[Weekly Compilation of Presidential Documents Volume 39, Number 32 (Monday, August 11, 2003)]
[Pages 1035-1039]
[Online from the Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]

<R04>
Remarks Following a Meeting With Secretary of Defense Donald H. Rumsfeld 
and an Exchange With Reporters in Crawford, Texas

August 8, 2003

    The President. We've had a fascinating discussion on a variety of 
subjects with Secretary Rumsfeld and Chairman Dick Myers. Of course, the 
Vice President is here. As an aside, the Vice President and I went 
fishing; we threw our first lure at about 6:20 a.m. this morning. Looks 
like--turns out the fish like cooler weather than hot weather; probably 
the press corps feels the same way.
    Turns out this is our hundredth day since major military operations 
have ended, ended in Iraq. And since then, we've made good progress. 
Iraq is more secure. The economy of Iraq is beginning to improve. I was 
interested to note that banks are now opening up and the infrastructure 
is improving. In a lot of places, the infrastructure is as good as it 
was at pre-war levels, which is satisfactory, but it's not the ultimate 
aim. The ultimate aim is for the infrastructure to be the best in the 
region. And the political process is moving toward democracy, which is a 
major shift of system in that part of the world.
    And we're pleased with the progress, but we know we've got a lot 
more work to do. And the Secretary was briefing me on the ongoing 
security operations and the status of our forces. But I can say--and I 
think he can say--progress is being made not only in Iraq but in 
Afghanistan as well.
    And then we spent time making sure that our military is configured 
in such a way as to represent the modern era, which means it will be 
more likely that the world will be peaceful. A modern, strong, light, 
active military will make it easier to keep the peace, and after all, 
that's the objective of the administration, is to promote freedom and 
peace. And the Secretary and his team are doing a really good job for 
the American people.
    Welcome back to the ranch, Mr. Secretary. We're thrilled you're 
here.
    Secretary Rumsfeld. Thank you, sir.
    The President. We'll be glad to answer a few questions. Let's start 
with the wires, of course.

Iraq

    Q. Thanks, Mr. President. You talked about progress, but there's 
some unfinished business in Iraq, also.
    The President. Yes----
    Q. No Saddam----
    The President. ----that's what I also said, we've got more to do.
    Q. To be specific, no Saddam, no weapons, 56 soldiers have died in 
this 100 days----
    The President. Right.
    Q. ----including one last night. What can you tell the American 
people about how many more soldiers will die? And also, your commander 
in Iraq said yesterday, ``Two years, absolute minimum.'' Is that an 
assessment you share?
    The President. Well, first of all, we suffer when we lose life. I 
mean, our country is a country that grieves with those who sacrifice, 
and our heartfelt sympathies and appreciation go to the loved ones of 
any soldier who's willing to defend the security of the United States, 
and that's what they're doing in Iraq. It's very important to people to 
understand that this is a part of the war on terror, that we're dealing 
with terrorists today.
    We learned a lesson on September the 11th, and that is, our Nation 
is vulnerable to attack. And we're doing everything we can to protect 
the homeland by making the Homeland Defense Department effective in 
securing the borders. But the best way to secure America is to get the 
enemy before they get us, and that's what's happening in

[[Page 1036]]

Iraq. And we're grateful for the sacrifices of our soldiers.
    I said, Scott [Scott Lindlaw, Associated Press], right after 
September the 11th, that this war on terror is a different kind of war, 
and it's going to take a while to win the war on terror. However long it 
takes to win the war on terror, this administration is committed to 
doing that, because our most solemn obligation is the protection of the 
American people.
    And as I said, the Secretary and I discussed what's happening inside 
of Iraq, and we've got a lot of brave soldiers slowly but surely 
demolishing the elements of the Ba'athist regime, those foreign 
terrorists who feel like they can use Iraq as a place to arm up and 
inflict casualty or perhaps gain strength to come and attack Americans 
elsewhere.
    We've been there a hundred days. We've made a lot of progress in a 
hundred days, and I am pleased with the progress we've made but fully 
recognize we've got a lot more work to do.
    Do you want to add to that, Mr. Secretary?
    Secretary Rumsfeld. No, sir. [Laughter]
    Q. Should people expect 2 more years, at least?
    The President. The American people should suspect that this 
administration will do what is necessary to win the war on terror. 
That's my pledge to the American people. They have got to understand 
that I will not forget the lessons of September the 11th. And those 
lessons are loud and clear that there are people who want to inflict 
harm on the American people. We lost 3,000-plus on that fateful day. And 
you know, I made the pledge to the American people and the families and 
those who grieved that we will hunt down the terrorists wherever they 
are and bring them to justice. And that's what we're going to do.
    Steve [Steve Holland, Reuters].

California Gubernatorial Candidate Arnold Schwarzenegger

    Q. What do you think of Arnold Schwarzenegger, and would you 
consider campaigning for him?
    The President. I will never arm wrestle Arnold Schwarzenegger. 
[Laughter] No matter how hard I try, I'll never lift as much weight as 
he does.
    I think it's interesting. You know, I'm a follower of American 
politics. I find what's going on in the State of California very 
interesting, and I'm confident the citizens of California will sort all 
this out for the good of the citizenry.
    Q. Would he be a good Governor?
    The President. As I say, I'm interested in the process. It's 
fascinating to see who's in and who's out, and yes, I think he'd be a 
good Governor.

Israeli Security Fence

    Q. Mr. President, there are reports today that Israel is willing, 
perhaps, to reroute the security fence it's been building. Is that 
enough of a concession by the Israelis, or should they abandon 
construction of the fence altogether?
    The President. Well, Dick [Richard Keil, Bloomberg News], let me put 
the fence and these issues into a larger perspective, if I might. In 
order for a Palestinian state to emerge, a couple of things must happen. 
First, the Palestinians, the people in the neighborhood, must deal with 
terror, must rout out those who would like to destroy the process.
    The fence, by the way, is a reaction to days when there were terror. 
I've said the fence is a problem because the fence is, you know, kind of 
meanders around the West Bank, which makes it awfully hard to develop a 
contiguous state over time. And so I've said we'd talk to the Israelis, 
and we are, about the fence. But we must have the fence in the context 
of the larger issue, and the larger issue is, will the conditions be 
such that a state can emerge? It's important for a Palestinian state to 
emerge, in our judgment, because the world will be more peaceful, Israel 
will be more secure and more--or as importantly, the Palestinians will 
have hope. But all parties must work against those who would make it 
very difficult to achieve the vision.
    Q. Are you regarding it as a step forward, a sign of progress?
    The President. Well, as I said--look, the Israelis are willing to 
work with us. They've said, ``We'd consult.'' We're consulting. In

[[Page 1037]]

order for there to be the progress that needs to be made, there needs to 
be security. The fence was a reaction to--in some ways, a reaction to 
the days of the intifada. And the more secure Israel feels, the more 
likely there will be a peaceful state. The more secure the region is, 
the more likely institutions necessary for the development of a 
Palestinian state will emerge.
    And so on all these issues, we'll deal, of course, with both 
parties. We're staying very active; Ambassador Wolf is doing a fine job 
there. But it's important to put all these issues in the larger context 
of what is necessary to achieve what we think--what I think will be 
great for the region, that is a peaceful Palestinian state.
    Larry [Larry McQuillan, USA Today].

Iraq

    Q. Mr. President, you've given us an update on Iraq and progress in 
stabilization there. At this point, are you able to give us even a 
ballpark estimate of what it may cost, say, in the next fiscal year? And 
will Americans be the ones who bear most of the cost of that?
    The President. Two points there: One, we generally don't do our 
estimates on the back of an envelope. In other words, by that I mean the 
commanders in the field will be dealing with the Secretary of Defense. 
Jerry Bremer will be bringing recommendations. And of course, we'll go 
to the Congress in order to fund any requests, and the requests will be 
well-thought-out, based upon some variables. And one of the key 
variables is how much money we can get other nations to contribute to 
the reconstruction efforts of Iraq or how many other nations are willing 
to contribute forces.
    So therefore, this is a--you know, the budgeting process is one 
that's ongoing. It's an iterative process, I guess is the best way to 
put it. ``Iterative'' is the right word, do you think?
    Secretary Rumsfeld. Yes.
    The President. In other words----
    Q. Is it too fluid, then? I mean, you're saying, because until we 
know how many people are going to help----
    The President. No, at some point in time, Larry--no, it's fluid up 
to a point, but obviously we're going to have to make a request. And 
when we do, it will be a request based upon sound judgment. It will be a 
well-thought-out request. It will be one where the Congress will be able 
to ask legitimate questions like you're asking and will be answered. And 
they're now in the process of coming up with a--the basis for a request 
to the United States Congress.
    You know, I remember, by the way, the initial stages of the war in 
Iraq. And the questions were, ``How long is it going to take?'' I think 
it kind of echoes the question that Scott asked: ``How long will you be 
there? How long will it take?'' And I can remember saying, ``As long as 
necessary.'' Remember? I don't know if you remember the offensive stage 
of the war. You were doing an interesting job of trying to get us to 
make absolute predictions. And what is necessary is to achieve an 
overall strategy, and whatever it takes to achieve the strategy, this 
administration is committed to.
    Q. But you know, going into that, sir, you actually gave a pretty 
accurate prediction of what that would cost.
    The President. Going into it, right, and we'll give you an accurate 
projection of what it's going to cost next year at the appropriate time. 
But also going into it, there was the timetable question, which also 
relates to spending. And that is, ``Why won't you tell us how long it's 
going to take?'' My answer was, ``How long? However necessary is how 
long it will take.'' And that's the way we feel now. And we are working 
hard to bring other nations to bear responsibility in Iraq.
    I want to say something about Afghanistan. Germany has taken a very 
active role in Afghanistan, and we're very thankful for that. As NATO 
steps forward, Germany has assumed a big responsibility. And we really 
appreciate the German participation. And the reason I bring that up is, 
is that that's a change from 6 months ago. And not only is Germany's 
participation important, it's robust, more robust than we would have 
anticipated. I look forward to thanking Chancellor Schroeder for that.
    And Larry, the point there is, is that things do change. And we will 
have a budget that is as accurate as it can possibly be when we go to 
the Congress, because we understand

[[Page 1038]]

the questions our planners and operators will receive. And they will 
come with good, sound data.
    Dana [Dana Bash, Cable News Network], and then Mark [Mark Knoller, 
CBS Radio]. We've got to get in before we have a heat stroke--
[laughter]--before you have a heat stroke, excuse me. [Laughter]

Iran

    Q. Mr. President, for you and for Secretary Rumsfeld, please. 
Secretary Rumsfeld, did you authorize Pentagon officials to hold some 
secret talks with Iran-Contra figure Manucher Ghorbanifar, in order to 
push for a regime change in Iran? And Mr. President, do you think that's 
a good idea, and is the new policy--official policy regime change in 
Iran?
    Secretary Rumsfeld. I had not had a chance to see these articles--or 
an article that I guess exists. I did get briefed by Condi and Larry 
DiRita here a minute ago. And my understanding is that some--one or two 
Pentagon people were approached by some people who had information about 
Iranians that wanted to provide information to the United States 
Government, that a meeting did take place--this is more than a year 
ago--that such a meeting did take place and the information was moved 
around the interagency process to all the departments and agencies. And 
it dropped. That is to say, the--as I understand it, there wasn't 
anything there that was of substance or of value that needed to be 
pursued further.
    Q. But it's your understanding that this wasn't intended to sort of 
go around any other talks that have been going on; these are unofficial 
talks with the Iranians?
    Secretary Rumsfeld. Oh, absolutely not. I mean, everyone on the 
interagency process, I'm told, was apprised of it, and it went nowhere. 
It was just--this happens, of course, frequently, people come in 
offering suggestions or information or possible contacts, and sometimes 
they are pursued. Obviously, if it looks as though something might be 
interesting, it's pursued. If it isn't, it isn't.
    The President. Well, we support the aspirations of those who desire 
freedom in Iran.
    Mark.

Democrat Presidential Candidates/Iraq

    Q. Mr. President, what's your response to the Democrats, including 
Al Gore yesterday and some of the Democratic Presidential candidates, 
who say that the American people were misled in advance of the war about 
the reasons for going to war--that you said disarming Iraq was the main 
purpose, but since then, no weapons of mass destruction have been found?
    The President. I say it's pure politics.
    Listen, thank you all. Have a beautiful day.
    Q. Do you want to say more than that?
    The President. No, it's just pure politics. We've got a lot of 
people running for President, and it's pure politics. The American 
people know that we laid out the facts. We based the decision on sound 
intelligence, and they also know we've only been there for 100 days. And 
we're making progress. A free Iraq is necessary for a--is an integral 
part of the war on terror. And as far as all this political noise, it's 
going to get worse as time goes on, and I fully understand that. And 
that's just the nature of democracy. Sometimes pure politics enters into 
the rhetoric.
    Thank you all.

European Union-U.S. Relations

    Q. One on Germany? Do you think that signals a shift that Europe 
might be coming around to helping out in Iraq now?
    The President. Oh, I think that we're getting--I mean, look, Great 
Britain has been helping out in Iraq for a long period of time. Poland 
has been helping out in Iraq. I mean, we've got a lot of people helping 
out in Iraq. And I thought that the German decision in Afghanistan was 
an important decision, and we're grateful for that.
    Listen, thank you all.

U.S. Troop Strength

    Q. Would you mind if I just asked about the meeting you had?
    The President. Sure, go ahead and ask about the meeting.
    Q. I mean, I know that's unusual, but----
    The President. Beautiful meeting. [Laughter]
    Q. But you know, are you now satisfied that maybe after reviewing 
our force strength that American forces are not stretched too

[[Page 1039]]

thin by the war on terrorism or maybe potentially could be down the 
road?
    The President. I'm satisfied.
    Secretary Rumsfeld. We discussed that in the meeting, and it's a 
fair question. Needless to say, when you have a spike in activity, a 
crisis in Iraq, it is important to review those questions. Dick Myers 
and his folks in the military review them continuously.
    We have found there are literally two or three--well, about two 
dozen things we can do that we reduce stress on the force, and the cost 
of adding end strength is significant. The time it takes to bring them 
in, recruit them, train them, equip them means there is a significant 
lag. So it's not something one does quickly. And as a result, we've got 
a major effort going on to take advantage of all the things we can do to 
increase the kinds of ways we can relieve that stress on the force. And 
it looks to me like we're going to be able to do that.
    And on the other hand, our country can afford to pay for forces at 
the level that can help defend and protect us. And to the extent at any 
point it looks as though an end-strength increase is appropriate, we 
obviously would recommend it, but we certainly don't see the evidence of 
that at the present time.
    The President. Thank you.

President's Vacation

    Q. Any new 100-Degree Club members?
    The President. Yesterday we added one.
    Q. Do we know him?
    The President. A Secret Service agent.
    Q. Are you going running today?
    The President. No, I'm not.
    Q. Did Dick Cheney catch anything?
    The President. Dick Cheney--he's a great fly fisherman. [Laughter]

Note: The President spoke at 11:47 a.m. at the Bush Ranch. In his 
remarks, he referred to Assistant Secretary of State for 
Nonproliferation John S. Wolf; L. Paul Bremer III, Presidential Envoy to 
Iraq; and Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder of Germany. Secretary Rumsfeld 
referred to Acting Assistant Secretary of Defense for Public Affairs 
Larry DiRita. A reporter referred to former Vice President Al Gore. A 
portion of these remarks could not be verified because the tape was 
incomplete.