Sec. Rice: Briefing En Route Andrews Air Force Bas

Secretary Condoleezza Rice
En Route Andrews Air Force Base
September 20, 2007

Briefing En Route Andrews Air Force Base

SECRETARY RICE: I thought it was a very useful, productive day and a half. It would have been very good to be able to stay longer but I obviously have to get back for the United Nations General Assembly. And I expect to have a number of meetings at the United Nations General Assembly that relate to the work that we're doing to support the Israeli-Palestinian bilateral track and also to get ready for the international meeting. I'll have a meeting of the AHLC, which is the -- essentially the group of donors for the Palestinians. I have a number of bilaterals related to this issue. There will be a Quartet meeting. So there's a lot of activity in New York and it was useful to be here to inform the discussions that I'm going to have in New York.

I found the meetings here very good because there's clearly a kind of focus and commitment on behalf of -- on the part of both of the leaders as well as the people who are working most closely with them to try and get this document done. I also found that they are using the prospect of the international meeting as a time when they would really like to be able to have the international community second or affirm and support the efforts that they're making. So I think these two are working very much synergistically.

I am looking to when it would be most useful to come out again. There are a number of holidays to contend with, both Israeli and Islam holidays. But in any case, I thought it was a very useful set of meetings and I look forward to the meetings that will build on that when I'm in New York.

QUESTION: You spoke a bit more about the document on this trip than we've heard before. Can you flesh that out a little bit for us? What do you expect the document itself to do? Is it fair to call it an agreement? Is it something that both sides will sign?

SECRETARY RICE: I think it's better to think of it as a joint statement. I don't want to try to give it a name because I think they will name it at some point. But really what they're trying to do is to address the issues that they have been addressing in their bilateral discussions to, in a sense, memorialize understandings that they have been coming to and are going to try to come to. It's clear that they are going to address the core issues that relate to the establishment of a Palestinian state.

I think we'll have to -- they're going to have to have a few sessions between their negotiating teams to really set the parameters of this document. But I expect that after they've done that, after they've had a chance to have several of those sessions, that that would be a good time to come out and see if there's anything more that we can do to be helpful.

QUESTION: Just very quickly on the document, do you want to see some kind of timeline, some specific benchmarks, you know, along the lines -- there was something like that on the roadmap and kind of got away from it -- but just on this issue of Gaza. The President was saying that if some kind of action was taken it could harm the discussions, it could sour the atmosphere and, you know, kind of cast doubt on Israel's intentions. Could you talk a little bit about how you see that and whether you really think that something like this could be an impediment with realities -- Israel having to respond to realities on the ground?

SECRETARY RICE: On the first question, I don't really expect that this document that they would have would have timelines. I think that's not the intent, although if they come to that agreement that would be fine, but that's not what I'm expecting.

In terms of what -- the Israeli decision concerning Gaza, let me just emphasize a couple of things. First of all, they haven't decided on any specific actions and they've been very clear that they have to look at legality, they have to look at issues of humanitarian impact and so forth.

Secondly, I don't think -- given that they haven't decided on any specific actions, I think speculating about what the impact might be isn't really something that I wish to do. The way that we see it is that, obviously, there is a problem. The rocket attacks need to stop from Gaza and, obviously, Hamas is the responsible -- is responsible at this point, or has declared itself responsible in Gaza as a result of what the Palestinian leaders have called a coup d'etat. And they're doing nothing to stop the rockets.

Now all of that said, the United States has a very clear policy about Gaza. It is an indivisible part of the Palestinian territories. It will be a part of the Palestinian state. President Abbas and Prime Minister Fayyad are the legitimate authorities for the entire Palestinian Authority. And one thing that I emphasized several times with the Israelis is that we are very concerned that innocent Palestinians not suffer humanitarian consequences as a result of any action that they take. Because the problem is Hamas; the problem isn't the people of Gaza. So I don't want to speculate on how it might affect this or that, given that the Israelis haven't even taken any steps.

QUESTION: (Off-mike)

SECRETARY RICE: No. Remember what I'm saying is that we recognize the indivisibility of those territories and he is the person who is the legitimate authority. Now there is an "illegitimate authority," in quotes, in Gaza at this point, which is Hamas, which in a coup took the streets, so to speak, from the legitimate authorities, from the Palestinian Authority security forces and so forth.

So clearly, right now, the people who have established control in Gaza are the illegitimate Hamas people. But I just want to emphasize what I emphasized with the Israelis, is that innocent Gazans who, through no fault of their own, are in Gaza with the Hamas in control of it -- they really must be very sensitive to, aware of, and -- aware of the humanitarian and other considerations that any action that they take would bring about.

QUESTION: Secretary Rice, it's been really interesting to watch this process because you've seemed to pick your way really carefully in how you characterize what this conference is trying to establish and what the goals of these -- this conference is. You used terms like common set of principles and that sort of thing, which is why it was sort of weird today when Abu Mazen got up there and he just listed it right out: Jerusalem, borders, settlements. Was it refreshing to hear him lay it out like that or does that make your job more difficult when you go back to the Israelis?

QUESTION: How do you feel about that?

QUESTION: And how do you feel about it? (Laughter.)

SECRETARY RICE: It doesn't make my job more difficult. Everyone knows that there are a set of issues that are going to have to be resolved if there's going to be a Palestinian state and these are among them. The only reason -- the only thing that I've been emphasizing is that they're not the only issues that have to be resolved. Security has to be resolved. It has to be a security concept that works for the new Palestinian state and for Israel and, for that matter, for the Palestinian neighbors. For instance, Egypt borders Gaza.

There will have to be understanding about economic relations, about resources. There are a number of issues that have to be resolved. But no one doubts or is trying to hide that those issues are also going to have to be resolved.

QUESTION: Madame Secretary, you spoke about a joint document addressing the issues, et cetera. What is the difference between this document and the roadmap? Why this should work and the roadmap failed? What is the difference?

SECRETARY RICE: Sylvie, I wouldn't say that the roadmap has failed. It's still in place. And one thing that I talked with both parties about is, there are a set of roadmap obligations, particularly in the first phase, that are going to have to be fulfilled if a Palestinian state is ever going to work. You know, you're going to have to deal with Israeli settlements. You're going to have to deal with dismantling the infrastructure of terror. So the roadmap remains a kind of set of guidelines that will ultimately get us to a Palestinian state.

I think that what really this does is -- recognizing that there is a sequence of obligations that will have to be fulfilled to get to a Palestinian state so the Palestinian state can actually be operational -- there is nonetheless now a willingness to talk about what that state will look like, what its contours will be, what its composition will be, and in the original roadmap that was at the end of the roadmap. And I think that what has really happened is that there's a recognition that in order to give a sense of reality and concreteness to particularly Palestinians that their state is going to be real and it's going to be viable, that that conversation, those discussions, have to take place now.

So waiting until all of the obligations of the roadmap are fulfilled and then starting to talk about that, which some had taken to be the sequence in the roadmap -- I think we've kind of gotten over that barrier to going ahead and having these discussions. That's really the major difference.

QUESTION: (Off-mike.)

SECRETARY RICE: I think a timeline isn't wise at this point. We'll see if one is helpful later, but it isn't wise at this point. But I don't want to leave the impression that the roadmap has been pushed aside. I think it's going to -- it's still a reliable guide to a lot of the obligations that have to be met. And I think both of the parties really do understand that.

QUESTION: In your discussions with Prime Minister Olmert, were you very specific as to how you think the Israelis can avoid a sort of humanitarian disaster in Gaza if they do impose some of their restrictions that they're talking about?

And then secondly, you've been going back and forth, I think it's six times this year. Do you really think the Israelis are committed this time? And from a personal perspective, how has it changed? I'm not asking you how you feel, by the way. (Laughter.)

SECRETARY RICE: No, we leave that question to Helene. (Laughter.)

First of all, we didn't get into details about humanitarian issues, but I just wanted to be very clear that this is of deep concern to the United States. We've worked very hard on the humanitarian side there and we want to be able to continue to work very hard on the humanitarian side. And as I said, they haven't taken any measures. The Israelis themselves said that they would weigh any measures regarding potential humanitarian consequences.

As to the six times out here, a lot has changed since that February trilateral in that cavernous room in the David Citadel. You'll remember that that was not long after the Mecca agreement. You'll remember that the tensions were pretty high and that one of the reasons even to have the trilateral was that I didn't think that they would meet at all had we not met in a trilateral format.

You'll also remember that we were using at that time the very carefully guarded phrase "political horizon" to try to point toward the direction where I think we've now landed. And these things take time and you have to be persistent. And I think that this last several months -- a lot has happened. What Hamas did in Gaza obviously has had an effect on both sides. But also there's been a process through the bilateral discussions of building confidence between the two leaders. And everybody now talks about the excellent atmosphere between them, the rapport indeed between them. I think they are building some trust. I think that the government of Salam Fayyad is demonstrating that it intends to act, that it even intends to act on some of its roadmap obligations, for instance, what he did and what the government did in shutting down some of the charities that really have been a front for terrorist financing. So yes, I think this has come a very, very long way from that trilateral.

QUESTION: (Off-mike.)

SECRETARY RICE: Yes, maybe -- well, I don't know. Do you go over a horizon? I really don't know. Let me put it this way: I know there was some skepticism about the term "political horizon" and what it meant. I think that what happened is that it gave an umbrella, it gave a context in which they could begin to discuss issues that have not been discussed for six years. Now they're openly saying that they are discussing core issues and that they would like to try and memorialize those understandings in a document. I think the announcement of an international gathering sometime in the fall has helped to galvanize people to try to move forward. And you know we're going to take equal care in planning the meeting, in consulting with people about how it might be successful and in getting to that point, because all of this needs to lead to a set of steps that gets them closer to the negotiation of a Palestinian state.

QUESTION: Good afternoon. Madame Secretary, this is Brian Bennett from Time Magazine. I would like to ask you to put your efforts at diplomacy between the Israeli and Palestinians in the Iraq context. And would, in your view, gains in this arena have a positive impact there in Iraq as far as getting the neighbors to have a more positive role in Iraq? And is Iraq a motivating factor? Obviously, there are lots of motivating factors, but is Iraq one motivating factor in your current efforts at diplomacy in Israel and Palestine?

SECRETARY RICE: First of all, this is a conflict, the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, that needs to be resolved for its own reasons. It's gone on a really long time. The Palestinians have been without a state for a really long time. There are generations now of Palestinians who’ve kind of come and gone while the promise of statehood has been held out but hasn't been fulfilled. And I think that that has been really not good for Palestinians, it's not been good for Israelis and it's not been good for the region.

In that context, as you look at the evolution of the Middle East to a Middle East which has a foundation of real stability rather than, I think, the kind of false stability that -- held in place, you know, with Syrian forces in Lebanon, Saddam Hussein in power in Iraq, et cetera -- without any willingness to speak straightforwardly about the need for liberalization and democratization of politics in the Middle East reform. That false stability I think was producing no channel for -- or limited channels for legitimate political expression and helped to contribute to the emergence of extremism in its most radical and virulent form being al-Qaida.

When you contemplate a Middle East that is different and that is evolving toward a really stable Middle East -- an Iraq that is out of Saddam Hussein's -- has overthrown Saddam Hussein and finds a way to overcome its differences peacefully rather than violently, that is really at the center of the Arab world a multiethnic or multi -- at least, multiconfessional democracy, a Lebanon that -- where its young democracy is able to function without foreign interference, and a Palestinian state, are all of a piece. And I think it's telling that whenever I meet, for instance, with the Gulf Cooperation Council and Egypt and Jordan, the discussions are most often about all three: Iraq, the Palestinian state and Lebanon -- support for Lebanon. So I do think they are all of a piece. And one encourages and reinforces the other. But the truth of the matter is it's hard to imagine the kind of Middle East that I think we would like to see, and it's going to take a while to get there without resolution of the Palestinian-Israeli conflict.

QUESTION: (Off-mike)

SECRETARY RICE: They do not link them. They don't say we won't do this – and it’s because they have interests in a stable Iraq, too. But it's not a matter of linkage; we won't help you here if you don't help us there. But it is that all of those who need to be involved in building this different kind of Middle East recognize that the Palestinian-Israeli conflict has got to be resolved if it's going to be a reality.

ENDS

More: Latest World News | Top World News | World Digest | Archives

© Scoop Media