[Weekly Compilation of Presidential Documents Volume 42, Number 32 (Monday, August 14, 2006)]
[Pages 1442-1450]
[Online from the Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]

<R04>
The President's News Conference With Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice 
in Crawford, Texas

August 7, 2006

    The President. Good morning. Since the crisis in Lebanon began more 
than 3 weeks ago, the United States and other key nations have been 
working for a comprehensive solution that would return control of 
Lebanon to its Government and to provide a sustainable peace that 
protects the lives of both the Lebanese and the Israeli people.
    Secretary Rice and diplomats from other countries are developing 
United Nations resolutions to bring about a cessation of hostilities and 
establish a foundation for lasting peace.
    The first resolution, which the Security Council is now considering, 
calls for a stop of all hostilities. Under its terms, Hizballah will be 
required to immediately stop all attacks. Israel will be required to 
immediately stop all offensive military operations. In addition, the 
resolution calls for an embargo on

[[Page 1443]]

the shipment of any arms into Lebanon, except as authorized by the 
Lebanese Government.
    A second resolution, which the Security Council will begin working 
on as soon as possible, will help establish a sustainable and enduring 
cease-fire and provide a mandate for a robust international force that 
will help the legitimate Government of Lebanon extend its authority over 
all of Lebanon's territory.
    Under this second resolution, the Lebanese Armed Forces, supported 
by the international force, will deploy to southern Lebanon. This 
international force will help Lebanon patrol its border with Syria and 
prevent illegal arm shipments to Hizballah. As these Lebanese and 
international forces deploy, the Israeli Defense Forces will withdraw. 
And both Israel and Lebanon will respect the Blue Line that divides 
them.
    These two resolutions are designed to bring an immediate end to the 
fighting, to help restore sovereignty over Lebanese soil to Lebanese 
democratic government--to Lebanon's democratic Government, excuse me--to 
strike a blow against the terrorists and their supporters, and to help 
bring lasting peace to the region. By taking these steps, it will 
prevent armed militias like Hizballah and its Iranian and Syrian 
sponsors from sparking another crisis. It will protect innocent Lebanese 
and Israelis. And it will help the international community deliver 
humanitarian relief and support Lebanon's revival and reconstruction.
    The loss of life on both sides of the Lebanese-Israeli border has 
been a great tragedy. Millions of Lebanese civilians have been caught in 
the crossfire of military operations because of the unprovoked attack 
and kidnapings by Hizballah. The humanitarian crisis in Lebanon is of 
deep concern to all Americans, and alleviating it will remain a priority 
of my Government.
    I also believe that innocent civilians in Israel should not have to 
live in bunkers in fear of missile attacks. To establish a lasting peace 
that protects innocent civilians on both sides of the border, we must 
address the underlying conditions that are the root cause of this 
crisis.
    I believe that the two resolutions I have discussed and that 
Secretary Rice is working on will put us on that path.
    And now I'll be glad to answer some questions. Nedra [Nedra Pickler, 
Associated Press].

United Nations Security Council Resolution on the Situation in the 
Middle East

    Q. Thank you, Mr. President. Lebanon has rejected the draft 
proposal, and Israel is not speaking out in support of it. How do you 
get a resolution that both sides will support?
    The President. Everyone wants the violence to stop. People 
understand that there needs to be a cessation of hostilities in order 
for us to address the root causes of the problem. That was the spirit 
that came out of the G-8 conference; it came out of the Rome conference 
that Secretary Rice attended. We all recognize that the violence must 
stop. And so that's what Secretary Rice is working toward with our 
friends and allies.
    Look, everybody is--I understand both parties aren't going to agree 
with all aspects of the resolution. But the intent of the resolutions is 
to strengthen the Lebanese Government so Israel has got a partner in 
peace. The intent of the resolution is to make sure that we address the 
root cause--the resolution is to address the root cause, which was a 
state operating within the state. Hizballah was--or is an armed movement 
that provoked the crisis.
    And so whatever comes out of the resolutions must address that root 
cause. And so the task today for the Secretary and her counterparts is 
to develop a resolution that can get passed. It is essential that we 
create the conditions for the Lebanese Government to move their own 
forces, with international help, into the south of Lebanon to prevent 
Hizballah and its sponsors from creating this--creating another crisis. 
And so that's where we're headed.
    Steve [Steve Holland, Reuters].

Level of Violence in the Middle East/United Nations Security Council 
Resolution

    Q. The Lebanese Prime Minister is demanding a quick and decisive 
cease-fire after

[[Page 1444]]

an Israeli air raid today killed 40 people. When will we see this 
resolution? And if it's approved, when will we see a cessation of 
violence?
    The President. I'll let Condi talk about the details of what she's 
going to do today, if you care to hear from her. But we will work with 
our partners to get the resolution laid down as quickly as possible. And 
the resolution will call for a cessation of violence. And the concern, 
by the way, from the parties in the region is whether or not the 
resolution will create a vacuum into which Hizballah and its sponsors 
will be able to promote more instability.
    We all agree that we ought to strengthen this Government, the 
Lebanese Government--that's the purpose of the resolutions, as well as 
to stop the violence.
    I don't know if you want to comment upon----
    Secretary Rice. First of all, we are working from what we believe to 
be a strong basis for a cessation of hostilities, that is the U.S.-
French draft, a strong basis for the cessation of hostilities, and then 
as the President said, to have a process then that can address the root 
causes. And we also believe that it's going to be very important that 
this first resolution lay a very quick foundation for passage of a 
second resolution. So these have to be worked, in a sense, together.
    I spoke last night and yesterday with Prime Minister Olmert, with 
Prime Minister Siniora, with Secretary General Kofi Annan, with a number 
of others, and I think we believe that there is a way forward.
    Now, we understand that this has been a very emotional and, indeed, 
devastating and tragic set of circumstances for Lebanon and for Israel. 
And obviously, the parties have views on how to stop this. Their views 
are not going to necessarily be consonant about how to stop it. The 
international community has a view, but, of course, we're going to take 
a little time and listen to the concerns of the parties and see how they 
can be addressed.
    But I want to just note, we believe that the extant draft resolution 
is a firm foundation, is the right basis, but, of course, we're going to 
listen to the concerns of the parties and see how they might be 
addressed. And that's really what's going to be going on today, 
particularly after the Arab League meets and Prime Minister Siniora 
emerges from that.
    The President. Yes, Peter [Peter Wallsten, Los Angeles Times].

U.S. Armed Forces

    Q. Thanks. Mr. President, officials have been quoted saying that the 
international force would not include U.S. troops. And I wonder if you 
can explain why that is? Is it because the military is already 
overtasked? Is it because you're afraid that the U.S. doesn't have 
credibility in the region?
    The President. No, I think--first of all, there has been a history 
in Lebanon with U.S. troops. Secondly, I have said that if the 
international force would like some help with logistics and command and 
control, we'd be willing to offer logistics and command and control. 
There are some places where--it's like Darfur; people say to me, ``Why 
don't you commit U.S. troops to Darfur as part of an international 
peacekeeping?'' And the answer there is that those troops would be--
would create a sensation around the world that may not enable us to 
achieve our objective. And so when we commit troops, we commit troops 
for a specific reason, with the intent of achieving an objective. And I 
think command and control and logistical support is probably the best--
is the best use of U.S. forces.
    Mike Fletcher [Washington Post].

Syria/Iran

    Q. Many strategists say that we'll never get to the bottom of this 
crisis unless the U.S. engages directly with Syria and Iran. Why not 
talk to them directly about this and have a back-and-forth conversation?
    The President. Yes, that's an interesting question. I've been 
reading about that, that people have been posing that question. We have 
been in touch with Syria. Colin Powell sent a message to Syria in 
person. Dick Armitage traveled to Syria. Bill Burns traveled to Syria. 
We've got a consulate office in Syria. Syria knows what we think. The 
problem isn't us telling Syria what's on our mind, which is to stop 
harboring terror and to help the Iraqi democracy evolve. They

[[Page 1445]]

know exactly what our position is. The problem is, is that their 
response hasn't been very positive. As a matter of fact, it hasn't been 
positive at all.
    And in terms of Iran, we made it clear to the Iranians that if they 
would honor previous obligations and verifiably stop enrichment of 
nuclear materials, we would sit at a table. And so there's a way forward 
for both countries. The choice is theirs. Now, I appreciate people 
focusing on Syria and Iran, and we should, because Syria and Iran 
sponsor and promote Hizballah activities--all aimed at creating chaos, 
all aimed at using terror to stop the advance of democracies.
    Our objective, our policy is to give voice to people through 
democratic reform, and that's why we strongly support the Siniora 
Government. That's why I've articulated a two-state solution between 
Israel and the Palestinians, two democracies living side by side in 
peace. That's why Condi went to see President Abbas, the President of 
the Palestinian Territories, to assure him that we're committed to a 
democracy. That's why we're making sacrifices in Iraq--to build 
democracy.
    In other words, we believe democracy yields peace. And the actions 
of Hizballah, through its sponsors of Iran and Syria, are trying to stop 
that advance of democracy. Hizballah launched this attack. Hizballah is 
trying to create the chaos necessary to stop the advance of peace. And 
the world community must come together to address this problem.
    Let's see here. Jim [Jim Axelrod, CBS News].

United Nations Security Council Resolution 1559

    Q. Mr. President, in the last couple of weeks, every time the 
question was asked, why not get an immediate cessation and then build a 
sustainable--terms for a sustainable cease-fire after you get the 
hostilities stopped, it was categorically rejected. Yet a few weeks 
later, here we are. Can you explain why this wasn't done a couple weeks 
ago?
    The President. Sure. Because, first of all, the international 
community hadn't come together on a concept of how to address the root 
cause of the problem, Jim.
    Part of the problem in the past in the Middle East is people would 
paper over the root cause of the problem, and therefore, the situation 
would seemingly be quiet, and then lo and behold, there'd be another 
crisis. And innocent people would suffer. And so our strategy all along 
has been, of course we want to have a cessation of hostilities, but what 
we want to do in the same time is to make sure that there is a way 
forward for the Lebanese Government to secure its own country so that 
there's peace in the region.
    And that deals with an international peacekeeping force to 
complement a Lebanese army moving into the south to make sure that 
Resolution 1559, passed 2 years ago by the U.N., was fully upheld. Had 
the parties involved fully implemented 1559, which called for the 
disarmament of Hizballah, we would not be in the situation we're in 
today.
    Let's see here. Yes, Richard [Richard Bennadetto, USA Today].

Diplomatic Efforts To Achieve Sustainable Peace in the Middle East

    Q. Mr. President, what are the specific stumbling blocks that are 
preventing this first resolution from being passed quickly? What are the 
people--what are the parties objecting to in the language that needs to 
be altered?
    Secretary Rice. I think that first of all, I don't--I'm not going to 
get into specifics about the views of the parties. I think that we have 
to do that privately and talk with the parties privately. But obviously, 
this particular resolution is important because it sets an agenda for 
the basis for a sustainable peace. And so it will not surprise you that 
the Lebanese have views of what should be on that agenda. The Israelis 
have views of what should be on that agenda. They aren't always the same 
views, and so working together to get to what that agenda should be is 
part of what's going on here.
    But I will say something that's very interesting. There is more 
agreement than you might think about how to prevent, again, a situation 
in which you have a state within a state able to launch an attack across 
the Blue Line.
    For instance, there is agreement that the Lebanese Government needs 
to extend its

[[Page 1446]]

authority throughout the country, that it needs to have the Lebanese 
Armed Forces move to take care of this vacuum that has been existing in 
the south, that there should not be any armed groups able just to 
operate in the south in the way that Hizballah has been able to operate 
in the south, that there ought to be respect for the Blue Line. These 
are all agreements between the two parties.
    And so there is going to be some pressure from both sides to get 
things onto the agenda because they want to get them onto the agenda. 
But I think we have a reasonable basis here that both sides can accept. 
I think there are some issues of timing and sequence that need to be 
worked out. There are some concerns about when an international force 
would actually be available. And so we're going to continue to work to 
address those concerns of the two parties.
    But as the President said, this last 3 weeks has been extremely 
important. Had we done this 3 weeks ago, we were talking about what 
people--an unconditional cease-fire that I can guarantee you would not 
have addressed any of these items that both sides know are going to have 
to be addressed if we're going to have a sustainable cease-fire in the 
future. So this has been time that's been well spent over the last 
couple of weeks, that everybody agrees it's time to have a cessation. 
We're going to work a little bit more with the parties, and I think this 
resolution will be the right basis--both to cease the hostilities and to 
move forward.
    The President. Sheryl [Sheryl Gay Stolberg, New York Times].

Diplomatic Negotiations/Situation in the Middle East

    Q. Mr. President, you've spoken with Prime Minister Blair and 
Chancellor Merkel about this. Have you spoken directly with Prime 
Ministers Olmert and Siniora? And if not, why not?
    The President. Because Condi is handling those conversations, and 
she's doing a fine job of doing so.
    Yes.

Hizballah/War on Terror

    Q. Mr. President, you've been quite specific in Hizballah's role as 
the creator of this conflict. But what is the magnet, what is the 
pressure point, what is the hook to get this group to accept a cease-
fire, to stop shooting and to stop kidnaping soldiers from across the 
border of another country?
    The President. Yes, I would hope it would be international pressure 
on not only Hizballah, the group of Hizballah within Lebanon, but also 
its sponsors. And that's the whole purpose of the United States working 
with allies and friends, is to send a clear message that sponsoring 
terror is unacceptable. It's the great challenge of the 21st century, 
really.
    Q. Do you----
    The President. Let me finish for a minute.
    Q. I'm sorry.
    The President. It is the great challenge of this century, and it's 
this: As young democracies flourish, terrorists try to stop their 
progress. And it's the great challenge of the United States and others 
who are blessed with living in free countries. Not only do terrorists 
try to stop the advance of democracy through killing innocent people 
within those countries, they also try to shape the will of the Western 
World by killing innocent westerners. They try to spread their jihadist 
message, a message I call--it's totalitarian in nature, Islamic 
radicalism, Islamic fascism. They try to spread it as well by taking the 
attack to those of us who love freedom.
    And as far as this administration is concerned, we clearly see the 
problem, and we're going to continue to work to advance stable, free 
countries. We don't expect every country to look like the United States, 
but we do want countries to accept some basic conditions for a vibrant 
society--human rights, human decency, the power of the people to 
determine the fate of their governments. And, admittedly, this is hard 
work because it flies in the face of previous policy, which basically 
says stability is more important than form of government. And as a 
result of that policy, anger and resentment bubbled forth with an 
attack, with a series of attacks, the most dramatic of which was on 
September the 11th.
    You know, your question is, can we get people to--a terrorist group 
to change their attitude? What we can do is, we can get state

[[Page 1447]]

sponsors of terror to understand this behavior is unacceptable and that 
we can convince some people in terrorist groups that there is a better 
way forward for them and their families.
    Remember, Hizballah is a political party within Lebanon. They 
actually ran people for office. The problem is, is that they're a 
political party with a militia that is armed by foreign nations, and, 
obviously, this political party with militia was willing to try to 
influence the Middle East through unprovoked attacks.
    And what Condi is working on and I work on is to remind people about 
the stakes in the Middle East. And those stakes include not only helping 
the Lebanese Government firm up its democracy--remember, we worked with 
the French 2 years ago to boot out Syria. Syria was inside Lebanon, and 
we felt that in order for a democracy to flourish, Syria needed to 
remove not only her troops but her agents, her intelligence agents, for 
example.
    And, obviously, there are some in the region that don't want the 
Lebanese Government to succeed. I also happen to believe that as Prime 
Minister Olmert was making progress in reaching out to President Abbas 
and others in the region to develop a Palestinian state, that that 
caused a terrorist reaction. Remember, this all started with the 
kidnaping of an Israeli soldier by militant Hamas, followed shortly 
thereafter by the kidnaping of two Israeli soldiers by Hizballah.
    And finally, the third most notable battleground in the advance of 
liberty is Iraq. It's interesting; if you go back to the work of Mr. 
Zarqawi, he talked about fomenting sectarian violence in order to stop 
the advance of democracy. The challenge of the 21st century is for free 
nations to help those who aspire to liberty. And, you know, the first 
question is, do people aspire to liberty? And the answer is, 
absolutely--look at the 12 million people who voted in Iraq. Or look at 
the people who went to the polls in Lebanon. It's just clear to me that 
there will be terrorist activities that will try to stop people from 
living a decent, hopeful life.
    And what you're watching now is diplomatic efforts to address the 
problem. I know there's--I sense a certain impatience in your voice 
about diplomacy coming to a conclusion. What Secretary Rice is doing, as 
well as me, is we are dealing with a lot of different interests. 
Remember, each nation at the Security Council has got its own domestic 
issues to deal with, as well, and so it is--I wish things happened 
quicker in the diplomatic realm--sometimes it takes a while to get 
things done. But what the American people need to know is, we've got a 
strategy--a strategy for freedom in the Middle East which protects the 
American people in the long run. And we've got a strategy to deal with 
the situations that arise in the Middle East--first Lebanon; of course, 
the Iranian nuclear weapon issue.
    And, as you remember, right before the G-8, the question on your 
mind was, would we ever get a resolution out of the U.N. on the 
Iranians' desire to have a nuclear weapon, as well as whether or not 
we'd ever get a resolution out of the U.N. to deal with North Korea? As 
a matter of fact, there was great skepticism, I felt, in some circles, 
as to whether or not we'd be able to put a diplomacy in place that would 
deal with these two very difficult problems.
    And, in fact, during the G-8, two resolutions were passed--by the 
way, those resolutions overshadowed by the situation in Lebanon. And I'm 
confident that working with our friends, if we stay on principle and 
remind people of the stakes, that we'll be able to accomplish the 
diplomatic objectives that we have set out--which is dealing with this 
problem and addressing the long-term issues.
    A couple more questions, and we'll get out--Suzanne [Suzanne 
Malveaux, Cable News Network].

Spread of Democracy/Situation in the Middle East

    Q. If I could follow Nedra's question. She had asked, Lebanon----
    The President. I can't remember that far back. [Laughter]
    Q. Lebanon's Parliament Speaker, Nabih Berri, who has been 
negotiating for Hizballah, has rejected the first resolution, saying 
it's unacceptable; they want the Israeli troops to pull out immediately. 
Is that a negotiable point? And also, Secretary Rice, will

[[Page 1448]]

you be reaching out to Berri, as you had spoken with him before?
    The President. Whatever happens in the U.N., we must not create a 
vacuum into which Hizballah and its sponsors are able to move more 
weapons. Sometimes the world likes to take the easy route in order to 
solve a problem. Our view is, it's time to address root causes of 
problems. And to create a vacuum, Suzanne, is unacceptable. It would 
mean that we haven't addressed the root cause.
    The idea is to have the Lebanese Government move into the south so 
that the Government of Lebanon can protect its own territory and that 
there be an international force to provide the help necessary for the 
Lebanese Government to secure its country. Remember, in Germany, the 
first thing I said was--or one of the first things I said; I think I 
said this--help me out here, if I didn't----
    Secretary Rice. I think you did.
    The President. ----was we want the Siniora Government to survive and 
to be strengthened. The linchpin of the policy is to support 
democracies. And so the strategy at the U.N., the diplomatic strategy is 
to support that notion, because a democracy in Lebanon will not only 
help that nation address its long-term issues--such as rebuilding and 
providing a hopeful life--but a democracy on Israeli's northern border 
will stabilize--help stabilize the region. We are committed to a 
democracy in the Palestinian territory.
    President Abbas, in his conversations with Condi, talked about 
moving forward with democracy. There are people who can't stand the 
thought of a society based upon universal liberty from emerging. And 
that in itself ought to be a warning signal to those of us who care 
deeply for peace, that people would be willing to kill innocent citizens 
in order to stop the advance of liberty.
    Now, I've talked a lot about the universal appeal of liberty, and I 
readily concede some people aren't willing to--some say, well, you know, 
liberty may not be universal in this sense--America imposes its will. We 
don't impose liberty; liberty is universal.
    It's one of the interesting debates of the 21st century, I think, 
that some would be willing to say it's okay for people not to live in a 
free society. It's not okay for us. If you love peace, in order to 
achieve peace you must help people realize that which is universal, and 
that is freedom.
    She asked you a question.
    Secretary Rice. Our point of contact for the Lebanese Government is 
obviously Prime Minister Siniora. As you know, I've also spoken to 
Speaker Berri on a couple of occasions.
    I understand how emotional this is for the Lebanese. They've been 
through a very difficult war. It's emotional for Israel as well. They're 
in the midst of a difficult war.
    Let me just say that in terms of what the end state will look like 
here, I don't think there is any disagreement that the right solution is 
the one that the President referred to. It's the Lebanese and the 
Lebanese Armed Forces able to secure their territory. And the 
international help is so that Lebanon can secure its territory. And I 
don't believe anybody anticipates that there should be foreign forces on 
Lebanese soil as a result of what has happened here.
    And so I think there is room on this issue to work on this issue, 
because everybody has the same vision--that it's the Lebanese Army, with 
support from an international force, that can actually prevent that 
vacuum from obtaining again in the south, so that we're not right back 
here 3 or 4 or 5 months from now, in the same situation.

President Fidel Castro of Cuba

    Q. Mr. President, I don't think we've heard from you since Fidel 
Castro has fallen ill. Can you give us what you know of his current 
condition, what your administration's contingency plans are for his 
death, and how they address the desire of Cuban exiles in this country 
to eventually go home and reclaim their property?
    The President. First of all, Cuba is not a very transparent society, 
so the only thing I know is what has been speculated. And that is that, 
on the one hand, he's very ill, and on the other hand, he's going to be 
coming out of a hospital. I don't know. I really don't know.
    And secondly, that our desire is for the Cuban people to be able to 
choose their own form of government, and we would hope

[[Page 1449]]

that--and we'll make this very clear--that as Cuba has the possibility 
of transforming itself from a tyrannical situation to a different type 
of society, the Cuban people ought to decide. The people on the island 
of Cuba ought to decide. And once the people of Cuba decide their form 
of government, then Cuban Americans can take an interest in that country 
and redress the issues of property confiscation. But first things first, 
and that is, the Cuban people need to decide the future of their 
country.

Progress in Iraq

    Q. Mr. President, if I could turn to Iraq for a moment.
    The President. Sure.
    Q. When you and Prime Minister Blair met at the White House a few 
months ago, you were asked about mistakes and missteps. And he said the 
one mistake he made was miscalculating in thinking that a young 
democracy, as you put it, would be born very quickly after the fall of 
Saddam. Are you prepared today to agree with him and acknowledge that 
you've had the same expectations, which were wrong?
    The President. Actually, I think--I can't remember his answer; I'm 
sure you've characterized it perfectly. My attitude is that a young 
democracy has been born quite quickly. And I think the Iraqi Government 
has shown remarkable progress on the political front, and that is, is 
that they developed a modern constitution that was ratified by the 
people, and then 12 million people voted for a government--which gives 
me confidence about the future in Iraq, by the way.
    You know, I hear people say, ``Well, civil war this, civil war 
that.'' The Iraqi people decided against civil war when they went to the 
ballot box, and a unity government is working to respond to the will of 
the people. And frankly, it's quite a remarkable achievement on the 
political front, and the security front is where there have been 
troubles. And it's going to be up to the Maliki Government, with U.S. 
help, to use the trained forces and eventually a trained police force to 
take care of those who are trying to foment sectarian violence.
    We've made some progress against some of those folks, particularly 
when Mr. Zarqawi met his demise. Remember, Al Qaida is in the country, 
all attempting to stop the advance of democracy. And the blowing up of 
the mosque created an opportunity for those who were trying to foment 
sectarian violence to achieve their objective. But the Iraqi people 
rejected that kind of sectarian violence; the Army stood strong.
    No question, it's still difficult. On the other hand, the political 
process is part of helping to achieve our objective, which is a free 
country, an ally in the war on terror that can sustain itself and govern 
itself and defend itself.
    Okay, who else? I don't want to hurt any feelings. Yes, sir.

United Nations Security Council Resolution 1559/War on Terror

    Q. Thank you very much.
    The President. Identify yourself.
    Q. Kevin Corke, NBC News, sir.
    The President. Right. I knew that.
    Q. Yes, sir.
    The President. Just wanted to make sure you did.
    Q. Yes, indeed. In reading the 1559 resolution and the draft as it's 
currently constructed, there are a lot of similarities, quite frankly. 
And I'm wondering if you could speak to, maybe, the frustration some 
Americans might be feeling that you've said we want sustainable peace; 
we don't want to come back here in a few months or a few years, and yet 
it seems like there will be another resolution, maybe another 
resolution, maybe another this, that, and the other. People get 
frustrated. Can you understand that and respond to that, sir?
    The President. Well, the people who should get really frustrated are 
the Israelis and the Lebanese. They ought to be the ones who are 
frustrated, because 1559 clearly laid a way forward for there to be a 
strong democracy in Lebanon, which will more likely yield the peace. And 
there is a level of frustration around the world with organizations that 
will take innocent life to achieve political objectives. And our job is 
to remind people that this isn't a moment; this is a movement, and that 
we must deal with this movement. We must deal with this movement with 
strong security measures; we must bring justice to those who would 
attack us, and at the same

[[Page 1450]]

time, defeat their ideology by the spread of liberty.
    And it takes a lot of work. This is the beginning of a long struggle 
against an ideology that is real and profound. It's Islamo-fascism. It 
comes in different forms. They share the same tactics, which is to 
destroy people and things in order to create chaos in the hopes that 
their vision of the world become predominant in the Middle East.
    And Condi and I will work hard--by the way, the United States can't 
win this war alone. We can do damage to the enemy. We can take the 
philosophical high ground and remind people of the importance of how 
freedom can change societies. But we will work with allies and friends 
to achieve this objective. And part of the challenge in the 21st century 
is to remind people about the stakes and remind people that in moments 
of quiet, there's still an Islamic fascist group plotting, planning, and 
trying to spread their ideology. And one of the things that--one of the 
things that came out of this unfortunate incident in the Middle East is, 
it is a stark reminder that there are those who want to stop the advance 
of liberty and destabilize young democracies. And they're willing to 
kill people to do so.
    I repeat, this whole incident started because Hizballah kidnaped two 
soldiers and launched rocket attacks. And it's been unfortunate that 
people on both sides of the border have lost life. And we're committed 
to helping the Lebanese Government rebuild.
    On the other hand, what we won't do is allow for a false hope. We 
believe that it's important to challenge the root cause now. We thought 
we had done so with 1559, but 1559 wasn't implemented. In other words, 
there was a way forward to deal with the problem. And now there's 
another chance to deal with the problem, and that's the role of the 
United States, working with others to not only remind people about the 
problem but to come up with solutions in dealing with the problem. And 
the solutions that we are working with our friends are, in our judgment, 
is the best hope for achieving stability and peace.
    But it takes a lot of work. And it takes commitment and focus. And 
that's what this administration will continue to do. We'll stay focused 
on the problem and stay focused on coming up with solutions that, when 
implemented, will leave behind a better world.
    Thank you all very much for your interest.

Note: The President's news conference began at 8:59 a.m. at the Bush 
Ranch. In his remarks, he referred to former Secretary of State Colin L. 
Powell; former Deputy Secretary of State Richard L. Armitage; President 
Mahmoud Abbas (Abu Mazen) of the Palestinian Authority; Prime Minister 
Ehud Olmert of Israel; Prime Minister Tony Blair of the United Kingdom; 
and Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki of Iraq. Secretary Rice referred to 
Prime Minister Fuad Siniora and Speaker of Parliament Nabih Berri of 
Lebanon; and Secretary-General Kofi Annan of the United Nations. A 
reporter referred to Chancellor Angela Merkel of Germany.