[Public Papers of the Presidents of the United States: George W. Bush (2004, Book I)]
[June 28, 2004]
[Pages 1144-1151]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office www.gpo.gov]
The President's News Conference With Prime Minister Tony Blair of the United Kingdom in Istanbul
June 28, 2004
Transfer of Sovereignty in Iraq
President Bush. Good afternoon. Earlier today, 15 months after the
liberation of Iraq, and 2 days ahead of schedule, the world witnessed
the arrival of a free and sovereign Iraqi Government. Iraqi officials
informed us that they are ready to assume power, and Prime Minister
Allawi believes that making this transition now
is best for his country. After decades of brutal rule by a terror
regime, the Iraqi people have their country back.
This is a day of great hope for Iraqis and a day that terrorist
enemies hoped never to see. The terrorists are doing all they can to
stop the rise of a free Iraq. But their bombs and attacks have not
prevented Iraqi sovereignty, and they will not prevent Iraqi democracy.
Iraqi sovereignty is a tribute to the will of the Iraqi people and the
courage of Iraqi leaders.
This day also marks a proud moral achievement for members of our
coalition. We pledged to end a dangerous regime, to free the oppressed,
and to restore sovereignty. We have kept our word.
Fifteen months ago, Saddam's regime was
an enemy of America and the civilized world. Today Iraq's Government is
an ally of both. Fifteen months ago, Iraq was a state sponsor of
terrorism. Today Iraq's leaders, with our support, are systematically
fighting terrorists across their country. Fifteen months ago, we faced
the threat of a dictator with a history of using weapons of mass
destruction. Today the dictator is a threat to no one, from the cell he
now occupies. Fifteen months ago, the regime in Baghdad was the most
aggressive in the Middle East and a constant source of fear and alarm
for Iraq's neighbors. Today Iraq threatens no other country, and its
democratic progress will be an example to the broader Middle East.
Fifteen months ago, Iraq was ruled by a regime that brutalized and
tortured its own people, murdered hundreds of thousands, and buried them
in mass graves. Today Iraqis live under a Government that strives for
justice, upholds the rule of law, and defends the dignity of every
citizen.
Iraq today still has many challenges to overcome. We recognize that.
But it is a world away from the tormented, exhausted, and isolated
country we found last year. Now the transfer of sovereignty begins a new
phase in Iraq's progress toward full democracy. Together with the Iraqi
Government, we're moving forward on every element of our five-part plan
for Iraqi self-government.
Iraq's interim government has gained broad international support and
has been endorsed by the U.N. Security Council. The United States and
our coalition partners are helping prepare Iraqis for the defense of
their own country, and we appreciate NATO's decision to approve Prime
Minister Allawi's request for assistance in
training Iraqi security forces--in training the Iraqi security forces.
We're helping Iraqis rebuild their country's infrastructure, and Iraq
will move--continue moving toward free elections, with important
assistance from the United Nations.
All this progress is being attacked by foreign terrorists and by
thugs from the fallen regime. The terrorists know they face defeat
unless they break the spirit and commitment of the civilized world. The
civilized world will not be frightened or intimidated. And Iraq's new
leaders have made their position clear: Prime Minister Allawi recently said that ``The insurgents are trying to
destroy our country, and we're not going to allow this.''
[[Page 1145]]
The struggle is, first and foremost, an Iraqi struggle. The Prime
Minister said of his people, ``We're prepared to
fight and, if necessary, die for these objectives.'' America, Great
Britain, our coalition respect that spirit, and the Iraqi people will
not stand alone.
The United States military and our coalition partners have made a
clear, specific, and continuing mission in Iraq. As we train Iraqi
security forces, we'll help those forces to find and destroy the
killers. We'll protect infrastructure from the attacks. We'll provide
security for the upcoming elections. Operating in a sovereign nation,
our military will act in close consultation with the Iraqi Government.
Yet coalition forces will remain under coalition command. Iraq's Prime
Minister and President have told me that their goal is to eventually take full
responsibility for the security of their country, and America wants
Iraqi forces to take that role. Our military will stay as long as the
stability of Iraq requires and only as long as their presence is needed
and requested by the Iraqi Government.
Today, at the moment sovereignty was transferred, the mission of the
Coalition Provisional Authority came to an end. Ambassador Jerry
Bremer has been tireless and
dedicated, and he returns home with the thanks of his country. Thousands
of American civilians have labored for progress in Iraq under difficult
and sometimes dangerous conditions. They also have our gratitude.
From the first hours of Operation Iraqi Freedom and to this very
hour, in their battles against the terrorists, America's men and women
in uniform have been unrelenting in the performance of their duty.
They've had staunch allies, like Great Britain, at their side. We asked
a lot of our military, and there's still much hard work ahead. We're
grateful for the sacrifice of all who've served. We honor the memory of
all who've died. The courage of our military has brought us to this
hopeful day, and the continued service of our military assures the
success of our cause.
In Iraq, we're serving the cause of liberty, and liberty is always
worth fighting for. In Iraq, we're serving the cause of peace by
promoting progress and hope in the Middle East as the alternative to
stagnation and hatred and violence for export. In Iraq, we're serving
the cause of our own security, striking the terrorists where we find
them, instead of waiting for them to strike us at home.
For all these reasons, we accepted a difficult task in Iraq, and for
all these reasons, we will finish that task.
Mr. Prime Minister.
Prime Minister Blair. Thank you, Mr. President.
Today is, obviously, an important staging post on the journey of the
people of Iraq towards a new future, one in which democracy replaces
dictatorship, in which freedom replaces repression, and of which all the
people of Iraq can look forward to the possibility and the hope of an
Iraq that genuinely guarantees a future for people from whatever part of
Iraq they come.
I think it's just worth reflecting for a moment on what we now have
before us, because today, of course, is extremely important. It's the
transfer of real and full sovereignty to the people and the Government
of Iraq. From now on, the coalition changes. We are there in support of
the Iraqi Government and the Iraqi people.
And what you have very clearly, therefore, is on one side you have
the Iraqi Government, the Iraqi people, the international community that
has now spoken through the United Nations, who want a free, stable,
pluralist, democratic Iraq. And on the other hand you have some of the
former Saddam supporters; you have outside terrorists; you have fanatics
and extremists of one sort or another who want to stop the possibility
of that new Iraq happening.
And of course, it's going to carry on being difficult and dangerous.
There was
[[Page 1146]]
the tragic loss of a British soldier today, and many American servicemen
have died. Many Iraqi civilians have died. Many of those who are joining
up to the new Iraqi security services have died, have given their lives.
But they've all given their lives in the cause of trying to provide a
different and better future for the people of Iraq.
And I think what is interesting about this situation is that for
those people who are there in Iraq causing this death and destruction,
they have a very, very clear and simple objective. And the objective is
not just to destabilize Iraq, to produce chaos, to produce bloodshed, to
try and prevent democracy. The strategy of these terrorists is to try
and prevent Iraq becoming a symbol of hope not just for the Iraqi people
but, actually, for that region and the wider world.
And that is why, in a very real sense, because Al Qaida and other
terrorist groups are actually there in Iraq now, what is happening in
Iraq, the battle in Iraq, the battle for Iraq and its future, if you
like, is, in a genuine sense, the frontline of the battle against
terrorism and the new security threat that we face.
And that security threat is what has dominated our discussion here
at the NATO summit. And that security threat, which is about this new
and poisonous and evil form of extremism linked to a perversion of the
true faith of Islam and repressive, unstable states that proliferate in
and deal in chemical, biological, nuclear weapons--that security threat
is the threat of our times.
And the reason why it is so important that NATO fulfills its
functions in respect of Afghanistan and Iraq is that in both those
countries, the same struggle for democracy and freedom is going on. And
you can see in Afghanistan--yes, of course, there are still tremendous
difficulties--but 2\1/2\ million refugees have returned there; girls are
now allowed to go to school--several million of them at school were
banned from school under the Taliban; economic growth rates of 30
percent last year, 20 percent this year.
What is the struggle? The struggle in Afghanistan is the struggle
between the majority of Afghans, 4 million of whom have already
registered to vote, against Taliban elements, Al Qaida elements, people
who want to drag the country backwards, who want to turn it back into a
failed and repressive state.
And so that's why it's right for NATO to step up to the mark today
and say, ``We are going to extend the role of the security force.'' It's
quite right for us to say, as the U.K., ``We will make a contribution in
putting the ARRC force forward in 2006 to allow NATO to continue with
its responsibilities.'' It's why it's right for us to look at the
measures we need urgently in order to give the protection for the
Afghans as they approach their September election date.
And in respect to Iraq, exactly the same issues arise. As I say,
there again--you have people trying to get towards freedom and democracy
and people trying to stop them. And so our job's got to be, again as an
international community, to give them help. And that's why it's
important that NATO helps with the training of the Iraqi security
forces.
And everybody knows that ultimately we can be there in support, but
as the Iraqis themselves will tell you, they know that ultimately their
task, their responsibility is to make their country safe. And they want
us to help. So that's what we're going to do, help with the training and
equipping of the Iraqi security forces.
Just one final point I want to make. I thought we had an interesting
set of discussions this morning and at lunch today. But there was a very
powerful speech that was made by the President of Latvia at our lunch
today when we were discussing the question of what NATO should do to
help Afghanistan and Iraq. And I think it's sometimes a very useful
reminder for some of the newest democracies in our world
[[Page 1147]]
to tell us, from a standpoint of immense moral force, just what
democracy means to people who have faced repression for so many years.
And she made a very powerful intervention that reminded us and reminded
me, certainly, again, of what it is we are here to do. We know the
security threat we face. We know the ultimate answer to it is not just
force of arms and security measures; it is ultimately the values of
democracy and freedom and justice and the rule of law. And that's what
we're trying to do.
And for NATO, after the end of the cold war, after all the changes
that have happened, I think it has its role today. It is to support that
process of transition and change, the world over, because ultimately our
best guarantee of security lies in the values that are not values that
are American or British or Western values but the values of humanity.
Thank you.
President Bush. We'll answer a couple of questions. Dick [Richard
Keil, Bloomberg News], you got a question?
Q. I do, Mr. President.
President Bush. Why don't you ask it?
Possibility of Martial Law in Iraq
Q. Mr. President, Iraq's new Prime Minister has talked in recent
days about the possibility of imposing martial law there as a way of
restoring security. Is that something that you think a new, emerging
Government should do, and particularly with the use of U.S. forces, who
would have to be instrumental in doing it?
President Bush. You know, Prime Minister Allawi has fought tyranny. He's a guy that stood up to Saddam
Hussein. He's a patriot, and every
conversation I've had with him has been one the recognizes human
liberty, human rights. I mean, he's a man who is willing to risk his
life for a democratic future for Iraq.
Having said that, he may take tough security measures to deal with
Zarqawi, but he may have to. Zarqawi is
the guy who beheads people on TV. He's the person that orders suiciders
to kill women and children. And so Prime Minister Allawi, as the head of a sovereign Government, may decide he's
going to have to take some tough measures to deal with a brutal,
coldblooded killer. And our job is to help the Iraqis stand up forces
that are able to deal with these thugs.
I mean, it's tough; there's no question about it. Look, they can't
whip our militaries. They can't whip our militaries. What they can do is
get on your TV screens and stand in front of your TV cameras and cut
somebody's head off, in order to try to cause us to cringe and retreat.
That's their strongest weapon. And we just--as Prime Minister
Allawi has said publicly many times, he will not
cower in the face of such brutal murder, and neither will we--neither
will we.
Prime Minister Blair. I think you've got to distinguish very
carefully between two separate things. The first is, undoubtedly, the
new Iraqi Government will want to take tough security measures. They
have to. They've got a situation where they've got these terrorists who
are prepared to kill any number of innocent people. And remember, the
innocent Iraqis who are dying in Iraq today are dying because of these
terrorist acts.
On the other hand, I know perfectly well from the discussions I've
had not just with the Prime Minister but with the other Iraqi ministers,
their purpose is to take tough security measures but in order to
guarantee freedom for people, not to take it away. So they're not going
to be wanting to introduce martial law that takes away the basic
freedoms of the people. On the contrary, they will be wanting to take
tough security measures, and we will want to help train their forces
able to guard and get after the people doing this killing. But it's not
going to be about taking away people's freedoms. It's going to be about
allowing those freedoms to happen.
Andy.
[[Page 1148]]
Iraqi Government Action Against Terror/Germany and France
Q. Andrew Martin, BBC. Could I ask both leaders, following on from
that, do we, in some sense, then give the new Iraqi administration carte
blanche to go after these people? The Iraqi Defense Minister was talking
this morning about hunting down and eliminating the insurgents. And if I
could also just ask, do you now regard Germany and, in particular,
France as shoulder to shoulder alongside you, after the difficult times
you've had with them over the past 18 months?
Prime Minister Blair. On the first point, I don't think there's any
question of the Iraqis--no Iraqi minister has said this to me, of
wanting to hunt people down, in the sense of kill people without a
proper trial and end up taking away people's basic liberties. They don't
want that at all. But you've got to understand what they're faced with
there. They're faced with a group of people who will kill any number of
people and who will do the most terrible acts of barbarity. And why--in
order to stop them getting a democratic and stable country.
As I keep saying to people, there are lots of things that we thought
might happen as a result of the conflict in Iraq. I mean, we were
confident of military victory. But there were lots of things that we
thought might happen. We thought there might be a humanitarian crisis,
and we made a lot of provisions for that. We thought that maybe--and we
were told this by many people, many so-called experts who said, ``Well,
the Iraqis, they'll want a theological state. They won't want a proper
democracy.'' These issues have actually either been dealt with or
resolved themselves.
What we've got is a very simple problem to describe and a
complicated problem to overcome. We have groups of terrorists and
insurgents who will use suicide bombs, who do not care in the least
about killing innocent people, who will do whatever it takes to stop the
country functioning properly.
Now, in those circumstances, I don't blame at all the Iraqi
ministers--any of us would be doing this, as politicians in the same
situation--of wanting to get after those people and hunt them down. But
they're not getting after them and hunting them down in defiance of
basic freedoms but in order to help basic freedoms. And so I don't think
we should set this new thing away that somehow the new Iraqi Government
wants to--somehow wants to put aside democracy and freedom and all the
rest of it. The reason they're trying to stop the terrorists is so that
democracy and freedom can flourish in Iraq.
Secondly, in relation to France and Germany, look, I mean, there's
no point in thinking--we haven't overcome the disagreement there was
about whether the conflict was justified. I mean, there's no point in us
standing here and saying, ``All the previous disagreements have
disappeared.'' They haven't. On the other hand, what is important is
you've got a United Nations resolution that has blessed the new
Government in Iraq, and you've got a situation in which we have accepted
today that there is a good and sound NATO role, which is actually the
only role we ever sought for NATO, of training and helping to train the
Iraqis so that they can do their own security work, which is the request
that they have made to us. And in that sense, I think the international
community has come together, and I welcome it.
President Bush. Yes, my sense is, is that there's a hope that we
succeed with all the nations sitting around the table. Everybody
understands the stakes. And the stakes are high, particularly for those
of us who recognize that the long-term defeat of terror will happen when
freedom takes hold in the broader Middle East. It's a long-term
solution.
And if you really think about what's happened since September the
11th, there's been some amazing progress. Pakistan has now joined the
battle against Al Qaida. President Musharraf has made a concerted
[[Page 1149]]
decision to go after Al Qaida, which hides in remote regions of his
country on the Afghanistan border. Libya has declared and produced its
weapons programs that we're now destroying. You know, Turkey is solid.
There's a solid democracy here in the broader Middle East which is a
great example.
Afghanistan, which was a terrorist haven--this is where the
terrorists plotted and trained to come and kill, not only in America but
elsewhere--is now heading toward elections. Who ever thought Afghanistan
was going to have elections? Three years ago you said, ``Gosh, you think
Afghanistan is going to have elections,'' I probably would have said,
``No.'' And so is Iraq--Iraq is headed towards elections too. It's
substantial change in a quick period of time. And I think everybody
sitting around the table is hopeful that democracy will serve as an
agent of change in this part of the world.
In terms of hunting them down, look, I think the Iraqis understand
what we know, that the best way to defend yourself is to go on the
offense and find the killers before they kill. I presume that's what
he was saying; I haven't
asked him his language. I have sometimes used that language myself. And
I've used it because my most solemn duty is to defend my country, is to
defend it from people that obviously are willing to kill innocent life
just like that. And my position is, is the best way to defend yourself
is to find the few, the few--and I believe that's what he's saying--that
we're going to find those few before they continue to bomb whoever
happens to be in their way. And we'll support him. We'll help him.
Let's see--Jim [Jim Angle, FOX News].
Opposition to Coalition Action in Iraq
Q. We were reminded by the anniversary of D-day that 60 years ago it
took an massive invasion to end the occupation of France and other
European nations. Now, in Iraq, the coalition has gladly and willingly
returned sovereignty to the Iraqis. And I wonder, is there any sign that
this has changed the views of your more skeptical NATO brethren, any
evidence that the critics are now persuaded to the view that you both
argued, that it was, in fact, a liberation? Or at this point, does it
matter to each of you what the critics say?
President Bush. Yes, it matters to me what you say. I mean, it
matters to me what--[laughter]--sorry. [Laughter] Just a little humor.
[Laughter] Yes, it matters. It matters because it is important for
nations that are blessed by freedom to come together to help nations
that are struggling to be free, and that's why it matters. The more
people participating in the process, the better off it is. The more
reconstruction there is, the more people willing to help with the
education of children, the more people willing to help rebuild
hospitals, the more people willing to help to rebuild this destroyed
infrastructure, infrastructure destroyed by the Taliban or by Saddam
Hussein, the better off the world will be.
And so, yes, the more people who say this is worthwhile, the more
likely it is 50 million people are going to realize the blessings that
we have, and the world will be better off for it.
And the examples of free societies in their neighborhoods are going
to make a huge difference in the lives of others. Listen, there are
people inside of Iran who are watching what's happening, young, vibrant,
professional people who want to be free, and they're wondering whether
or not they'll have that opportunity. And I think a free Iraq and a free
Afghanistan are going to set such a vibrant, bright example for others.
And so, yes, it matters. And I think people are beginning to see
that we were, in fact, liberators and that we're not only going to
liberate, we'll follow through, no matter how tough it gets on the
ground.
Prime Minister Blair. I think, speaking as someone with a largely
uncritical media--[laughter]--I think that, sure--I'm
[[Page 1150]]
not sure that we will have persuaded all our critics, no. But I think
that--I think it's just worth emphasizing the degree to which our own
strategy has evolved, post-September the 11th. Sometimes people talk
about this issue to do with international terrorism today as if somehow
it was because of what we have done in Afghanistan or Iraq that this
terrorist threat exists. This terrorist threat was building up there for
a long time. September the 11th did--and should have--changed our
thinking. And the way our strategy has evolved is that I think we know
now that it is important not simply to go in and get after the Taliban
in Afghanistan but also to say, ``No, we're going to do something else.
We're also going to give that country democracy and freedom, because
that is actually part of the battle against terrorism as well.''
And that's why it's important to see this as a whole picture. The
fact is, if Iraq becomes a stable and democratic country--and I'm not
underestimating for a single instant the difficulties in doing that,
incidentally--but if it does, that is a huge blow to the propaganda and
to the effort of the extremists. That's, in fact, why sometimes I think
they have a clearer idea of how important it is to stop us than
sometimes the Western world has of why it's so important that we get
there with Iraq and with the Iraqi people.
And so the Greater Middle East Initiative and the idea of spreading
democracy there, resolving the Israeli-Palestinian issue on the basis of
two states, both democratic states--because what we want for the
Palestinians is not just their own state; we want a democratic state for
them, where they have proper freedoms as well.
So I think that you can see this as part of an evolving strategy,
where we realize we've got to be prepared to take tough security
measures and tough action where necessary, but we know that that is not
all that it's about. It's also about trying to show that there is a
value system there that isn't related to any religion or one religion,
one civilization. It's about these basic values of humanity that,
wherever they're implemented and tried, you get greater security,
because basically democracies--well, they have to fight sometimes when
they have to defend themselves, but they don't have the same aggressive
intent that these unstable or extreme or fanatical regimes do.
So part of what we're trying to do--and yes, it's tough at the
moment, and of course, you get into a situation where people will fight
us very hard. That's in the nature of any of these struggles that you
undertake, but our honest belief is the world will be a safer place if
we're able to make this work. And I don't know whether we've convinced
people of this or not, but I do think--the one thing that interests me
is occasionally when people who opposed our action in Iraq will say,
``The really important thing now is to get those democratic elections.''
And I think that's fantastic, but let's be clear: We wouldn't be talking
about democratic elections in Iraq if Saddam was still there.
Timing of Transfer of Sovereignty in Iraq
Q. A question for both of you. How do you counter the impression
you've created today that you couldn't hand over the burden of Iraq
quickly enough and the way that it was done is proof, is a symbol, if
you like, of a shambles in Iraq?
Prime Minister Blair. It's a little bit tough there, Bill--I mean,
you know--[laughter].
President Bush. Well, let me try it then. You know that last Friday
we handed over the final ministry to the Iraqi interim government. In
other words, we have been making a transfer of sovereignty all along.
And the--actually, we've been contemplating this move for a while. But
the final decision was by Prime Minister Allawi,
and he thought it would strengthen his hand. And so that's why the
handover took place today, as opposed to 48 hours later. And so, not
only is there full sovereignty in the
[[Page 1151]]
hands of the Government, but all the ministries have been transferred,
and they're up and running.
I supported the decision. I thought it was a smart thing to do,
primarily because the Prime Minister was ready
for it. And it's a sign of confidence. It's a sign that we're ready to
go, and it's a proud moment--it really is--for the Iraqi people. And
frankly, I feel comfortable in making the decision, because I feel
comfortable about Prime Minister Allawi and President al-Yawr. These are strong people. They're gutsy.
They're courageous. They're, as we say in Texas, standup guys. You know,
they'll lead. They'll lead their people to a better day. And it's going
to be very hard for them and very trying, but they just--they and the
Iraqi people need to hear, loud and clear, they'll have our friendship
and our support, no matter how tough it gets.
Prime Minister Blair. I think it's worth just pointing out as well--
I agree, obviously, with what's just been said, but I think you've got
somewhere in the region of, is it 10 or 11 ministries that are already
effectively run by the Iraqis themselves. I mean, their health and
education ministries are already run by Iraqis. But it's a sign of their
confidence and their desire to get on with it. They want to do it. They
know that in the end, they've got to do it. They want that
responsibility.
And I think one of the exciting things about the last few weeks is
that the Iraqi people, in a sense, through their Prime Minister and
President, have indicated, ``We want the responsibility.'' Now, we then
stay and support, however, and we're not walking out of this at all. We
stay and support them, and we'll stay for as long as it takes to make
sure that that support is there for them, so that we help them to that
freedom and democracy they want to see. And it's a--I think that, in a
way, the relationship between us and the Iraqi Government has been--it's
a healthier, better relationship now that there's this transfer of
sovereignty there, and where they really want the responsibility of
running their own country. But they know the practical fact is, for the
moment, until their own security forces are built up properly, they need
our support, and they have our support.
President Bush. Thank you all very much.
Note: The President's news conference began at 4:55 p.m. at the Hilton
Istanbul. In his remarks, he referred to Prime Minister Ayad Allawi and
President Ghazi al-Ujayl al-Yawr of the Iraqi interim government; L.
Paul ``Jerry'' Bremer III, former Presidential Envoy to Iraq; former
President Saddam Hussein of Iraq; senior Al Qaida associate Abu Musab Al
Zarqawi; and President Pervez Musharraf of Pakistan. Prime Minister
Blair referred to President Vaira Vike-Freiberga of Latvia. A reporter
referred to Minister of Defense Hazim Qutran al-Khuzai al-Shalan of
Iraq.