[Weekly Compilation of Presidential Documents Volume 38, Number 15 (Monday, April 15, 2002)]
[Pages 589-597]
[Online from the Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]

<R04>
Interview With the Wall Street Journal

April 8, 2002

    Q. Thanks for doing this. This is really--I appreciate it a lot.
    The President. You bet.
    Q. It's a big event tomorrow for the Wall Street Journal.
    The President. Well, I understand--yes, I understand you're kind of 
changing your format.
    Q. Yes. It will look different, color.
    The President. What about the sketches? What happened to the poor 
sketches?
    Q. They'll still be there. You'll still get one.
    Counselor Karen Hughes. This is--journal----
    Q. Somewhat short.
    Q. Subdued color. Champagne, as they call it.
    The President. What is your job?
    Q. I'm the Washington bureau chief.
    The President. What is Al Hunt's job?
    Q. He's the executive Washington editor. I can't define that exactly 
for you; somebody else will have to do that for you.
    The President. Somebody upstairs somewhere.
    Q. He's the guy you have to worry about.
    The President. Good. That's why he's here. [Laughter]
    Q. It's a good day to be here. It's a good day to be talking to a 
former oil guy, actually.
    The President. Yes.

[[Page 590]]

Iraqi Oil Exports/Energy Policy

    Q. And I thought maybe we would start there. You saw what the Iraqis 
said today about cutting off oil exports.
    The President. Taking production off for a month?
    Q. Yes. And the Iranians and the Libyans have said similar things. 
Do you worry about some form of another Arab oil embargo or some form of 
oil embargo by some people?
    The President. Here's my thoughts on that. One, it means that we 
need an energy policy that encourages diversification away from places 
like Iraq. You know, the ANWR debate has been amazing to watch because 
of the amount of misinformation that has been laid out there. But the 
reason I bring up ANWR is because it just so happens that once 
production is up and running on a very small footprint in the middle of 
this vast country, we can produce as much oil as Iraq produces on the 
world market.
    A good energy policy is one that obviously encourages conservation 
and new technologies but is also one that helps America diversify away 
from sources of crude oil in places like Iraq. And I--the first I heard 
of this, I said this is a--justifies more than ever the call for 
exploration in areas where technology will allow us to do so in 
environmentally friendly ways.
    I also saw the response of other nations, nations that were willing 
to step up and increase production, and I appreciate that as well.
    My other reaction is that Saddam Hussein is willing to cut off 
production even though it affects his own people. It helps define the 
nature of this regime. I've told people as I've made the case for--about 
my strong feelings about Iraq, that this is a person who is willing to 
poison his own people. Now it looks like he's willing to cut off 
revenues so that he can't feed his own people. Anyway, I'm not--I mean, 
axis of evil.
    Q. You mentioned the statements by other countries. Did you--have 
you heard anything from Saudi Arabia? Did Secretary Powell hear from 
Saudi Arabia?
    The President. I haven't, not yet. He's, as a matter of fact, eating 
dinner with Crown Prince Abdullah as we speak. No, I just--I thought Ari 
told me that there had been some movement on the----
    Press Secretary Ari Fleischer. They said they're not going to follow 
a call for an embargo; OPEC has said that.
    Q. And in terms of--if you have Iraq, if you have Iran, possibly 
Libya, you still have a substantial effect on the market, couldn't it?
    The President. Well, it could, absolutely. There is excess supply, 
and we'll just see how it plays out. But to me, it indicates that--well, 
that's another reason why we've got to be very cautious about making 
bold predictions about the economy. We're an energy-dependent nation. 
And as a result, it's--you know, it points up to part of the fragility 
of our economy. In other words, when you're dependent, a price spike can 
affect growth, obviously.
    So I'm pleased with some of the progress being made, but as I told 
the folks there in this speech I just gave on terrorism insurance: You 
know, people can try all the numbers and prognostications and all they 
want; I'm the kind of fellow who believes that if somebody can't find 
work or is worried about their job, we've got a problem. And bad energy 
policy or the failure to have energy policy or the fact that we're 
dependent upon unstable countries is a reason why I am--do not believe 
that we're out of the economic woods yet.
    Q. Is what Iraq is doing, does it amount to a hostile act against 
the U.S.?
    The President. Well, I wouldn't call it a friendly gesture. It is--
you know, this is a man who obviously hates America. And he's not just 
affecting America, by the way; it's affecting countries--all countries. 
If, in fact, his action has the--is able to run the price of crude up, 
it's going to affect Europe; it's going to affect poor nations; it's 
going to affect poor people around the world. This is a guy who has 
tried to manipulate the market for short-term gain for the wrong reason, 
is a person who is unfriendly to all nations, as far as I'm concerned.
    Q. You would like a better energy policy; that's fine, and that's 
understandable. In the shorter term, if you've got a problem, there are 
some other options you can consider. You could think about SPROs out 
there.

[[Page 591]]

    The President. Could do that.
    Q. There are gas taxes that could be reduced. Either of those 
options appeal to you?
    The President. We'll look at all options. If, in fact, his threat--
look, we're the kind of people that deal with problems; that's what 
happens in the White House. You're dealt a problem, and we deal with it. 
And we'll look at all options. But let's--I think we need to be a little 
careful about predicting whether or not this man is going to have the 
effect he wants to have until----

President Saddam Hussein of Iraq

    Q. The effort to do something about Saddam Hussein has obviously 
been kind of put on hold while this Middle East situation gets sorted 
out. It could take a long time to sort out the Middle East situation. 
How long does it stay on hold?
    The President. Well, not necessarily.
    Q. Not necessarily----
    The President. I wouldn't--you made--repeat your question. I think 
you made a pretty strong assumption in your question.
    Q. Well, it's only based on the 20 years of history.
    The President. No, what did you just say, though--seriously, I'm not 
being critical. I'm just curious. Again, you just said my plans for Iraq 
have been placed on hold?
    Q. Yes. Is that incorrect?
    The President. Iraq is a problem, and again, another reason why it's 
a problem, we witnessed today. And we are constantly talking with our 
friends and allies about Iraq. I spent a great deal of time this weekend 
talking to Tony Blair about Iraq. As I've said, all options are on the 
table for Iraq, and that's about all I've--pretty much about all I'm 
going to say. I don't know what you meant by----
    Q. It would be wrong to say that your plans are on hold?
    The President. You see, I assume from your question that we're not 
really thinking about Iraq now, that somehow, because the Middle East 
has flared up, any thought about Iraq or keeping a coalition together on 
Iraq----
    Q. I was thinking more action rather than thought.
    The President. Well, I mean, we're looking at all options. And Iraq 
is an important country. By the way, chasing down the Al Qaida killers 
is still a priority, even though the Middle East has flared up. I'm in 
no hurry on a lot of issues. I'm a patient man; I'm a deliberate person. 
I understand we live in a world where people are constantly saying, 
``Gosh, after 6 months, how come this isn't over?'' Some people say 
that; most Americans don't feel that. They understand that we're in the 
long, long pull. So you've got to put everything in context.
    And the way I am, I'm a deliberate, patient man when it comes to 
conducting this war, thorough war, to defend our freedom. And I have 
said publicly that the idea of an Al Qaida terrorist network hooking up 
or matching up with or allied with--let me start over--``allied with,'' 
I think, is a more understandable word--a nation that has developed a 
weapon of mass destruction is a scenario that I will not leave our 
children saddled with, in other words.
    And again, my timeframe is longer rather than shorter. In other 
words, the fact that we haven't proved whether or not Saddam--or bin 
Laden is alive or dead or--he may be dead, may be alive, that fact just 
simply doesn't bother me. Because if he is alive, we're going to get him 
eventually, and if he's dead, that's fine, too.
    But we're making progress there, just quietly, steadily making 
progress. Abu Zubaydah is a very good example; for those of you who 
follow the Al Qaida network, you understand the significance of an Abu 
Zubaydah capture. And anyway, I don't know if I answered your question 
properly. In other words, it almost implied that things have to be 
immediate on all fronts; otherwise, there's not a focus. And that's just 
not the case.
    Q. Just as a prognostication----
    The President. Just as a hypothetical?
    Q. See, that's not what I was going to say. You can define it, I 
guess.
    The President. Okay.
    Q. Do you think if we're sitting here a year from now talking, 
Saddam Hussein is still going to be in power in Iraq?

[[Page 592]]

    The President. That's one of those hypotheticals. [Laughter] I'm not 
going to----

Gas Taxes

    Q. Let me go back to something I mentioned earlier, gas taxes. Any 
reason for Republicans to start thinking about rolling back some gas 
taxes at this point?
    The President. I think you're asking me--you're speculating on 
something that hasn't occurred yet.

Gas Prices

    Q. Just to follow up on that, though, how much of a--do you have any 
sense of how much of an increase in the price of oil or the price of gas 
we could see as a result of this?
    The President. No, I don't yet. I understand you all are trying to 
make news, but this is--this is a fresh statement by--so we've just got 
to see how the world reacts.
    But one thing is for certain: The fact that people are concerned 
points up the fact that we had better do something for the good of our 
country in terms of diversification of supply away from sources of crude 
oil in places like Iraq.

Israeli Withdrawal From Palestinian Territories

    Q. The other part of your Middle East problem today is obviously on 
the West Bank. You don't seem to have gotten much of a response.
    The President. Actually, there is some new news. IDF announced they 
were withdrawing out of two Israeli cities. What are the names of them, 
Steve?
    Deputy National Security Adviser Hadley. Tulkarm and Qalqilya.
    The President. Qalqilya. That's right. And that's a beginning. If 
responsible leaders want peace, they must--there are clear things that 
they must do. The Arabs must condemn and fight terrorism. They must cut 
off funding. They must stop propagandizing about the great heroic 
martyrdom of suicide killers. They must explain clearly that Israel has 
a right to exist and they intend, as leaders, to coexist with Israel in 
a peaceful way.
    The Israelis must continue withdrawal. I was very concerned that a 
point had been reached at which it would be very difficult to achieve 
peace. We want peace. We have laid out the vision for peace, and Israel 
has recognized the Palestinian state. Israel has signed on to Tenet and 
Mitchell, as has the PLO. And my point is that Israel has recognized the 
framework for peace, and it's time for her to start pulling out in order 
to allow all of us who care about peace to be able to work to get peace 
in the region.
    Q. Have you been told by the Israelis that this is a response, the 
beginning of a response to what you asked for in the last few days?
    The President. I have not been told that. All I can tell you is 
they're beginning to withdraw, at least from these two cities, as of an 
hour ago.
    Q. What did you think of the Prime Minister's speech to the Knesset? 
Have you had a chance to----
    The President. Today?
    Q. Yes.
    The President. I didn't see it. I had a--the only thing I've heard 
from him was, we had a good conversation on Saturday.
    Q. A good conversation?
    The President. Yes. I mean, it was good in the sense that he knows 
where I stand, and he heard my--it was a good, frank discussion, let me 
put it to you that way. Ari told me that the word was moving around that 
it was a very hostile conversation. It wasn't. It was just a very frank 
discussion about two leaders who are concerned about the region.
    Q. What he said today was basically--I don't know if I can get you 
the exact words--but, ``We're going to keep going until we're done.'' It 
didn't say when that was going to be.
    The President. I just can tell you they started pulling out of 
cities.
    Q. When you talked to him, or just in general, are there 
consequences if that doesn't continue?
    The President. It's going to continue.
    Q. Sorry?
    The President. I think it will continue.
    Q. The withdrawal?
    The President. I think he heard what I said, and I repeated it again 
today, prior to this news. And Colin Powell's mission is to continue to 
work to set the framework for

[[Page 593]]

political discussions, and part of that is for Israel to withdraw.

Secretary of State Powell's Visit to the Middle East

    Q. And as part of the Powell mission, do you anticipate him meeting 
with Arafat?
    The President. It depends on the circumstances at the time. He's got 
full latitude to do what he thinks is necessary to get the process 
headed toward a political settlement.

Chairman Yasser Arafat of the Palestinian Authority

    Q. And if Yasser Arafat does what sort of things between now and 
when Security Powell gets there, is that more likely to happen?
    The President. That's up to Powell. But obviously--listen, Yasser 
Arafat, as I've said--somebody asked me the other day, have I lost trust 
in him? I said, ``Well, he never earned my trust.''
    The way you earn trust is by leading and by, you know, not 
squandering missed opportunities--squandering opportunities, creating 
missed opportunities after missed opportunities, to provide--here you've 
got a nation, America. I'm the first President, I believe, to have ever 
gone to the United Nations and laid out a vision for a Palestinian state 
at peace with Israel. And this is an administration that laid out the 
Tenet plan, embraced the Mitchell plan that was, I guess, finalized on 
my watch but started under President Clinton's watch. So you've had two 
administrations working toward a blueprint for peace. And Mr. Arafat, 
instead of focusing and seizing and using his energy to achieve this 
vision, has not led. So he's never earned my trust.
    Q. So who leads, if Arafat doesn't?
    The President. Arafat is the leader. That's who we're dealing with.

Secretary of State Powell's Visit to the Middle East

    Q. Do you have any interest in having Powell see alternative 
Palestinian leaders while he's there?
    The President. I think Colin ought to visit with whomever is 
necessary to move the peace agenda, and he'll just use his judgment. 
We've got General Zinni on the ground there. Burns, I believe--Burns is 
with Powell. So we've got our experts there that understand the area 
very well. And Powell has got an agenda, which is to move the process 
toward a political settlement. And obviously, we've laid the conditions 
out in my speech on Thursday, as to what it will take. And he's got the 
U.N. resolution standing behind him, a blueprint toward where we need to 
get, and there are responsibilities on both parties.

Crown Prince Abdullah of Saudi Arabia

    Q. Somebody suggested to me that one reason that you dispatched 
Secretary Powell was that the Saudis were--that you had some frank 
conversations with the Saudis over the last few days, including one in 
which they indicated the Crown Prince might not make it to Crawford, 
Texas, unless the situation----
    The President. No.
    Q. Can you describe the conversations with the Saudis on this point?
    The President. Well, listen, the Saudis are just as concerned as 
other nations in the region. But the idea of saying, ``You must do this, 
or else I'm not going to come to Crawford,'' just isn't--that didn't 
happen. Not only didn't it happen, it wouldn't be a very smart thing for 
anybody to do. It's just not the way I--it's not the way we do things in 
this administration.

Energy/National Economy

    Q. Let me go back to oil for just a second, and then I think you 
want to switch to something else. Have you gotten, in any kind of 
conversations with the Saudis, any assurances that they are not in the 
oil embargo business anymore and that they'll try to make sure others 
don't----
    The President. I'm sure the subject will come up with Colin and the 
Crown Prince, but this has been relatively--you know, this is new.
    Q. Right.
    The President. So it'll be a topic of conversation.
    Q. Yes. Yes.
    The President. And as Ari said, he felt like that the OPEC, as well 
as the Saudis--again, tell me the news; I haven't seen it.

[[Page 594]]

This is all breaking since I just arrived from Knoxville.
    Counselor Hughes. The President has been in Tennessee.
    The President. Ari watched the whole speech on C-SPAN in Knoxville, 
didn't you?
    Press Secretary Fleischer. Yes. They said they're not going along 
with the call.
    The President. So we just have to see.
    Q. But it's your--the recovery is fragile enough that there are 
things that can still throw it off track.
    The President. Oh, I think so. I don't think the recovery is a 
given. And that's why we need to have this terrorism bill, terrorism 
insurance bill. I mean, there are things that Congress can do, and I 
think there are some signed signals we need to send. We need a trade 
bill. We need an energy bill--that will help--even though it won't 
happen immediately. Diversification won't happen immediately. It will 
help calm nerves. It means that the long term is more optimistic than 
not.
    So there are things we need to do. California, the California energy 
situation wasn't a year ago. And yet, it seems like it was years ago 
that California looked like it was running out of energy. And to me, 
that was a wake-up call. Where are we going to get our gas from to fuel 
the electricity, the new plants that were built in California?
    And you know, the Prime Minister of Canada is thrilled that we're 
increasing demand, because he's a major supplier of gas, and we're going 
to have to work with them. That's why I've got this hemispheric energy 
group, Mexico, Canada, the United States, meeting as to how to increase 
supplies in our hemisphere, the need for pipelines, and where they ought 
to go.
    In other words, that's important. And Mexico, herself, is grappling 
with a constitutional issue on energy. We export about 8 percent of our 
natural gas to Mexico. And obviously, to the extent that Mexico is able 
to attract capital and explore for more gas, it's good for Mexico in 
terms of jobs; it's good for their cash flow; and it's good for the 
energy picture in our hemisphere.
    In my judgment, obviously, we've got to go to Alaska. It's a part of 
a strategy to diversify away from unstable sources of energy. And we 
need more nuclear power as well. That's why the Yucca Mountain issue is 
an issue. We need clean coal technology. We need a comprehensive effort. 
And we need conservation as well. The interesting fact that came out of 
the California energy crisis was that they increased their conservation 
by about 10 percent, which is significant and necessary and good.
    I believe that some of the--I've got faith that technology will--
that we will have new automobiles. But it's not going to be quick enough 
to deal with immediate issues in the Middle East, for example. In other 
words, down the road there is going to be some new technology. We'll 
still be driving, all of us; we'll still be driving, and we'll be 
driving cars that make us less dependent on foreign sources of crude and 
are much cleaner burning.

Corporate Management Reform

    Q. You wanted to switch to corporate----
    Q. Yes. Well, you were talking about things that potentially 
threaten the recovery. Do you think that the--I don't know if ``crisis'' 
in confidence is too strong a word, but the feeling, you know, the 
concerns about corporate governments is a serious----
    The President. I think it's a serious--I think it's an issue that we 
need to look at and look at very carefully. I think the markets reflect 
the fact, though, that most investors have still got confidence in our 
economy and in corporate America. But reforms are necessary, and the 
CEOs need to be held accountable for full exposure or full detail of 
assets and liabilities. There needs to be pension review. If officers 
sell, the employees ought to be able sell. There ought to be better 
information sharing. There ought to be more diversification.
    On the other hand, we've got to make sure that we don't disincent 
companies for 401(k) compensation. I think it's a vital part of building 
up savings for our workers.
    There are discussions now about options, how we handle options. I 
think options are important. I think they're a good incentive program. I 
think once options earn the money, that they ought to be calculated in 
the dilution of--yes, be part of the--that they ought to be dilutive in 
their earnings

[[Page 595]]

per share calculations. To me, that seems like a reasonable way to 
handle that issue so that people fully understand the effect of options 
being granted.
    Q. But not as Chairman Greenspan has suggested, expensing?
    The President. My personal opinion is that--and I think most of the 
people in my administration feel like the best way to calculate--you 
know, earnings are earnings. And earnings per share is the calculation 
oftentimes used in an investment decision. And so we ought to state the 
earnings for what they are and affect the earnings per share. Listen, 
Alan Greenspan is very smart; I hate to get into a debate with him. But 
my view is, is that it achieves both objectives. One, what are the true 
earnings of the company? And two, what is the dilutive effect of options 
in the money? We may perhaps get to the same end that he is trying to 
achieve, and that is a full accounting of options. To me, that's a 
reasonable way to do that.

Arthur Andersen/Corporate Responsibility

    Q. One of the things that's happening right now is that, obviously, 
Arthur Andersen is teetering on the brink. Are you--is it possible the 
Justice Department went a little too far and a little too hard after 
Arthur Andersen? Are you comfortable with the idea that they might go 
away, as a result of what the Justice Department has done?
    The President. Well, I believe people ought to be held responsible 
for decisions made, and I will refer--I'll ask you to refer your 
questions to the Justice Department as to their tactics and decisions. 
Since they filed the suit, they'll be good at explaining it to you.
    Q. But there are policy--I mean, there are policy issues involved. 
And some people say the way the Justice Department went at it is--you 
know, threatened to put thousands of people on the street who were 
totally innocent and all of this.
    The President. There is a need to hold people responsible. I 
oftentimes talk about responsibility era--each of us need to be 
personally--you know, personal responsibility. I also make sure I 
broaden that to corporate responsibility as well. There is a 
responsibility for leadership to conduct themselves in a responsible 
way. I'll leave the details to the Justice Department, but the idea of 
holding people accountable or entities accountable is a very important 
part of ushering in the responsible era. And we'll let--there are all 
kinds of pundits, and I've heard this, that, and other. We'll just let 
the Justice Department answer those questions about the tactics.
    Q. Do you think corporate America had kind of gotten away from that 
responsibility?
    The President. I think--I do think there have been periods where the 
growth and the apparent creation of wealth gets so kind of easy, in a 
way, that people forget--not all people but some forget.
    I remember the oil business in the early eighties, and people would 
say, ``The price is going to 100.'' You know? And investment decisions 
were pretty lax. It just seemed like there was this kind of euphoria 
that swept up this particular sector. And every IPO hit, and everybody 
was in the money and options. It just seemed like the sky was the limit. 
There was never going to be any reality.
    And during those periods of time, sometimes, some fail to remember 
that they have a responsibility to people other than themselves--namely, 
shareholders. And when we look back at this period, I think we'll find 
some incidents of that.
    You asked me whether or not those incidents would cause lack of 
confidence in the future. I don't think so at all, and I think the 
market reflects that. On the other hand, it does call us to action, and 
that's one of the reasons why we've laid out a series of initiatives to 
deal with this issue.
    I worry about a board of directors that are too acquiescent to a 
CEO, beholden not to the shareholder but to the CEO. That concerns me. 
I'm not sure of the law that you can pass necessarily, but I do think 
there is a culture that can evolve out of this period of time which will 
remind people they have a responsibility as leaders of a corporation.
    Q. Can you do anything to make that evolution happen?
    The President. Well, I think it is happening. I can't, as the 
President, call upon, reform and change and call people to account, in a 
broad sense. I mean, I'm not

[[Page 596]]

going to get involved in every lawsuit that comes down the pike, but I 
can remind people that we have a responsibility as citizens.
    And there is a big responsibility in corporate America amongst the 
CEOs who treat their workers with respect. I was particularly grateful 
of the automobile manufacturers to promote product with keeping their 
workers' livelihoods in mind. I thought that was noble during this 
period of time. That sometimes stands in contrast to a corporate 
stereotype where people say, you know, ``I don't really care about the 
livelihood of the workers. For me, I'm going to bottom line, focus 
immediate bottom line.'' There is a responsibility that these leaders 
have.

Situation in the Middle East

    Q. Can I just return to the Middle East for a second? I can't get 
over it. When----
    The President. You're writing about it for your whole life.
    Q. I know. I'm stuck. I'm in a rut; I admit it. It's pathetic. 
[Laughter]
    The President. No, it's important.
    Q. Sometimes.
    The President. You know, it's an issue that has consumed enormous 
amounts of time by this administration and every administration 
preceding me in modern history.
    Q. It's lifetime employment for journalists, too.
    The President. It's an important issue. It's an issue in which we've 
got enormous stake. It is an issue that--there has to be a vision of 
peace; there has to be a commitment to peace. And my job is to lay out 
that vision and to lead parties to the steps necessary to achieve the 
vision. And it's going to take a while.
    Step one, in order to get there, is withdrawal of troops, from the 
Israeli perspective; and for the Arabs, to stand up and be accountable 
for holding--cutting off financing of terrorists and disrupting 
terrorist networks. These are people that do not--the terrorists and 
bombers do not want peace. They want to kill to prevent peace.
    Q. Just to finish that thought, though--as you've often said, you're 
an optimistic person.
    The President. Yes.
    Q. Doesn't it feel like we're further away from any kind of a 
resolution than we've been in a long time?
    The President. Well, I--listen, I hate the killing. Yes, in one way 
it seems like we're a long way away from peace, obviously, when you turn 
on your TV and see death, suicide bombers blowing up Passover 
celebrations, young Arab girl blowing up a young Israeli girl.
    But I also know if the innate goodness of mankind and that there are 
people who understand that this way is--as I said, enough is enough. I 
think there is enough good will in the region, inherent goodness of the 
people on both sides of the issue that we'll ultimately have leadership 
say, ``We're sick of this, and now let's work together.''
    I don't know if it's going to be a month or a year, however long. 
But nevertheless, this is a--and you have to look at it that way. You 
have to believe that peace is possible, and I believe it is. Ask Jerry 
Seib if peace is possible. He knows this issue better than me.
    But I believe it is, and my administration will continue to work as 
if it is achievable. And one of our jobs is to pick and choose the time 
when we spend capital, be judicious in how we approach these issues, to 
not create false expectations, to be realistic about what's possible, 
and lead.
    But in order to lead, you've got to see a better day. And I feel 
that. This picture right here says--it's a Tom Lea. He wrote the line, 
``Sarah and I live on the east side of the mountain. It is the sunrise 
side, not the sunset side. It's the side to see the day that is coming, 
not to see the day that is gone.'' And I love that picture, because I 
love the man and I love Texas; because I also love the quote, because it 
is a frame of mind necessary--it's a frame of mind that a President must 
have in order to be a good President.
    And I believe that there are a lot of people in the Middle East, 
average, hard-working mothers and fathers, who want to see a better day. 
And we've got to lead to that better day.

Note: The interview began at 5 p.m. in the Oval Office at the White 
House. In his remarks, the President referred to Prime Minister Tony 
Blair of the United Kingdom; Usama bin Laden and

[[Page 597]]

Abu Zubaydah, leaders of the Al Qaida terrorist organization; Prime 
Minister Ariel Sharon of Israel; U.S. Special Envoy to the Middle East 
Gen. Anthony Zinni, USMC (Ret.); Assistant Secretary of State for Near 
Eastern Affairs William Burns; Prime Minister Jean Chretien of Canada; 
and Jerry Seib, Washington bureau deputy chief, Wall Street Journal. The 
President also referred to the Tenet plan, the Israeli-Palestinian 
cease-fire and security plan of June 13, 2001, negotiated by Director of 
Central Intelligence George J. Tenet; and the Mitchell report, the 
Report of the Sharm el-Sheikh Fact-Finding Committee, issued April 30, 
2001. A tape was not available for verification of the content of this 
interview.