11:00 A.M. EDT

Real Audio of Briefing

MR. DENIG: Good morning, ladies and gentlemen and welcome to the Washington Foreign Press Center. Welcome, also, to journalists at the New York Foreign Press Center who are watching by DVC.

It's a real honor and pleasure to be able to welcome back to our podium Dr. Condoleezza Rice, the President's National Security Advisor. She will have an opening statement to make and after that, she'll be glad to take your questions.

Dr. Rice.

DR. RICE: Thank you. Good morning. It's a pleasure to be back at the Foreign Press Center. I have a few opening remarks, very brief.

My last visit with you was a little less than two weeks after President Bush declared major combat operations over in Iraq. Today we are 132 days into helping the Iraqi people rebuild their country into a secure and prosperous and democratic country.

Along with international partners, we are accelerating the process by which the Iraqi people will assume their own sovereignty and responsibility for their own future, and as the President outlined on Sunday evening, we are focusing on three key areas: improving security by aggressively hunting down terrorists and individuals who are attempting to undermine progress; expanding the contributions of the international community through consultations in the United Nations on a possible new United Nations resolution; and the orderly transfer of sovereignty and authority to the Iraqi people.

It is important to realize that after 30 years of tyranny and malign neglect, the spirit of the Iraqi people is finally becoming stronger. The decrepit infrastructure is finally being rebuilt. And the future of the country is beginning to be determined by Iraqis, themselves.

The Governing Council has been named and a preparatory committee has been formed to devise a way to write a constitution. And there are also 25 ministers now running every Iraqi ministry.

The political road ahead, as Ambassador Bremer has said, includes drafting a new constitution, ratifying that constitution, electing a government, and of course, when that government is elected, disbanding the Coalition Provisional Authority. The task ahead is challenging, setbacks are inevitable, but the cost of failure in the global war on terrorism is simply too high. The President made clear on Sunday night that America is resolute, our friends and allies are resolute, we will prevail.

Thank you.

MR. DENIG: Okay. What we'll do today is ask you to ask only single questions, not layered questions. If you ask multiple questions, Dr. Rice will choose which one of those that she'll answer.

Let's start with Al Jazeera in the front here, please.

Please identify yourself and your news organization and use the mike.

QUESTION: Wajd Waqfi from Al Jazeera TV. Dr. Rice, many say that this Administration lacks a clear strategy regarding Iraq. How do you answer them and they also say that the reason why you're not giving the Congress enough details is because you don't have such a strategy, and the reason why you are now going to the United Nations Security Council is also because of that. How do you respond to these critics?

DR. RICE: Okay, thank you. From the very beginning, the President made very clear that the decision to go to Iraq rested on the fact that Iraq was a threat to the interests of the region, to the interests of the United States, to the security of the world; that it would be difficult, after the military victory, to secure the peace in a place that had been through almost 30 years of terrible tyranny and, we now know, through a period of time in which the infrastructure was neglected to the point that large parts of the country, really, were without adequate electrical supply. So we've known that this was going to be a difficult task.

And the strategy is very straightforward. In the short-term, the goal is to improve the security situation. That is being done both through the use of American and Coalition forces, which are now deployed throughout the country, and are, by the way, being reformulated in ways that are more appropriate to the kinds of things that you have to do at this point; patrolling, for instance, rather than the kinds of forces that we had there at the beginning, which were to fight war.

Secondly, on the security situation, to increase the number of Iraqis involved in their own security, the acceleration of the building of the army, the acceleration of the building of police forces. There are already some 60,000 Iraqis who are involved in the security of their own country, but that number will increase.

And third, to deal with an element that is somewhat new, which is the foreign terrorists that seem to be coming into the country. We don't know the numbers, but that is obviously a problem and so we are working to increase border security, to protect infrastructure, to make certain that we are responding to that threat.

Secondly, there is a political horizon that is being developed by the Iraqi people, themselves. One thing that the Governing Council is doing is to develop a political horizon, political timetable that could then be shared with the United Nations because the UN resolution that the U.S. would like to put forward would, indeed, have the timetable come from the Iraqis themselves, which is what we think makes sense -- giving a political horizon to the Iraqi people for the establishment of a sovereign Iraq when they are capable and able to take on those responsibilities.

And finally, we are accelerating and deepening our efforts to increase the number of international partners. We have a lot of international partners. There are almost 30 countries involved now on the ground with the United States. The United Nations has been very involved -- involved enough, unfortunately, that terrorists went after the United Nations and the relief workers who were there helping the Iraqi people.

But we believe that a new United Nations resolution could provide an opportunity for more countries to be involved, for the international financial institutions to be involved. A secure and prosperous Iraq that is on the path to democracy in the middle of the Middle East is going to benefit the entire international community. And we believe that the states of the international community want to be involved in pushing that process forward.

QUESTION: Thank you. Umit Enginsoy with Turkey's NTV Television. Dr. Rice, Iraq's Foreign Minister and some Kurdish leaders recently have voiced opposition to a possible deployment of Turkish peacekeepers in Iraq. Has this changed your willingness to work with Turkish peacekeepers? And if not, and if Turkey decides to send troops, how would you resolve the differences between the Turks and the Iraqi Kurds? Thank you.

DR. RICE: Yes. Well, we've noted the statements, but we believe that there are ways to serve the interests of all the parties here, and, if Turkey wishes to participate, that there will be ways in which Turkey can participate. Turkey is, of course, a neighbor, and it is a longstanding ally of the United States and a member of NATO. And all of those things make Turkey a very valuable and potentially very excellent contributor to the effort of stabilizing and making a more peaceful Iraq.

So we will work through any details that there may need to be about how Turkish forces might be involved. But if it is the decision of the Turkish Government -- and I have to emphasize that it would be the decision of the Turkish Government -- that they wish to participate, I'm quite certain that we can work out ways in which the Turkish Government, in which Turkish forces can participate.

QUESTION: Samir Nadir, Radio Sawa. There was a report last Friday in the London Financial Times that concluded that the roadmap is dead and that the President and the White House is stepping back -- the President is stepping, especially, on involvement between the parties. Can you comment on this?

DR. RICE: Thank you for the question. In fact, the roadmap is there and will remain on the table as a reliable guide to the President's June 24th vision of two states living peacefully side-by-side. In fact, there really isn't any other option but the creation of a peaceful Palestinian state, and a peaceful Israel living side-by-side. That is what is going to be best for Israel. That is what is going to be best for the Palestinian people.

And so we have to keep that vision in mind. We have been going through an unsettled period, of course, particularly in Palestinian politics. We are in touch with all of the parties. I, myself, am constantly on the telephone. Secretary Powell is constantly on the telephone. The President himself has talked to leaders and will continue to. For instance, he has the King of Jordan here at the end of next week.

So we're actively involved and engaged. What we do need, as the Palestinians decide how to configure themselves politically, is a realization of what the President's vision really was for the Palestinian political leadership, which is institutions that work. This should not be about a single personality. This is really a prime minister who will be empowered to do the things that must be done on behalf of the Palestinian people, such as to unify the security services.

As former Prime Minister Abbas said, you have to have one gun, one authority, one law in the Palestinian territories. And that means you have to unify the security services. You can't have nine different security services, none of them reporting to the Minister of Interior; it just can't work. The Palestinians need desperately to take on the obligation that they undertook in the roadmap to deal with the terrorist infrastructure, to dismantle it. You are going to continue to have terrorist attacks as long as there is not a dismantling of that infrastructure. The transparency in finances, which we think has come a long way in the Palestinian Authority. The ability to govern, and govern wisely and justly and to deal with the security situation is at base of being able to move forward.

Now, the Israelis also have responsibilities. And we are in constant discussion with the Israelis. We have made clear that we have very deep concerns about the conditions of the Palestinian people, that life has to he made better for them, that closures need to be lifted where they can, that when the Gaza was turned over to the Palestinian Authority, that was a good step, that's something we would like to get back to, that the Israelis need to continue the dismantling of outposts. They need very much to look at the root of this fence that is being built. The President has a vision in which you wouldn't need a fence between these people. But certainly, as Prime Minister Sharon promised, it shouldn't be an intrusion on the land, the agricultural lands or the university lands of the Palestinian people.

So we're continuing to work on these issues. But we need to get some fundamentals right. And we are looking to the leadership of the Palestinian people, and to the people who want reform, to make certain that this time the Palestinian Prime Minister has the tools that he needs to deliver on behalf of the Palestinian people.

QUESTION: Ms. Rice, Carl Hanlon, Global Television, Canada.

Just wondering, now that the U.S. is asking countries, including Canada, for support with the situation in Iraq, will President Bush deliver on his promise to visit Prime Minister Chrétien in Ottawa? His decision last spring to cancel that trip was widely seen as a snub by Canadians, for the decision not to support the war in Iraq.

DR. RICE: Unfortunately, the President sometimes is not able to travel and to make trips, and the Prime Minister and the President talked about this and talked about the particular situation in which the United States found itself at that time. The Prime Minister and the President have talked. They've talked on a number of occasions. And I'm certain that at an appropriate time, when possible, the President will have an opportunity to visit Canada. They will see each other, of course, very shortly, at the Asia Pacific Economic Council in Thailand, and I'm sure they'll have a chance to talk then.

QUESTION: Sorry, the Brits normally stand up when we're speaking to a lady.

Dr. Rice, would you -- David Smith, from Channel 4 News of London. Would you -- wouldn't your job of building an international coalition, of getting the world to pick up the pieces now in Iraq, wouldn't it be considerably easier if you were to admit the mistakes made in the post-war period? I mean do you accept that mistakes have been made, and it's time to -- for a measure of humility about this?

DR. RICE: I'm never quite certain about the supposed mistakes that have been made. The United States undertook with its coalition partners a very difficult task. We know that there are people who disagreed with the decision that we made. But we made the right decision. Saddam Hussein is no longer in power. His sons are no longer a threat to succeed him in brutalizing the Iraqi people. The Iraqi people no longer have to fear mass graves. The Iraqi people, the international community, the region, will not have to fear a bloody tyrant who has attacked Arab nations in the neighborhood, who pursued and used weapons of mass destruction. The world is safer for the demise of Saddam Hussein.

Now we have a difficult post-war task, which is to bring to this long-suffering people and this long-suffering land, a stable, prosperous, peaceful, and ultimately democratic future. That is going to be of great advantage, not just to Iraqis, but to the entire region and to the security of the United States. The United States is putting forward enormous resources to accomplish this job. The President on Sunday night made very clear that we will do what it takes, we will spend what it takes -- that's why he's willing to go to the American Congress and ask for $87 billion over this next period of time, $20 billion of which will be for Iraqi reconstruction so that we can take care of the most critical tasks and made certain that the services are underway.

But this is a hard task. One thing, if there was something that was really underestimated, it was how really awful Saddam Hussein was to his own people. I know it's hard to believe that you can underestimate that. But when you look at an infrastructure that looked gleaming, if you looked at pictures at Baghdad, but when you think about it, it was pictures of presidential palaces; and you look instead at the living conditions of people in Basra or in Sadr City, if you look at the fact that the electrical power grid was serving, really, only 50 percent of the country, if you look at the fact that there were large parts of the country with no sewage, yes, this is a hard task.

But the United States has been involved in these kinds of efforts before. When we went to help liberate Germany and Europe from a tyrant, we also took an obligation afterwards to help the people with their future. We stayed until it was done.

Now, we believe that this task should be shared because we will all benefit. But let's remember that the United States and the Coalition Partners undertook this because we believed it was in the best interest and the security of the world. That was the right decision. And we've been on a strategy to bring that to fruition ever since.

QUESTION: Ma'am, just to follow up concerning -- my name is Khaled Dawoud from Egyptian newspaper Al-Ahram.

Just to follow up, I mean, in case of not admitting mistakes. Everybody is asking where are the weapons of mass destruction, which was the main reason of the imminent threat that Iraq posed?

And then concerning the terrible condition of the Iraqi infrastructure, all UN reports at that time through the years of sanctions referred to these very terrible conditions of the Iraqi infrastructure.

Finally, ma'am, in the framework of the Security Council resolution, are you ready? What is the future of Mr. Bremer, exactly? I mean, we understand about the military command, but about the civilian command?

SECRETARY RICE: Mr. Bremer remains there as the Coalition Provisional Authority, but let me speak to what we knew before. I read all of those UN reports, and I would dare anyone to tell you that they thought that the Iraqi infrastructure was in the circumstance that it is. The fact is that under Saddam Hussein, this was an opaque, totalitarian society where it is actually always difficult to get information about what was going on inside the country.

Now, I would remind people that when West Germany found itself in a situation of having to unify with East Germany, there were surprises about what there was going on in East Germany, and they were sitting right next door with all kinds of interchange -- so the fact that you would underestimate how big the reconstruction task might be in Iraq is not at all surprising.

The United States, with its coalition partners, made a decision that the world is benefiting from now, and will benefit from in the future -- and that is to remove from power a bloody dictator who had defied the will of the international community, who by all accounts, whether they were UN accounts or the accounts of foreign intelligence services or the accounts of three different Administrations in the United States, had used and continued to pursue weapons of mass destruction. The President was not willing to permit that threat to remain in the world's most volatile region.

We are awaiting, of course, the reports of former weapons inspector David Kay, who is doing a thorough job now of putting together documentary evidence, the interviews that we could not get done while Saddam Hussein was still in power, physical evidence, to put together a full picture of what has happened to the weapons of mass destruction, the state of his programs, but let's be very clear. There wasn't really very much disagreement going in. If you look at UN reports, if you look at former Administrations, if you look at intelligence services around the world, that this was somebody who had used and had continued to pursue weapons of mass destruction. We will find, now, with the full picture before us, the state of those programs.

QUESTION: My name is Said Arikat from Al Quds newspaper. Dr. Rice, Prime Minister Abbas cited as one of the reasons for his resignation the Administration's inability to deliver on promises that it has given him. And Mr. Qureia also stated that one of the conditions that he would accept the premiership upon is a full U.S. support.

Will you continue to give support to Mr. Qureia or will you continue to demand of the Palestinians to attack the terror infrastructure while looking the other way while the land grabs is going on and the war is going on and so on? Thank you.

SECRETARY RICE: Let's be very clear that the obligations in the roadmap are pretty clear for all the parties. And the obligation in the roadmap of the Palestinian Authority was to dismantle the terrorist infrastructure and to act against terrorists. It was also to unify the security services.

We know that there are many reasons that that did not get done. We know that internal Palestinian politics is, shall we say, complicated. But the fact is that without the full authority over security forces and the security situation for the Palestinian Prime Minister, it is really not going to be possible to achieve what we need to achieve.

Now, we have also told and worked with the Israelis on their obligations under the roadmap, including on the lifting of closures, including on the dismantling of outposts. We were making some progress on the turnover of territory to the Palestinian Authority.

So, yes, we are determined that all parties should meet their responsibilities. Even though the security sense was not mentioned in the roadmap, we have been dealing with the Israelis on that issue.

So the United States has been very actively engaged here. But let me just remind everybody of what the most valuable asset of the United States in this regard is. The most valuable asset is that you have a President of the United States who is prepared to work for a Palestinian State and to work for it on the fastest possible timetable. I can't tell you how many American Presidents mumbled when it came to the question, "Should there be a Palestinian state?" The President went out and said, "The only way that this works is a two-state solution." And it's now, somehow, just become a part of our vocabulary, a two-state solution. It wasn't always so.

The United States will be there for any party and for the parties if they are also prepared to fulfill their obligations. And that's what we're saying to potential Prime Minister Aba Alaa, and we are saying it to the Israelis, as well. There is only one future, and that is together. There is only one future that is together in the absence of terror. And we're working very hard for the parties to get there.

QUESTION: (Inaudible)

SECRETARY RICE: We are there for any Palestinian leadership that is prepared to really carry out its responsibilities. Again, you've got to unify the security services, continue the reforms, continue to move toward transparency in financial affairs.

The United States went so far as to give a direct funding for the first time to the Palestinian Authority because the finances were being cleaned up. There is a lot that we can do there. There is a lot that the Israelis can do. There is a lot that the Palestinians can do. We will work with any party who is prepared to fulfill those responsibilities.

QUESTION: Michael Backfish, German business daily Handelsblatt.

As money is a key issue in the reconstruction of Iraq, what's wrong with the idea that the United Nation plays a lead role in the political process including the temporary civil administration? Wouldn't that provide the international legitimacy and also the bucks necessary?

SECRETARY RICE: Well, we believe that the Iraqi people should play the lead role in their own future, and that is why the sovereignty, that is why the responsibilities are being turned over to Iraqis on an almost daily basis. That's why the army, the construction of the army has to be accelerated, the construction of the police. That's why there are now 25 ministers running the Iraqi ministries, and that's why the Government Council, the 25 of them, broadly representative of all aspects of Iraqi life, are so import to this process.

I would note with some -- that we have some pleasure -- we are very grateful that the Arab League has decided that it will now deal with, will seat the Governing Council. It's an important step, because these are the Iraqi people. These are people who suffered under Saddam Hussein. These are people who kept the torch alive for a free Iraq in exile. They have the right to be involved in their own future.

Now what role the United Nations should play in the process that gets us to the full sovereignty for -- to sovereignty for the Iraqi people, that status will be determined in discussions and in consultation.

But we are still in a very complicated situation. Jerry Bremer is doing an outstanding job as Coalition Provisional Authority. The Coalition Provisional Authority itself is multinational. He works with the United Nations, worked particularly well with the late Sergio de Mello, whose death is a great loss to everyone. And we will find the right strategy for moving toward the political horizon that everybody wants, which is the development of sovereignty for the Iraqi people at the earliest possible date. But it needs to be when they are able to take on those responsibilities.

The [Coalition Provisional] Authority and the UN should work with the Governing Council to determine exactly how that will be done.

QUESTION: Thank you. Ogata with Kyodo News, a Japanese News Agency. Thank you for the opportunity. Well, President made it clear that he will ask EU and Japan to rebuild Iraq -- the reconstruction efforts. Well, is President planning to fly to Tokyo next month? It's a report that he will go around 17th. And President will put forward the $20 billion and ask for the Congress to renew Iraq. But how much of money the United States Government will ask EU and Japan?

SECRETARY RICE: Well, the international community and the Coalition Provisional Authority, and the Iraqis, themselves, have been making some estimates of what it will take to rebuild the infrastructure. Let's remind ourselves that the goal here is to get a working infrastructure in place in Iraq so that economic activity can return to the country.

This is not a financial aid package that one expects to have Iraq become a kind of ward of the international system that just needs money year after year after year after year. Iraq will eventually be able, we believe, to return to economic self-sufficiency, because they have resources, they have educated people; they have the means by which to do it. But the infrastructure needs to be rebuilt. Investments need to be made.

And so what the President has done is to put forward that the United States will, in this very near term, put in $20 billion as our contribution to the front end, that is, to doing the most urgent tasks right up front -- electricity, water, health -- and then we would expect that the remainder of the needs should be met by some combination of Iraqi resources, of which there will be some, and international resources, hopefully both from individual donors and from the international financial institutions. The UN resolution speaks to this. It's going to be extremely important. There will be a donor conference on the 23rd, 24th of October. And before that, we will be going around and consulting with our allies about how to do this.

But we need to remember what is at stake here. Yes, the price tag may be very high. However, freedom is priceless. Security is priceless. When the World Trade Center came down, we would have paid any price to avoid that. The bombings in Bali, or the bombings in Mumbai, we would have done anything to avoid that.

And so we need to keep our eye on what we're trying to do here. And a stable and prosperous Iraq is going to be the centerpiece of a more stable Middle East, along with, hopefully, a Palestinian state that can live alongside Israel, and then you'll have a different kind of Middle East. And there are a lot of people in the Middle East who want a different kind of Middle East than exists now.

That's why we will go to our friends and allies. We will remind everyone that we undertook a similar grand project in the rebuilding of Germany and Japan, and that it has paid off hundreds of times over in prosperity, two of the leading economies of the world. Yes, there are long-term goals. But you have to have long-term goals at a time like this.

QUESTION: Tokyo (inaudible).

DR. RICE: The President will go to APEC and I'm sure that at some point he will see Prime Minister Koizumi. We will see if Japan is one of the stops.

MR. DENIG: I'm sorry. We've run out of time, ladies, gentlemen, but thank you very much, Dr. Rice.

DR. RICE: I'm sorry; I'd like to come back sometime. Thank you very much. Okay. Thank you.
[End]