[Weekly Compilation of Presidential Documents Volume 42, Number 28 (Monday, July 17, 2006)]
[Pages 1306-1315]
[Online from the Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]

<R04>
Interview With Foreign Journalists

July 10, 2006

    The President. I'm looking forward to it. I'm going to see Angela 
Merkel on her home turf. She kindly invited me to go to her part of the 
country. I always view that as a sign of generous hospitality, when 
somebody says, ``Come by my home area.'' And I'm looking forward to 
going, and I'm looking forward to having a good discussion with her on a 
variety of subjects.
    I've spoken frequently with the Chancellor since she's gotten in, 
and that's important, because Germany has got a very important role to 
play, not only in Europe but around the world. So I'm looking forward to 
that a lot.
    And then, of course, I'll be going to Russia and have--Laura and I 
and the Putins will be having dinner, which is a good chance to continue 
our friendship. We've got a good friendship with the Putins. We're 
comfortable around them. And then, of course, the next day we'll have a 
bilateral meeting, which will be more business than pleasure. I also am 
looking forward to that. I've spoken to Vladimir Putin frequently over 
the last couple of weeks on a variety of subjects. And the world is 
complex. There are problems that are surfacing. I've always felt like 
it's best to work with friends and allies to solve the problems. And so 
we'll have a variety of topics on the agenda.
    And then we've got the G-8. I think the topics there are relevant--
energy security. I view energy security, from my perspective, as how do 
we diversify away from hydrocarbons. That's the definition of security 
from an American perspective. I will be--it just so happens, it's a 
really interesting moment where there's the need to be--protect our 
national security and economic security comes at a time when there's 
great concern about global warming, and it turns out that you can 
achieve economic and national security and protect the environment at 
the same time. For example, civilian nuclear power--that's going to be 
an important subject, as far as I'm concerned.
    If you truly are concerned about protecting the environment, then it 
seems like to me that civilian nuclear power is a good way to go. 
Technologies have changed; we'll discuss that. Some agree; some don't 
agree. But nevertheless, it's going to be a part of the dialog. I look 
forward to talking to them about our research and development efforts 
into new types of batteries that will be able to power automobiles for 
the first 40 miles without using gasoline, or talk about use of ethanol 
or our experimentation and our work with hydrogen. In other words, 
there's a variety of things we can talk about to help with energy--on 
the energy security issue.
    We'll talk about infectious diseases. I thank the Russian President 
for putting that on the agenda. That's going to be a very important 
topic--if there were to be a pandemic flu outbreak. It's important for 
us to have discussed our individual plans and how we intend to work 
collectively on the problem.
    We'll talk about education matters. I intend to talk about trade. 
We've got--the Doha round is out there, kind of--people are wondering 
whether or not we'll be able to move it. I'm still upbeat about it, by 
the way. I think we can get something done. I just finished meeting with 
my trade minister and our team involved on the subject. But this will be 
a good forum to talk about it, not only at the first days of the G-8 but 
when the members of the G-20 come. There will be an important discussion 
with the leader of Brazil and others.
    As well, one of the things we will talk about are common values that 
are important--

[[Page 1307]]

transparency, anticorruption, free markets--values that tend to bind us 
and that can unite us in common purpose. So I'm looking forward to it.
    Michael [Michael Backfisch, Handelsblatt].

Germany-U.S. Relations

    Q. Mr. President, German-American relations have improved since 
Angela Merkel became Chancellor. With Silvio Berlusconi being out of 
office and Tony Blair's days being numbered, has Germany become 
America's most important pillar in Europe, and would you even use a 
formula such as partnership and leadership, as your father dubbed the 
relationship with Helmut Kohl?
    The President. First, let me say, we had disagreements over Iraq, 
obviously. But apart from that, I always felt our relationship with 
Germany was vital and important. Much has been made about the 
differences between Chancellor Schroeder and myself, and no question, 
there were differences. But I will tell you that from my perspective, 
and I think he would say this, is we've tried to work beyond that. There 
were other issues we had to deal with besides Iraq. So the relationship 
has been good since I've been the President.
    Angela Merkel comes into office now at a time where we've gotten 
that behind us, and we're moving forward. Remember, one of the first 
decisions I made after 9/11 was to go into Afghanistan, and the Germans 
supported us on that. So there's--we've worked together, and I do 
believe that, as I mentioned to you, Germany has got a very important 
role to play in Europe and in the world. And Angela Merkel is assuming 
the mantle of leadership, for which I'm grateful.
    From my perspective, I think the American President and the country 
must maintain a lot of good relations with Europe, since Europe is a--
it's vital. It's a vital center of trade, and it's a vital center of 
exchange, and it's a vital center, I hope, of working together to, kind 
of, spread common values. But we've got a good relationship.
    Andrei [Andrei K. Sitov, ITAR-TASS].

President's Birthday

    Q. Thank you, sir, for inviting us, for giving us this opportunity.
    The President. Any time.
    Q. May I congratulate you, sir, on your recent birthday. I was on 
the South Lawn there, watching.
    The President. You were watching me turn 60? [Laughter]
    Q. No, the Fourth of July, the celebration.
    The President. Let me ask you something, does that seem old to you, 
60?
    Q. No, not at all, sir.
    The President. Good, yes. [Laughter]
    Q. Sir, you are----
    The President. The American press corps seems to--makes it seems 
like it's a very old age--people--how old are you, Tom?
    Q. Sixty-one.
    The President. See.
    Q. Everybody knows your medical stats, sir. You are in good 
condition.
    The President. Thank you for wishing me a happy birthday. Finally 
ended. Go ahead.

Russia-U.S. Relations/World Trade Organization

    Q. Thank you, sir, for indulging us.
    I wanted to ask you about the continuing Russian integration. Will 
there be----
    The President. Continuing Russian integration?
    Q. Integration into the world bodies. Will there be a deal on the 
WTO negotiations with Russia in St. Petersburg? And also, when do you 
expect Russia to gain a permanent seat at the financial G-7?
    The President. First of all, as far as the G-8 goes, from my 
perspective, Russia is an active participant. President Putin has been 
there; he speaks; he talks; he acts; he interfaces. Plus, he's hosting 
it--is hosting this G-8.
    Secondly, we talked about the WTO negotiations with Russia, and 
there is--I've presented the letter to the President, which makes it 
very clear, our position, so that there's no ambiguity about what needs 
to happen in terms of market access from both--the perspective of both 
countries. And we will continue to work, see if we can't get this done.
    President Putin has got his issues at home; we've got issues here. 
And that is, we've got to make sure any agreement we strike is a good 
one. And there's two issues that are very

[[Page 1308]]

important for--a lot of issues are important, but I would say the two 
areas where a lot of people will be paying attention to it here in 
America is, one, on agriculture, we want to make sure that if somebody 
says they're going to take our products into their country, they'll do 
it. And secondly, the other is intellectual property rights. And that's 
what a lot of people will be looking at from this perspective. I'm sure 
Vladimir Putin has got pressures on his side too.
    I do believe it's in our country's interest to have Russia as a 
member of the WTO. It's been a difficult negotiation, because there's 
more than one constituency. That's what President Putin has got to 
understand. One issue--not just satisfying what our trade negotiators 
think is fair; we've got to make sure we can get it through the 
Congress.
    But others are watching as well; other nations are watching the set 
of negotiations. So hopefully we can get it done. I'm optimistic about 
it.
    Mario [Mario Platero, IlSole24Ore], congratulations to you .

2006 World Cup

    Q. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. President. Did you watch the game?
    The President. I watched some of it.

Italy-U.S. Relations/War on Terror

    Q. Mr. President, the new Italian Government has stated that there 
are, and I quote the Italian Foreign Minister, Mr. D'Alema, ``evident 
differences with the U.S., certainly with respect to policies from the 
previous years.'' And a decision about whether to stay in Afghanistan 
will be made in the next few days, and a decision has been made to 
withdraw completely from Iraq, contrary to what the commitment of the 
previous Government was. Are you disappointed by that?
    The President. First of all, I want to thank the Italian people and 
the Government for their contributions in Iraq. They were there during 
some of the most difficult times. And the previous Government made a 
commitment and met its commitment, and we're very grateful for that. The 
current Government campaigned on not staying in Iraq; that's what they 
said. So when you win elections, you're supposed to do what you say you 
do. So I'm not surprised. I would hope--and I appreciate the 
commitments. I would hope they would--toward, for example, training 
through NATO or reconstruction aid. This is an historic time.
    And one of the messages I'll be sending people at the G-8 is, 
liberty is universal; the world is better off when there's free 
societies. We'll worry about our own selves, of course, but we've also 
got to need to worry about others living under the--that may live under 
the clutches of a tyrant or others who are trying to build a democracy. 
And we would hope that established democracies would help young 
democracies grow, and there's all kinds of ways you can do that. There's 
a difference of opinion, obviously, in certain corners as to whether or 
not we should have gone into Iraq in the first place. But now that we're 
there, the hope is that we can work with nations to help build the new 
democracy. And that's not my appeal; that's the appeal of Prime Minister 
Maliki and others. So I'm confident we can work with the Government, 
looking forward to it.
    Q. On Afghanistan, you hope they will stay?
    The President. Of course I do. It's a new democracy. We'll see. 
Every country gets to make its own mind what to do, but I would hope 
that those who are weighing whether or not it makes sense to stay or go 
look at the consequences of failure and realize the great benefits of 
liberty for the people of Afghanistan. An elected government there--
society is changing. It takes hard work. I happen to believe the hard 
work it takes is necessary for peace.
    Masaomi. Did I say it right?

North Korea

    Q. Masaomi.
    The President. Yes, see, pretty close. [Laughter]
    Q. Thank you very much. I have a question on North Korea. Security 
Council is about to adopt North Korea resolution. The U.S. had vowed to 
continue diplomatic efforts to resolve the issue. But what kind of 
measures will you take to get North Korea back to the six-party talks?
    The President. First of all, I want to thank the Japanese 
contribution in the Security

[[Page 1309]]

Council. Secondly, I think there's an interesting new development, that 
the Japanese have decided to delay tabling the resolution to give the 
Chinese a chance to go to Pyongyang to have a discussion with the leader 
in North Korea, with the desire of having them come back to the table. 
So that's where we are--them being the North Koreans--come back to the 
table.
    And that's where we are. And so the Security Council option is 
always there. But to answer your question, the strategy at this point in 
time is for the Chinese to travel and to make the claim that it would be 
in North Korea's interests that they come back to the table and remind 
them they've already been at the table and they agreed to a Korean 
Peninsula that is nuclear-weapons free. That's what they've agreed to--
they being the North Koreans, along with the United States, the 
Russians, the South Koreans, the Japanese, and the Chinese. So that's 
where we are.
    Michael.

Energy

    Q. Mr. President, energy security--25 percent of Europe's natural 
gas consumption is satisfied by Russia. In the case of Germany, it's 
more than one-third. Is Europe, is Germany too energy-dependent on 
Russia, and do you see the ensuing danger that Russia has the means to 
potentially blackmail Europe?
    The President. I think each nation or each group of nations has to 
make their own national security calculations. I can just give you my 
perspective where the United States is, and you can draw whatever 
conclusions you want from that.
    I think--we are dependent on oil from, in some cases, unstable parts 
of the world. And while you may be able to manage your way through the 
short term; in the long term, eventually I think that will be a problem 
for national security purposes here. And therefore, when you talk about 
energy security, it is part--people say, ``Well, security is how you 
guarantee supply.'' That's one view of security. It's just that supplies 
can get disrupted sometimes. I view security as diversification away 
from a particular source of energy that may be the cause of the worry 
about insecurity in the first place.
    And so the German Government is going to have to make its decision 
as to whether or not it makes sense to have a supply--one-third of its 
supply from a single source. I can tell you this, I've told the American 
people we will spend billions to put technology in place or achieve 
technological breakthroughs that will enable future Presidents to say, 
``I no longer have to worry about a single source of supply; I no longer 
have to worry about disruption; I no longer have to worry about 
politics.'' And I think the world needs to go there, in my own judgment. 
I think the whole world would be better off if we're less reliant upon 
forms of hydrocarbon.
    Is it possible? Yes, it's possible. We're spending over a billion 
dollars on hydrogen technologies and research to determine whether or 
not you can actually drive your automobiles with hydrogen, a byproduct 
of which is nothing, water. The issue with hydrogen, however, is, one, 
obviously, the technologies. But it takes a fair amount of power to 
create the hydrogen. And therefore, the question is, will nations such 
as ours, and others, be willing to use nuclear power to be able to 
provide the power to create the hydrogen in the first place? It's a 
policy choice countries are going to have to make.
    We are working with India and China, for example, on nuclear power. 
I think it's in everybody's interest that these new, growing economies 
have--that the appetite for hydrocarbons in these growing economies is 
lessened with the advent of nuclear power. I know it's in--it really is 
in everybody's interest because of the globalization of energy demand. 
In other words, India demands more; it causes your prices to go up.
    And so our contribution to trying to deal with energy security is to 
not only spend money here at home but also to work with developing 
countries to reduce their appetite for hydrocarbons. And to this end, 
we're working with Japan and Russia, France, and Great Britain to spend 
money to come up with a fast breeder reactor program, so that we can 
reprocess, burn, and reduce the amount of waste, which will hopefully 
then make the idea of additional civilian nuclear

[[Page 1310]]

power in other countries more palatable politically.
    Q. And Russia's potential blackmailing power?
    The President. That's going to be up to the Europeans to make that 
decision. That's not an issue we worry about here at home. That's an 
issue that the European leaders are going to have to work through, 
particularly at the EU, to make sure that they're not in a position 
where somebody can change the equation. Obviously, there was--some of my 
friends who were the leaders in Europe were somewhat concerned about the 
Ukrainian issue. We expressed our opinion on that very clearly. But the 
decisionmakers, your leaders, are going to have to make the decision as 
to whether or not they view the current status as something that they 
need to diversify away from. And I just laid out some ideas as to how, 
at least, we're trying to do that.
    Andrei.

Alternative Fuel Sources/Georgia

    Q. You just gave me an opening there----
    The President. Well, I'm trying to, Andrei. I'm Mr. Thoughtful, as 
you know. [Laughter]
    Q. ----by referring to Ukraine, sir. Russia, for years, has been 
subsidizing its neighbors with energy supplies. President Putin recently 
suggested that it was to the tune of $3 billion to $5 billion a year. 
Basically he said, ``If any new friends of those countries want them to 
have cheap energy, are they willing to pay?'' So is this country willing 
to pay the same amount for cheap gas for Ukraine and Georgia?
    The President. Well, look, there's a pretty good market. I mean, 
there's a marketplace. And the definition of price--you can judge 
whether or not it's fair, given kind of comparable situations elsewhere. 
Michael's point is, if you've got a sole source of supply or a 
significant sole source of supply, sometimes that source of supply can 
set the market. And I would think that what most consumers would want 
was fair, transparent pricing.
    One way to make sure you've got fair pricing is to have alternative 
sources of energy so that you're able to make different choices, and 
that's very difficult, particularly when it comes to natural gas. Gas is 
a hard product to transport. Gas requires enormous capital investment. 
Oil can be transferred by cart, by trucks. Gas has to be transferred by 
pipeline, more or less. Now there's a whole new technology coming, which 
is liquefied natural gas, so it can be transported by fleet. And so all 
I would ask is that there be transparency, that there be--that people 
know fully what the rules are, and that the contracts be open, easy to 
understand, and honored.
    Q. And if I may stay with the neighborhood for a second there. You 
recently hosted the President of Georgia. Why do you think it's in 
NATO's interest to admit a country with two internal conflicts on its 
territory?
    The President. I think it's in the world's interest that there be 
peaceful resolution of those two internal issues. I also think it's in 
NATO's interest to welcome countries which adhere to rule of law and 
marketplace economics, a country that is a democracy, a country which 
allows for public dissent and free press. I think those are all 
wonderful values that ought to be incorporated--that NATO--that will 
benefit NATO, with the incorporation of a country like Georgia. It's not 
a given that Georgia enters. All I said was that Georgia ought to be--
that the way forward into NATO for Georgia ought to be clear, and the 
road ought to be clearly delineated so that they can then do the things 
necessary to earn NATO membership.
    There's some question as to whether or not the United States was 
committed to this Georgian ascension, at least to be a part of the MAP 
Program. I think I cleared that up. I think people pretty understand--
pretty well understand my position on that now.
    Q. That's good. Thanks.
    The President. Mario.

Italy-U.S. Relations

    Q. Yes, Mr. President.
    The President. So let me ask you something, Mario. Was your face 
painted yesterday? [Laughter]
    Q. Mine wasn't. But one of a friend of mine was, but my dog had an 
Italian flag.
    The President. Very good. [Laughter]
    Q. So that created quite an impression. Mr. President, two senior 
officials of SISMI,

[[Page 1311]]

the Italian counterintelligence service, have been arrested just 
recently.
    The President. Mario, I'm going to give you a chance to ask another 
question because I'm not going to talk about ongoing cases. If you'd 
like to come up with another question----
    Q. It's an open case. It's open in the sense that today, there has 
been a request from the magistrate for the extradition of 26 CIA----
    The President. Mario--Mario----
    Q. In principle, you would----
    The President. Mario, no, I'm not going to talk about the case. You 
can ask another question, since I cut you off before you were able to 
ask your full question.
    Q. You confuse me with the soccer. [Laughter]
    The President. This is just in fairness.
    Q. Okay.
    The President. Gone from Mr. Thoughtful to Mr. Openminded here. 
[Laughter]
    Q. Well, Mr. President, you've known Mr. Prodi for a long time, and 
you've known Mr. Berlusconi--you've known both of them. And how would 
you assess the personal relationship that you had with Mr. Prodi and 
with Mr. Berlusconi? Is there a difference how comfortable would you 
feel with one or the other?
    The President. I feel very comfortable with both. The first thing 
that's important is, I feel comfortable with the people of Italy. We've 
got very close ties.
    And let me just take a step back. What's interesting about our 
country is that we've got--we've had close ties with a lot of countries. 
My ranch was settled by Germans.
    Q. Really?
    The President. Yes. There's a huge number of Italian Americans, a 
lot of Russian Americans. You know, Norm Mineta in my Cabinet is a 
Japanese American. In other words, so when you talk about relations with 
an American President, you've got to understand that there's a--at least 
I have, I know my predecessors have connections, close connections with 
people who have fond--either fond memories and/or great pride in their 
motherland.
    And the way I like to define relations is that we've got--that I've 
got good relations and great respect for the country of Italy. 
Obviously, people are so different that you've just got to gauge your 
relationship to meet certain objectives. And our objective with our 
European friends is to have a Europe that is whole, free, and at peace 
and is in close concert with the United States.
    And so I think in this case, Prodi and Berlusconi share that 
objective, both share the same objective; same in Germany. And so I deal 
with them differently. They're just different types of people with 
different backgrounds. But I've known Romano Prodi, particularly since 
he was the head of the EU. I've worked with him quite a bit. Ask him 
about the time when I was riding my mountain bike on the beaches of Sea 
Island, Georgia. I came roaring by as fast as I could. There was Prodi 
with his head down. I made some kind of noise or something startled him 
out of his walking shoes, you know. [Laughter] My point is, there he 
was. He's a guy who I felt comfortable enough roaring by on a mountain 
bike, three Secret Service agents spewing up sand. [Laughter]
    I know him. I feel comfortable talking to him. I may--he may not 
agree with me. But the fundamental question I think you're searching for 
is, can you still have a good relationship even though you disagree on 
issues? And the answer is, yes. That's part of life. There's a--look, 
I'm the kind of person, I make decisions; I deal with problems; I want 
to solve them. And sometimes--and, you know, I make it clear where I 
stand. And that creates--in the world, people say, ``Wow, that creates 
tension.'' But privately, it doesn't. That's what you've got to know, 
that there's a--and I work hard to make sure that I've got good personal 
relationships with these leaders so we can solve problems. And I'm 
confident that----
    Q. Will you see him in----
    The President. Prodi?
    Q. ----in St. Petersburg, in a bilateral----
    The President. I don't even know. I'm not the scheduler, Mario. But 
I will see him.
    Q. In a bilateral?
    The President. Well, I'll take him aside, just the two of us, if 
that's--I'll take your recommendation for it. When I see him, I'll take 
him aside and congratulate him. I don't

[[Page 1312]]

know whether or not we're having bilaterals or not. Are we?
    National Security Adviser Stephen J. Hadley. We're still looking at 
it.
    The President. Mario, you want me focused on the big picture. I 
don't know my schedule. [Laughter]
    Q. Thank you.
    The President. All right. Masaomi.

Japan-U.S. Relations

    Q. Mr. President, U.S.-Japan relations are enjoying a golden age, a 
so-called golden age, which can be credited to close friendship that you 
and Prime Minister Koizumi share. On the other hand, Japanese relations 
with China and South Korea have chilled on Koizumi's watch. So how will 
you build the U.S.-Japan alliance with the next Prime Minister? And what 
do you hope to see in his approach to diplomacy towards Asia?
    The President. First of all, our relations are good. I'm not sure 
any President and Prime Minister are going to be able to duplicate our 
trip to Graceland. [Laughter] It's an unbelievable experience, if you 
think about it. It's really one of the interesting lessons of history, 
isn't it? And what I--I'm told these guys are sick of hearing me say 
this, but I'm going to say it anyway--what the President referred to by 
``these guys'' are the American people sitting behind--so my dad fought 
the Japanese. And that is startling to me that his son takes the Prime 
Minister to Graceland. Something happened. We fought the Germans; now 
we're very close friends.
    And what happened was, there's a--liberty took hold, a Japanese-
style democracy. That's what we're working on in Afghanistan and Iraq. 
Those are the stakes, as far as I'm concerned.
    And so we've got a great relationship, and I intend to keep it that 
way. It's in American interests that we work closely with Japan. It's 
also in our interests that Japan have got better relations with China 
and South Korea. And that's going to be up to the Japanese leaders to 
make the determination of how to do that. I, of course, have said that 
to Prime Minister Koizumi: ``We would hope that you would be able to 
improve relations.'' It's in our Nation's interest that our friends have 
good relations with other friends and acquaintances.
    And so that's going to be an interesting issue as to whether or not 
that's the case, whether that's a campaign issue in your democracy, 
whether or not it even matters to the people of Japan. But that's why 
you have elections. That's why you have decisionmaking in the democratic 
process, to determine whether that's an important issue.
    And that's--you know what's interesting about the world in which we 
live, if the Chinese are able to get the North Koreans back to the 
table, think about a negotiating arrangement where you've actually got 
the Japanese and the Chinese and the South Koreans and the Americans and 
the Russians all sitting down, trying to convince Kim Jong Il to give up 
his nuclear weapons program. It's pretty remarkable, when you think 
about it.
    And it's--and so I happen to believe--and the same thing is 
remarkable, in some ways, that we're still working very closely together 
on Iran. Germany has been great on Iran, by the way. Appreciate the 
Chancellor's strong position.
    And the reason I bring this up, these are issues which we will 
solve, and we're more likely to solve them more quickly when we work 
together to solve them. And it's--to me, it's a very positive 
development. It's a new framework. It's kind of an interesting--it's an 
interesting data point in history to know that nations with different 
backgrounds and at times warring with each other are now working 
together to deal the common--with the common threats. And it's a threat 
if the Iranians have a nuclear weapon. It's a threat to world peace. 
It's a threat to all of us. It's a threat for North Korea to develop a 
nuclear weapon. It's a very destabilizing event in the Far East. So 
we're working very closely with each other to get it done.

Japan-China Relations

    Q. Do you have any worry about the relations between Japan and 
China?
    The President. Do I worry about it?
    Q. Yes.
    The President. Well, I would hope it would improve, is the best way 
to put it--

[[Page 1313]]

hope it would improve. I think it's an important relationship. And I 
can't make it improve. That's up to the parties to make it improve. I 
can say, I hope it improves, to both parties, which I'm more than 
willing to do.
    Anyway, looking forward to going. Who's going? You're going, Steve? 
Tom? Stretch, you going? You're going to be there.
    Q. Mr. President----
    The President. No more questions.
    Q. That's it?
    Q. One more?
    The President. Okay, yes.

Iran

    Q. Great. [Laughter] Mr. President, you were mentioning Germany's 
role vis-a-vis Iran. Provided that there is no positive Iranian response 
before the G-8 summit----
    The President. I'm not sure I accept that yet.
    Q. Yes, well, let's just give it a try.
    The President. Well, it's hypothetical, Michael.
    Q. Okay, let's give it a try. What measures----
    The President. You can try it. Give me a head's up. [Laughter]
    Q. What measures--what kind of sanctions will the administration 
strive for? And how do you want to convince Russia and China to come 
aboard?
    The President. We spent a lot of time talking about these--more than 
one issue now, obviously, Russia and China. But part of diplomacy is 
just constant work, constant dialog, and constant discussion, and remind 
people that we have declared common goals. The goal on the Korean 
Peninsula is a nuclear weapons-free peninsula. The goal of the Iranians 
is no nuclear program.
    And everybody has got different interests. And so everybody has got 
different pressures. So diplomacy takes awhile. And what you're 
watching--what the world watches now is diplomacy in action. And we will 
work very quietly with our friends to work toward a resolution of the 
issue with the goal of achieving this thing diplomatically, of achieving 
this issue--success diplomatically but also with the goal of saying, you 
know, with common voice to, in this case, the Iranians, no weapons 
program.
    I'm not sure I necessarily accept your hypothesis that something 
positive isn't going to happen. I don't know. But what I'm going to tell 
you is, we'll react to it if it doesn't, if something positive doesn't 
happen.
    Q. So far, nothing has happened. On the Iranian side, it's been 
going on for a long time.
    The President. Right, but there's a meeting here pretty soon. 
Wednesday.
    Q. So you're trusting the Iranians?
    The President. No, no, no. You're asking me to--you're asking me--
you're predicting the outcome of the meeting, and I'm saying, I'm not 
predicting the outcome of the meeting. And either way, we'll be prepared 
to react.
    Q. So there is----
    The President. Good try, though, on the hypothetical question.
    Q. Very briefly.
    The President. Yes, Andrei.

War on Terror

    Q. The Russians got their Usama bin Laden, Shamil Basayev, who was 
responsible for killing the children in Beslan. What do you have to say 
to the Russians about that? And also, will you be discussing with 
President Putin his new idea about the new binding treaty to replace the 
old START I that expires?
    The President. I'll be talking to him about a variety of subjects. 
Yes, looking forward to hearing from that. And I--I guess we're 
gathering the details on the death of the guy, to find out more about 
it, you know. But if he's, in fact, the person that ordered the killing 
of children in Beslan, he deserved it.
    Q. Mr. President, on the U.N.--United Nations, after Kofi Annan----
    The President. It's an interesting thing about terrorists, by the 
way, they'll kill children like that. They don't care.

United Nations Secretary-General

    Q. The name surfaced recently of Prince Zeid, who is a member of the 
royal family of Jordan--was the representative of Jordan to the U.N. And 
he would be the first Muslim in case he would run for it.

[[Page 1314]]

    The President. You're trying to rope me into the----
    Q. No, I'm saying, would you be against a moderate Muslim?
    The President. You're trying to get me to commit a name, actually 
talk about names.
    Q. No, no, no. In general. [Laughter]
    The President. As I understand it, the--traditionally, there's kind 
of a--regions rotate, and we're really looking in the Far East right now 
to be the Secretary-General--Secretary-General there. Holland [Steve 
Holland, Reuters].
    Q. Oh, sorry. [Laughter]
    The President. Well, that's kind of where the current--that's kind 
of where the current--he's over 60. No he's not--53?
    Q. Fifty-one.
    The President. Fifty-one. That's kind of--his birthday was recently. 
That's kind of--so the discussions mainly, at least the ones I've heard 
about this, somebody from the eastern--Far East----
    Q. Asia.
    The President. Asia, yes. So this is the first I've heard of this 
suggestion. And you'll find that we will work closely with friends and 
allies to come up with the best candidate, but we won't be committing 
publicly, like you're trying to get me to do.
    Q. But with general principle, will you be against a Muslim, in 
Indonesia, for example, who is up for the position?
    The President. Not at all, would not be against a Muslim. The 
criterion I'm for is somebody who wants to spread liberty and enhance 
the peace, do difficult things like confront tyranny, worry about the 
human condition, blow the whistle on human rights violations.
    Yes, sir. Final question now, for certain. Michael roped me into 
another round there. [Laughter]

North Korea

    Q. Going back to North Korea, do you still think U.S. can deal with 
Kim Jong Il in resolving the crisis, or do you have sort of regime 
change in mind?
    The President. What we want is for the North Korean leader to give 
up his weapons programs. And the United States tried to deal with him 
bilaterally in the past, and it didn't work. So I changed the policy. I 
said it's not going to be just the United States dealing with the North 
Korean leader. We're also going to have other partners like Japan and 
South Korea and Russia and China.
    See, in the past, negotiators from the United States sat down and 
said this, that, and the other, and the North Koreans didn't honor the 
agreement. So I'm trying a different approach. My last approach didn't 
work, so hopefully this approach will work. And I think it's more likely 
to work because you've got more than just one person saying it--you 
know, ``Get rid of your weapons programs.'' Now we've got neighbors 
saying the same thing. And so that's where we are right now.
    What's interesting, I thought, was that, you know, the Chinese, the 
United States, Japan, and South Korea, Russia all said, ``Don't fire 
your weapon; don't fire your rockets.'' And he fired his rockets.
    And that ought to be an interesting lesson to all of us involved in 
this relationship, that we've got to stay very close together and speak 
with one voice, because it's very--he must hear clearly that that kind 
of behavior is unacceptable. People have asked me, what do I think he's 
trying to achieve? I don't know. It's a nontransparent society. It's 
hard to tell. Like, if I were to make a decision, you'd be reading about 
it. People, reporters all over the place trying to--``Why did he do 
this; why did he do that?'' And that's good. That's what an open society 
does. I don't know what objective he was trying to achieve.
    But from my perspective, it sent a signal that he really was not 
afraid of isolating himself even further. My attitude is, is that the 
people of North Korea can have a much better life than they've--than 
their leader has chosen for them. There's tremendous starvation in North 
Korea. There's huge concentration camps. It's unacceptable behavior, as 
far as I'm concerned.
    And I would hope that the North Korean leader would choose a 
different path forward. And the way to do that is to get rid of your 
weapons programs in a verifiable fashion. There's a better way forward 
for the Iranian leadership than isolation, and that is to get rid of the 
weapons programs in a verifiable fashion. It's their choice to make. 
We've

[[Page 1315]]

made our--the United States has made its choice; Germany has made its 
choice; Russia has made her choice; Japan has made its choice. We've 
made our choice; the choice is theirs. And I would hope that these 
leaders would recognize that there is--there's benefits for their 
people. They truly care about their people. There's benefits for their 
people.
    You know, one of the most moving moments of my Presidency came when 
the young--when the mother of--young daughter was kidnaped by the North 
Koreans. Imagine. Anybody got children here? Imagine if some foreign 
nation ordered your child to be kidnaped, just removed. And never--they 
never heard from the girl again. They went--she was telling me, she was 
wondering whether she was murdered, and they searched everywhere. It's 
unbelievable, isn't it? It turns out that they believe that she was in 
North Korea, a regime that just felt like there was no accountability 
and no regard for human rights and just took this young child.
    So the mother was sitting there in the Oval Office with me. It was 
incredibly emotional. After all these years, she still felt this pain in 
her heart. And my point is, is that there's a better way forward than 
that, to live in a society like that. And the choice is his to make, in 
North Korea's case. I hope he makes the right choice. It's important for 
all of us to continue to make that very clear. If he chooses the other 
way, he'll be isolated and his people won't benefit.
    Okay. Thank you all. I enjoyed it.

Note: The interview was taped at 2:30 p.m. in the Roosevelt Room at the 
White House. In his remarks, the President referred to Chancellor Angela 
Merkel and former Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder of Germany; President 
Vladimir Putin of Russia, and his wife, Lyudmila; President Luiz Inacio 
Lula da Silva of Brazil; Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki of Iraq; Chairman 
Kim Jong Il of North Korea; Prime Minister Romano Prodi and former Prime 
Minister Silvio Berlusconi of Italy; Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi of 
Japan; Shamil Basayev, a Chechen separatist leader, who was killed on 
July 10; and Sakie Yokata, mother of a Japanese woman abducted by North 
Korean authorities. Reporters referred to Prime Minister Tony Blair of 
the United Kingdom; Usama bin Laden, leader of the Al Qaida terrorist 
organization; Secretary-General Kofi Annan of the United Nations; and 
Prince Zeid Ra'ad Zeid al-Hussein of Jordan. The transcript was released 
by the Office of the Press Secretary on July 11. A tape was not 
available for verification of the content of this interview.