From today's newsletter

TRANSCRIPT:

MR. REEKER: Good afternoon. I hope everybody had a
chance to have lunch before the briefing this time. It
may be a good idea to start late.

You all got an opportunity to hear from the Secretary
this morning when he spoke with you from C Street.
Further to some of his comments, we will be putting
out a statement a bit later this afternoon -- I'll get
you the paper copy of that -- on cooperation for the
safeguarding of Iraqi antiquities and cultural
property because, as the Secretary indicated, this is
a serious issue. The people of the United States of
America value the archeological and cultural heritage
of Iraq that documents over 10,000 years of the
development of civilization.

Obviously, we have all seen the distressing reports
that, in recent days, the national museums in Baghdad
and in Mosul have been looted, as well as some other
institutions and cultural sites. This kind of looting,
as the Secretary indicated, causes irretrievable loss
to the understanding of history and to the efforts of
Iraqi and international scholars to study and gain new
insight into our past.

And so we would point out that objects and documents
taken from the museums and sites are the property of
the Iraqi nation and, under Iraqi law, they are,
therefore, stolen property, whether found in Iraq or
in other nations; and anyone knowingly possessing or
dealing in such objects is committing a crime. Such
individuals may be prosecuted under Iraqi law, and
here in the United States may be prosecuted under the
U.S. National Stolen Property Act.  So the Iraqi
people, as well as members of the coalition forces and
others, are warned not to handle these artifacts; in
particular, we would point out that Americans are
asked not to purchase or otherwise trade in such
objects, as they belong to the nation of Iraq and are
stolen property.

So, as the Secretary indicated, we will be working
with others. The Office of Reconstruction and
Humanitarian Assistance will help Iraqis and
international experts in their efforts to restore
artifacts and catalogues of antiquities that were
damaged by the looters, and a senior advisor to the
Office of Reconstruction and Humanitarian Affairs,
Ambassador John Limbert, is going to take the lead in
this effort.

So we are working through Interpol to pursue broader
international law enforcement efforts to help locate
and return these items to Iraq before they make it
into international crime channels.

And as Secretary Powell mentioned to you earlier, we
have also been in touch with UNESCO, with the United
Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural
Organization, regarding a constructive role that they
can play in safeguarding Iraqi antiquities.

So we will put that out in a little more detail on
paper later after the briefing.

Questions on this or other subjects?

QUESTION: Yeah, I have a question on this.

MR. REEKER: Matt.

QUESTION: But I think if it's addressed in the
statement, then don't bother to answer it now. But who
exactly has been in touch with UNESCO? Where is that?

MR. REEKER: It just so happens that the UNESCO
Executive Board is meeting this week in Paris, so our
observer delegation to that meeting is there.
But we have an observer to UNESCO, as you know, who
works out of our embassy in Paris, so through those
channels we've been in touch.

QUESTION: Have you not reestablished a --

MR. REEKER: As the President announced, you will
recall, last September, the United States will return
to UNESCO and we are tentatively scheduled to rejoin
on October 1st of this year. But we have not yet named
a U.S. ambassador and we are working out the
discussions of how that will --

QUESTION: Does not being a member now affect any --
affect your dealings with them?

MR. REEKER: Not that I am aware of. We have an
observer status, and so we go through those channels.

QUESTION: All right. And then the last thing on this
is did -- you said that people who take these things
may be prosecuted under Iraqi law? Well, who, exactly,
is enforcing that? Anyone?

MR. REEKER: Well, that's something that would emerge
over time, Matt, but these are crimes. The point is
that anybody that is knowingly possessing or dealing
with these objects is violating laws and so, okay --

QUESTION: Right. And the last thing you said was that
the coalition, or one of the things you said,
coalition forces are warned not to handle or touch
these things? It was my understanding that, and there
were witnesses, plenty of them, who saw coalition
forces actually helping move some of the stuff. I mean
not to steal it, obviously to protect it.

MR. REEKER: To protect it. Yes, obviously in the
context of doing the right thing --

QUESTION: Okay.

MR. REEKER: -- in terms of handling and I don't think
there is any suggestion that coalition forces have
been involved in the unfortunate looting.
There are those, obviously, that in the course of
events in Baghdad have been involved in that and we
have seen that, but it is of concern to us, so we are
going to work with Iraqis and with others.

Terri.

QUESTION: The U.S. Government was reportedly warned
that this would be a target of looting, so why, why
wasn't more done to not -- to stop it from getting to
this case, which is far down the road? You say things
have been damaged but, from the press reports, it
seems like everything's been destroyed.
Why didn't the United States try to stop it?

MR. REEKER: I think you would need to talk to Central
Command, who has been fighting a war in Baghdad and
other places. As you know, in recent days, we have
made great progress in that effort, but while there
are pockets of resistance, while there are still
priorities in terms of the security, the whole point
is, this is important to us, and that is why we are
working with others and making the statements that I
have just made. And I think the Pentagon has already
briefed both from Central Command in Doha and from my
colleague, Ms. Clarke's, briefing today to that
regard.

QUESTION: So the State Department role just came in
when it was time to clean up? You also couldn't try to
safeguard --

MR. REEKER: The State Department is not on the ground
in Iraq, Terri, and has not been --

QUESTION: I understand that, Phil.

MR. REEKER: Yeah.

QUESTION: But you're making the statement about it
today as a high concern of the State Department, so
I'm just wondering why it wasn't prepared in advance.

MR. REEKER: Right. We are highlighting the situation.
The State Department is the one that obviously deals
with UNESCO and other organizations, with Interpol, as
I indicated, and the Secretary highlighted that for
you this morning.

Anything else on this subject?

(No response.)

MR. REEKER: No?

George.

QUESTION: Do you have anything on the visit of Kofi
Annan's Special Advisor on Iraq, who is in town today?

MR. REEKER: Mr. Ahmed, yes. I think we talked a little
bit to some of you about that Friday afternoon. We, as
you will recall, welcomed the appointment of
Rafeeuddin Ahmed as the UN Secretary General's Special
Advisor on Iraq last week. And, at our invitation, Mr.
Ahmed is in Washington today for a series of meetings
with officials from the State Department, from the
U.S.  Agency for International Development, from the
Defense Department, and also the National Security
Council, obviously, discussing then UN's role in the
post-conflict period in Iraq.

And, of course, this follows on from the commitments
that the President has made, that Prime Minister Blair
made at Hillsborough, that the United Nations will
play a vital role in Iraq's reconstruction. And so
this is a first opportunity to have this fairly
comprehensive -- it is a full day of meetings here in
Washington to just exchange thoughts and ideas, and
see where we will go from here.

Joel.

QUESTION: Question: The communications outlets, I
guess, or distribution in Iraq has been out, and, of
course, they have state-run newspapers, television.
Is much of what's gone on in the way of looting, can
you attribute that to the
-- basically, the failure to switch over to, I guess,
a coalition television and radio network? Of course,
the newspapers have to take a little bit of time
because there is --

MR. REEKER: I am not sure if I can accept all of the
premise of your questions.
You might want to talk to some of those on the ground
who are briefing on the exact situation in Baghdad. I
do believe that the coalition forces have begun
-- some days ago -- providing television and radio
broadcasts within Iraq utilizing equipment they have
been able to bring in, and utilizing existing Iraqi
channels for that sort of thing. But I think
Department of Defense or CENTCOM could give you a
better idea of that.

And, obviously, that will be one area for the Office
of Reconstruction and Humanitarian Assistance to work
on, and we would hope as we move ahead in days and
months to come that independent media would be an
important part of the redevelopment of Iraqi civil
society.

Eli.

QUESTION: Did you have a follow-up, Joel?

QUESTION: Yeah, I do have a follow-up.

MR. REEKER: Yes.

QUESTION: The Interior Minister of Pakistan has said
that the U.S.
policies are polarizing the world, and, of course,
there is various opinions, I would assume, coming out
of various countries. How do you characterize his
statement?

MR. REEKER: I am not quite sure how that follows up on
media inside Iraq.

QUESTION: With respect to the coalition forces in
Iraq.

MR. REEKER: I think, Joel, what we have seen over the
last several days is a welcoming by the people of Iraq
of their liberation by coalition forces, the fact that
they no longer have to live in fear of Saddam Hussein.
We have seen more and more stories in media all around
the world about the horrible conditions under which
the people of Iraq have been forced to live for more
than two decades. We have seen stories from media
representatives talking about the stories they were
unable to tell for fear of retribution.

And so I think there is an opportunity now, as well as
covering the immediate situation on the ground in
Baghdad and other parts of Iraq, to also review and
tell the story of what the people of Iraq have endured
in terms of the torture, in terms of the
disappearances, in terms of some of the horrific
things that we have read and spoken about.

And so I think the world will unite in that, and our
hope would be that everybody would put their energies
now toward the reconstruction of Iraq, toward
supporting the Iraqi people in building a new life for
themselves, rebuilding their structures, their civic
structures, as well as their infrastructure, which has
been neglected for so long. And they have a great
opportunity to do that, and I think President Bush and
Secretary Powell have made quite clear our commitment
to helping with that.

Now, Eli was going to go next.

QUESTION: Can you say -- tell us about some of the
Iraqis who have been living in Iraq who are invited to
the Nasiriya meeting tomorrow?

MR. REEKER: I don't think I am going to go into any
great detail on that. As you know, there were Iraqis
living, as you just pointed out, inside Iraq, those
who have emerged as potential leaders to take part in
this first of a series of meetings that the Secretary
addressed again just a short time ago, as well as
Iraqis representing groups from outside of Iraq who
have worked very hard to see the day where Iraq would
be liberated from Saddam Hussein. So this meeting
which will take place in Nasiriya tomorrow will bring
together liberated Iraqis from these newly freed areas
of Iraq, as well as members of the Iraqi opposition,
many of whom we have worked with on the Future of Iraq
project, and that will happen tomorrow in Nasiriya.

I think the Secretary already mentioned for you, but I
will remind you, that President Bush's Special Envoy
Zalmay Khalilzad is going to lead a U.S.
delegation to that meeting, and our Deputy Assistant
Secretary for Near East Affairs Ryan Crocker, an
Arabic speaker, will attend and will lead much of that
discussion.

QUESTION: Can I follow up, Phil? When you talk about
leaders inside of Iraq, are you referring to people
who were maybe sort of mid-level apparatchiks in the
regime? Or are you talking about -- have you found
dissidents in the prisons? Are you talking about
tribal leaders? Are you talking about religious
leaders? I mean can you give us any more specifics?
Because, you know, as you can imagine, it's a little
unclear right now what happens to all of the sort of
bureaucrats in this terrible regime the U.S. has just
toppled.

MR. REEKER: I think what we are looking at is a broad
coverage. Of course, as the Secretary has indicated,
as Ambassador Boucher discussed, I think, the end of
last week with you, this will not be the first of
these, what some have called town hall meetings, but
this will be the first of what will not be the last.
There will be many of these, we would hope, around
different parts of Iraq.

Even in the early days as parts of Iraq were
liberated, you see the emergence of local leaders,
tribal leaders, community leaders, and these are the
people we are trying to identify who will have
interesting things to say, we believe, commentary and
input into how they would view their future and to
discussing their futures and ideas regarding the Iraqi
interim authority, which, as you know, we want to form
-- see the Iraqis form as soon as possible.

So that is the kind of groups we'll be looking at.
Exactly where they come from, where they are drawn,
will remain to be seen as we go on with this project.
But I think people do emerge, and those on the ground
are able to identify people who have exhibited an
interest or potential for leadership or can represent
particular groups within their communities.

QUESTION: But you can't answer the question about ties
to the former regime? I mean, would there be some sort
of --

MR. REEKER: Not specifically. I think we want to make
sure that Ba'athist elements of -- whether it's
ministries or other structures, cadres, are
eliminated. But as we look at ministries, one of the
things we'll be seeing is there may be some very
skilled civil servants, others that don't have those
strong links or ties to Saddam's repressive regime,
who may bring something to the table. But that is part
of what the Garner group will do is work and liaise
with those ministries to see how they can move ahead
to bring those important structures of civil society
back into operation.

Jonathan.

QUESTION: Yeah, a follow-up on that. Firstly, can you
provide us with a list of participants tomorrow?

MR. REEKER: No, I can't right now and I will --

QUESTION: No, tomorrow after the meeting.

MR. REEKER: I will find out. They will probably
release one there, I would think. We will leave it to
the people there.

QUESTION: And secondly, are any of those civil society
people who took part in the Future of Iraq project
also taking part in the meeting in Nasiriyah tomorrow?

MR. REEKER: I believe I said a few minutes ago, if I
said what I have in front of me, that the liberated
Iraqis will include representatives from the Future of
Iraq project that are schedule to meet tomorrow. So
the exact makeup of the list, as you know, I am not in
a position to share at this point, but those are
representatives, those being Iraqis who were outside
of the country and working with us and working with
others thinking about the future of Iraq.

You will recall we had many, many different working
groups under that project to focus on different
aspects of the society so that already, over many
months, they have been able to plan for this time,
post-Saddam Hussein.

Matt.

QUESTION: Can you tell us what Ambassador Tutwiler is
going to be doing in Iraq?

MR. REEKER: Yes. Ambassador -- it's the U.S.
Ambassador, of course, to the Kingdom of Morocco.
Ambassador Margaret Tutwiler is going to depart
Morocco soon and serve temporarily as a special envoy
of President Bush assisting the Office of
Reconstruction and Humanitarian Assistance in Iraq.

She is going to help coordinate the public
communications there at that office.
And I think the decision to have Ambassador Tutwiler
travel there does reflect the high importance that we
place on public affairs and communications efforts in
post-war Iraq, kind of reflecting on Joel's question a
bit earlier.

Secretary Powell spoke personally to King Mohamed VI
on Saturday and provided assurances to the King that
Ambassador Tutwiler will return. She remains the U.S.
Ambassador to Morocco and she'll return following this
temporary assignment to [Iraq]. So we appreciate the
Moroccan Government's understanding and concurrence
with this decision and expect her to be in Iraq for
several weeks.

QUESTION: What, exactly, will she do? Will she be a
spokesperson?

MR. REEKER: I think, you know, that will remain to be
seen.
Precisely, she is going to help coordinate
communications. As you know, she has a lot of
experience in that regard and we will much appreciate
that. We will be able to work with her from here, as
well, and just coordinate all the interest on the
ground.

As you know, many of your colleagues are already there
in Iraq now, in Baghdad, in other parts of Iraq, and
so communications will be an important part of the
work of General Garner's group as they proceed forward
with their responsibilities.

QUESTION: You had to get the Moroccans' permission to
do this?

MR. REEKER: I didn't say that.

QUESTION: Well, you said, "concurrence."

MR. REEKER: I think they, you know, they understand
and concurred that this was a good thing to do.

QUESTION: Was there some -- you guys had some concern
that they would think they were being neglected or
something if -- I'm not trying to be snide, I'm just
trying to figure out why, you know, did the King of
Morocco think, for some reason --

MR. REEKER: In diplomacy, Matt, we usually, you know,
you send an envoy and the host government accepts that
envoy, and then you call, and, as the Secretary did on
Saturday, explained to King Mohamed that we are going
to ask Ambassador Tutwiler to go temporarily to Iraq,
and he concurred that that was a good idea.

QUESTION: Okay.

MR. REEKER: Betsy.

QUESTION: On the question of Syria. There's been a lot
of language the last few days --

MR. REEKER: Been a lot of questions from you and your
colleagues.

QUESTION: Yeah, well.

MR. REEKER: So it just generates more language.

QUESTION: A lot of -- what's the word to describe it?
A lot of sort of puffed-up language about how
concerned we are about Syria and that Syria should
hand over Iraqis and that they should sort of take a
lesson from what happened in Iraq.

The EU, in a statement today, was asking this country
to sort of lower its rhetoric on this question. And I
am wondering whether the U.S. is willing to follow
through on this rhetoric. I mean you seem to be
threatening Syria with some sort of action.

MR. REEKER: Betsy, I would point you to the
Secretary's remarks. He spoke to all of you. He
answered, I think, three questions on Syria and was
quite clear about our concerns, as have others been.
We have had some longstanding concerns about Syria
that we have talked about from this podium certainly
for years. In terms of active support for terrorism,
we know that Syria has been listed as a state sponsor
of terrorism since we have been listing such things.

We have also had concerns about weapons of mass
destruction and missile programs. That is publicly
available, as you know, in what we call the 721 Report
that you are all quite familiar with. So I don't think
much of the language you refer to is particularly new.
I think Secretary Powell made it quite clear that we
are concerned that there are these issues with Syria.

As Foreign Secretary Straw of the United Kingdom
indicated as well, there is questions that Syria needs
to ask, and some things that Syria needs to think
about in terms of their future. We are entering a new
stage in the region now where we won't have and don't
have Saddam Hussein as a threat to the stability of
the region. It's a great opportunity for Iraqis to
rebuild their country and have a stable country.

And it's the kind of thing that Syria can also think
about, in terms of how they want to deal in the region
and deal internationally. So we hope that the Syrians,
as well as others, would reexamine their practices,
past practices, past behavior, and give some thought
to that. And I think that's what the statements from
U.S. officials and others have reflected.

And the specific concerns we have had about the
border, as Secretary Powell indicated to you, we are
keeping in very close touch with the Syrians about
that. They have told us that their border is closed to
all but humanitarian travel. And we hope that, in
fact, that's the case. As Secretary Powell indicated,
it's a porous border, so we watch that closely as
well.

And when it comes to the question of representatives
of the former Iraqi regime, senior Iraqi officials,
those most directly involved in the barbarity and the
viciousness of Saddam Hussein's regime, which included
people involved in the development of weapons of mass
destruction, we don't want to see them, and we
wouldn't think the Syrians would want to see them in
Syria.

So, as the Secretary noted, Syria has a choice to
make, and we hope they will make the right one. And
that's the message that we continue to convey through
our diplomacy.

Elise.

QUESTION: Also in Syria, Syrian officials say that
while the U.S. has made these accusations about
chemical weapons, Iraqis being harbored in their
country, things like that, that this administration
has not offered them concrete details, hard evidence,
that would prove and help them substantiate the fact
that they are not cooperating.

MR. REEKER: I think we have a continuing dialogue with
Syria and with Syrian officials. As I indicated, our
ambassador, Ambassador Kattouf, meets regularly, so do
others on his staff, with Syrian officials,
counterparts, in Damascus. We certainly raise these
issues in other conversations with Syrian officials.

And it is exactly what I have reflected here, that
these are the concerns we have, these are the things
we would want Syria to think about, we would want them
to address, specifically with the border and questions
about weapons of mass destruction or questions about
those from Saddam Hussein's regime who would seek
refuge in their country, and really ask themselves,
"Are these the type of people you want in your
country?"

We'll continue to have that dialogue and we'll
continue to discuss with them information that we have
or other things that concern us, so that we can hope
the Syrians will address them.

QUESTION: If I can follow up. I understand what you're
saying. But what the Syrians are saying is that they
say they are concerned about these allegations, and
they want specific details, without getting into any
intelligence matters that you might -- what that
intelligence might be.

Have you shared with the Syrians actual specific and
detailed information that is proof of your concerns or
that give you reason for these concerns that they can
either substantiate or do something about?

MR. REEKER: We'll continue to have our conversations
with Syria through our diplomatic channels, and we're
going to keep those private conversations and not try
to conduct them through the press or through the
public. We have made clear what our concerns are. Some
of them are longstanding issues that you are all quite
aware of that have been out there for many, many
years.

And I will just reiterate what I said. These are
questions that Syria needs to address, things Syria
needs to think about, as they think about their own
future and how they want to relate with not only other
countries in the region, but also with the rest of the
international community.

Next to you. Yes, ma'am.

QUESTION: Why is it so important to start talking
about this publicly in the last few days if you have
been having these continuing private conversations for
so long?

MR. REEKER: You are the one that ask me the questions.
So we have gone through this. You are not a regular at
our briefing room. But I think the issue comes up
quite frequently about Syria, about state sponsors of
terrorism, about concern over weapons of mass
destruction. We have a lot of public reports,
including the report that I mentioned that's a CIA
report that is put out twice a year.

It is a report to Congress on the Acquisition of
Technologies Relating to Weapons of Mass Destruction
and Advanced Conventional Munitions, to give you the
full name of it; and that has consistently outlined --
every time it is released, every six months -- our
concerns with respect to Syria, in terms of its
pursuit of weapons of mass destruction.

QUESTION: If I may follow up, even though I am not a
regular. It's absolutely clear that your rhetoric has
ratcheted way up in the last few days.

MR. REEKER: I think, you know, I have been asked this
question now two or three times, so has the Secretary,
so have others, and you have heard all of the answers.
These are our concerns. We have continued to answer
your questions as they get raised about the concerns
we have and our hopes in terms of how Syria will look
at them. Those are the answers, and there is an
ongoing dialogue with Syria about that. They aren't
new concerns, although clearly the idea of Iraqi
officials, or things leaving Iraq and going to Syria,
those would be newer issues.

But the overall issues that we have been talking about
in terms of concerns about Syria, with regard to
terrorism, with regard to weapons of mass destruction,
many of those are longstanding issues. And that's the
kind of thing we want to see addressed.

Jonathan.

QUESTION: The Syrians, in response to this, have said
several times in the last few days, and indeed for
some years, that they would welcome full disclosure
under UN auspices of all weapons of mass destruction
in the region.
What does the United States think of that proposal?

MR. REEKER: I am not aware of those specific
proposals, Jonathan, and I would have to go back --

QUESTION: Could you prepare an answer, though? Because
it's quite clear that they've made that, made that
proposal?

MR. REEKER: I will go back and see what we said about
it in the past, if it is something that has been a
regular topic.

Eli.

QUESTION: I, too, would like to know the answer. But
are you prepared at this point, given that you've been
talking about specific allegations, specifically about
the border, itself, and whether individuals have
crossed it in both directions, and the Syrians have
denied this, are you prepared at this point to say
that the Syrian Government is lying?

MR. REEKER: Eli, I am prepared to say what I have
already said, what Secretary Powell has said, what
other senior U.S. Government officials have said on
the record, and I don't really have anything more to
say. We --

QUESTION: Well, someone has to be lying based on what
both governments have said on the record.

MR. REEKER: We have made clear our concerns. These are
things that can continue to be discussed through the
diplomatic channels that we have, and that is what we
are going to do. And I don't have anything else to add
at this point.

QUESTION: Phil. Can I just follow up again?

MR. REEKER: Yes.

QUESTION: In the view of the United States, is there,
in fact, any legal impediment under international law
to Syria developing chemical weapons?

MR. REEKER: Jonathan, I would have to go get a legal
analysis for you to determine whether there are legal
impediments. It's not a question I can answer for you.
I will find out what our longstanding views are.

QUESTION: Do you think that you can make these
accusations and make these threats without actually
considering any -- the legal basis for --

MR. REEKER: I am not aware of the threats that you are
talking about.
I am not aware of threats having been made. I'm
talking -- I'm aware of what we have said quite
publicly are the things that concern us. Those are the
things that we will address in our continuing
discussions with Syria, as well as others within the
international community.

QUESTION: Okay, could you take the question on how you
see the legal basis --
what the legal basis is for a complaint against
Syria's --

MR. REEKER: We can have concerns about how a country
behaves and what they are doing, and we can express
those concerns. We have every right to do that, and we
do. If they have concerns, they can express their
concerns. That's what discussion and diplomacy is
about, and that's what we are engaged in at this time.

QUESTION: Fine.

MR. REEKER: Matt.

QUESTION: But can I at least -- could you at least
take a question on how you see the legal position
under international law of those programs?

MR. REEKER: I don't know. I will look into whether it
is something we have addressed before and you can go
find for yourself, or whether we will have something
else --

QUESTION: So, can I, just to --

QUESTION: Did the Secretary --

MR. REEKER: Yes. Can we just keep going?

QUESTION: Well, okay. Well, still on Syria.

MR. REEKER: Yes, Eli.

QUESTION: Can you just explain how, you know, there's
been a lot of talk about how you want to continue to
raise these concerns and have these discussions in
private. The Secretary talked about this morning. But
how does that get you to a resolution of the issue if
both of the sides do not agree on the truthfulness of
the original accusation?

I mean, I'm just, I don't understand how talking about
something that people don't agree happened gets you
anywhere.

MR. REEKER: Well, Eli, you are not in the room --

QUESTION: No, I'm not in the room. Okay.

MR. REEKER: -- when those talks take place, and you're
not going to be in the room when those talks take
place.

QUESTION: Okay.

MR. REEKER: Of that I am fairly confident.

QUESTION: Okay.

MR. REEKER: And so we're going to continue to have the
diplomacy we have and we are not going to try to
conduct it all publicly from here or from any other
point around the globe. The Secretary of State has
made clear, as has the President, the issues that are
of concern to us, often in response to your questions,
as I have done here today. We have talked to the
Syrians about this on a regular basis. We have said
that to you every time that we have been to Syria.
Whether it was Ambassador Burns, Assistant Secretary
Burns' travel, or whether it was the Secretary of
State, himself, going to Syria, he has talked about
the issues that we have raised.

So, as the Secretary said to you this morning, it is
no secret that
-- to the Syrians or to anybody else that we have
concerns over these kinds of developments, and that is
why we discuss them.

Now, Matt was going to be next.

QUESTION: Can you expand at all on what the Secretary
meant when he said that you guys would be considering
economic and potentially diplomatic measures against
Syria?

MR. REEKER: No, I will just stick with exactly what
the Secretary said.

QUESTION: Do you know, has that consideration -- have
you actually begun considering those things?

MR. REEKER: I don't have anything beyond what the
Secretary has said.

QUESTION: Can you explain -- is Syria under any U.S.
sanctions right now, other than the ones that relate
to it being designated a state sponsor?

MR. REEKER: I have to go back and check.

QUESTION: Can someone look into that, please?

MR. REEKER: Yeah.

QUESTION: Phil, I know that you said that the idea of
Syria harboring, potentially harboring, members of the
Iraqi regime is new, but last year at this time the
Secretary was actually lobbying Congress to not enact
the Syria Accountability Act because of its
cooperation with the administration on issues related
to terrorism such as al-Qaida, the Taliban, saying
that Syria's cooperation has actually saved American
lives. So is that -- what has changed over the last
year, in terms of your concerns on Syria? You also --

MR. REEKER: Those aren't mutually exclusive things.
Syria remained designated as a state sponsor of
terrorism.

QUESTION: Well, you also -- you also seemed to be very
happy with --
well, you also seemed to be very happy with Syria when
it voted for Resolution
1441, so I guess, are there any areas of cooperation
that are still ongoing with the Syrians, or are they
not potential partners in cooperation right now?

MR. REEKER: They are very much potential partners in
cooperation, and I would direct you back to the other
things. When there have been things that we have been
able to work on successfully with Syria as partners;
that's a good thing.
It doesn't eliminate the fact that there are other
things that have and continue to concern us. And
that's what diplomacy is about is continuing to talk
about both sides of those equations and to continue to
work, in our case, with the Syrians to try to address
these concerns that we have.

QUESTION: Do you think --

MR. REEKER: Still on this?

QUESTION: Yes. Do you think that the new Syria
Accountability Act, you will this time agree with it,
if it pass the Congress?

MR. REEKER: I don't know. That's a hypothetical that I
am just not in a position to address.

QUESTION: Will you send the -- anybody like Mr. Burns
or other to Syria soon or?

MR. REEKER: I am not aware of any travel to announce
at this time.

Yes, sir.

QUESTION: So the question back in the Middle East
raised by the people, naïve as it may sound, is that
while Syria is being now demanded to stop developing
weapons of mass destruction, the Israelis do stockpile
weapons of mass destruction. It's no secret. The
administration is silent on that.
How can you address that point?

MR. REEKER: I just don't want to go down again one of
these back and forth things. We have addressed the
issues that we have about Syria, the concerns we have.
As I said, much of this is stuff that is longstanding.
And if you go back and look at the things we have said
in reports, the things we have said in briefings, the
things we said during travel, these are issues of
concern to us and we will continue to address those
with Syria.

It's obviously high on our list of bilateral issues,
and there are other countries that would be concerned
about this, too. So the Secretary has been quite clear
and the President has too, that this is an opportunity
for Syria to think seriously about how it wants to
relate with the region, with the United States, and
with others in the international community, and where
they want to direct their resources and their own
aspirations for the region and for their own country.
And that's what we will continue to do in terms of
that regard.

Yes.

QUESTION: Are you not concerned about Israel's nuclear
weapons?

MR. REEKER: I don't have anything today for you,
Jonathan, about alleged nuclear weapons --

QUESTION: You just don't want to say anything about
it? Is that right?

MR. REEKER: -- or anything else.

QUESTION: Okay. Why are you not concerned by Israel's
nuclear weapons?

MR. REEKER: Jonathan, this is just not a discussion
about Israel. You are asking me questions about Syria
--

QUESTION: We're talking about the Middle East.

MR. REEKER: And then you can --

QUESTION: Israel is a neighbor of Syria. They are
enemies. Do you understand that? I mean, of course
it's relevant.

MR. REEKER: Jonathan, do you want to come do a
briefing?

QUESTION: It's relevant. I mean, do you think it's
irrelevant? Okay.
Do you think it's relevant to the --

MR. REEKER: Jonathan.

QUESTION: -- to the case of Syria, that one of its
neighbors has nuclear weapons or not?

MR. REEKER: I have been asked about our discussions
and concerns with Syria.
That's what we have been addressing. You have turned
this, you know, all the way around about something
about, you know, what have we raised with Syria.

And I have directed you to what the Secretary has
said, what the President has said, and what we we'll
continue to discuss in our relationship with Syria.
That is separate from any other discussions about
other countries or any other topics. That is what we
will continue to look at with regard to Syria, and you
can laugh and grin all you want. That's the issue
here. And does anybody else have a question on the
same subject, or shall we move on?

QUESTION: On reconstruction. Sir.

MR. REEKER: Yes.

QUESTION: There has been a lot of talk about getting
the -- how do you get the French and the Germans and
Russians possibly involved in this? Is also --

MR. REEKER: We are talking about Iraq?

QUESTION: Yes, right.

MR. REEKER: Okay. You usually asked about another
country.

QUESTION: I know. I know. That's why you wouldn't call
on me.

MR. REEKER: I was a little worried, yeah.

QUESTION: No, this is a question. Today, for example,
The Post had an editorial saying that Bush should make
a phone call to Chirac. And their leading columnist,
Hoagland, said Chirac should make a phone call to
Bush.
What's going on -- is there going to be any pushing by
the State Department on phone calls?

MR. REEKER: I am not going to start commenting on
every newspaper's editorials and their suggestions.

QUESTION: No, but this is in the air very much.

MR. REEKER: If you want to know about phone calls -- I
think you mentioned the President -- I would direct
you to the White House. I can tell you what phone
calls the Secretary has made. I mentioned that he had
talked to the King of Morocco over this weekend. He
also talked to Foreign Secretary --
Foreign Minister Palacio of Spain on Saturday. And
today, as he already told you, he has talked to
Foreign Minister Papandreou of Greece, who also
represents, of course, the European Union presidency.

QUESTION: It's a looming problem. Does the State
Department have any thoughts, any recommendations?

MR. REEKER: What exactly is the looming problem?

QUESTION: Well, what are you going to do with France,
Germany, and Russia? And how do you repair relations
with them, or do you repair relations with them?

MR. REEKER: I think we have relations with each of
those countries.
France and Germany are allies. They are NATO allies.
We have long histories with each of those countries.
We have unique relationships with each of those
countries. So I wouldn't put countries into any
particular grouping just because they happen to have
had a meeting of their own over the weekend. We took
note of that meeting. We took note of their statements
regarding the rebuilding of Iraq, their interest in
the United Nations.

As you know, President Bush and Prime Minister Blair
have talked about a vital role for the United Nations
in that effort. They mentioned that in their
joint-communiqué just last week. Certainly, we have
been very forthcoming in talking to other countries in
the international community in general about practical
steps necessary to meet some of the challenges in
terms of the humanitarian needs in Iraq and building a
prosperous and democratic Iraq. And we hope that other
countries will be as interested as we are in seeing
that process through.

I think the Secretary has mentioned to you, and
Richard Boucher mentioned last week that at least 58
countries have already responded to us with offers of
things they would like to contribute to the
reconstruction process, and we will be continuing to
follow up with those countries and any others that may
be able to contribute. And so France, Germany, Russia,
they will all, hopefully, be thinking about roles they
may play, how they may contribute, because I think
it's in all of our interests, including those three
countries', to see Iraq emerge as a successful, stable
nation within secure borders, with its territorial
integrity intact, without ties to terrorist groups,
without weapons of mass destruction, with a
representative government on a democratic path
utilizing its resources for the good of its own
people, rather than deploying those resources toward
the development of weapons or squandering it on the
personal desires of one tyrannical dictator, his
family and his inner circle.

So those are the hopes we have, and we hope that
others in the international community will share those
as well.

QUESTION: Can I ask a question that you thought I was
going to ask?

MR. REEKER: Okay. That means we are switching subjects
for a few minutes, right?

QUESTION: Yeah. You had a very optimistic statement
last week about the agreement in Caracas between the
government and all. And that same night, there was a
terrific bomb, which flew apart the place where they
were meeting. And now the democratic opposition is
pulling back, and Mr. Chavez has been making all kinds
of remarks that indicate he is not taking that very
seriously, any accord.

And, meanwhile, the Venezuelan Ambassador here
proclaimed on Friday that in order to get a working
referendum -- for a referendum to take place,
according to their laws, the opposition would have to
get all of the votes that Chavez got back in 1998
since when his popularity has plummeted, plus one.
Now, are we sticking -- is the State -- is the
American policy still going to stick behind this
effort to bring irreconcilable groups together?

MR. REEKER: Is that it? You read your ideas into the
record, and now I can try to address that.

QUESTION: Okay.

MR. REEKER: Somewhere in there, you did talk about the
attack that took place, the bombing over the weekend,
and we join the Organization of American States,
Secretary General Gaviria, in condemning this attack
by those who seek to undermine the significant accord,
the same accord that we welcomed on Friday.

This accord, as you will see from the statement we put
out Friday, was between the Venezuelan Government and
the opposition and it charts a path to a, what they
are calling, "a constitutional, democratic, peaceful
and electoral solution for Venezuela," something we
have talked about for many, many months during this
time of crisis in that country.

It's certainly what's called for in the Organization
of American States Permanent Council Resolution,
Resolution 833. And in terms of the bombing over the
weekend, we are urging the Venezuelan authorities to
fully investigate the matter and promptly bring the
perpetrators for justice.

We had applauded on Friday both the government's and
the opposition's dialogue teams, those people that
came together for this extraordinary effort to plot
out a path forward so that all the Venezuelan people
could peacefully and democratically build a better
tomorrow for themselves. And so while we commend
Secretary General Gaviria and the Organization of
American States and the work of nongovernmental
organizations like the Carter Center and, indeed, the
United Nations Development Program, we certainly
condemn the actions that took place in terms of this
bombing over the weekend.

Elise.

QUESTION: New topic?

MR. REEKER: New topic?

QUESTION: North Korea?

MR. REEKER: Okay.

QUESTION: Can I stick and give Iraq?

MR. REEKER: I thought you were sticking with
Venezuela. No? Why don't we come back? Let's do North
Korea.

Do you have a question, Elise, or just a general --

QUESTION: Yeah. Over the weekend North Korea seemed to
indicate that it might be willing to have multilateral
talks, and I was just wondering what you make of this.

MR. REEKER: We read the North Korean statement with
interest, and we are following up through appropriate
diplomatic channels.

QUESTION: Have you done that yet? Has there been any
follow-up?

MR. REEKER: I think, I don't want to get into the
details, as we haven't all along, but as you know, we
have had discussions with a lot of capitals and we're
continuing to do that. We are engaged in a process
with a number of capitals. As we have said before, we
consult very closely with South Korea, with Japan, of
course, and also with China, with Russia, with
Australia. There are a lot of countries that are
interested in this. That is why we felt that this is a
multilateral issue and so that is what we're going to
continue to do.

QUESTION: Have you followed up with the North Koreans
is my answer --
is my question.

MR. REEKER: The New York Channel, as you know, is
always open. I am not aware of specific conversations
and just wouldn't get into that at this point, but we
are following up on what we read.

QUESTION: Does this mean that you guys will be wanting
to move again to another Security Council discussion?

MR. REEKER: I don't know that I could give you a next
step in this process at this point. We'll just have to
see where we go in the next few days.

QUESTION: Can you say what you thought of these
comments? Did you see them as a positive signal?

MR. REEKER: I will just say that we read them and we
are following up.

QUESTION: Sir, do you have a --

MR. REEKER: Yes?

QUESTION: Me?

MR. REEKER: Yes, you.

QUESTION: Oh, thank you, sir.

MR. REEKER: Please. Yeah.

QUESTION: Japanese News, Kyodo News. (Inaudible)
relating with this previous question, do you have any
sense of timing when the multilateral forum will be
held in the near future?

MR. REEKER: No. I couldn't give you any more
indication of next steps in terms of that.

QUESTION: And also, what kind of a formula are you
assuming to create the (inaudible) dialogue, such as
six-party, or eight-party, or ten-country or --

MR. REEKER: I don't think we should get ahead of
ourselves. I'm not assuming anything or making any
particular formulas at this point, but we'll let you
know when we have something more to give. Now, the
gentleman in the back, and then his partner behind
him.

QUESTION: You said of previous assurance in the
Northern Iraq in the Kirkuk and Mosul still ruled by
the Kurdish Peshmerga and they start attacking the
Turkomens and the Arabs, also, and the area, is the
tension is very high --

MR. REEKER: I'm afraid that doesn't reflect what the
reports that I have seen from the region. You may want
to check with the Defense Department on any specifics
of that, but my understanding is that coalition forces
are in charge there. It's what we were talking about
last week, and both in Kirkuk and Mosul.

QUESTION: And also, tomorrow's meeting, the political
meeting in tomorrows --

MR. REEKER: The meeting in Nasiriyah?

QUESTION: Yeah. Why don't you invited the Turkomans?
They are the ethnic, biggest group and other biggest
group?

MR. REEKER: As I indicated, I haven't given you any
great details of who was invited. I talked generally
about inviting a broad representation of people from
different groups, groups that were outside Iraq,
groups inside Iraq, and that this is the first in what
we expect to be a series of meetings in different
parts of the country. So, hopefully, all of those
meetings will be broadly representational because as
you know, one of the core elements of our vision for
the future of Iraq is that it have a representative
government that represents all the different ethnic
groups, religious groups, tribal groups.
That's going to be very important. That's a strength
that Iraq should build on, just as other countries
have built upon their diversity and that's what we
would hope for. So don't take this meeting as any
single symbol. This is a first meeting. It's an
important step. It's an opportunity for now-liberated
Iraqis to begin to add their voices to be heard from,
to share ideas on what they think about their future
and how they can move forward.

And now your friend behind you. Yes.

QUESTION: Do you have anything on the today's
telephone communication between Secretary of State
Colin Powell and the Foreign Minister of Greece
Georges Papandreou?

MR. REEKER: Well, as the Secretary mentioned this
morning when he came out and spoke to reporters, he
did speak with Foreign Minister Papandreou this
morning.
They talked about the issue of the safeguarding of
Iraqi antiquities and cultural property.

Greece, obviously, has a tremendous amount of
experience in the field of antiquities and cultural
property in restoring and some of those issues and
identifying that. There's some expertise involved.
And, of course, Foreign Minister Papandreou is also
speaking on behalf of the European Union, which has an
interest in this and, as you know, many of the centers
for trade in antiquities, or these types of cultural
property, maybe European cities and the European Union
will have an interest in this. That's why we've been
in touch with Interpol, that's why UNESCO will be
involved in trying to make sure that anything that's
been taken out of the country can be brought back,
because it belongs to the Iraqi people.

QUESTION: One more question, Mr. Reeker. The former
Secretary of State Lawrence Eagleburger under George
Bush, Sr., administration told the BBC today, "If
George Bush, Jr., decided he was going to turn the
troops loose on Syria and Iran, after that, he would
last in office for about 15 minutes. In fact, if
President Bush were to try that now, even I would
think that he ought to be impeached. You can not get
away with that sort of thinking in a democracy."

Any comment, or do you have anything on that?

MR. REEKER: I hadn't seen the remarks, but I hadn't
heard anybody make such a suggestion, either.

Wait, you have another colleague here? Yes?

QUESTION: Is NATO in danger of falling apart, or what
is its mission?

MR. REEKER: No, quite the contrary, I believe NATO is
going to expand; it's going to take in new members. We
introduced our own -- I don't know if we'd call is
legislation, but it was to the Congress, to amend the
treaty that will help us expand NATO with new members.
So NATO has an important role to be played. It's a
strong alliance, stronger than any alliance that I
think the planet has ever seen. And we will continue
to work very closely with all of our NATO allies.


[End]


Released on April 14, 2003

***********************************************************

See http://www.state.gov/p/nea/ci/c3212.htm for State
Department information on Iraq
************************************************************

To change your subscription, go to http://www.state.gov/www/listservs_cms.html

=====
Indigo Nights
[log in to unmask]

Looking for a Job?  Try Got Links?, Your One-Stop Portal
http://victorian.fortunecity.com/stanmer/414

__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
The New Yahoo! Search - Faster. Easier. Bingo
http://search.yahoo.com

=========================================================
Important Subscriber Information:

The Museum-L FAQ file is located at http://www.finalchapter.com/museum-l-faq/ . You may obtain detailed information about the listserv commands by sending a one line e-mail message to [log in to unmask] . The body of the message should read "help" (without the quotes).

If you decide to leave Museum-L, please send a one line e-mail message to [log in to unmask] . The body of the message should read "Signoff Museum-L" (without the quotes).