For Immediate Release
Office of the Press Secretary
March 21, 2003
Press Briefing by Ari Fleischer
President's daily schedule
Military campaign
Camp David this weekend
Post-war Iraq
Turkey
Supplemental
Congressional leaders meeting
India
Iran and North Korea
Tax bill
2:31 P.M. EST
MR. FLEISCHER: Good afternoon. Let me fill you in on the President's day.
I want to begin, the President this morning, in his remarks with congressional leaders, noted the sacrifice that the
brave men and women of our military are making. Particularly, the President extends his sympathy and condolences to the
families of those who lost their lives -- the Americans and the British -- in events in the Persian Gulf.
The President also honors the sacrifice of all the family members who are at home as their sons and daughters, husbands
and wives are in the Persian Gulf fighting for the disarmament of the Iraqi regime.
The President this morning had his intelligence briefing, followed by an FBI briefing. He convened a meeting of the
National Security Council. Then he had a meeting with the Secretary of Defense.
The President this morning also, as part of a consultation with members of Congress, met with the Speaker of the House,
the Majority Leaders, Leader Daschle, Leader Pelosi and Leader DeLay, to inform them of the latest situation in the
Gulf.
The President then taped his radio address, and he has departed for Camp David.
With that, I'm happy to take your questions. Helen.
Q Can you say whether Iraq is the end goal here? Some of the President's advisors have said they thought it would be
good to go on to other countries in the region, to democratize or liberate. What is it? Can you clarify for the American
people --
MR. FLEISCHER: Who has suggested that?
Q Perle, for one. Richard Perle.
MR. FLEISCHER: I'm not aware of anybody who works for the President who has said that. There may be outside people who
have some thoughts.
Q But Iraq is the sole goal?
MR. FLEISCHER: The President has made repeatedly clear to the American people, as he said in his address to the nation
the other night, that the purpose of this is the disarmament of the Iraqi regime.
Terry.
Q Ari, has the President watched any of this, the unfolding events in Baghdad, do you know?
MR. FLEISCHER: Obviously, the President, having authorized the mission, was aware of the mission, knew when it would
begin, et cetera. And I don't think he needs to watch TV to know what was about to unfold.
Q I was wondering if he had any comment on the impact of it?
MR. FLEISCHER: No, the President's approach is to gather the information about what is happening in its totality. He
receives the information from his advisors, people who have a sight on all areas of what is underway. The President is
aware, of course, the American people as they watch these events unfold; but he gets his information in a totality.
Q To follow up on that, the President has spoken many times of the special burden and the special responsibility he has
as Commander-in-Chief of sending young Americans into harm's way. And has he ever spoken of -- he's also talked about
liberating the Iraqi people from this brutal regime. But have you heard him talk about this other responsibility which
may weigh on him heavily today, and that is for the death of innocents, for Iraqi moms and dads and children who may,
despite our best efforts, be killed?
MR. FLEISCHER: There's no question about that. And I think the President worries about it from two points of view --
one, in terms of the present mission. This is why the President and the Department of Defense work so carefully, and we
have such a modern military that is capable of engaging in precision strikes, so that the targets are indeed the
military targets. As always in war, there is risk, there will be innocents who are lost. And the President deeply
regrets that Saddam Hussein has put innocents in a place where their lives will be lost.
The other portion of what the President remembers when he thinks about the innocents are the 3,000 innocents who lost
their lives on September 11th in the United States. And if it were not for the worries that the President had about an
Iraqi regime, in defiance of the United Nations, possessing weapons of mass destruction, which he fears could again be
used against the United States, you might not see this developing.
Campbell.
Q Just to clarify Terry's question. You said the President doesn't need to watch TV to know what's going on in Iraq, but
you're telling me -- these are pretty astounding images -- he doesn't have a television on somewhere, he's not watching
what's going on?
MR. FLEISCHER: The President, again, understands the implications of the actions that he has launched to secure the
disarmament of the Iraqi regime to liberate the people.
Q Right, right, right. The question, though, is he watching TV, or not?
MR. FLEISCHER: The President may occasionally turn on the TV, but that's not how he gets his news or his information.
Q I'm not suggesting it is; but we just want to try to get an image of --
MR. FLEISCHER: From time to time, he might.
Q Can I ask on a different subject. There was a humanitarian crisis in Iraq even before the bombing began, in terms of
food shortages. After what we saw today, this massive attack on Baghdad, that situation is clearly going to be much,
much worse beginning tomorrow. What, specifically, is the administration planning to do when the sun comes up?
MR. FLEISCHER: Well, one, that's not necessarily true. The destruction of a palace of Saddam Hussein's, the destruction
of a military facility may not have anything to do with the feeding of the Iraqi people. In all cases, the United States
is leading the effort, and along with the military come massive waves of humanitarian relief in the form of food, in the
form of medicine, in the form of everything that may be necessary to help protect and to feed the Iraqi people.
We will see if any of that is, indeed, necessary to the degree that has been anticipated and planned for. But you should
not necessarily leap to that conclusion based on what you saw on TV today.
Q Just one final question. President Chirac, of France, said today that he would not support a U.N. resolution that
would give the U.S. and Britain the authority to administrate in Iraq. What's your reaction?
MR. FLEISCHER: Well, as was said at the statement in the Azores, we will continue to work with the United Nations. The
President does believe the United Nations has a role in the future of Iraq and the reconstruction of Iraq. The President
would hope that nobody would stand in the way of the humanitarian reconstruction of Iraq.
Mark.
Q Ari, Secretary Rumsfeld made mention of the surrender discussions that are going on. And he also made mention of third
parties being involved. Is there anything you can tell us about that in terms -- you know, what level they're going on?
MR. FLEISCHER: No, I think Secretary Rumsfeld addressed it. I think you heard him say that much of this is the
unit-to-unit type of communication. The President made his message clear in a way that was unequivocal. He gave Saddam
Hussein 48 hours to leave the country, to avoid military conflict. The President wishes Saddam Hussein had left the
country so that this would not have come to pass. Saddam Hussein made his choice.
Q Speaking of Saddam Hussein, can we just go over the tape one more time, and just give us your best read on what --
what the tape tells us and what it does not tell us, and what you know and can tell us about Saddam Hussein's fate?
MR. FLEISCHER: Yes. The tape has been analyzed by the Central Intelligence Agency. And their analysis has led them to
believe that the tape is, indeed, the voice of Saddam Hussein, but no conclusions have been reached about whether it was
canned ahead of time or not. There is insufficient information for anybody to draw a conclusion about that.
Q The larger question, does that tell us anything about where he is, how much control he's got?
MR. FLEISCHER: No. The fact that Iraq released a tape doesn't tell anybody anything about where Saddam Hussein is or is
not.
Q Can I ask one additional question about Camp David this weekend. The President is going to be spending the weekend
there. Can you describe what his plans are for the weekend? Will he be able to keep in touch?
MR. FLEISCHER: There will be a meeting of the National Security Council tomorrow morning. The principals -- the Vice
President, Secretary Powell, Secretary Rumsfeld, Director Tenet and others, of course, Dr. Rice -- will be joining the
President at Camp David for participation in the NSC meeting. Camp David, as you can imagine, has every modern
communication. It's a Marine facility. It has everything that anybody needs.
Q Let me first follow on Campbell's question. The resolution that --
MR. FLEISCHER: I thought you were going to ask about watching TV.
Q I may. The resolution that the U.S. would propose in the U.N. would do what? Would turn over the administration of
Iraq's oil monies to the U.N., or to the U.S. and the U.K.?
MR. FLEISCHER: Well, I think the exact form of any resolution is still a matter of discussion. The exact role of the
United Nations is a matter that people have to talk about.
Q You've been talking about it; you have a pretty good idea.
MR. FLEISCHER: Well, it all deals with the Oil for Food program, for example. The Oil for Food program is a program
administered through the United Nations. We are in discussions now about the administration. We hope the United Nations
will act on the Oil for Food program so that the revenues can continue to go and be used to feed the Iraqi people. That
will result from Iraqi oil. That's important. That's a United Nations program.
Q But will the U.S. and the UK control it, or would the U.N.?
MR. FLEISCHER: That's a United Nations program, I just said. Oil for Food has long time been a United Nations program.
Q Ari, the President has been very -- had very limited visibility over the last couple of weeks. He's come and addressed
the American people twice. We've seen him once or twice -- twice this past week, in very carefully regulated sessions
where he has chosen not to take questions. Is he deliberately going out of his way to avoid putting his personal stamp
on the leadership of this war, perhaps because his father was criticized for personalizing the war with Saddam too much?
MR. FLEISCHER: No, but I think from the President's point of view, particularly in the early stage, the very onset of a
military operation, the President thinks that it is most appropriate to let the Defense Department officials, who have
direct supervision and responsibility for all aspects of the military plan, to take the questions, to answer the
military operational questions, because they are the most expert in it.
The President has spoken out today, he spoke out yesterday. If your question is, when will he take your questions, I
assure you he looks forward to doing it. You may have your opportunity soon.
Q My question really is, is he trying to avoid becoming too identified with the war?
MR. FLEISCHER: I think that the American people will make their judgments about what role the President plays. And I
think they understand very clearly that this is a President who has made the decision to disarm Saddam Hussein through
the use of force, after having tried to do it through the United Nations. They watched that whole discussion play out
for the last six months. He is the President, he's made his decisions and the American people are watching him.
Q Is the President satisfied with the progress thus far in the war?
MR. FLEISCHER: He is, Steve. The President believes that progress is being made. The President has tremendous confidence
in the men and women of our military, and the leadership of the military, and in the plan that has been written to
disarm Saddam Hussein's regime and to liberate the people of Iraq.
Q Ari, the Senate appears ready to pass a budget resolution tonight. Has the President delayed sending up the emergency
request for funds for this war until after that resolution passes?
MR. FLEISCHER: No, it's exactly as I indicated for the last several weeks on it. The President has reviewed various
estimates about the possibility, the possible cost of action, involving military costs and other costs, and the
President has said that at the appropriate time he would send it up. And I think that time is coming, but it's just not
here yet.
Q And can I ask one more question about television, just a very direct question? Did the President not see the pictures
on television this morning, the very dramatic pictures of the bombs and the explosions over Baghdad? He did not see
those?
MR. FLEISCHER: I was with the President just as the operation was beginning, at about 1:00 p.m., and he was not watching
TV at that time. I wasn't with him for the duration of it, so I couldn't answer in all instances about it. I probably
shouldn't answer a question like this in this room, but the President does not watch a lot of TV.
Q No, but they were very, very dramatic pictures. It's hard to imagine the President of the United States who had
ordered this attack did not see any evidence of it.
MR. FLEISCHER: Elizabeth, I don't know that the President needed to watch TV to understand what it means to authorize
military force and to know that the mission has begun and the mission is underway.
Q So the answer is unclear, we don't know if he saw them?
MR. FLEISCHER: I've just described to you where I was with him, but I wasn't with him for the entire duration of what
you all saw on TV.
Mike.
Q Ari, how does the administration expect allied forces to be greeted in Baghdad?
MR. FLEISCHER: That remains to be seen. The President believes, as a result of much of the information that he has
heard, that the Iraqi people are yearning to be free and to be liberated. The Iraqi people have lived under a brutal
dictatorship led by Saddam Hussein, and the history of mankind shows that people want to be free. And given the chance
to throw off a brutal dictator like Saddam Hussein, people will rejoice.
Q And may I ask if the administration expects the allied forces to find evidence or remnants of chemical or biological
weapons, or a reconstituted nuclear program?
MR. FLEISCHER: Well, there is no question that we have evidence and information that Iraq has weapons of mass
destruction, biological and chemical particularly. This was the reason that the President felt so strongly that we
needed to take military action to disarm Saddam Hussein, since he would not do it himself.
As the military effort continues, I think you will see information develop for yourself, firsthand. This is one of the
reasons that there are so many reporters present with the military. In many ways, you will have these answers
yourselves. You are there, you are on the ground. And you will find the answers and they will speak volumes themselves.
Q So you expect the weapons will be found?
MR. FLEISCHER: There's no question. We have said that Saddam Hussein possesses biological and chemical weapons, and all
this will be made clear in the course of the operation, for whatever duration it takes.
John.
Q Two questions on Saddam. First, without disclosing any intelligence sources or methods or anything, since the first
strike Wednesday night on that compound in Baghdad, has the United States seen any evidence that either Saddam Hussein
or either of his two sons are issuing orders, in command of the government, in command of the military, actually in
charge of the government?
MR. FLEISCHER: We don't know.
Q Is that a "no," you've seen no evidence? Or you don't know. Are you -- again, communications could be intercepted --
MR. FLEISCHER: We do not have any concrete facts to report. There are all kinds of rumors about what has happened to
Saddam Hussein and his sons, but there are no concrete facts to report.
Q Earlier today, Secretary Rumsfeld said there were unit-to-unit, U.S. unit to Iraqi unit contacts about surrender and
the like. But Secretary Powell said that there were channels open through third parties, it seemed to imply to higher
level people in the Iraqi government. Can you expand on that for us?
And is there still an option on the table -- whether it be Saddam Hussein or Tariq Aziz or other senior officials in the
government -- is there an option on the table for them to leave? Or, as one official here put it last night, is the only
question for Saddam Hussein and presumably those around him now justice?
MR. FLEISCHER: Well, let me put it to you this way. One, I'm not in a position, I'm not going to be able to shed light
on every communication that may or may not be taking place. But, two, the President continues to hope that this can be
settled in the most peaceful way possible. And the use of force is being pursued to help make this get settled in the
most peaceful way possible. We shall see what the ultimate outcome is.
Q The "most peaceful way possible" suggests, then, that you would not -- would the United States government allow Saddam
Hussein or somebody at a very high level near Saddam Hussein, at this point, to leave the country and to go into safe
haven? Is that still an option for, say, the top 25 people in the Iraqi regime?
MR. FLEISCHER: I will just leave it the way I said it. The President continues to hope that this can be settled with the
least amount of violence possible. And we shall see exactly what takes place on the ground in Iraq.
Q The Turkish parliament has voted to permit troops into Northern Iraq. What is U.S. policy on that and what actions do
we intend to take in order to see that that doesn't happen?
MR. FLEISCHER: Well, there have been numerous conversations had with Turkish officials. The message has been expressed
directly to Turkish officials, and that message still stands. But we see no evidence that they have taken that step. I
saw some wire reports immediately before I came out here saying -- quoting anonymous Turkish officials as saying that
the hiccups that had developed in the overflight rights have been resolved. I cannot confirm that.
Q We have important allies inside Northern Iraq who are very much afraid of the entrance of Turkish troops. Would we
actually use military force to prevent Turkish troops from entering Northern Iraq?
MR. FLEISCHER: You're asking me to speculate about a hypothetical, and I'm not prepared to do that.
Jim.
Q I want to talk again about the President's decision making. Was he -- obviously there was some delay between when the
war began and when the military began the "shock and awe" campaign. Was that a presidential decision, or was this
something he left up to military commanders?
MR. FLEISCHER: No, the President leaves these matters up to the military commanders. The President has signed off on the
war plan. And the President leaves it to the members of the military, the leadership, to make the determinations about
what the exact right time it is. They make those on a variety of military factors. And the President believes the best
way to be successful in winning a war is to let the experts run the war.
He will, of course, continue to supervise it, to oversee it, and to be deeply involved, but he believes that the
military planners need to make those decisions.
Q The initial idea, of course, "shock and awe", was to sort of hit the whole country and to shock and awe the military,
as well as those loyal to Saddam. Instead, what we've done -- because of the opportunity earlier this week -- was to
sort of start from a top-down to work on Saddam, and then on those who are most loyal to him. Is that the kind of
decision the President was involved in? Would he have been engaged in discussions about whether or not there was a shift
in strategy here?
MR. FLEISCHER: Well, clearly -- and I think that's been made very plain to everybody here -- is that as a result of a
meeting that took place on Wednesday, there was new information received and it was acted upon. And I think what you're
seeing is in many ways something similar to what you saw in Afghanistan -- with the United States ability not only to be
effective, to be accurate, but to be nimble. And this is the part of the transformation of the military; this is a part
of the 21st century thinking about how to be effective in the conduct of military affairs.
Q Can you tell us now if we're at the point that we would have been without that target of opportunity on Wednesday? Is
this --
MR. FLEISCHER: I don't think that it's appropriate for me to get into that type of operational detail and any plans as
they may have once existed somewhere.
Greg.
Q Looking ahead to the supplemental, which I gather -- next week, can you talk a little bit about what you would expect
the parameters that the President would like to place on consideration of the bill when it's on the Hill? How much
flexibility does he need in terms of managing the money? How wide can that bill written by Congress to include other
domestic issues?
MR. FLEISCHER: Well, the supplemental's primary purpose is to fund military operations. Obviously, the build-up of
forces in the region and then the actual engagement in combat incurs additional costs above and beyond what had
previously been budgeted. That's the purpose of the supplemental.
The President has also let it be known that there will be money in there for homeland security -- that will be in there.
And we'll see the exact nature and extent of what is in there at the time that the President authorizes it.
Ken.
Q Is the President trying to send a message either to the American people or to the Iraqi leadership by going to Camp
David this weekend in the middle of a war?
MR. FLEISCHER: No, there's no message being sent to anybody in Iraq about that; no.
Q How about to the American people or to the world in general? Is he trying to convey a message of relative normality in
his life?
MR. FLEISCHER: I think one thing is clear. For the American people, as much as they participate, watch what is
happening, follow the debate and follow the military action, their life goes on. And that's vital. That's terribly
important to the country.
And as I mentioned earlier, the President has every -- every -- bit of communication available and necessary, as well as
has the personnel available and necessary with him at Camp David this weekend.
Q So to follow, just to put a -- by following his normal routine, by going to Camp David, he's trying to suggest to the
American people that they should follow their normal --
MR. FLEISCHER: I suggest to you the President is following his normal routine.
Richard.
Q Ari, in the congressional leaders meeting this morning, how would you characterize the relations between Senator
Daschle and the President? Did the subject of his criticism of the President come up?
MR. FLEISCHER: This was a serious, serious briefing, a classified briefing about military operations. And this is an
important obligation of the executive branch, working with the legislative branch, which has an important role to play
in this matter. That's what the briefing focused on.
Q Did the subject of his criticism come up at all?
MR. FLEISCHER: I wasn't there for every bit of it. I'd be very, very surprised.
Q Getting back to the supplemental, Ari. What is the President's message to those senators who would like to link any
kind of tax cuts or even the size of tax cuts to the question of the cost of the war?
MR. FLEISCHER: Well, the President believes that no matter what happens in the pursuit of a war, it is vital that jobs
are available for the soldiers and the Marines and all the servicemen and women when they come home from the war. And
that means it's important for Congress to pass an economic growth package that gets the economy growing again, faster
than it was already growing.
And so the President hopes that the package that he sent up to the Congress will be the package that the Congress agrees
to. Clearly, the House of Representatives did pass the President's -- largely passed the President's proposals into the
budget resolution they just passed. It's pending in the Senate. There are a series of debates underway and votes
underway in the Senate as we speak. And so far, so good.
Q The homeland security money that will be in the supplemental, my understanding is the White House is concerned that
risk assessment, in terms of the cities and locations that should get that money is not being considered enough by
appropriators. What's the White House view on that?
MR. FLEISCHER: The President does think for homeland security funding to be the most effective, it needs to be the most
flexible. It should not be earmarked to specific cities, not on the basis of the threat to that city or to that state,
but rather on the basis of some other, more parochial factor or legislative factor. So the President believes that the
purpose of taxpayers sending money to Washington for the purpose of protecting the homeland is to protect the homeland
where the threat is the greatest.
Q Ari, yes or no, has Saddam Hussein lost his last opportunity to leave Iraq?
MR. FLEISCHER: Well, certainly he didn't take up the opportunity that the President provided him. And I said that that
would be his final mistake, and indeed he has made a mistake that looks final. So I can't answer every instance. But the
President gave him the opportunity to leave, he did not take it.
Q No further discussions on that point? You've said several times today, pointedly, that the President hopes this can be
concluded in -- with as little loss of life as possible, as little damage to Iraq's infrastructure, which certainly
leaves open the possibility that even at this late date, he could escape the country and go into exile and the
hostilities --
MR. FLEISCHER: I do not know, we do not know enough about the status of Saddam Hussein to know if that's an option. We
don't know.
Q Would it be an option --
MR. FLEISCHER: We don't know. April.
Q Ari, two things. What do you say to these Americans who say they are patriotic, who want disarmament, but don't want
war for the examples that we're seeing now -- death and destruction in Iraq? It's being laid out for you in your front
yard right now and around the country. What do you say to these people?
MR. FLEISCHER: Well, the President's message to those people is, they're just as patriotic as anybody who has a
different view of how best to achieve disarmament. There is no question about that. What there is a question is, how to
effectively disarm Saddam Hussein. And on that point, the President and much of the country respectfully disagree.
Q And on another subject, back onto the television watching. You say President Bush doesn't watch much television. Is he
not watching the "shock and awe" today because he's getting military video, U.S. video of the events there?
MR. FLEISCHER: April, he is not doing anything differently today than he would typically do. The President does not
typically watch a lot of TV, to get his news from TV. I know I shouldn't say it in this room, but that's not what he
does.
The President receives briefings that give him the information he needs to do his job in totality. The President
approaches this in a very serious fashion about receiving the best, most up-to-date briefings from the best, most expert
officials. And that's how he approaches his job.
Q But isn't it understandable that as the American public is watching the bombardment, turning to nighttime sky into
light and seeing the gravity of the situation, that he might need to understand what America is seeing and see it with
them so he can speak effectively to the American public?
MR. FLEISCHER: The President of the United States did not need to watch TV to understand what the American people think
about the decision to use force to disarm the Iraqi regime. He understands what the American people understand, that
there are risks involved, that lives may be lost -- but the cause is right, the cause is just, the goal is disarmament
to protect our people. And he has a deep understanding of all that.
Goyal.
MR. FLEISCHER: Ari, the President has spoken with the Indian Prime Minister three to four times in a month continuously.
What they have been talking about? Is this Iraq only? And what President has been asking India to do in this war, or
what the Prime Minister is asking the President?
MR. FLEISCHER: Well, typically, in the conversations with the President the two discuss, most recently, the situation in
Iraq. They also talk frequently about the need to peacefully resolve any of the disputes along the line of control.
That's typically the two subjects they'll talk about.
Q -- line of control there was a -- the President has spoken and the Prime Minister mentioned to the President that
there was a legislation in New Hampshire -- legislators passed a resolution on Kashmir. And India is saying that in the
parliament that this is internal affairs and local --
MR. FLEISCHER: This is something that was passed into legislature in New Hampshire? I can't speak to that.
Joe.
Q In the meeting this morning, did the President talk about keeping his domestic agenda on track?
MR. FLEISCHER: The meeting with the congressional leaders, to the degree that I heard about it, was focused entirely on
the military mission.
Q Has the U.S. government engaged in any disinformation this week in order to get the leaders of Iraq to move from one
place to another? And what do you, personally, think about this information?
MR. FLEISCHER: I think, given the fact that you have as many reporters as you have on the ground and are able to watch
events live, with
your own eyes, I think you know that any attempts to do anything that would be said to be lies would not possibly work
and should not be done.
Connie.
Q Thank you. A few questions. First of all, please, to the President, he can get everything he needs from radio, he
doesn't need TV. Seriously --
Q The Wall Street Journal. (Applause.)
Q What are you doing here at the White House to make certain that Iran or North Korea or any other countries are not
taking advantage of the situation while we're so heavily engaged in Iraq?
MR. FLEISCHER: Well, our nation is a large one and is able to honor its commitments globally, even with the action that
is taking place in Iraq. The message to North Korea, as you well know, has been a diplomatic message, a message that is
being pursued in a multilateral fashion. And that will continue to be the case.
Foreign affairs are being conducted in all corners of the world at the same time events are unfolding in Iraq. The
United States carries out its messages daily, not only to North Korea and to Iran, but to other nations, on a host of
issues, with whom we have important trade obligations. The President continues to have meetings with his staff on
domestic matters. The Trade Representative continues to be engaged around the world in promoting trade around the world.
The business of the United States of America across the globe goes on.
Q One more on Turkey, sir. Given Turkey's inconsistent behavior, does the President still think it's entitled to the
same billions of dollars worth of aid?
MR. FLEISCHER: Well, there's nothing new to report on that front. I've shared with you before about the total aid
package that had previously been offered to the Turks, and that total package is not on the table.
Q Ari, the President may not watch the war on TV, may not need to watch it on TV, but a lot of people around the world
will. And is this the image that he wanted them to see, of the "shock and awe" campaign, of the war? And did he weigh
the possible effect on public opinion that those images might have?
MR. FLEISCHER: Well, have you seen an effect on public opinion? I'm not sure -- are you saying it's -- what effect have
you seen?
Q I'm offering that as a possibility. But they are pictures that a lot of people will use to judge how the war is going,
how it's being carried out.
Q Let me make sure everybody understands what I have said about the President's TV watching habits. I explained that the
President does watch, but he does not depend on TV for his source of all news that he receives. He will watch things,
from time to time, as I made clear. I was asked specifically, where was the President at 1:00 p.m. today, was he
watching TV from 1:00 p.m. to 1:30 p.m. or so. And I explained that I was with the President at the beginning, he was
not watching it at that time, and I can't speak for what he did when I was not in the room with him.
In terms of the public, the President believes that the public understands what is at stake here when military force is
used. The public has seen the use of military force before. And the American people are always regretful if it has come
that force must be used to achieve an objective. And in this case, as regretful as the American people are that our
military has to be engaged in combat -- risking the lives of Americans, let alone anybody else -- the American people
understand what is at stake is protecting the American people from Iraq's possession of weapons of mass destruction.
The American people also saw September 11th on TV, and the American people and their President never want to see a scene
like that again on our shores. One of the best ways, in the President's judgment, to make certain that that scene is no
longer -- is never seen again is to make certain that enemies who would gather across oceans are not able to gather, in
the form of receiving weapons of mass destruction from the Iraqi regime that they could then bring to attack us once
again.
Q Ari, with Secretary Rumsfeld and others today saying that the Iraqi regime is losing control, how and when would the
U.S. anticipate filling the power vacuum?
MR. FLEISCHER: Well, I think events on the ground will dictate the pace of all future events involving the
reconstruction of Iraq. The principles that are going to guide reconstruction of Iraq, at whatever time it becomes
operative, will be the protection of the territorial integrity of Iraq, and that Iraq shall be governed from both within
and without by the Iraqi people. That's the principles that the administration is pursuing.
We've been in touch of a great number of Iraqis, both within and without, and we will continue to pursue those
endeavors.
Q What's going to be done in the short term, assuming this prediction is fulfilled that control is lost, to prevent
anarchy there?
MR. FLEISCHER: First of all, I think it's important, as exactly what the Secretary said, we're watching the scene unfold
in Iraq. This continues to be the early stages of a military operation of whose length no one can predict. So before
people can make actual predictions about the next government, this military campaign will continue to be pursued. Once
the military campaign has pursued point of success, of course we will maintain the presence to protect the security of
the Iraqi people. We want to make certain that if there are any old scores to settle, if there are any internecine
conflicts, we can help to protect the security of the Iraqi people.
In addition, we will continue to have a presence for, as Campbell talked about earlier, the humanitarian aspects, the
distribution of food and other programs. I can share with you that already, as part of our effort to help jump start the
United Nations Oil for Food program, we have provided already $40 million to the World Food Program, for logistic
preparations, and will soon provide an additional $20 million.
We're prepared to provide approximately half a million metric tons of food if there is an extended break in the Oil for
Food program deliveries. We are undertaking an enormous humanitarian program of our own, including contributions to U.N.
agencies and our own food donation. We hope the United Nations and other nations will quickly be able to join us.
Secretary Veneman at the Department of Agriculture announced yesterday the release of some 600,000 metric tons of wheat
for the Iraqi people.
Q Do you view as troubling at all President Chirac's statements today, though, that the U.S. and the UK should not be in
charge of oversight of the post-war --
MR. FLEISCHER: We will continue -- the goal is worthy, you can be certain that the humanitarian needs of the Iraqi
people are met. And we will continue to do everything necessary to meet those humanitarian needs. We will work through
the United Nations. We have our own abilities in the region to protect and provide for the humanitarian needs, and we
will pursue those both.
Q Has the list grown of nations that are backing --
MR. FLEISCHER: The last update I have is 46. So that would be an indication of growth by two.
Q And one last question, if you'd be so kind. Does the President feel the close resolution, the one that was approved by
the Senate and the House, finally put an end to any political bickering on the war?
MR. FLEISCHER: That's not up to the President, that's up to anybody who would politically bicker.
Q Ari, the administration made clear in Afghanistan that this was not -- that that war was not about one man, Osama bin
Laden. But isn't it the case that this war is, in fact, about one man, Saddam Hussein? And is it possible for the
U.S.-UK to declare victory if they can't account for a dead or exiled Saddam Hussein?
MR. FLEISCHER: That's an interesting question. And there are, indeed, differences. As you can see, the President kept
referring to the war in Afghanistan as a different kind of war because of the nature of the al Qaeda organization, or
loosely knit group of terrorists who don't operate out of any set, fixed positions. They had bases that they would
operate in Afghanistan, they then would disperse around the world -- as we saw on September 11th -- blend into our
society and to other societies to carry out their acts of terror, making it a different kind of war.
In many ways, this is a more traditional type of military conflict that people can witness. The key to this military
conflict is to make certain that Saddam Hussein, his sons and the leaders around them are not in a position to do to the
world again what they have done now, which is arm themselves with weapons of mass destruction, particularly biological
and chemical weapons, which then could be used against the people of the United States. That's the objective of the
military campaign, is to disarm the regime and make sure that nobody can take power in the regime who -- and have to
make this a repeat event for a future American President.
So I hope that answers your question.
Q One quick one -- does that mean, then, we need some definitive proof of his demise before we can declare a victory
here?
MR. FLEISCHER: I think what's most important is that Iraq be governed by people who are able to govern Iraq in a manner
that it becomes -- that all nations on earth should be become nations that are dedicated to peace, not to the
development of weapons of mass destruction for the purpose of using them against their neighbors, as Iraq has done in
the past.
Q Ari, you speak of Iraqis embracing us as liberators. But a recent poll by Zogby International of all the Arab world --
countries around there show a very negative perception of the United States -- 95 percent in Saudi Arabia have a
negative view of the United States. Why would Iraqis be different? Why would they have such a more positive view? And
with this "shock and awe" campaign, which could result in civilian deaths, why are they suddenly going to become
enamored of --
MR. FLEISCHER: Well, you just said something about all these civilian deaths. As Secretary Rumsfeld explained earlier,
this is targeted at the military targets. If there are civilian casualties, of course, and there are no guarantees in
war, as we said, but every step is being taken to protect the civilians and the citizens of Iraq.
You know, I don't know that I need to answer that question. I think events on the ground will prove themselves out.
You'll have the answers yourselves. You are on the ground there; you will witness it yourself. From everything the
President has heard, his belief is that the Iraqi people will welcome the throwing off of the repression that they have
suffered under. It is mankind's nature to want to be free. And the Iraqis deserve that, just as much as anybody else on
this earth deserves that. And events on the ground will prove themselves out; we shall see exactly what unfolds.
Anne.
Q You said earlier that you don't know whether Saddam Hussein is in control. Is that to say you don't know, and the
administration does not know, whether he's alive? Is that accurate?
MR. FLEISCHER: I've been asked the question any number of ways, people trying to find out what the status of Saddam
Hussein is. The fact of the matter is we don't know. We do not know how Saddam Hussein is feeling today.
Q But is it safe to assume that, given that the bombs are still falling, that you're operating on the assumption that he
is still alive and that you will operate on that assumption until it's proven otherwise?
MR. FLEISCHER: There's a military campaign that is underway. The purpose of the campaign is to disarm the regime, to
target the military facilities of a wide variety of natures. And anything beyond that, you need to talk to the Pentagon
about. I have no more answers on that.
Q Ari, some former Presidents have come to the West Wing, like, in the middle of the night when they've been conducting
wars. You said yesterday that President Bush does not feel like he should be micromanaging this war. Can you expand on
that a little bit and tell us why he feels that way?
MR. FLEISCHER: Because the President believes that the best way to carry out a military operation is to very carefully,
thoroughly review the plans in advance; to ask the hard questions of the planners as the plan is being developed; to
have a team in whom he has confidence; to have a military on the ground that is superbly trained, well equipped, and
well paid. The President is satisfied that those criteria have been met. He would not have authorized action had he not
been satisfied that those criteria were met. And that is the President's approach to it.
Throughout the process, the President will continue to monitor it. He will continue to watch. He will continue to be
very adaptable as events require. I think you saw that on Wednesday.
Q Ari, thank you. Part of my question has been answered already, but I am going to ask you anyway.
MR. FLEISCHER: I thought you might. (Laughter.)
Q If Saddam Hussein is injured bad, or wounded, and if at least one of his sons was killed in Wednesday's night air
strike, who is in charge in Iraq, and who are we dealing with, if anybody?
MR. FLEISCHER: It's not a question of who are we dealing with. There's a military operation underway to deal with their
weapons of mass destruction and their top leaders and their military targets. That's with whom we're dealing. And the
President gave Saddam Hussein his opportunity to leave the country, and he did not avail himself of it. It couldn't have
been any clearer. If he did not, the President said, leave within 48 hours, he could have -- military conflict would
result. Military conflict has resulted.
Finlay.
Q A couple of years ago, the President traveled to key states to influence, you know, wavering senators in the vote on
the tax bill. By staying so close to the home front right now, isn't he, in effect, disarming himself in the current
fight over the tax bill?
MR. FLEISCHER: Well, I think, number one, you have to give credit where the Congress has acted. The House of
Representatives, in a narrow margin, passed the President's budget last night. I can point out that the margin by which
they passed his budget was triple the margin by which they passed trade promotion authority, which is now law of the
land. A narrow margin, but narrow margins become laws of lands.
In the Senate, they're continuing to discuss the budget. It is being voted on as we speak. Many of the amendments that
sought to defeat the President's budget have not been accepted. Some have, at least for the moment, whittled down the
size of the tax cut that the President proposed. We'll see if that's the final word or not in the Senate. It may or may
not be. But then it goes to the conference. The Ways and Means Committee has already started taking action on the tax
plan, which can only follow after the overall budget is passed. So whether the President is in Washington or travelling
the country this year, progress is being made and the President is heartened by the progress.
Q But, Ari, among the senators that are in opposition to the size of the tax cut this year and want to at least cut it
in half, there are those among them that supported the President's tax cut in 2001. Is the administration at all
concerned about this?
MR. FLEISCHER: Well, of course we're going to continue to be engaged in the legislative process, but if you watch the
legislative process, you'll see it's working -- working rather nicely. The House just passed the President's budget. The
Senate is still in the middle of it. So different members of Congress, of course, are going to have different opinions
at different times.
And the President will continue to work with them, because the bottom line remains, passage of a budget and an economic
growth plan that creates jobs for the American people. That's the final end that the President is seeking.
Q Ari, back to the supplemental. You said that the President -- the time for the President to act is coming, but we're
not there yet. What piece of the puzzle is he waiting for that he doesn't have yet? For instance, is he waiting to see
if the war is going to be over quickly or drag on?
MR. FLEISCHER: I think one thing we've made clear all along is the President was reserving the final judgments about
what the appropriate numbers or range of numbers would be to present to the Congress until we could express it to the
Congress with the greatest precision. And a certain amount of passage of time helps to arrive at that precision.
THE PRESS: Thank you.
MR. FLEISCHER: Thank you.
END 3:12 P.M. EST