TRANSCRIPT: POWELL BRIEFING WITH BRITISH FOREIGN SECRETARY
(He and Cook discuss Libya, ESDI, Iraq, Middle East, NMD, Balkans)

February 6, 2001

Secretary of State Colin Powell and British Foreign Secretary Robin Cook held a joint media availability following their bilateral meeting February 6 at the State Department in Washington.

In his opening remarks, Powell said that he and Cook had discussed Libya, the European Security and Defense Identity (ESDI), the Middle East, Iraq, and the Balkans.  Cook added that they had also discussed the proliferation of missile technology and national missile defense.

Concerning Libya, Powell -- after welcoming the verdict in the Lockerbie trial -- said that Libya "must fulfill the requirements of the Security Council in full, including acceptance of responsibility for its actions, the actions of its officials, and also in paying appropriate compensation."

On the question of ESDI, Foreign Secretary Cook said both he and Secretary Powell had agreed that "an increase in Europe's rapid reaction capability could strengthen NATO and we are both determined that this new European capacity shall  be firmly anchored in NATO."

Powell said the Bush administration has a very good understanding of what ESDI is all about, and that if it is "firmly embedded in NATO and we're not duplicating planning capabilities ... then there's no reason to see this as destabilizing NATO in any way."  He added that the United States and its European partners could "work through the modalities" of the issue in the months ahead "without any great difficulty," and Cook said, "I am content with all that."

National missile defense, Powell said, is a "very sensible concept that complements strategic offensive forces and nonproliferation efforts and command- and-control systems, and all together they strengthen deterrence and they protect us from these dangerous weapons systems that are in danger of proliferating."

"And I think if we can make that case, then everybody will want to be a part and play a role in missile defense, whether it's theater missile defense or national missile defense," he added.

Regarding the Middle East, Powell urged leaders in the region "to do everything to make sure that violence doesn't start to swell up, to make sure that we don't have provocations, provocations which then lead to counter-provocations and a cycle of violence begins which throws things into a state of uncontrolled events just happening." 

On Iraq, according to Cook, both men agreed it was important to get the debate focused on the threat from Saddam Hussein and his ambition to acquire weapons of mass destruction.

Following is the State Department transcript:

(Begin transcript)

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE
Office of the Spokesman

February 6, 2001

JOINT PRESS AVAILABILITY
WITH BRITISH FOREIGN MINISTER ROBIN COOK AND
SECRETARY OF STATE COLIN L. POWELL

Benjamin Franklin Room
Washington, D.C.

SECRETARY POWELL:  I am very pleased to have as my guest today a good friend, Foreign Secretary Robin Cook.  I look forward to a close and productive relationship with the Foreign Secretary in the months and in the years ahead as we pursue our common interests.

The United States and Britain enjoy an enduring and unique partnership, a partnership that is rooted in common values and interests, and strengthened by all we have been through together over many, many years.  Throughout the past century, whether in war or peace, the United States has always counted on its special bond with Britain to ensure that our common values not only endure, but that they prevail.

I remember particularly well our shared efforts in Operation Desert Storm and in so many other hot spots around the world during my days as Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.  And from the fields of battle to the halls of diplomacy, the United States and Britain have always been resolute allies and stalwart friends.

And of course the challenges we face today are far different than the challenges we have faced over the past century, but our purposes in this new century remain the same:  to safeguard freedom, peace and prosperity in our own nations by supporting democracy and the rule of law throughout the world.  Some say that no nation or alliance can contend with the new challenges of international crime or proliferation and terrorism, and I say that if we stand up to these challenges and act together over time, we will meet them and we will defeat them, as we have met and defeated other enemies in our common history.

Toward that end, a major blow was struck last week by the welcome verdict in the Lockerbie trial.  Secretary Cook and I reviewed that verdict in our discussion today.  It is clear that Libya must fulfill the requirements of the Security Council in full, including acceptance of responsibility for its actions, the actions of its officials, and also in paying appropriate compensation.

The Foreign Secretary and I also had the opportunity to discuss the situation in the Middle East and in Iraq.  We reviewed prospects for cooperating in NATO and our common endeavors in the Balkans, and we reviewed developments in European Security and Defense. On all of these issues, Britain is playing a leading and constructive role, and we want to continue working together closely -- very, very, closely.

No one can foresee all the challenges that face the Anglo-American relationship as well as our NATO allies and other friends in the years to come.  In an era when a hidden hacker can cause immense financial harm or grave security breaches with a series of keystrokes, for us to know what would happen would take a crystal ball that none of us possesses.

But I can predict this:  Based on what I know and what I heard in our discussions today, the United States and Britain will remain strong friends and staunch allies forever into the future.  And that is a good thing, not just for our two countries, but also for our friends and allies and for the entire community of nations.

So it is a very, very great pleasure for me to welcome the Foreign Secretary here, and I now give you the floor, sir.

FOREIGN SECRETARY COOK:  Thank you very much, Colin.  I am also pleased to have had this opportunity to renew my friendship with Colin Powell.  We met last year when he came to address our Wembley Conference on building successful communities.  I was powerfully impressed then by the commitment with which he spoke about giving all our kids a decent start in life, and the leadership he has given America's Promise.

One of the projects pioneered by America's Promise is to give youngsters from difficult neighborhoods the experience of working with executives.  I have therefore offered to Colin Powell that I will take two of the youngsters from America's Promise to the London Foreign Office for a week, and they'll spend a day alongside me in the Foreign Secretary's room.  In return, Colin has agreed to take two youngsters from an underprivileged background, one from Merseyside and one from South Yorkshire, to spend a day with him in the State Department.  That is the first agreement we've negotiated between us -- (laughter) -- and it's a good example of bridge-building between our peoples.

We have covered a wide agenda over the past two and a half hours.  We have both agreed on what Libya must do in the light of the guilty verdict on the bombing of Pan Am 103 over Lockerbie:  Libya must fulfill the remaining requirements of the Security Council; its leadership must accept responsibility for the act of one of its senior intelligence officers; and Libya must pay compensation to the relatives.

I described to Colin the real efforts that Europe is making to expand its capacity for crisis management, humanitarian intervention and peacekeeping.  We both agreed that an increase in Europe's rapid-reaction capability could strengthen NATO, and we are both determined that this new European capacity shall be firmly anchored in NATO.

We both shared deep concern at the proliferation of missile technology.  Colin Powell described the process of review which the Administration is undertaking on National Missile Defense.  I welcome the commitment of the US to consult with its allies and with Russia.  We also agreed on further discussions between us to identify what initiatives we could jointly take to strengthen the international regime against missile technology proliferation and to develop a coordinated counter-proliferation strategy.

We have both welcomed exciting changes for the better in the Balkans.  We could not have secured such progress without the robust resolve of the US and the UK.  We are both committed to finishing the job by ensuring that we build a stable peace and an open democracy in the Balkans.  An important step to that goal is for Serbia to fulfill its obligations to the War Crimes Tribunal.

Finally, we both agreed that it is vital for security in the Gulf that Saddam Hussein is defeated in his ambitions to develop nuclear, chemical or biological weapons with which to threaten his neighbors and his own people.  We agreed that our officials should meet over the coming weeks to ensure that our policy in Iraq is focused on that clear priority.

So we found a lot of common ground and a big agenda for future work between us.  That is what you could expect.  The US is Britain's oldest friend and it is our closest ally.  We are both the largest investor in each other's economies.  We both share the same values of freedom and of democracy.  We both look to NATO as the basis of our defense.  That is why both our countries need a partnership between our governments that is as strong and as warm as the friendship between our peoples.

Colin Powell and I have made a good start in making sure that we will have a close partnership based on common interests and mutual trust, and today we have put down a good foundation for a successful visit by Prime Minister Tony Blair in two week's time.

Thank you.

Q:  Speaking of typical neighborhoods, how soon do you think you might go to the Middle East -- perhaps from Mexico?  And, Mr. Minister, you spoke of a common stance on lots of things, but your government normalized relations with Libya, which the US decidedly did not do.

Are you having second thoughts?  I know it was a different terrorism case, but you're on a friendly relationship, or at least a working relationship, with Libya.  Is that the way you think two close allies ought to proceed?

Thank you.

SECRETARY POWELL:  I would expect to travel toward the end of the month, and I am hoping to not only go to the Middle East and the Persian Gulf area, but to Europe as well.  But those details are not yet set.

FOREIGN SECRETARY COOK:  On Libya, can I stress that everything we've done on the Lockerbie trial has been done in close agreement with the United States.  The agreement to a trial under Scotch law before a Scottish judge in a third country was an agreement we first reached with the United States.  Our response to guilty verdict is one that was agreed in close cooperation, and our responses absolutely identical.

Yes, it is true we have diplomatic relation with Libya, but diplomatic relations are not a reward for good conduct; they are a means of communications now to press on the Government of Libya the importance of their both accepting responsibility and paying compensation to the relatives -- goals which we fully share with the United States.

Q:  Secretary Powell, Javier Solana and other voices in Europe have talked about the fact that there isn't complete agreement in this country, or complete understanding, of Europe's plans for a defense force.  I was wondering if you are now convinced that those plans will, in fact, help rather than hinder NATO, and whether you feel that you need to assist in arguments so that more people in this country are reassured about it.

Thank you.

SECRETARY POWELL:  I can tell you that within the Bush Administration the President and I and Secretary Rumsfeld and Dr. Rice and others think we have a very good understanding of what the European Security and Defense Initiative is all about:  an effort on the part of our European friends to increase their capability for rapid reaction in Europe and wherever else the need might arise.  And we support that goal.

We have had conversations with our friends to satisfy us that it will always be within the context of NATO and that there will be added capabilities coming online for these new responsibilities.  And I have heard nothing in my conversations today with Robin that would suggest we won't be able to achieve a common understanding on these issues, firmly anchored in NATO without duplicating things, which would not be wise, but at the same time giving our European friends the support they need to develop this program, develop this rapid reaction capability in a way that they can act when it isn't completely appropriate or not the right thing for NATO to do, or for one reason or other the US is unable or feels it best not to participate.

So I think all of this is complementary and we can work through the modalities of this in the months ahead without any great difficulty.

FOREIGN SECRETARY COOK:  I am content with all that.

Q:  Secretary Powell, can you help us understand any more the Bush Administration's view towards pursuing Middle East peace?  I know the election is still technically ongoing, the votes aren't technically counted, but every report is that there will be a new Prime Minister in Israel.  And I wonder if you could help us shed any light on what your plans are and whether reports that you will be a little more standoffish are correct or not.

SECRETARY POWELL:  Well, "technical" is an important word in light of recent events in the United States with respect to elections, so I will not prejudge what the Israeli people might be doing at this very moment.

Whoever wins that election, the United States stands ready to be engaged in the quest for peace.  We have a role to play.  We have to see what the Israeli people say through this election process.  We are not going to be standoffish, but at the same time we want to make sure that the search for peace, the quest for peace, is seen in a broad regional context so that the quest doesn't stand alone in and of itself.

And we want to work with our friends in Europe, we want to work with our friends in the United Nations and elsewhere, to persuade all of the parties to the conflict that during this very, very delicate time immediately following the election we do nothing, and the leaders in the region do everything, to make sure that violence doesn't start to swell up, to make sure that we don't have provocations, provocations which then lead to counter-provocations, and a cycle of violence begins which throws things into a state of uncontrolled events just happening.

And so this is the time to be patient, see what the Israeli people say, give the winner an opportunity to decide what kind of a government will be formed as a result of this, and to encourage all the leaders and all the people of the region to refrain from any acts that would lead to violence or that would provoke counter-provocations.  And until we know what the Israeli people have said, I think it's wise for us to not speculate any more as to what might happen.

FOREIGN SECRETARY COOK:  I absolutely agree with that plea for the reduction in violence in order that we can proceed with negotiations on peace.  Whoever is chosen as the Prime Minister of Israel is a matter for the people of Israel, and we will respect their choice.  All we ask of whoever is chosen is that he work with the international community to take forward negotiations on Middle East peace.

And I think it is very important that the United States and Europe continue to remain in close contact.  If we are going to maintain the Middle East peace process, then it will only succeed on the basis of them receiving the same message from both sides of the Atlantic and from the rest of the international community.

Q:  Secretary Powell, just going back to the rapid-reaction force that Europe is planning, could you say, however, whether you share Secretary Rumsfeld's concerns that it could destabilize NATO, that it has that ability unless things are got right, particularly on the planning process?

And secondly, could you say whether you want British participation in National Missile Defense, whether you think that it will be necessary to upgrade the radar station in Britain as part of that defense?

SECRETARY POWELL:  I think if we approach the European Security and Defense Initiative in the way that Robin and I have discussed, with an understanding that it is firmly embedded in NATO and we're not duplicating planning capabilities and that we're adding to the overall capacity of both NATO and the EU countries, then there's no reason to see this as destabilizing NATO in any way.  In fact, I think it is our common belief that it will strengthen NATO.  And I didn't see Secretary Rumsfeld's exact quote, but I'm sure it was in that context that we don't want to do anything that would lead to the kind of result you suggested.

And the potential exists, working together in consultation with candid exchange of views on the different issues, we can strengthen NATO and not weaken NATO.  We don't want to do anything that weakens NATO.  It is the bedrock of the North Atlantic relationship between Canada, the United States and our friends in Europe.

With respect to National Missile Defense, we hope that in the months ahead as we develop our concept and as we put programs behind that concept, we will demonstrate to our friends in Europe and to our friends in Russia and China and elsewhere that this is a very sensible concept that complements strategic offensive forces and nonproliferation efforts and command-and-control systems, and all together they strengthen deterrence and they protect us from these dangerous weapons systems that are in danger of proliferating.

And I think if we can make that case, then everybody will want to be a part and play a role in missile defense, whether it's theater missile defense or national missile defense.  And so I think the burden is on us to demonstrate that, and we plan to do so in the programs that we're going to be coming forward with and in the consultations that we're going to be having.  The Wehrkunde Conference this past weekend that Secretary Rumsfeld attended gave us an opportunity to continue those consultations, and Robin and I have had a long talk about it today, and I look forward to many such conversations with Robin again, with my other European colleagues, and with my Russian and Chinese colleagues in due course.

FOREIGN SECRETARY COOK:  On the European security, I think what Secretary Rumsfeld said at Wehrkunde was that an increase in capacity could strengthen the Alliance.  Now, our determination is it is going to strengthen the Alliance.

And I want to stress that the agreement that we've reached at Nice on European security clearly sets out, first of all, a European operation will only occur where NATO as a whole has decided not to act.

Secondly, it will be limited to peacekeeping and humanitarian intervention.  The text clearly says that territorial defense is a matter for NATO for those countries that are members of NATO.

Thirdly, all the NATO members in Europe who are not in the European Union would have the right to participate in such an operation.

And fourthly, we want any European-led operation to draw on the operational planning capacity of NATO in order to make sure we're fully anchored in NATO.  Now, if we both work on those objectives we can produce an increased capacity which will strengthen NATO and make for fairer burden-sharing.

Q:  Thank you.  Secretary Powell, you mentioned the need for restraint within the Middle East following today's elections in Israel.  As you well know, there is a direct linkage between the status of the Middle East peace process and Iraq.

How concerned is the Bush Administration that a continued Palestinian Intifada, or a wider conflict within the region itself, will negatively impact your desire to reenergize sanctions against Iraq?

And for Secretary Cook, are you convinced from what you heard today from Secretary Powell that, in fact, the Europeans will be consulted and also will not have the duplication within the European plans to develop a strategic defense, its own rapid-reaction force?

Thank you.

SECRETARY POWELL:  Obviously an increase in violence affects a number of issues throughout the region, but the real reason that we are encouraging restraint, pleading for restraint today, is because we don't want to see more lives lost in the region; we don't want to see more young Palestinians killed; we don't want to see any more Israelis killed.

This is the time to stop the killing, stop the violence, and get back to confidence-building measures, get back to a situation where economic activity can start up again in the West Bank and Gaza.  And when you have economic activity starting again, where people can earn a living again, where people aren't killing one another, then you have a basis for moving forward.  And that is uppermost in our mind even though obviously it affects the entire region.

But today and for the immediate future, our concern is just stopping the killing and not allowing violence to rise in that region because it is destructive of the efforts of the peacemakers; it is destructive of what we ultimately have to get to, a situation where two peoples can live in this one land in peace.

FOREIGN SECRETARY COOK:  On the issue of consultation, yes, I'm absolutely confident that we will be consulted as the review of National Missile Defense moves forward.  I have been assured there will be consultation, and the whole point of my being here is to establish a basis for frank, open dialogue of mutual trust between us.  I mean, try stopping us from consulting each other when we've got somebody to say to each other.

On the European security, I absolutely accept that it is important that we devise a model which does not involve duplication.  Duplication is wasteful.  It is also pointless because we have in NATO a superb organization with a great operational planning capacity which can provide that backup to any EU-led operation.  That is why we are determined that we will go forward with the European Security Initiative in ways that anchor it firmly in NATO and draw on those assets that we two together and our partner nations have built up in NATO.

Q:  Secretary Powell, I wanted to ask a question a little bit closer to home.  About two weeks ago, Eduardo Pizano, the chief of staff to Colombian President Pastrana traveled to Beijing to ask China for help in solving what he called his country's horrible drama.  Specifically, Colombia is asking the Chinese for help in developing agriculture programs in northeastern Colombia.

In light of these Chinese presence in the Panama Canal, does it concern you at all that the Colombians are inviting a Chinese presence in Colombia?

SECRETARY POWELL:  I haven't seen that particular report, but I don't know why it would trouble me, especially if the Chinese have something to contribute.  Chinese presence in the Panama Canal has been written about and spoken of, but I have not found that this so-called presence in the form of shipping companies and the like have created any danger to the Panamanian people, the Panamanian Government, or to the Canal itself.  Our interests are served.

So without knowing any more about it, I don't see anything that should cause me any great distress.  President Pastrana is free to seek advice where he finds it most useful.  One always has to be careful that you're getting the advice you sought and nothing more, and I am sure he will be careful.

Q:  Secretary Powell, what beyond jaw-boning can we do to try to relieve the problems of violence in the Middle East?  Urging people to not engage in violence is fine, but are there any practical steps you can take?

And to you and to Secretary Cook, did you discuss on Iraq any question of re-tailoring sanctions so that they are more narrowly defined to get out the weapons and no longer give Saddam an excuse to penalize the Iraqi people?

Thank you.

SECRETARY POWELL:  Jaw-boning is not a bad term, and as a practical matter that's pretty much all we can do right now, and hope that the leaders in the region recognize the absolute importance in controlling the passions and controlling the emotions.  And if they do that, and if they give the next Israeli Government time to establish its policies, then good things will flow from that eventually besides just jawboning -- assistance, economic activity.  They will be in a position to engage in diplomacy and political activity to see how the two positions, the negotiating positions, can be brought closer to one another, and hopefully get the whole quest moving forward again toward a solution.

So, for now, it's a little bit more than jaw-boning; it's really making an impassioned plea to exercise restraint so that we can get beyond jaw-boning and onto more concrete activities.  But if you're going to have violence, and if people are shooting at one another and responding in kind, then good things will not flow from such a situation.

FOREIGN SECRETARY COOK:  On the question of Iraq, we had a very good exchange of views in which we are quite clear that what we need to do is to get the debate on Iraq focused on the threat from Saddam Hussein; that is, the threat to acquire weapons of mass destruction -- chemical, nuclear, biological weapons -- and the missiles to use them.  And we want to make sure that we focus the sanctions regime on making sure we succeed in preventing Saddam from developing those military ambitions.

Can I, since you asked, take this opportunity of making clear there are no sanctions on food or on medicine.  Saddam can buy as much of those as he wishes, and he has the money to do it.  Iraq is now exporting more oil than it ever has at any time in the history of Iraq, exporting as much oil as Iran or Venezuela, where people do not go hungry or short of medicine.  He does though -- and we know this -- import over 10,000 bottles of scotch every month.  If he's got the money to buy those 10,000 bottles of scotch a month, he can buy baby food.

Q:  Secretary Powell, you talk about engaging in the Middle East, but given recent history, might the Israelis and Palestinians be better off without US involvement in a peace process?

SECRETARY POWELL:  At the end of the day, they have to want peace more than we may want them to have peace.  At the end of the day, they have to come together across a table and negotiate with each other.  But to the extent they find American facilitation, American presence, American leadership, useful toward that end, then I think we should provide it.  We have done so for many, many years, and President Bush stands ready to do so again in the future.

But it has to be more than us just forcing them into positions that they may or may not support.  There has to be a genuine effort on their part and a realization that both sides will not be able to achieve everything they want and will not be able to give up everything that the other side might want.  So compromise will be called for, and we are in that stage of these long negotiations where the most difficult issues are still ahead of us.

And it will take very determined, bold, strong leadership to solve those issues.  And to the extent that the United States can be helpful, or the United Kingdom, or the EU, or the United Nations, all of us should stand ready to do so.  And the United States plays a unique role in this regard because of our history in these negotiations over the past 20-odd years.

FOREIGN SECRETARY COOK:  It takes courage to reach out and make peace with another side which has been perceived with hostility, and I think the pressure and the united encouragement of the international community can be valuable in helping leaders to take that step.  And both of us together will try and get the message across to the leadership and the people of Palestine and Israel that they both have much more to gain from a peace settlement that would offer them security than it would cost them in terms of the compromises necessary to get that agreement.

SECRETARY POWELL:  Thank you very much.

(End transcript)

(Distributed by the Office of International Information Programs, U.S. Department of State.  Web site: http://usinfo.state.gov )