCLELLAN: Well, it was the experts of the United States and the
United Kingdom that are working with Libya to make sure that they
follow through on their commitments. And appropriate action will be
taken from that material. But they agreed to give up those materials
and take steps to eliminate them, eliminate the programs.
Q Right, but why --
MR. McCLELLAN: Jim, I'm not an expert in all the different steps that
are being taken here. But I'm sure we can look into that and get you
those questions, or you can direct that to the appropriate people who
are involved in this.
Q Okay. On Iraqi weapons, is there any concern about the fact that the
intelligence appeared to be incorrect? I mean, does the President share
concerns expressed on Capitol Hill about the fact that the intelligence
does not appear to have been accurate?
MR. McCLELLAN: Jim, I think if the inspection teams had found half of
what Dr. Kay uncovered, they would have found Saddam Hussein in
material breach of his resolutions, the Security Council would have
found him in material breach. We know from what Dr. Kay has already
uncovered that Saddam Hussein was in material breach. We very much
appreciate the hard and difficult work that was undertaken by Dr. Kay.
Now you have Charles Duelfer, who will be heading up the Iraq Survey
Group and finishing their mission. He will gather all the facts. He
will draw as complete a picture as we possibly can so that we can learn
the truth. It's important that we gather all the facts, then we can
compare what we knew before the war with what we have learned from the
Iraq Survey Group.
But I would point out to you that the Iraq Survey Group's progress
report talked about how -- and this is -- quote -- "We have discovered
dozens of WMD related program activities and significant amounts of
equipment that Iraq concealed from the United Nations during the
inspections that began in late 2002." It went on to say that, Saddam
has not given up his aspirations and intentions to continue to acquire
weapons of mass destruction. Saddam's weapons delivery systems were
"already well advanced. In the chemical and biological weapons area, we
have confidence that they were at a minimum clandestine, ongoing
research and development activities that were embedded in the Iraqi
intelligence service."
So I would point out that that right there shows that he was in clear
violation of Security Council Resolution 1441, which was a final
opportunity or face serious consequences.
Q One last thing, if I could. An American official in Paris today is
saying that in the next round of contracts, all comers will be
welcome. Is that true?
MR. McCLELLAN: There's no change in what I've previously said from
this podium in terms of contracting.
Q So he should tell the French that he was wrong?
MR. McCLELLAN: Well, I haven't seen the specific comments you're
referring to. But our position was that circumstances can change. And
we're moving into -- will be moving into a second round of contracts,
and we said the circumstances can change. Certainly we recognize the
important contribution that Canada made at the Madrid Donors
Conference, and so circumstances have changed for Canada. And I said at
that time that it may change for others, as well. But that's where it
stands.
Q I understand that. I'm just -- the U.S. Under Secretary for Trade
Grant Aldonis told people in France, all comers will be welcome the
second round. So he's suggesting it has already changed.
MR. McCLELLAN: I saw the media reports and it's still where I left it
last time, which is what I just said.
Q So he's a little too far out front?
MR. McCLELLAN: Well, again, I haven't seen the full context of his
remarks. I've just seen media reports. I don't always necessarily rely
on media reports, even though I trust you guys.
Q Scott, in brief prelude to my question, what kind of aircraft was
used? Why Knoxville? Because of its proximity to Oakridge? And will you
put out a detailed list of the 55,000 pounds?
MR. McCLELLAN: I think those are decisions made by others. I don't
have that level of detail with me. In my update to you, I thought it
was important to update you on the progress that we are making, though,
at this point.
Q You don't know what kind of plane it was -- whether it was a C-5, or
a C-17 or --
MR. McCLELLAN: No, I'm sorry.
Q And my question that I wanted to ask about the three-star general
who, in Afghanistan, is now saying that Osama bin Laden and Mullah Omar
will be captured by the end of the year -- is this wishful thinking?
Does the President know something that says the capture of these two
guys is imminent?
MR. McCLELLAN: Well, one, we continue to make great progress in the
war on terrorism. But it is a war that continues. And the President has
already talked about, most recently in his State of the Union address,
that we've already captured or killed some two-thirds of the al Qaeda
leadership. We continue to pursue others. Obviously we removed the
Taliban from power. And we continue to pursue others who either
supported or were involved in terrorism, to bring them to justice.
We have said, in terms of Osama bin Laden, that we will find him and
he will be brought to justice. And that remains the case.
Q Scott, you said the President believes it's important to confront
gathering threats. Isn't it also important, for the sake of American
leadership in trying to control proliferation, to describe those
threats accurately? And hasn't this President and this government's
credibility been damaged by the failure to find in Iraq those actual
weapons -- not weapons of mass destruction program-related activities,
but the actual weapons that the President of the United States, the
Vice President of the United States, the Secretary of State, and the
Secretary of Defense, all told the American people and the world were
there? Isn't credibility in question?
MR. McCLELLAN: Make no mistake about it, I said obviously it's
important to look at what we knew before the war and compare that with
what we've learned after the war. But that work is ongoing, and I think
you will agree that it's important to gather as many facts as possible,
to let the Iraq Survey Team complete its work, which is to pursue the
truth, to find the truth -- that's their mission -- and to gather all
that information. Then we look and compare with what we knew before
with what we've learned since, after the Iraq Survey Group has
completed its work.
But we already know -- and you said something about accurate
description. It was very accurate to say that Saddam Hussein was a
dangerous man and a gathering threat, and it was important to confront
that threat. For some 12 years and some 17 Security Council
resolutions, he chose to defy the international community. He was given
a final opportunity, but he continued to show defiance. And it was
important that he be removed from power. And that's exactly what the
President did.
And the intelligence that you're referring to was something that was
shared by intelligence agencies around the world. It was shared by the
United Nations. It was not just our own government that had gathered
this intelligence.
And I point out what I said earlier, that if the inspection teams that
had been in Iraq had discovered half of what Dr. Kay uncovered in his
progress report, then the United Nations Security Council would have
had to move to find Saddam Hussein in material breach. And 1441 was
very clear in the language: one final opportunity or face serious
consequences. The world is safer and better because of the action we
took. America is more secure. It was the right decision then; it's the
right decision today for those reasons.
Q I understand that, but what has been found isn't what was claimed to
have been there. And I just wonder, is the President at all concerned
about credibility, going forward in this crucial area of weapons
proliferation?
MR. McCLELLAN: The President, as he said earlier, wants to know the
facts. And the Iraq Survey Group is gathering the facts. They're
drawing as complete a picture as possible. And we should let them
complete their work. Then we can go and compare what we knew before
with what we learned after. But it doesn't change the bottom line.
Saddam Hussein was a gathering threat. He was a grave and gathering
threat to the world and to America. And it was important that we took
the action that we did, particularly in a post-September 11th world
that taught us the importance of confronting threats before it is too
late.
Q Just one quick follow-up on Libya. You also said that as Libya
becomes a more peaceful nation, it can become a source of stability in
Iraq and Africa--
MR. McCLELLAN: And the Middle East.
Q And the Middle East. Qadhafi is an unelected dictator.
MR. McCLELLAN: And as you know, that we are pursuinG--actively
pursuing to spread democracy and freedom around the world, and there
are a number of different ways you do that. But obviously, different
threats require different strategies and a number of different ways
we're pursuing things. But make no mistake about it, people understand
that our word is something that is credible now, and people are
responding in different ways. And we continue to -- we appreciate the
progress that Libya is making in fulfilling its commitment. We also,
obviously, are working in a number of different areas to address other
threats when it comes to Iran and North Korea and otherareas.
Q Does the President expect Qadhafi to move, make moves towards
opening up his society--
MR. McCLELLAN: We are always advocating the importance of democracy.
And the President talks--you often hear him talk about the importance
of freedom, how that's a universal right of all people.
Q First of all, I just wanted to reinforce a request for an inventory
of what came out from Libya, particularly on some centrifuge parts,
which would be the most critical for us to understand what exactly you
brought out.
MR. McCLELLAN: Yes, I thought it was important to update you all from
this podium. And, obviously, we'll work to make sure other people can
--
Q Right. A specific list would be--
MR. McCLELLAN: -- some of the people more involved in those technical
issues can work with you on those issues.
Q On the question of Iraq, two issues. First, you've been using the
phrase, "gathering threat" and "grave danger," which obviously are
words that the President, himself, used many times before the war. You
have not used the word "imminent threat." And the essence of Dr. Kay's
comments recently would suggest that there was no way for there to be
an imminent threat.
Does the President now believe that, in fact, while the threat was
gathering, while the threat may have been grave, that, in fact, it was
not imminent?
MR. McCLELLAN: I think we've said all along that it was a grave and
gathering threat. And that in a post-September 11th world, you must
confront gathering threats before it's too late.
I think some in the media have chosen to use the word "imminent."
Those were not words --
Q The President himself never used that word?
MR. McCLELLAN: Those were not words we used. We used "grave and
gathering threat." We made it very clear that it was a gathering
threat, that it's important to confront gathering threats in this
post-September 11th world, because of the new dangers and new threats
that we face.
Q So then under your interpretation, if you're not using the word
"imminent" and the President didn't use it, this was not a preemptive
attack, this was a preventative war? Is that the White House position?
MR. McCLELLAN: No, again, September 11th taught us that we must
confront gathering threats before it's too late. Saddam Hussein --
Saddam Hussein had ample opportunity to come clean.
Q I hear you, Scott. But there's a definitional difference.
"Preemptive" has to do with imminent threats. "Preventative" has to do
with non-imminent threats.
MR. McCLELLAN: He was a gathering threat, and it was important that we
confront that threat. I don't know that I necessarily agree with your
distinctions that you're making there.
Q Okay. On the second issue, which has to do with waiting for the
final report to come in, Mr. Kay said -- Dr. Kay said that he believed
that the work currently was about 85 percent complete. What you're
telling us today is that before the White House decides whether or not
to conduct an investigation or work on intelligence reform on these
issues, you are going to wait for a complete report to be completed--
MR. McCLELLAN: Actually, I think the CIA has already said that they're
looking into--into some of the intelligence. They've already publicly
said that. What I'm saying is that it's too soon to draw firm
conclusions. You need to let the Iraq Survey Group complete its work.
But you mentioned a few things that Dr. Kay said. I would point out
that Dr. Kay agreed fully with the statement that Iraq was a gathering
threat. He -- and Dr. Kay also was the one who said that Iraq is a very
dangerous place and that Saddam Hussein had the intention and he had
the capability. And, certainly, in a post-September 11th world, someone
that has his history must be confronted before it's too late.
Q Just to be clear I understand what you're saying here, though. The
President himself is not going to seek intelligence reform from --
directed from here, as opposed to internal CIA--
MR. McCLELLAN: No, no, I was pointing out the CIA was already looking
into things. I said, yes, we very much want to compare what we knew
before the war with what we learn once the Iraq Survey Group complete
its work--completes its work. But it's too soon to make those judgments
now. It's premature to get into drawing firm conclusions, because
their work is ongoing. And I think all of you can appreciate the
importance of gathering all the facts that you can in finishing that
mission before you draw firm conclusions.
Q But, Scott, didn't the President draw a firm conclusion on this when
he went --
MR. McCLELLAN: Steve. I'll come back to you -- that he was a gathering
threat, and it's been shown that he was.
Q But you just said it's too early to draw those conclusions.
MR. McCLELLAN: It's been shown that he was a gathering threat.
Q You just said it's too earlyto draw those conclusions.
MR. McCLELLAN: No, no. I'm referring to comparing what we knew before
the war with what we learn once the Iraq Survey Group completes is
work. So I think you're drawing a different distinction there.
Q How long do you think it will take to complete the work?
MR. McCLELLAN: That's a decision that Charles Duelfer will make as the
new head of the Iraq Survey Group. I think he addressed some of that
last week. But he's the one --
Q -- tell us when it will --
MR. McCLELLAN: Look, I mean, that's totally up to the Iraq Survey
Group. And I think it's a very important issue for them to continue to
pursue their mission, and those are decisions they will make. The one
thing the President has said is, find the truth.
Q And, secondly, Mr. Brahimi is here today for meetings. What would
you like him to do in Iraq?
MR. McCLELLAN: Well, he was here last week and met with some
officials, met briefly with the President, as well, and the President
thanked him for all that he is doing. The President just wanted to have
an opportunity to meet him while he is here. That was a brief meeting.
But he's back meeting with some senior officials, just to continue some
discussions.
Q Would you like him to lead this political team in Iraq?
MR. McCLELLAN: He's a special advisor of the United Nations, and those
are decisions that the United Nations would be in place to make -- I
mean, the United Nations would make those decisions.
We do welcome the announcement by the United Nations to send a team
into Iraq, and we look forward to supporting the efforts of that team,
that was requested by the Iraqi Governing Council, to go in and look at
and assess the feasibility of elections moving forward.
Q Scott, back to the Iraqi weapons, and the weapons themselves. Both
before the war and after the war, the President said he was confident
those weapons would be found. Others here said the same thing. Is that
statement no longer operative?
MR. McCLELLAN: Mark, I think that, one, this was addressed earlier by
me and by the President, as well. We know --
Q -- based on Terry asking --
MR. McCLELLAN: Let's make clear, we know that a decade of intelligence
by our own government and intelligence agencies around the world, and
the United Nations, itself, all concluded that Saddam Hussein had
weapons and unaccounted for weapons programs.
Q If we're waiting to hear you guys say that the weapons will be
found, we're waiting --
MR. McCLELLAN: Look, no, the Iraq Survey Group is continuing its
mission. It's important to let them complete their work and draw as
complete a picture as possible. You asked me to get into prejudging the
final outcome here. I mean, Dr. Kay even pointed out that there is
important work to complete. And he said that it's important -- he said
it's important that they complete their work. We want --
Q -- you guys think they still might be --
MR. McCLELLAN: Look, we'll be at a point when they complete their
work where we compare what we knew before the war with what we
learn after from the Iraq Survey Group. But it was intelligence
agencies around the world, the United Nations that documented all this
and talked about his weapons and weapons programs. So you all should
keep that in perspective, as well.
Q Does the President think weapons will be found yet?
MR. McCLELLAN: I think I just addressed that question. I think he
addressed it earlier.
Q Two quick ones, one on Libya. It's laudable that -- remarkable how
quickly this stuff is being taken out and brought here, of all places.
Why is it so fast? Is it because you're afraid the Libyans might
reconsider? Or is it because the Libyans are in a hurry to get some
sort of reward?
MR. McCLELLAN: Well, I can't speak for the Libyan government. I can
speak for our own people. This was something that was discussed over
several months. Libya came to agreement with the United Kingdom and
United States, and now we're moving forward on it. They're making real
progress to fulfilling their commitment. And there's more to do, but
they're on the right road.
Q But you're confident that they're going to go through with this and
it's not they're rushing it --
MR. McCLELLAN: They were very clear -- I mean, Colonel Qadhafi was
very clear in his statement back in December, and they're making real
progress in that commitment.
Q The other thing is you've said that it's too early to judge on the
weapons of mass destruction, that there's more work to do. But David
Kay does seem to have judged. Has he made a mistake? Has he gone too
far in suggesting yesterday and the day before that he doesn't think
there are going to be any weapons found? Is that--
MR. McCLELLAN: I'm not sure that's exactly what he said. In fact, he
said that it's important that they complete their work. And he said
it's a large country, didn't rule out surprises, is what I saw that he
said. That's what I've seen.
Q He also said he doesn't expect weapons to be found.
MR. McCLELLAN: I don't think those are his exact words. But I would go
back and look at his exact words. But I would remind you that -- of
what the President said earlier, that obviously, we want to be able to
compare what we knew before the war with what we learn from the Iraq
Survey Group. That's important to do. But their work is ongoing, so
let's let them gather all the facts and then we can come back and do
that at that point.
Q I'm just wondering whether David Kay should have waited as well, in
your view.
MR. McCLELLAN: Well, he's no longer heading up the Iraq Survey Group.
And I think he pointed out that Iraq is a very dangerous place. He
pointed out that he agreed that it was a gathering threat. He even went
on to say that it is potentially more dangerous than we thought before
the war.
Q Scott, on Poland, did Poland get any contracts today?
MR. McCLELLAN: Did they get any contracts today? Those aren't
decisions made here. Those are decisions made through the contracting
process, independently of here.
They talked about Iraq, certainly. That was -- one of the issues they
discussed was Iraq. And I think as we're sitting here talking about
Iraq, I think that there are few people that have as deep an
appreciation for liberation as the people of Poland. They recognize the
value and importance of freedom and democracy. We very much appreciate
their strong contributions to helping the Iraqi people realize a free
and democratic and prosperous future. It is something that they have
gone through recently, and so they are playing an important role in
those efforts.
Q But there were no decisions--
MR. McCLELLAN: Those aren't decisions made here, Roger. Those are
decisions made separate and apart, through the contracting process,
separate from here.
Q Scott, two quick questions. One, there is a story flying around the
Globe that Prime Minister of India, Mr. Vajpayee, and General Musharraf
may be heading for getting Nobel Peace Prize, and President Bush has
recommended or is about to recommend, or he supports that.
MR. McCLELLAN: I don't know anything about those reports. That's the
first time I've heard those reports. Obviously -- welcome the
announcement by India and Pakistan that they're following through to
continue their dialogue and have high-level discussions. It's important
that they continue moving forward to reduce tensions in the region.
Those relationships -- those relations are improving. We're pleased to
work closely with them in that. We have been working closely with them.
We're pleased to continue working closely with them, and we're pleased
that they're moving forward to have ongoing, constructive dialogue.
Q India Globe is also carrying a small report that -- let me ask you
directly whether President Bush supports the Nobel Peace Prize for the
two leaders, or not, based on --
MR. McCLELLAN: I'm not going to get into speculating about decisions
down the road.
Go ahead, Richard.
Q And, finally, the second one --
MR. McCLELLAN: Let's keep moving. Richard, go ahead.
Q The 9/11 Commission is seeking a two-month extension for the report,
from May until July. Is the White House about to grant that?
MR. McCLELLAN: Well, one, I think -- it's Congress, I would remind
you, is the one that set the original statutory deadline. There was a
lot of discussion that went into setting up the commission and that was
all part of it. And certainly from our standpoint, what we want to
continue to do is to provide unprecedented cooperation with the
commission. We're working very much in a spirit of cooperation with the
commission; we will continue to do so. I think it's important that they
move forward as quickly as possible to complete their work, especially
given the subject of it. I mean, if there's information that we can
learn that can help prevent a future attack from happening, it's
important that we have that mission -- that we have that information.
Q Does the White House support an extension?
MR. McCLELLAN: I'm sorry?
Q Does the White House support an extension?
MR. McCLELLAN: Well, again, Congress is the one who set that deadline
when they set up the commission. We think it's important that they move
forward as quickly as possible to complete their work. And, obviously,
those types of discussions would involve Congress, but we continue to
believe that they ought to move forward as quickly as possible to
gather the information that they can that can help us prevent something
like September 11th from ever happening again. And the best way to do
that is to continue taking the action we are to take the fight to the
enemy.
Go ahead, Russell.
Q Scott, Paul Bremer has apparently ruled out quick elections in Iraq.
The constitutional law advisor to the Coalition Provisional Authority,
Noah Feldman, is quoted in today's New York Times as saying, "if you
move too fast, the wrong people could get elected." And apparently
there's a fear of electing -- polls show that the Shiites would gain
control in Iraq if there was an election today, and there's a fear of
electing an Islamic Iraqi government. Does the President agree with
Mr. Feldman, if you move too fast the wrong people could get elected?
MR. McCLELLAN: That's not the way the President of the United States
looks at it. One, if you look at the November 15th agreement that was
worked on by the Iraqi Governing Council and agreed to with the
Coalition Provisional Authority, it calls for three direct elections
within that framework. It calls for election of the drafters of the
constitution. It calls for direct election on the ratification of the
constitution. And, finally, at the end of 2005, it calls for a
permanent representative government to be directly elected by the
people of Iraq.
And what you're seeing now is that more and more, the Iraqi people are
assuming responsibility for their future. This is becoming more and
more of an Iraqi-driven process. The U.N. announced today that they
would be sending a team in there -- to work with the coalition on
security arrangements. But we look forward -- and that was something
that was requested by the Iraqi Governing Council, for the United
Nations to go in and look and assess the feasibility of conducting
elections by the June 30th deadline for transferring sovereignty to the
-- full sovereignty to the Iraqi people.
And so we look forward to seeing their assessment and hearing their
advice. We've made it very clear in terms of the November 15th
agreement that we are open to refinements and clarifications. But this
is more and more of an Iraqi-driven process. They're assuming more and
more responsibility for their future and for their decisions.
But we believe it's important to move forward as quickly as possible
to transfer sovereignty back to the Iraqi people, because they're
becoming more -- they're in a better position, as time goes by, to
assume full responsibility now for their future. But those are
decisions -- the decisions about their future permanent government will
be made directly by the Iraqi people. That's spelled out in the
framework.
Q If they say they want an Islamic government and they want the U.S.
out, will we get out?
MR. McCLELLAN: Well, again, there's -- one, there's a fundamental law
that they're working on right now and it has some basic principles that
will be enshrined in it. The other aspect, in terms of the United
States and our military presence, along with the coalition, those are
discussions that are being had with the Iraqi Governing Council now, as
well.
And I think that the Iraqi people appreciate our efforts to help them
with their security. But more and more, the Iraqis are assuming
responsibility for their own security. They are the largest contributor
to security forces right now. I don't know the latest number, I think
it's well above 160,000 Iraqis who are now involved in their own
security. So those are the discussions that, under the November 15th
agreement, are underway now.
Q But if they want us out, will we get out?
MR. McCLELLAN: I think I've addressed it.
Q Did the United States reimburse Libya for this equipment that it
took out?
MR. McCLELLAN: Terry, I'd have to follow up on questions. I don't know
anything to that point.
Q Just one last kick at this can. Don't David Kay's statements really
illuminate the following concept, and that is that when the President
took the world to war against Iraq in March of last year, there was
really no way to quantify the current threat posed by Iraq, and that
his decision was only made on a best estimate of Iraq's capabilities
based on past history?
MR. McCLELLAN: I think it was a decision that Saddam Hussein chose.
Remember, Saddam Hussein was the one who was given one final
opportunity to comply or face serious consequences. Saddam Hussein is
the one who chose defiance. And as I said, given his history, and given
the events of September 11th, we could not afford to rely on the good
intentions of Saddam Hussein.
Q Will you accept the concept, though, that there was no way to
quantify the current threat posed by Iraq when the President was taking
this country to war?
MR. McCLELLAN: Again, it was intelligence that was shared by agencies
around the world. It was intelligence that was shared by the United
Nations, not only our government. And will you acknowledge that Saddam
Hussein was a grave and gathering threat? He was a dangerous man. And
that's what -- that's what it was based on.
Q I wasn't making the decision for war --
MR. McCLELLAN: Well, you're asking questions. But Saddam Hussein was a
grave and gathering danger, and he has now been removed from power. The
world is safer and better because of the actions that we took.
Q Thank you.
MR. McCLELLAN: Thank you.
END 2:25 P.M. EST
|