Remarks With Quartet Members
Secretary Condoleezza Rice
United Nations Headquarters
New York
December 15, 2008
Quartet Members: United Nations Secretary General Ban Ki-moon, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, Russian Foreign
Minister Sergey Lavrov, Special Representative for the French Foreign Ministry Gerard Araud, High Representative for
European Common Foreign and Security Policy Javier Solana,European Commissioner for External Relations Benita
Ferrero-Waldner,
MODERATOR: Please take your seats and turn off your cell phones, please, and kindly – before you ask your question, kindly
identify your media and give your name. And I guess our Quartet members are here. We have EU High Representative Javier
Solana, U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, we have the Secretary General, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov,
European Commissioner for External Relations Benita Ferrero-Waldner, and we have Mr. Gerard Araud, Special
Representative of French Foreign Minister Bernard Kouchner, on behalf of the EU Presidency.
Mr. Secretary General.
SECRETARY GENERAL BAN: Thank you very much. Good evening, ladies and gentlemen of the media. The Quartet has just completed its discussions
and will soon be meeting with ministers and representatives of the League of Arab States. I will distribute the Quartet
statement in a moment, but I would just make a very brief introduction.
On behalf of the European Union, the Russian Federation and myself as Secretary General of the United Nations, and also
other Quartet participants here, I want to thank the outgoing U.S. Administration, in particular President Bush and
Secretary of State Dr. Condoleezza Rice, for their efforts to advance Israeli-Palestinian negotiations in the context of
Annapolis peace process. These efforts have been tireless and are continuing. A very important progress is underway. We
are united in our conviction that it must be continued and intensified in the period ahead.
In this respect, we look forward to working closely, from the outset, with the administration of President-elect Obama
to achieve the goal of a two-state solution and comprehensive Arab-Israeli peace.
Thank you very much. We’ll be ready to answer your questions. Thank you.
MODERATOR: The first question goes to the (inaudible) representative Harvey Morris for the Financial Times.
QUESTION: (Inaudible) for the FT, and I’d like to give the traditional welcome from the UN Correspondents Association and to
thank the Secretary General, Secretary Rice, Minister Lavrov, and our other distinguished guests for sparing us some
time today, which agreeable task allows me to ask the first question, which I’d like to put to Secretary Rice.
Madame Secretary, the Quartet statement and also the text of a draft resolution that we’ve seen, which will come up for
debate in the Security Council tomorrow reaffirms support for a two-state solution in the Middle East. I know you won’t
speculate on the outcome of the Israeli election, but let’s say hypothetically that Mr. Netanyahu wins. He’s not someone
who has traditionally supported such a solution, certainly not in the terms that members of the Quartet would understand
it.
What pressure can be brought either by the Quartet or by individual members of the Security Council to ensure that a
future Israeli government will commit itself to this outcome?
SECRETARY RICE: Thank you. Well, first let me note that the – a lot has happened since really 2003 in terms of the broadening of the
base of support in Israel for the two-state solution: the acceptance of the Roadmap by the Israeli Government; the
participation in the Annapolis process. And I think that one has to go back really to the father of the settlement
movement and, at the time, the Likud prime minister, then founder of Kadima, Ariel Sharon, to see that the two-state
solution is one that I believe has really broad acceptance. And I’ve heard that from Israeli leaders across the
political spectrum.
What the resolution will do tomorrow – and I want to thank my Russian counterpart for Russian co-sponsorship of that
resolution – it was really conceived by the Russian Federation and the United States and the other members of the
Quartet supporting. What that resolution does is to put the international community on record in believing in the
irreversibility of the Annapolis process – bilateral negotiations toward a two-state solution, a comprehensive solution,
and the various principles of Annapolis and what the parties have established since then. And I believe that that will
then add the voice of the international community through its most powerful and its most consequential body – that is,
the Security Council – to establish Annapolis as the way – the Annapolis process as the way forward.
Obviously, Israel will have a prime minister one way or another after February, and the Israeli Government will have to
chart a course. But I believe that the international community will have done what it can do in the strongest possible
terms, and that is to put the weight of the Security Council behind not just the two-state solution but a particular
process for getting there. And I might just emphasize that Annapolis, of course, is not just a top-down – that is
negotiated process toward the solution of two states, but also a bottom-up process of Roadmap obligations and of
improving life for the Palestinian people on the ground. And that is really the reason for the resolution tomorrow.
MODERATOR: We give a question to – yes, go ahead, (inaudible).
QUESTION: Yes, my (inaudible) Rice and to Mr. Lavrov. Is this resolution you’re presenting tomorrow an alternative to what many
people see as the failure to establish a Palestinian state by 2008? And, sir, Mr. Lavrov, what about the situation in
Gaza, the settlement activity, and many reservations which the Arab side has to this resolution you’ve co-sponsored?
Thank you, sir.
SECRETARY RICE: I believe that if you look at the language of Annapolis, it says that the parties will make the best efforts that they
can – they could to come to an agreement by the end of the year. I think they have made best efforts and they continue
to make best efforts. And so what this resolution does is to urge, as the parties did with us and the Quartet when we
were in Sharm el-Sheikh, the continuation of this process to the conclusion of a comprehensive agreement, and also
within the context of a broader Israeli-Arab peace. And so that is the reason for the resolution.
But I’d just like to take one moment to speak to the question of not having achieved an agreement by the end of the
year. They won’t achieve agreement by the end of the year, but they have achieved a good deal of progress in their
negotiations, a good deal of progress in the work that is being done on the ground. And I would just remind that this is
the first time in almost a decade that Palestinians and Israelis are addressing all of the core issues in a
comprehensive way to try to get to a solution. And if that process takes a little bit longer, so be it. But we are very
much further along, certainly than we were in 2001, and I would argue even than we were in 2007 when Annapolis was
concluded.
MODERATOR: Mr. Lavrov.
FOREIGN MINISTER LAVROV: (Via interpreter) Thank you. I can add that altogether we are firmly committed to continuing negotiations, and in this
regard we have laid out appropriate arrangements, including in the statement that has been circulated today, and in the
draft resolution that is being tabled for consideration by the Security Council tomorrow.
And in these documents, there is a reaffirmation of our position, including on the crisis over Gaza and with respect to
the settlement policies that we do not support and we call for an ending of that. And with respect to Gaza, we met today
with – and discussed this quite in detail with the participation of Tony Blair, and we have specific plans that we will
implement. And the main thing is that we have this draft resolution that together with our U.S. colleagues we have
tabled in the Security Council, and this lays out the continuance of the process here. If you see the text, you would
see that in no way does this have to do with superseding the primary goal, which is the coexistence of two states,
Palestine and Israel, within peace, stability, and security. This resolution does not change anything here; on the
contrary, it is aimed at continuing our joint efforts and implementing them, including taking into account the recent
affirmation by the League of Arab States the Arab Peace Initiative, which we view as having great capacity.
MODERATOR: We’ll go to Raghida Dergham, Al-Hayat.
QUESTION: Yes please, my question is first to Secretary Rice. Has your Administration coordinated at all with the incoming
administration of President-elect Obama about this peace – this resolution itself and the direction from here on, and
particularly if the Palestinian track of the negotiations is the priority for you, will it be for the next
administration?
And for Foreign Minister Lavrov, would you tell me kindly what do you envision tomorrow’s meetings will bring about
between the 5+1 and the GCC+3 on Iran and Gulf security? Are you coming with anything in particular? Do you expect much
of it? What is the Russian interest in attending it?
SECRETARY RICE: As is the tradition in the United States, we will certainly and are briefing the Obama administration, or the coming
administration of President-elect Obama, on where we have been in the peace process, what we see its prospects to be.
But it would not be appropriate for me to speak for the President-elect and his team for how they will choose to move
forward. I would simply refer you to the words that I myself have heard him speak and that all of you have heard him
speak, which is that he puts a high priority on the issue of Middle East peace. But it has been our responsibility to
make certain that this file is turned over in completeness and in transparency to the new team, and that’s really what
we’ve done.
MODERATOR: Catherine Mercier. Oh, you had two questions – a two-part question.
FOREIGN MINISTER LAVROV: (Via interpreter) The meeting to be held tomorrow was proposed by our colleagues in the process that is called 3+3 or
5+1, that Arab countries have shown well-understood interest in this theme, and it is in everyone’s interest and their
interest that there be no worsening of the situation in this area. Therefore, we will take part in this meeting, we will
clarify those principles that were agreed upon in the format of the work on the Iran nuclear program, and we will
advocate that these principles be implemented.
Particularly for Russia, we are firmly committed to the need to use this process in order to support with all possible
means via the Security Council, the UN, and via other channels, support the work of the IAEA. We will avoid any steps
that would complicate that or make it impossible. And on these terms, we will then tomorrow talk with our Arab partners,
who, I repeat, are showing well-based, justified, and understandable interest in this theme.
MODERATOR: The next question for Catherine.
QUESTION: Yes, my question is for Mr. Secretary General. My name is Catherine Mercier from CBC News Radio Canada. I’m sorry, it
doesn’t have to do with the Quartet. My question is regarding the abduction of Canadian Robert Fowler in Niger. He was a
special envoy. What do you know about what happened to Mr. Fowler?
SECRETARY GENERAL BAN: I am also concerned about that. We are doing all our best efforts about his whereabouts. We are now mobilizing all
necessary information networks on this. We will keep you informed about that.
QUESTION: (Inaudible) on a special mission for his – on – as special envoy for Niger or on illicit arms?
SECRETARY GENERAL BAN: I do not have any detailed information, I’m sorry to tell you. But I’m also very much concerned about, you know, I’ve
been informed – briefed about this incident. We are doing all best efforts to identify, first of all, his whereabouts
and what’s behind it. We will let you know. Thank you.
MODERATOR: (Inaudible), the Post.
QUESTION: Thank you. Hello, yeah. This is a follow-up on Harvey’s question, specifically what Netanyahu has been critical of in
the Annapolis process is the idea that the core issues, all the core issues, should be upfront. And that is very much in
this proposed resolution. What do you think of that?
And also for Ms. Rice, how do you envision your namesake, Susan Rice, and your successor, Hilary Clinton, getting along
in the new administration? (Laughter.)
SECRETARY RICE: I’m not certain who the first part of the question was directed toward. I’m not going to get involved in internal
Israeli politics. They’re in an election campaign. The Israeli people will make their choice. They’ll debate all of
these issues as is befitting a great democracy, and so I won’t comment on any specific comments that various parties
have made.
I will simply underscore again that, as the President has said, President Bush has said, and as Annapolis acknowledges,
it is really only possible to get to peace through dealing with all of the core issues. And that is why Annapolis lays
out what it lays out. But I don’t think it’s appropriate for me to comment on any specific statements that people have
made during this time.
I know Senator Clinton very well. I have known her since she brought her freshman daughter to Stanford when I was the
Provost of Stanford. She is someone of high intelligence, great integrity, and, in fact, has what one needs most in this
job, which is a profound commitment to the United States, its interests, its values. And I think many people here know
her from having been very involved in UN affairs when she was First Lady, and of course, she was Senator from New York
as well. And so I think she will do a really very fine job as Secretary of State.
And as to Susan Rice, Susan Rice was a student when I was at Stanford. There seems to be a theme here. And we know each
other well. She is also somebody who is highly intelligent and will work very hard. And I think she will put her heart
and soul into the UN, because she’s a great believer in this institution and in what it can do.
I do believe that – now, not speaking for my successors, but I do think that the United Nations over the last several
years – in particular, the Security Council – has been asked to do some very difficult things. And sometimes it’s
succeeded and sometimes it has not. And if the United Nations and the Security Council, in particular, are going to keep
the mandate for really defending international peace and security, it will have to do hard things, not just the easy
ones. And that is not always easy, because obviously it’s not easy to get all of the Security Council members to agree,
or even the Perm 5 to agree. But I think we’ve established a record in the Bush Administration of working very
aggressively and very actively in the Security Council to ask it to do hard things, and I don’t think that’s going to
change going forward.
MODERATOR: (Inaudible.)
QUESTION: The Diplomat Magazine, Moscow. The question is to all the ladies and gentlemen taking part in this press conference, how efficient is the
Quartet in doing its job, and how important are the decisions taken today? Thank you.
SECRETARY RICE: Our leader. (Laughter.)
SECRETARY GENERAL BAN: I think the Quartet has been proven to be very effective and efficient and very cooperative among the Quartet
principals And since we have established this format, we have been meeting quite regularly, at least several times a
year during the last several years. And particularly since the Annapolis peace process was launched November last year,
we’ve been meeting very closely to accelerate this peace process. And this – the meeting, together with our partners,
which we have newly introduced, that has been also very much important, working together with the Arab partners. I’m
sure that we will continue to promote the acceleration of Arab Peace Initiative, even with the transition of government
in America and Israel and the Palestinian. You can have full support and assurance from us. Thank you.
MODERATOR: We go to Sylviane Zehil.
QUESTION: Sylviane Zehil, L’Orient-Le Jour. Madame Secretary – Madame Secretary, when you started your tenure as the secretary of state, you were much more into
new democracy in the Middle East. What do you think you achieved when you look back? What do you believe you achieved in
this matter, in this field, particularly in Lebanon and in the Middle East, please?
SECRETARY RICE: Well, thank you. First, let me say that the United States has long been a country that believes that its values and its
interests are intertwined, and that America is safer when democracy is on the march, and we are more vulnerable when it
is not. Our best friends and partners, of which we have many, are states with which we share values. It doesn’t mean
that we aren’t able to cooperate with states where we simply share interests, but our strongest partners are those with
which we share values.
The one exception to the view that our values and interests were inextricably linked had really been the Middle East,
where I think we had really focused more on stability at the expense of values. We didn’t talk much about democracy in
the Middle East. And I think as a result, we probably contributed to what the Arab Human Development Report called a
freedom deficit in the Middle East, where really as Africa and Asia and Latin America and certainly Europe moved further
and further along the lines of representative, pluralistic, popular legitimacy with governments, the Middle East was not
moving in that direction. But I do believe that because of the President’s emphasis on the Freedom Agenda, the
conversation is different in the Middle East today than it was in 2001 or even in 2005.
One can go to the Forum for the Future and hear the voices of civil society throughout the Middle East being empowered –
an institution that the United States with Arab partners created. One can sit, as I did the other day, and be with
Palestinian leaders who are working with youth and youth centers and English language and really even sports, and listen
to their hopes for their democratic state of Palestine. One can, as President Bush had the chance to do yesterday, be
received by the democratically elected president of a multiconfessional, multiethnic Iraq – something that I think was
unthinkable just a little while ago.
And as to Lebanon, one has only to go back to 2005 and recognize that this is now a state where Syrian forces are no
longer in Lebanon, where Lebanon has elected a president of that country, where there is a democratically elected prime
minister of that country, where they are in a national dialogue about how to put all of the arms of the country under
one authority, where as a result of the good diplomacy after the war of 2006, the Lebanese army is now deployed
throughout the country and is a truly national institution, where Syria and Lebanon seem ready to establish proper
relations between them as two independent states, and where by no means are the problems of Lebanon finished or
resolved, but where I think people speak of a sovereign and independent Lebanon in ways that I did not hear just a few
years ago. And that is something of which I am immensely proud and very gratified, but it is not principally because of
the policies of the United States. It’s because of the toughness and insistence of the Lebanese people in finally having
their sovereignty and their independence.
Thank you.
ENDS