    [Public Papers of the Presidents of the United States: George W. Bush (2006, Book II)]
    [July 13, 2006]
    [Pages 1386-1393]
    [From the U.S. Government Publishing Office www.gpo.gov]

    The President's News Conference With Chancellor Angela Merkel of Germany in Stralsund
    July 13, 2006

        Chancellor Merkel. Ladies and gentlemen, I am delighted to be able
    to welcome the President of the United States here to Stralsund yet
    again. We had a lengthy conversation just now in the office of the
    mayor. We felt very much at home here in this beautiful city hall. We
    talked about all of the different issues on the global agenda.
        We shall later on see a little bit more of the countryside here, of
    the city itself. I am really pleased to be able to show to the President
    of the United States how matters have developed here, with some problems
    still existing but also what sort of problems we've coped with quite
    successfully. And it's such a great thing to have this lovely weather
    for our visits.
        Just now in our talks, we talked at great length about international
    issues. Unfortunately, there are quite a lot of problems that we need to
    deal with and for whose solution we feel responsible. The first and
    foremost on top of the agenda is certainly Iran. The international
    community actually submitted a very substantial, very fundamental offer
    to Iran, starting from the firm view that Iran should not be in
    possession of a nuclear weapon, but that, on the other hand, Iran should
    have--should know good development. So far we have not received any sort
    of reaction from the Iranian leadership as to how their position is on
    this offer.
        And this is why it was only consistent that yesterday the foreign
    ministers decided yet again to show clearly, also through a resolution
    in the U.N. Security Council, that should Iran not in any way reply to
    this offer and accept this offer, we unfortunately have to embark on a
    new course. The door has not been closed, but Iran must know that those
    who have submitted this offer are willing--and this is the success of
    yesterday's meeting--Russia, China, the E-3, and the United States of
    America,

    [[Page 1387]]

    all of them together are willing to act in concert and to show this
    clearly through their action in the Security Council.
        We also addressed the very disturbing situation in the Middle East,
    and it fills us with concern. And we have also stated clearly that
    everything needs to be done in order to come back to a peaceful
    resolution. We need to remind all of us again how this escalation
    started, with the kidnaping of a soldier, through rockets--for the
    firing of missiles against Israeli territory. And we can only urge all
    parties, appeal to all parties to stop, to cease violence, and to also
    release the kidnaped soldier and to stop this firing of missiles at
    Israeli territory.
        We would like to appeal to the powers in the region to see to it
    that further escalation is warded off and that, first and foremost, the
    root causes of this conflict are removed. And only in this way will a
    negotiating process become possible again. We have every interest in
    seeing the Lebanese Government be strengthened and this Government being
    able to pursue its policies in a sensible and secure environment.
        We also addressed matters of trade, global trade. Here we--and I'm
    saying this from a German perspective--have a common interest in seeing
    this world round be a successful one, this world trade round. But that
    means there has to be movement on all sides. And we're expecting a
    reasonable, sensible offer by the G-20, because this is where movement
    is necessary. Europe and others have submitted far-reaching proposals,
    and we would like to explore every possibility of these negotiations,
    but that means, as I said, movement on all sides. And here I see that
    the G-20 has to deliver.
        We also addressed those issues that will be on the agenda at the G-8
    in St. Petersburg. Here, first and foremost, energy policy, secure
    energy supply, was at the top of the agenda. We addressed African
    issues, Darfur and the Congo mission. We as Germans, as you know, have
    taken out a commitment as regards Congo. We also, however, see the
    situation in Darfur as a threatening one.
        We found that there is a lot that we agree on, as regards our common
    responsibilities, responsibilities that we see for the two of us the
    world over. And I, for one, think that as regards, for example, Iran,
    this responsibility ought to be shouldered by more and more countries--
    that goes for Russia; that goes for China. It will only be if we act in
    concert that we will be able to vanquish the tyrants, remove
    dictatorships, and contain those who sponsor terrorism. And Germany
    would like to give its contribution to that.
        President Bush. Chancellor, thank you very much. Thanks for the
    invitation. This is a beautiful part of the world, and Laura and I are so honored to come to your constituency and
    meet some of the friendly people who live here. I remember you coming to
    the Oval Office, and you said, ``If you are coming to Germany, this is
    the part of Germany I want you to see.'' And now I can see why you
    suggested it. I'm looking forward to the feast you're going to have
    tonight. I understand I may have the honor of slicing the pig.
        We had a good discussion--it's more than a discussion; it's really a
    strategy session, is the way I'd like to describe it. We talked about a
    lot of subjects. We talked about the Middle East and Iran, and I briefed
    the Chancellor on North Korea. We talked about Iraq and Afghanistan as
    well.
        But when we talked about the issues, it's important for you to
    understand, we're really trying to figure out how to work together to
    solve problems. And I appreciate--appreciate the Chancellor's judgment a
    lot. It's an interesting conversation, you know, when you toss out what
    may seem to be a problem that's insoluble, and all of a sudden, two
    people start thinking about how to solve it, solve the problem. And
    that's what we're doing.
        You know, on the Iranian issue, for example, the last time that we
    were together,

    [[Page 1388]]

    we talked--spent a lot of time on Iran, and the Chancellor was wondering
    whether or not the United States would ever come to the table to
    negotiate with the Iranians. You made that pretty clear to me that you
    thought it was something--an option we ought to consider, which I did.
    And I made it clear to the Iranians that if they were to do what they
    said they would do, which is to stop enrichment in a verifiable fashion,
    we're more than pleased to come back to the table.
        There's no question that this issue can be solved diplomatically,
    and there's no question that it can be solved diplomatically with
    Germany and the United States strategizing as how to solve it. And I
    want to thank the Chancellor's leadership on this issue. It's really
    important for Europe to speak with one common voice. And it's important
    for Angela and myself to work with Vladimir Putin, which we will do at the G-8, to continue to encourage him
    to join us in saying to the Iranians loud and clear, ``We're not
    kidding; it's a serious issue. The world is united in insisting that you
    not have a nuclear weapons program.''
        We talked about the Israeli-Palestinian and the Israeli issues with
    Hizballah and our common desire to work together to help bring peace to
    that troubled region. My attitude is this: There are a group of
    terrorists who want to stop the advance of peace. And those of us who
    are peace-loving must work together to help the agents of peace--Israel,
    President Abbas, and others--to
    achieve their objective. You got to understand, when peace advances,
    it's in the terrorists' interests in some cases to stop it. And that's
    what's happening.
        We were headed toward the roadmap; things looked positive. And
    terrorists stepped up and kidnaped a soldier,
    fired rockets into Israel. Now we've got two more kidnapings up north.
    Hizballah doesn't want there to be peace. The militant arm of Hamas
    doesn't want there to be peace. And those of us who do want peace will
    continue to work together to encourage peace.
        We talked about North Korea. I assured the Chancellor that I'm
    committed to the six-party talks and that the five of us in the six-
    party talks will work to convince North Korea to come back to the table.
    I'm hopeful that we can get some U.N. action on North Korea.
        We did talk about Doha, the trade round, and it's--look, these trade
    rounds are difficult to negotiate with. We've all got our own interests,
    but the good news is, we do share a common desire to open up markets.
    Germany is a great exporter. It's in Germany's interest that tariffs be
    reduced around the world. It's in our interests that tariffs be reduced
    around the world. And I committed to what I told the world back last
    September: We will reduce agricultural subsidies. But all we want is
    fair treatment when it comes to market access.
        I'm optimistic we can still get something done on the Doha round.
    It's going to take work, but G-8 is a good place for us to continue the
    dialog, and we will.
        And I guess that's about all--we discussed a lot of things, in other
    words. And thank you for having me. I'm looking forward to that pig
    tonight. [Laughter]
        I'll be glad to answer a couple of questions. Do you want to start
    her off?

    Iran

        Q. Chancellor, you spoke about charting a new course as regards a
    response to the Iranian conflict. What new course will that be? You
    talked about the results of the foreign ministers' meeting where they
    will appeal to the Security Council. What sort of action will there be?
    Again, just a resolution that only demands certain things, or is the
    objective a resolution that will then actually threaten sanctions of a
    specific nature? This question is also addressed to the President.
        Chancellor Merkel. Well, essentially what we're talking about here
    is not a totally

    [[Page 1389]]

    new process; it's just another phase. We have waited patiently whether
    Iran will examine this offer and in which way it will react. So far we
    have not had any sort of reliable reaction. And for us, the precondition
    for talks has always been suspension of the enrichment activities, and a
    precondition for talks has always been, well, we will then, under the
    circumstances, not react with sanctions. But through this common action,
    we are now making clear, because we are not receiving a reply, that
    there will be a concerted action and that there will be specific steps.
    And we're defining what steps these will be if Iran continues to let us
    wait with its response.
        So we wanted to demonstrate yet again that the international
    community is willing to show resolve to pursue this strategy further in
    every direction. Iran has received a proposal that I think is a very
    substantive one, a very good one, one that is good for the development
    of its own country, of its own interests--is in its own interests. But
    if Iran should not reply, if they think they can prevaricate in the hope
    of the international community being split, then this proves them wrong.
    And this is why I am so happy about the conclusion of that meeting of
    the foreign ministers.
        President Bush. This notion that the Iranians must understand that
    they can't wait us out and can't hope to split a coalition--and so the
    first step is to go to the United Nations and speak with as common a
    voice as possible.
        Your question really is, how fast should the process move along? And
    my attitude is, the answer to that is, it should move as fast as
    necessary to make it effective, which is a nonanswer, admittedly. But
    the truth of the matter is, diplomacy takes a lot of work, and there are
    different interests involved here. We do share a common goal of no
    nuclear weapon and no program. And by the way, we've already sanctioned
    Iran, so we've got a different position than others. It's easy for me to
    espouse sanctions, since it's already a fait accompli. But we understand
    other nations have got--there's a pace to this diplomacy. And I assured
    the Chancellor that the United States will continue to work to make sure
    the process is steady as it moves forward.
        The key first step is--common goal, which is no nuclear weapon or
    program--and united message to the Iranians. I truly think they're
    trying to wait us out. They think it's a matter of time before people
    lose their nerve or a matter of time before different interests are able
    to influence the process. And I think they're going to be sorely
    mistaken. I think they're going to be disappointed that this coalition
    is a lot firmer than they think.
        It is in our interests to make sure they don't have a weapon. It
    would be dangerous if the Iranians had a nuclear weapon. And that's a
    recognizable fact now. So I appreciate the Chancellor's position on
    this.
        Yes, Terry.

    Russia

        Q. Madam Chancellor, Mr. President--Terry Hunt with the AP
    [Associated Press]. Looking ahead to St. Petersburg, I'd like to ask
    you, do you think that Russia is honoring human rights and democratic
    freedoms and has a responsible approach to energy security?
        And, Mr. President, were you surprised by President Putin replying
    to Vice President Cheney's criticism, saying that it was an
    ``unsuccessful hunting shot?''
        President Bush. Did I think it was a clever response? It was pretty
    clever. Actually, quite humorous--not to dis my friend the Vice
    President. I don't know, do you want to start
    with this? I'd be glad to--[laughter]. No, I think our job is to
    continually remind Russia that if she wants to do--have good relations,
    that she ought to share common values with us. We share common values;
    free press is a common value we share. And I've expressed my opinion to
    President Putin. You might remember my
    visit with him in Slovakia where I was quite

    [[Page 1390]]

    pointed in my concerns about whether or not there is a free and vibrant
    press in Russia. We share concerns about the ability for people to go to
    the town square and express their opinions and whether or not dissent is
    tolerated, whether or not there's active political opposition.
        And so I will continue to carry that message. My own view of dealing
    with President Putin, though, is that
    nobody really likes to be lectured a lot, and if you want to be an
    effective person, what you don't go is scold the person publicly all the
    time; that you remind him where we may have a difference of opinion, but
    you do so in a respectful way, so you can then sit down and have a
    constructive dialog.
        And that's exactly how I'm going to continue my relations with
    President Putin. I'll be firm about my
    belief in certain democratic institutions; I'll be firm in my belief
    about the need for there to be an active civil society, and NGOs should
    be allowed to function in Russia without intimidation. But I'm also
    going to be respectful of the leader of an important country. And I may
    not tell you exactly what I talked to him about in private, and I would
    hope that he wouldn't tell you what he talks to me about in private.
        But, yes, we've got issues. Listen, we've got common problems that
    we need to work together to solve--North Korea and Iran are two. And
    we've also got--I hope he continues to understand that it's in his
    country's interest to implement the values that Germany and Russia--
    Germany and the United States share.
        Chancellor Merkel. Well, first, as to the issue of energy security,
    I can safely say that, looking at Germany over the past few decades,
    Russia has always proved to be a reliable supplier of energy. They have
    always abided by the treaties that we signed. But we would wish--and
    I've addressed this with the Russian President--that they actually bring
    the energy charter to its completion, that is to say, commit themselves
    to it, because then we would have a greater degree of certainty and
    security that we understand our common commitments on this.
        As regards--a strategic link between Russia and Europe obviously is
    of tremendous importance. It's important because we need energy supplies
    from Russia. And this is why we shall work towards Russia accepting that
    charter, that energy charter, so that we get a legitimate charter that
    is also based on contracts. But again, it has to be said that Russia has
    always been a reliable supplier.
        As to democracy and human rights, during my visit to Russia, I met
    with a number of representatives of nongovernmental organizations. We
    discussed what is desirable, what ought to be there as regards Russia's
    further development, and what needs to be addressed, time and again. And
    let me tell you that I talked to the President about these issues.
        I think also we ought to have an open, confidential dialog. We
    should not, sort of, speak loudly and in public about certain issues;
    that we have different ideas about how a pluralist society, a democratic
    society ought to work; that there ought to be a strong opposition is
    certainly one of the realities of life. There are differences of opinion
    between Russia and the European Union. We would wish for Russia to
    embark on a path that leads to a lively and very pluralistic political
    landscape, that they enter into a dialog with their civil society, which
    is at yet not there, for many reasons.
        But we would like to share with them, also, the experience that
    we've made with democracy, that pluralism in a democracy, last but not
    least, actually enhances stability in a country. And that is an
    experience that we have made, and that is a very strong force which
    drives reform processes forward. For example, we've seen that in German
    unity. It's sometimes complicated to bring those decisionmaking
    processes forward in a democracy, but then you receive the necessary
    legitimacy. And that is the experience that informs us in our talks.

    [[Page 1391]]

    Situation in the Middle East

        Q. A question addressed to you both. You talked about the Middle
    East, and what is your assessment of the military action of Israel in
    Lebanon? The French Foreign Minister already said it is
    disproportionate. Does that give you cause for Europe or the United
    States to intervene?
        And apart from the pig, Mr. President, what sort of insights have
    you been able to gain as regards East Germany? [Inaudible]
        Chancellor Merkel. Neither have I, but apparently a camera team was
    there when it was shot. So apparently it is already there, physically.
    [Laughter] I hope it's actually already roasting; otherwise, we won't be
    able to eat it tonight.
        Well, as to the violence in the Middle East, particularly as regards
    Lebanon, I think that one needs to be very careful to make a clear
    distinction between the root causes and the consequences of something.
    So we started here from a case of kidnaping of a soldier, and one of the
    other root causes, also, is the activity of Hizballah. And it's most
    important for the Israeli Government to be strengthened, but it is also
    clearly shown that these incursions, such as the kidnaping of soldiers,
    is not acceptable.
        And the parties to that conflict obviously have to use proportionate
    means, but I am not at all for, sort of, blurring the lines between the
    root causes and the consequences of an action. There has to be a good
    reaction now, not from the Israeli Government but from those who started
    these attacks in the first place.
        President Bush. ----to help calm the situation, we've got diplomats
    in the region. Secretary of State Rice, who
    is here, is on the phone talking to her counterparts. I'll be making
    calls.
        I gave you my initial impression earlier, and that is that it's a
    sad situation where--when there is a very good chance for there to be a
    two-state solution enacted--that is, two states living side by side in
    peace--it's really sad where people are willing to take innocent life in
    order to stop that progress. As a matter of fact, it's pathetic.
        And having said that, Israel has a right to defend herself. Every
    nation must defend herself against terrorist attacks and the killing of
    innocent life. It's a necessary part of the 21st century.
        Secondly, we--whatever Israel does, though, should not weaken the
    Siniora Government in Lebanon. We're concerned
    about the fragile democracy in Lebanon. We've been working very hard
    through the United Nations and with partners to strengthen the democracy
    in Lebanon. The Lebanese people have democratic aspirations, which is
    being undermined by the actions and activities of Hizballah.
        Thirdly, Syria needs to be held to account. Syria is housing the
    militant wing of Hamas. Hizballah has got an active presence in Syria.
    The truth of the matter is, if we really want there to be--the situation
    to settle down, the soldiers need to be returned, and President Asad needs to show some leadership toward peace.
        To answer your question about involvement, we will be involved
    diplomatically and are involved diplomatically.
        Steve [Steve Holland, Reuters].

    Iran

        Q. Thank you, sir. Just to follow up----
        President Bush. Follow up on?
        Q. On both of these. Does it concern you that the Beirut Airport has
    been bombed? And do you see a risk of triggering a wider war?
        And on Iran, they've so far refused to respond. Is it now past the
    deadline, or do they still have more time to respond?
        President Bush. I thought you were going to ask me about the pig.
        Q. I'm curious about that too. [Laughter]
        President Bush. The pig? I'll tell you tomorrow after I eat it.
        The Iranian issue is--will be taken to the U.N. Security Council. We
    said that

    [[Page 1392]]

    we have--to the Iranians, we said, ``Here's your chance to move forward,
    and we'd like a response in a reasonable period of time.'' And we meant
    what we said. One of the important things about moving toward the
    Security Council, it shows that when we say something, we mean it. In
    order for--to help solve these problems, you just can't say things and
    not mean it. And so when we spoke, we said, reasonable period of time--
    weeks, not months--that's what we explained to the Iranians. They
    evidently didn't believe us. And so now we're going to go to the
    Security Council, and we're united in doing that.
        Q. Their deadline has passed----
        President Bush. Their deadline passed, right. That's why we're going
    to the U.N. Security Council.
        Q. ----have time?
        President Bush. Oh, they've got plenty of time. I mean, the U.N.
    Security Council--they've got time to react. They've got time to make a
    decision. By the way, it's their choice. We've made our choice. It's the
    Iranian choice. And as Angela mentioned, there was an offer put on the
    table, a reasonable offer, for them to make the choice as to the way
    forward.
        And our choice is, look, we want to have relations with you, but
    you're not going to have a weapon or the capacity to make a weapon. It
    would be incredibly dangerous if we--5 years from now, Iran shows up
    with a nuclear weapon and threatens people in the neighborhood, and
    they're going to say, ``Where were you? What were you doing during that
    period of time?'' And that's what we're working on.
        And so time--when we said, weeks, not months, we meant it. And now
    we're heading to the U.N. Security Council. They can show up any time
    and say, ``Wait a minute. Now we'd like to go back and negotiate, now--
    take a look at the interests.'' We're not precluding any further
    negotiations with the Iranians.
        In order for us to come to the table, however, what they must do is
    verifiably show that they're not enriching, like they said they would do
    earlier. This is not a--this is not a new statement by them. They agreed
    to this in Paris. All we're asking them to do is to honor what they said
    they would do in the past in a verifiable fashion.
        The rest of your four-part question?

    Situation in the Middle East

        Q. Sorry about that, sir.
        President Bush. That's okay. It just--it's a bad habit.
        Q. Does the Beirut--the attack on the Beirut Airport, does that
    concern you, and are you concerned about triggering a wider Middle East
    war?
        President Bush. As I mentioned, my biggest concern is whether or not
    actions taken will weaken the Siniora
    Government. Democracy in Lebanon is an important part of laying a
    foundation for peace in that region. We have worked really hard to get
    Syria out of Lebanon--U.N. Resolution 1559 and its followup, Resolution
    1680, were manifestations of the work of the international community to
    get Syria out of Lebanon. We've always felt that a democracy in Lebanon
    is important for the Lebanese people, and it's important for the region.
        So the concern is that any activities by Israel to protect herself
    will weaken that Government. And we have made that--or topple that
    Government--and we've made it clear in our discussions.
        Having said all that, people need to protect themselves. There are
    terrorists who will blow up innocent people in order to achieve tactical
    objectives. In this case, the objective is to stop the advance of
    peace--which is a remarkable statement, isn't it--willing to kill to
    stop peace.
        We have a good chance to get a two-state solution, two democracies
    living side by side in peace. It is a clear and achievable vision. There
    is a way forward called the roadmap to achieve that vision. What will
    prevent that vision from being achieved

    [[Page 1393]]

    is--are terrorist activities, and that's what you're seeing taking
    place.
        Thank you all.
        Chancellor Merkel. Thank you.

    Note: The President's news conference began at 12:34 p.m. in the Town
    Hall. In his remarks, he referred to President Vladimir V. Putin of
    Russia; President Mahmoud Abbas of the Palestinian Authority; Gilad
    Shalit, an Israeli soldier captured and held captive by militants in
    Gaza since June 25; Prime Minister Fuad Siniora of Lebanon; Ehud
    Goldwasser and Eldad Regev, Israeli soldiers captured and held captive
    by militants in Lebanon since July 12; and President Bashar al-Asad of
    Syria. A reporter referred to Minister of Foreign Affairs Philippe
    Douste-Blazy of France. Chancellor Merkel spoke in German, and her
    remarks were translated by an interpreter.