[Weekly Compilation of Presidential Documents Volume 42, Number 28 (Monday, July 17, 2006)]
[Pages 1327-1333]
[Online from the Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]

<R04>
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

[[Page 1328]]

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--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

[[Page 1329]]

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, 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

[[Page 1330]]

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 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. 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 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.

[[Page 1331]]

    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.

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,

[[Page 1332]]

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 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

[[Page 1333]]

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 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 Putin of Russia; 
President Mahmoud Abbas (Abu Mazen) of the Palestinian Authority; Prime 
Minister Fuad Siniora of Lebanon; 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.