MR. REEKER:  I take it you are talking about the Middle East, but you didn't indicate that, so I will just make sure for the viewers at home that they know what we are talking about.

Again, in terms of Germany, we have talked before about support for Germany, a close friend and ally, their role in this, as well as other member-states of the European Union, as well as Norway, as well as Russia.  I don't have any confirmation of any particular meetings.  I have seen press reports suggesting some meetings, but I would want to refer you to the parties involved on those.

We support direct contacts between the parties.  We have been facilitating a security talk structure, as you know, under the Tenet work plan, and we will continue to support both sides in these efforts as much as possible.

QUESTION:  That's pretty much what I am trying to get at.  With the Germans stepping forward, will the US sort of recede for a while?  Because maybe you don't want duplication or whatever.  Or is the US still busy trying to get Palestinians and Israelis together to talk about security? 

MR. REEKER:  I think we remain deeply engaged in the process, doing what we did.  Your discussion of Germany obviously has to do with the fact that Foreign Minister Fischer has been traveling in the region, as he has done before.  And we have talked about that before and how that is helpful, how we work together, as I indicated, with allies and friends in Europe and the region to work on this. 

So all of us are interested in seeing the violence come down; that is, having movement on the security track to end the violence so that the parties can then move into the Mitchell Committee recommendation implementation, which we have been talking about for so long and which everyone agrees -- the Germans, the Israelis, the Palestinians, and certainly we do -- is the road forward. 

QUESTION:  Mr. Arafat is in China today trying to convince President Jiang to have China be involved in --

QUESTION:  Can we stay on the Middle East? 

MR. REEKER:  He is on the Middle East.  I think if we just let people finish their sentences, we would do well there.

QUESTION:  -- trying to convince China to get involved in the peace process.  Does the United States have any particular comment on any potential China involvement?

MR. REEKER:  I am not really aware of the specifics of his travel, but we would certainly hope that everybody in the international community would encourage the two sides to work together to get the violence down.  The message is clear.  The structures for moving forward are clear in terms of a security implementation track with the Tenet work plan, and of course the Mitchell Committee Report, which has been embraced internationally as the way forward.  So we would hope that the same message is delivered to both parties, wherever their leaders may be traveling.

QUESTION:  So getting back to the meeting that has allegedly been arranged, former Israeli Foreign Minister Shlomo Ben-Ami described this meeting as "mythologic."  I am wondering if the State Department would agree with that characterization. 

MR. REEKER:  No, I simply said if you want confirmation of such a meeting, which has been written about in the press but I don't have any information about, you would want to talk to the parties involved and get their responses on that. 

QUESTION:  Wait a second, please, if I may.

MR. REEKER:  Yes, Barry.

QUESTION:  The Secretary of State, even on vacation, called Mr. Fischer and they talked about this when those first reports came about.  Now we know Mr. Arafat has, on occasion, taken people by surprise and made public the proposals -- Mr. Fischer seemed surprised with the Germans interested in furthering peace, said sure, we'd do it if you want.  The Israelis said, I don't know, we'll think about it.

MR. REEKER:  Question?

QUESTION:  Yes, the question is, explaining why, I need to ask -- or have a basis for asking the US, which isn't exactly a disinterested party, what does the US know about this process?  Is it a live process?  Is it a process the US will be involved in as well?

I don't mean generically; this notion of Berlin as the venue for security talks.  The truce talks.

MR. REEKER:  It is a notion that I read about in the press.  I think it is tied in with the fact that Foreign Minister Fischer has been in the region, has been talking with both parties.  Any specifics on a process or a notion involving that, you would need to talk to those parties about.  In the bigger picture, we support the direct contacts between the parties.  We remain very engaged, both through telephone calls, through our people on the ground, through senior officials, continuous engagement in this, trying to find the bridges to help the parties cross the divides that have existed for so many years.  And we will remain engaged in that.

This is a process that has no exclusivity; it is about everybody trying to move forward on what the whole international community has embraced as the path forward -- that is, the Mitchell Committee recommendations.  And in order to do that, as we have discussed, they need to work together on the security side to get the violence down.

QUESTION:  Has the United States -- I'm sure you have seen the proposals for what they call a "rolling cease-fire" starting in one area and then extending to other adjacent areas -- have you discussed this with the parties?  And do you think this is a possible way into getting the violence down?

MR. REEKER:  Anything in terms of the specific proposals that we have seen reports on in various media, you would want to -- in the case of the one you are discussing, we would want to refer you to the Israeli Government for comment regarding plans or proposals it is considering.  I think my message and answer would be the same, is that we remain deeply engaged in the process, trying to help the parties find the bridges that they need to cross the deep divide they have.  We work with both sides.  We try to lend our good offices.  We talk to leaders in the international community, as well as the leaders in the two -- the Israelis and the Palestinians.

We try to find ways we can restore a sense of trust and confidence between the two sides in the hope of finding a lasting, permanent solution.  And so whatever the two sides can do to find those ways back, we in the international community have provided structures and ideas and ways to move forward, and everyone has agreed that those are the ways to move forward.  Now it is a matter of exerting the maximum effort necessary to implement those ways so that they can make progress on this.

QUESTION:  Do you have any comment on remarks by Deputy Security Minister -- Public Security Minister Gideon Esra on suicide bombers?

MR. REEKER:  Yes.  I think we have seen reports of remarks, and if reports of those remarks are accurate, particularly those involving threatening the families of suicide bombers, we find those offensive and reprehensible, especially coming from a senior government official.

Our condemnation of suicide bombers has been very clear.  We have said, and continue to say, that the Palestinians need to do everything possible to stop the violence, to preempt attacks by suicide bombers and arrest those responsible for the violence.  And those are essential actions, without which the efforts will be impossible to continue to move forward into the Mitchell Committee implementation. 

But remarks such as the ones that are reported, especially if coming from a senior government official, we do find offensive, reprehensible, as I said.  We are confident that the Israeli Government would never condone such a strategy.  And of course, as I just indicated, we have consistently called on both sides to refrain from incitement and would expect that the Israeli Government would take immediate steps to distance themselves from the remarks, such as these that were reported.

QUESTION:  Well, you have said "reported" three times.  Has the US -- we have asked about other reports, like the rolling cease-fire and all, and you tell us, go to the parties; you don't want to comment on the reports.  Here is a report of a man saying something.  So the question --

MR. REEKER:  And I just commented on it.

QUESTION:  And you are walloping it out of the stadium.  Has the US Government tried to verify whether he said this?  Has the US Government tried to verify if his reported remarks represent Israeli policy?

MR. REEKER:  I don't know, Barry, but as I said, we are confident that the Israeli Government would never condone such a strategy, and our position on such remarks I have just outlined.  And what we have called for consistently is that both sides refrain from incitement.  Remarks like those would certainly constitute incitement, and we would expect that the Israeli Government would take immediate steps to distance themselves from remarks such as these.

QUESTION:  You are -- the State Department is taking a position on remarks that the State Department can't verify were actually said.  That's not a question; that is my surmise, because you have called them -- that is not your fault; it's the State Department -- has called these "reported" remarks, and you have gone to town on them.  And there was a reported remark by John Bolton that turned out to be 100 percent incorrect.

MR. REEKER:  Right.  That is why I referred to it as "reported."

QUESTION:  So why doesn't the NEA try to find out if he actually said that, and if it is Israeli policy?

MR. REEKER:  Barry, could you just stop for a moment, please?  I think I have responded to the question as asked, what would be our response to these remarks as reported.  It has been very clear what we would think about such remarks.  Okay?  I think what I said really stands on its own.  I don't think there is anything else to add to that.

QUESTION:  I'm just saying.  The State Department is picking and choosing which reports it feels it should make statements on, and which it says, go find out --

MR. REEKER:  Barry, I did make statements on each of them.  In terms of --

QUESTION:  Well, a rolling cease-fire is awfully important too to take a position on, and I asked your position.

MR. REEKER:  And I told you that if you want specifics on anybody's plan, you should talk to them.  In terms of any ideas that the two sides can come up with and work together to help get the violence down, to use the Tenet process or whatever they can do to make progress on the security track, and then move into Mitchell Recommendation implementation is what we are for.

QUESTION:  The questioner didn't ask, please, about what are the details of this plan.  The question was:  Does the State Department see merit in a rolling cease-fire?  And your answer was:  Ask them about it.

MR. REEKER:  We see merit in whatever processes the two parties can agree on to use to further security development to get the violence down. 

QUESTION:  I was going to ask about these remarks too. 

MR. REEKER:  Sorry, Terri.  Somebody stole your thunder.

QUESTION:  No, that's okay.  I'll just narrow it down a little bit more.

He apparently made these remarks on Sunday -- or, anyway, several days ago.  Is there a reason why we don't know?  We are in very good contact with Israel.  Do you know that we have asked, and do they just not want to answer, or you just don't have anything for us?

MR. REEKER:  I don't have anything else for you.  I think I have made a very plain statement in terms of our reaction to the remarks that are reported.  We have seen the same press reports.  No one has asked me about it until this time, and so now that you have asked me about it, whoever brought it up first, I am telling you what we would think about remarks like those. 

We have said that both sides should avoid and refrain from incitement.  Obviously, it has incited some of you particularly, and we find those remarks would constitute incitement.  They don't help the process. 

We would expect and are confident that the Israeli Government would never condone such a strategy as outlined in those remarks. 

QUESTION:  Are you looking into whether they did say these things? 

MR. REEKER:    I don't know exactly what we are pursuing in terms of that.  What we are doing is making quite clear our position on it because I think looking into the precise timeline of who said what when is not going to change any situation.  What is going to be clear is what our position is on that, and that is what I am here to explain to you.

QUESTION:  Other than making this -- we often ask this question and I know it's annoying, but other than making this statement here, have you expressed this view to the Israeli Government through your own channels? 

MR. REEKER:  I could go back and check.  I am quite sure we have because, as I tell you often, the messages that we bring to you here publicly are quite the ones we are taking privately as well in discussions with leaders on all sides.  The Secretary himself has told you that in terms of a number of his phone conversations.  The message that I delivered was the same one we have said publicly about what we want to see happen and what we think has to happen to have movement in a positive direction in the situation in the Middle East. 

Betsy.

QUESTION:  Has the Secretary talked to Fischer since his phone call several days ago?

MR. REEKER:  I am not aware of another phone call.  I was not able to check on any calls the Secretary might have made today.  As of yesterday, however, there was not another one.  I will double-check on phone calls for you, though.  Hold on a second and I will see what I've got here. 

Two days ago when I came out here and said that the Secretary was, as I spoke then at one o'clock, speaking with Foreign Minister Fischer, I believe was the last time.  But I will have to double-check on any calls today. 

QUESTION:  A question with respect to the Middle East.  The problems of getting both these plans -- first the Mitchell plan, next the Tenet cease-fire plan or strategies -- were they fixed in stone, or are each of these plans looking at day-to-day type results, meaning either terrorists and/or the resultant Israeli striking of Hamas and Hezbollah? 

MR. REEKER:  I am not quite sure I am understanding your thought process.

QUESTION:  In other words, were the plans fixed in stone as to what is actually occurring, both on the ground and the attitudes of both the PLO and the Israelis?

MR. REEKER:  Why don't we try to address that.  I don't think anything is fixed in stone.  You may have missed our discussion of the developments as we helped to bring forth what is known as the Tenet work plan, which is a process, a structure by which the two parties can try to use security talks that we offered to facilitate to work together to bring the violence down.  That is a process and Director of Central Intelligence George Tenet went to the region and worked on that.  So the international community, in this case led by the United States, has helped to provide a structure for the two parties to make progress on the security side.

The Mitchell Committee Report is quite clear.  We can get you a copy of it.  It is available on the worldwide web.  In terms of what it outlines, it was a committee that was called after the Sharm el-Sheikh talks to examine the situation and to provide recommendations on a way forward.  And that is what they did, and those recommendations and the whole report was embraced by both sides -- the Israelis and the Palestinians -- as well as the rest of the international community as what we see as the best way forward, providing the sides a structure, a road map to use to make progress on this and get back on the path to peace.

QUESTION:  I guess what I was saying is that it's like Chairman Arafat is now in India, or going to China, and he is trying to get certain countries to back his particular thoughts and actions.  And we, of course, have our own thoughts --

MR. REEKER:  Do you have a question?

QUESTION:  Yes.  The question is:  Prior to those talks --

MR. REEKER:  Which talks would those be?

QUESTION:  Meaning the talks, maybe in Berlin or elsewhere, were specifics given to both sides of what they could and should be doing, and obviously maybe both sides are ignoring?

MR. REEKER:  I don't think we are going to get any further on this.  I just explained to you that there is a Tenet work plan which gives them a structure on the security side, and there is the Mitchell Committee Report which lays out a road map for moving forward in a variety of steps -- and we will provide that for you if you want -- to make progress in this issue.

Mr. Lambros.