Daily
Press Briefing
Adam Ereli, Deputy Spokesman
Washington, DC
October 21, 2005
*
* *
12:32
p.m. EDT
MR.
ERELI: Good afternoon, everyone. Let me begin
with a comment on the Mehlis report, which was issued
yesterday in which we've all had a chance to look at.
First we commend Judge Mehlis and his team for the professionalism
and courage during the investigation, and for a report
that is both factual and credible.
We also commend the extensive cooperation of Lebanon whose
traditional and security authorities proved during the
investigation that they can move ahead, and at times,
take the lead effectively and professionally. The Mehlis
report is very serious and deeply disturbing. It states
that there is converging evidence pointing at both Syrian
and Lebanese involvement in this terrorist act. The report
also makes clear that there are political motives for
this terrorist act, which as the report notes, came to
a head at a meeting between Rafik Hariri and Bashar al-Asad
on August 26, 2004.
The
report points to a conspiracy involving Syria. It details
false statements, lack of cooperation, and rehearsed testimony.
It also concludes that there's probable cause to believe
that the decision to assassinate former Prime Minister
Rafik Hariri could not have been taken without the approval
of top rank Syrian security officials, and could not have
been organized without the collusion of their counterparts
in the Lebanese security services.
We
stand with the people of Lebanon, the families of the
victims, and the international community in calling for
accountability for this terrorist act. The people of Lebanon
must also know that they will be free from executions,
assassinations and threats and that the international
community will not tolerate the use of such tools of repression
to further destabilize Lebanon.
We have begun consultations with our friends in the Security
Council and in the region on next steps to be taken by
the international community.
QUESTION:
How about the unanimous diplomat who says Asad's brother-in-law,
the Chief of Intelligence and potentially his successor,
is the ringleader -- is the focus of the inquiry. Can
you say anything about that?
MR.
ERELI: I don't have anything to add to what Mehlis
has put forward in his report. The report doesn't say
that, so it's certainly not -- I'm not in a position to
do that. I think what the report does say is that there's
a need for further investigation and to follow up on leads
and for more information. And it calls very clearly on
the government of Syria to cooperate with Mehlis and his
team, and the Lebanese officials working this as they
endeavor to gather the fact and to follow the evidence
where it leads. And that kind of cooperation, that kind
of investigation can hopefully answer the questions raised
in that regard.
QUESTION:
The view of , the U.S. Government -- you are saying that
top intelligence officials, couldn't happen with their
collusion, their laying the --
MR.
ERELI: Well, the U.S. Government is noting what
conclusions Mehlis has come to in his reports, and is
responding to those conclusions as very serious and deeply
disturbing.
QUESTION:
Can you image, as a experienced State Department official,
in Syria, intelligence officials being involved, and the
Chief of Intelligence not being part of it and not knowing
about it?
MR.
ERELI: I'm not going to speculate. I'm going
-- we will underscore the importance of Mehlis continuing
his investigation and finding the facts to answer precisely
those kinds of questions for the benefit of the international
community, for justice, for accountability and for the
Lebanese people to know without doubt that the international
community is going to continue to stand by them and support
them as they seek to take control of their country from
foreign powers that have historically exercise influence
for reasons other than the interest of the Lebanese people.
Yes.
QUESTION:
Didn't you (inaudible) say that you're in consultation
with the UN Security Council? What does that mean and
is it a UN -- new resolution imminent in punishing Syria
further?
MR.
ERELI: It means that our Ambassador to the UN,
John Bolton, has began talking to Security Council partners
about the Mehlis report, compare notes, discuss what appropriate
next steps are. It's something that obviously the Secretary
is very much involved in, other members of the Administration,
our ambassadors in the field, to take stock of what the
report indicates and look at it also in a broader context.
Because let's remember, we've got a general issue to deal
with, and that general issue is Syria and the independence
of Lebanon and it's governed by a number of resolutions.
It's governed by 1559. It's governed by 1595, which is
the Mehlis report, and it's governed by other resolutions.
So
there is an issue that the international community is
seized with: Lebanese sovereignty, Lebanese independence
and Syrian actions that compromise those goals. And so
in dealing with that issue, we've got a number of resolutions
and a consultative process that has been set up. The Mehlis
report is one piece of that process. There is another
report coming out next week, the Larsen report on implementation
of 1559. So these consultations, which have begun, are
part of a broader framework to deal with a problem that
the international community is very concerned about. And
so they've begun today -- they will continue, obviously
over the next couple of days, where they lead and what
they produce is, at this point, I think, too early to
say.
QUESTION:
Are we likely to see these new resolutions formed and
implemented before the final report of Mehlis?
MR.
ERELI: I don't want to predict.
QUESTION:
Are you discussing or will you discuss military action?
This is a nervous capital. People think this Administration
resorts to force as a way of solving problems.
MR.
ERELI: I think the record of this Administration
is clear and commendable, that we seek peaceful negotiated
diplomatic solutions to problems. That is certainly the
course that has been set forth on this issue and that's
where our focus is.
QUESTION:
So you are preparing a resolution about --
MR.
ERELI: I didn't say that. I said we are seeking
a diplomatic solution to this problem. And that has been
our approach from the beginning in consultation with allies
and partners -- France, Syria's Arab neighbors -- from
the moment that Hariri was assassinated, that has been
the approach.
Yes.
QUESTION:
Can you give us a sense of the range of possibilities
that you're considering at the UN --
MR.
ERELI: No.
QUESTION:
And also is there -- no?
MR.
ERELI: No.
QUESTION:
All right. And is there any discussion -- I think there's
a second tranche of sanctions available to the U.S. under
the Syria Accountability Act that have not been invoked.
Is there any discussion of that possibility?
MR.
ERELI: I think our focus right now is on multilateral
collective action.
QUESTION:
So no?
MR.
ERELI: I didn't say that. I said our focus right
now is on multilateral collective action.
QUESTION:
Follow up on that. Why is that, Adam, if the U.S. feels
strongly about this, why wouldn't you have taken a stronger
bilateral --
MR.
ERELI: I'm not taking it off the table, number
one. Number two, it's a tool that we have, if it's useful.
Number three, I'm not aware that there's any immediate
plans to take action under the Syrian Accountability Act,
but that doesn't preclude such actions from being taken
in the future.
QUESTION: (Inaudible) Secretary Rice talk about military
action also in(inaudible) with Iraq?
MR.
ERELI: Did who?
QUESTION:
Secretary Rice, in the testimony to the Senate.
MR.
ERELI: Well, look, when we talk about our possible
actions, nobody ever takes anything off the table. That's
-- when you deal with any international situation. So
if you ask me, is that option off the table, never in
any discussion do you take options -- that option off
the table. But that should not lead you in the direction
to conclude that this is something that is being prepared
or contemplated or worked on. That's why I say our focus,
our preferred way of dealing with this, is multilateral,
is diplomatic. That is where we are engaged. That is what
we are working on. That is where we see things going.
And I urge you to, you know, keep that at the forefront
of your thoughts when writing about how we deal with this
issue.
QUESTION:
Did you have a future of Syria group that's working on
something where you have a group of experts?
MR.
ERELI: Future of Syria group?
QUESTION:
Yeah.
MR.
ERELI: A FOSG -- no, not that I'm aware of. (Laughter.)
I mean, the issue of Syria is dealt with as are, you know,
other complex problems that we deal with all the time:
North Korea, Iran, others. There's an interagency process,
policymaking process, discussion process, that comes up
with our positions and our approaches to problems and
that applies to Syria, as it does to other international
issues before us.
Yes.
QUESTION:
And (inaudible), do you follow the discussions with the
French on that?
MR.
ERELI: Well, as you know, Under Secretary Burns
was in Paris a few days ago, so that was an important
issue of discussion. Secretary Rice confers with her colleagues
regularly. She was in, as you know, Paris over the weekend
last weekend. Obviously this is an issue of discussion.
The National Security staff is in contact with their French
counterparts. So I would say that we are in regular and
consistent, and close contact with our French partners
on this issue, as well as on other issues. And it's not
just the French; it's the British. Secretary Rice is,
as you know, with Foreign Secretary Straw today in Alabama,
and for the weekend. And as I said, in the region we are
in contact with our embassies, with foreign officials
there.
Yes,
ma'am.
QUESTION:
When -- did you say Nick?
MR.
ERELI: No. I said that Nick was scowling, but
if you want to defer to Nick.
QUESTION:
All right. Nick, you can go first.
MR.
ERELI: I'm sorry, Nick.
QUESTION:
Thanks. You'd said -- you talk about diplomatic solutions.
But I wonder, aren't you not interested in seeing those
responsible for this act punished in any way?
MR.
ERELI: Absolutely. I think I said that we want
to see those responsible identified and brought to justice
and held accountable.
QUESTION:
Well, when you talk about accountability, though, and
bringing someone to justice, if there is -- if there is
implication of President Asad himself, how would you expect
or could you expect him to be making sure that people
are held accountable if he himself isn't?
MR.
ERELI: That's not it. You need to stick with
the facts and you shouldn't get ahead of the facts, and
that's why it's important for Judge Mehlis to continue
his work and to gather a body of evidence that allows
the international community to take concrete action in
response to concrete facts.
QUESTION:
And you don't think any of the facts so far point to Asad?
MR.
ERELI: The answer to that question is in the
report itself and I was referring -- which I referred
to in my earlier comments where I said that there is evidence
pointing to Lebanese and Syrian involvement, including
involvement by the Syrian security services. That's as
far as the report goes. There are other questions that
Mehlis raises that he says he doesn't have the answer
to and needs additional time and effort to determine.
So that's why it's important for him to continue and,
why I also stress, it's important for the Syrian Government
to cooperate more fully than it has in the past.
Yes.
QUESTION:
What do you make of the Syrian Ambassador of the UN saying
it's a very political analysis and that Syria remains
innocent. What is the U.S. have to say on that?
MR.
ERELI: I'd say those -- he's in the minority
of one on that score. All the other reaction has been
similar, that these are disturbing -- it's a disturbing
report. It points to Syrian involvement. It is factual
and credible. Look, Mehlis interviewed 400 people. He
collected over 60,000 pages of evidence. That's not political;
that's thorough, exhaustive, and meticulous and factual.
So let's be clear: This is an independent investigator,
appointed by the UN pursuant to a UN Security Council
resolution. This is not the result of any vendetta or
a conspiracy, or unilateral move by one country on another.
This is an international response to an act of terror.
And in the age in which we live, those who commit acts
of terror should know that they are going to be held accountable,
not by one country or another country, but by the international
community. And that's what we're seeing taking place here.
Yes.
QUESTION:
On the case, for example, of Iran. Despite the fact that
Iran's pursuits of nuclear weapons perhaps threaten more
countries than this case, the U.S. and the EU have not
been able to get a resolution passed at the IAEA, for
example, with real teeth in it. You've had to back off.
How do you expect on a matter like this that is more narrowly
focused? How would you expect the countries to line up
behind you?
MR.
ERELI: Well, I think you're comparing apples
and oranges here. I don't think they're --
QUESTION:
I'm not comparing the cases, I'm comparing your ability
to get
MR.
ERELI: I think the approach to each case depends
on the facts of the case. And, you know, Iran's 20-year
pursuit of nuclear weapons is materially different than
the assassinations are -- about a bomb of the Former Prime
Minister of Lebanon --
QUESTION:
That's my --
MR. ERELI: And the way you deal -- I'm sorry -- the way
you deal with an act of terror and one country's domination
of another country is different than dealing with one
country's clandestine pursuit of nuclear weapons. Now,
in both cases, you work through multilateral, through
international institutions, through multilateral diplomacy
to throw the light on infractions and violations of international
norms, which have occurred in both cases. In both cases
you seek to redress those violations. But the nature of
the violations are different. The nature of the acts are
different. The nature of the programs are different and
therefore the actions that you're going to take are different.
In
the case of Iran, I guess I would take issue with the
fact that we haven't gotten the resolutions we want out
of the board of governors. In fact, we've got a resolution
that declared that Iran in noncompliance. That's very
significant. But what we're seeking with Iran is different
than in Syria in the sense that Iran -- we are working
with the EU-3 cooperatively successfully in partnership
with the EU-3 and the lead in, trying to work through
a negotiated solution to this problem. Syria -- we're
not going to be able to negotiate with Syria over its
involvement in or its purported involvement in an act
of terror. That's not an issue for negotiations, it's
an issue for investigation and, based on the evidence,
prosecution.
Yes.
QUESTION:
Looking at this in a different aspect. Syria's just below
Turkey. Turkey, of course, is at the southern border of
NATO and is a perspective candidate for the EU. And it's
more geopolitics in that I would imagine the Syrians and
Iranians, unfortunately, are working together. Is this
also being taken into consideration, not just over Lebanon,
but geopolitically?
MR.
ERELI: What we're trying to do in all of this
is to get Syria to act as a good neighbor and as a responsible
member of the international community. That obviously
has implications for Lebanon, but it also has implications
for Iraq, as we've seen, and Turkey and Jordan, and the
Palestinians and Israel, and, you know, the list goes
on. One of the reasons why I think the international community
is so concerned about Syrian behavior is because of the
neighborhood that it lives in and because of its potential
for destabilizing the efforts of other countries and undermining
the aspirations of other people, whether that be Lebanese
people for independent sovereignty, whether it be the
Palestinian people for an independent state that lives
in peace with Israel, whether it be for the Iraqis who
are trying to develop a peaceful and stable democracy,
but are having to fight a determined but unprincipled
insurgency, or whether it be for Turkey that obviously
has its own issues with -- it's own issues. So we are
mindful of the importance of Syria in the region and I
think that's why we are so determined -- we, the international
community are so determined to work together to affect
responsible behavior and responsible decisions by the
Government of Syria.
QUESTION:
On the one hand, you say you want to resolve this diplomatically
with Syria, but then on the other, you say that you're
not going to negotiate with Syria over an act of terror.
So my question is are you planning any direct bilateral
discussions --
MR.
ERELI: No.
QUESTION: -- with Syria over this, and what kind of diplomatic
channels are you going to use apart from --
MR.
ERELI: I mean, this is not a bilateral -- the
point here is it's not a bilateral issue. Syria -- the
assassination of the Former Prime Minister of Lebanon
is not an issue between the United States and Syria. It
is an issue for the international community because, as
I said before, it's an act of terror. So the question
is not why won't the United States negotiate with Syria,
the question is , what can the - what should the international
community do in response to an act of terror that has
broad implications for security and stability. And that's
why you see a number of UN Security Council resolutions
in response to this action and a concerted effort on the
part of the United States, France, member - Britain, members
of the Security Council - Arab States to find out what
happened and to take action to prevent it from happening
again.
And let's not forget in all of this - to stand by and
protect and preserve the independence and sovereignty
of Lebanon, because that's what most directly at risk
here.
QUESTION:
Do you think you will get the support of Russia in the
Security Council on this subject?
MR.
ERELI: (Inaudible) Russia, to date, has been
very supportive in this and I don't see any reason to
- I don't see any suggestion that that support has lagged
in any way.
QUESTION:
New subject --
QUESTION:
Yes. Nowadays, is that - Turkey and Syria has very warm
relations. Did you ever --
MR.
ERELI: I don't know - no, anyway, go ahead.
QUESTION:
Yeah. Excellent, actually. Did you contact with the Turkish
officers to urge the Damascus or the Syrian officers on
the subject?
MR.
ERELI: Not that I'm aware of, no.
Sir.
|