These discussions will focus on advancing President Bush's vision for two states living side by side within secure and recognized borders.  And these discussions will also address the continuing efforts by the United States, the Quartet and our international partners to assist the Palestinian people in their effort to implement reform of Palestinian institutions and the economy in preparation for statehood.

 The Secretary will also meet bilaterally in New York on Tuesday with Egyptian Foreign Minister Maher and Jordanian Foreign Minister Muashar, and the Quartet will meet late on July 16th with the foreign ministers of Egypt and Jordan at an event hosted by the UN Secretary General Kofi Annan to continue their consultations on these issues.

 The second piece of travel -- what?

 QUESTION:  Do you know what time is this going to --

MR. BOUCHER:  I don't have exact times for all this yet.  Generally, sort of late morning through the evening. 

QUESTION:  (Inaudible.)

 MR. BOUCHER:  Not decided yet.

 QUESTION:  Do you know whether the Arab ministers are coming to Washington later in the week or something? 

 MR. BOUCHER:  We're also considering how to talk to others.  The Saudi Arabian Foreign Minister is tied up in Saudi Arabia, I think, on these days.  So we've been talking to him about when we might get together with him and others, but I don't have anything definite on that yet.

QUESTION:  Is anyone going to meet the Egyptians and the Jordanians (inaudible) as well, or is that --

 MR. BOUCHER:  That will be a possibility as well, but as I said, nothing definite yet.

 Second piece of travel.  Later this month, Secretary of State Powell will travel to India, Pakistan, Thailand, Malaysia, Singapore, Brunei, Indonesia and the Philippines from July 27 -- although I think departure is the 26th -- until August 3rd for the days of events.  We'll put out a statement that gives you some of the substance of this discussion.  As you know, the Secretary has been working and very interested in the situation in India and Pakistan.  That remains a prime issue for us, and he wants to go out and meet with the leaders there again.  And then he'll also proceed to Southeast Asia and to the ASEAN Regional Forum Meeting, which is being held this year in Bandar Seri Begawan.

As far as dates go, he'll be in India and Pakistan on July 27 and 28, although the final arrangements for those stops are being made.  Which stop which day is not absolutely certain yet.  He'll arrive in Bangkok on July 28th, travel to Kuala Lumpur on July 29th, and visit Singapore July 30th.  He'll be in Bandar Seri Begawan July 31st and August 1st, and he'll fly on to Jakarta for August 2nd, and then on to Manila for August 3rd, and then we'll come home.

QUESTION:  Richard, can I ask you a question about that?

MR. BOUCHER:  Okay.  That's the end of the statements, so you can ask any questions you want.

 QUESTION:  Yeah, I mean, obviously they're all important countries and the stops are all important, but you know, we know a little about India and Pakistan, and that's really an enormous crisis situation, and we know about ASEAN.  I don't know how to put this without seeming to slight any country -- I don't mean to -- but is it because he's in the area he's making all these other stops, or are they really special, pressing?  Or is it something --

MR. BOUCHER:  The Secretary has wanted to do this for a long time.

QUESTION:  Yeah.

MR. BOUCHER:  You have a number of close US partners and allies in the region, including Thailand, which is a US ally.  We have major interests in this region of Southeast Asia.  We have two of the most important -- I think Indonesia's probably the largest Muslim country in the world.  Malaysia is also an important Muslim country, and we've just had a recent visit by the leader of Malaysia here.

So we have important relationships out here that are vital to our economic, political, diplomatic future, as well as our security interests.  You'll remember the efforts that we're making with countries in the region to fight terrorism, especially the cases that were uncovered by the Singapore Government that we worked with them on to fight terrorism potentially directed at US interests overseas in this area.

 QUESTION:  And the Philippines is part of that?

 MR. BOUCHER:  The Philippines certainly, as an ally and somebody who we're cooperating closely with in the fight against terrorism. 

 So for all these reasons, not only he's wanted to make this trip to Southeast Asia for a long time, but also there are immediate and pressing issues with regard to the fight against terrorism throughout this region, and important US interests for the here and now, as well as for the long term.

QUESTION:  I mean, increased concern, or is it just going to continue at the same level?

MR. BOUCHER:  The Secretary has been in close touch with leaders in this region, as well as the United States having the trips that you know about -- Deputy Secretary Armitage, Defense Secretary Rumsfeld.  Those produced the easing of tensions that we've seen.  The Secretary's continuing to work with the leaders there by phone.  He spoke last week with the outgoing Indian Foreign Minister and the incoming Indian Foreign Minister.  He spoke on Monday with President Musharraf of Pakistan.  So we've kept in touch directly, as well as through our ambassadors and our embassies out there.

The issue I would say at this point is that there has been some easing of tensions, there has been a significant decline in the infiltration along the line of control.  We continue to look for that to be made permanent in accordance with the pledges that President Musharraf has made.  We're continuing to look for the kind of actions that both sides can take to make this process move forward, in terms of, for example, ending the camps on the Pakistani side, continuing to take steps such as the Indians have taken to ease the tensions, to allow -- you know, they've allowed personnel to go on leave from the military, they've redeployed some of their ships. 

And so we want to keep that momentum going towards the easing of tensions, and we want to keep on the agenda and in discussions with them the issue of dialogue, which is, I think we all agree, the way that ultimately these questions need to be resolved.  So our interests in pursuing that and seeing it move forward is very strong.

There are other issues.  We have important relationships with both these countries as well, in Pakistan a growing and broadening relationship and a movement towards democracy with elections in October that we want to firmly support.  That can be an important step on the road back to democracy, which is very important to us.  And with India, a much broader relationship as well.  So a lot to discuss.

 QUESTION:  A last one, if I may.  We've been told that tensions are easing, and that the Indians -- and some Indian soldiers, in fact, have been removed from the border, from the line of defense.  The Indian ministers have been saying no; the Indian ministers have been saying that the infiltration is continuing, even increasing, some have said.  Military and civilian Indian officials have said this.  Is it -- you know, I guess it goes up and down.  But the US is confident there is some decline in tensions, that Musharraf is making good?

MR. BOUCHER:  We are confident, and I think Indian officials have said this, whatever the temporary increases that they report, overall there's a significant decline in the level of infiltration.  Now, President Musharraf has said that that's a permanent change.  He's made that commitment to us and we've conveyed it to the Indian Government.  And we all want to see that happen, that this does remain a permanent change. 

 And second of all, we want to see the continued action that he has talked about, like the action against camps and groups.  So we want to see those things continue.  We also want to see a continuation of steps on the Indian side to ease off and deescalate the situation. 

Anything else?

QUESTION:  Can I go back and ask you about the Quartet for a second?

MR. BOUCHER:  Yes.

QUESTION:  The last two meetings that represent lower level representatives from the Quartet, they were both in London.  There was the Burns one and then the Cheney one. 

MR. BOUCHER:  Yes.

QUESTION:  After the Burns one, there was talk about creating a steering committee for identifying priorities of Palestinian transformation, I think was the phrase. 

MR. BOUCHER:  Yes.

 QUESTION:  What's the --

MR. BOUCHER:  That was what our Deputy Assistant Secretary Elizabeth Cheney was out in London for, were meetings of what's called the International Task Force.  And those meetings in London, she met with on Wednesday the representatives of the Quartet, of Japan, Norway, World Bank and the IMF to continue the discussions that Assistant Secretary Burns had had last week on how to advance reform and go through some of the things they talked about. 

These are meetings of the International Task Force on Reform that was announced during the Burns visit.  The Quartet and the donor community agreed that the Task Force should identify areas of priority for donor assistance on reform and oversee progress and effectiveness of international support to Palestinian reform efforts.

We expect the Task Force will play a coordinating role in supporting Palestinian reform and ensuring that donor funds are spent effectively.  These discussions within the Task Force will factor into Secretary Powell's discussions with the Quartet in New York next week.

QUESTION:  So the Task Force is the steering committee that was referred to?

 MR. BOUCHER:  Yes.

 QUESTION:  Okay.  And do they -- all the members of this realize that they're on this?  I mean, the IMF and World Bank have agreed to -- and Japan and Norway?  And if yes, I mean, is it going to grow, or is that going to be -- is that it? 

MR. BOUCHER:  I'd have to check on sort of the formal membership question, but certainly all these parties were there discussing the topics that were on the agenda that I just went through. 

QUESTION:  Okay, so they --

 MR. BOUCHER:  And they're all participating in this effort to support, as the international donor community, the efforts of the Palestinians to reform, particularly areas like fiscal accountability.

 QUESTION:  Okay.  So they've all signed on for a long term -- or they've all signed on to be members of this Task Force?

 MR. BOUCHER:  They're all participating.  Signed on long term?  You'd have to ask each of them what they signed on for.

QUESTION:  Okay.  Now, how does this relate to the meeting on Tuesday?  Will the ministers be taking what the Task Force discussed in London on Wednesday and refining it more, or is that kind of a separate thing now? 

MR. BOUCHER:  The discussions with the Task Force will factor into Secretary Powell's discussions with the Quartet in New York next week.  They will be --

QUESTION:  (Inaudible.)

MR. BOUCHER:  Yeah.  The ministers will discuss, I think, a broader agenda than the particular Task Force, just as the Assistant Secretary-level group did discuss a broader agenda.

John.

QUESTION:  Just for the record, can you explain the purpose and significance of inviting the Arab foreign ministers to join them? 

MR. BOUCHER:  The President, back in his earlier speech April 4th, and then again in the speech he delivered a week or two ago, made quite clear that the international community needed to assume the burdens of moving this whole process of peace forward if we were to get anywhere.  He made that again clear in his speech on how to achieve a Palestinian state that can live side by side with Israel.  And certainly the efforts that we have asked for, the efforts that we have seen indeed from Arab parties, have been very important to trying to move that forward and trying to set that horizon and support reform.

So that will be the source of the discussions.  Egypt, Jordan and Saudi Arabia -- as we managed, we think, to set up some meetings with them -- have been very important to this effort and we continue to work with them closely in all aspects of it, whether it's reform or the political aspects of what we're trying to achieve in the longer term. 

Eli.

QUESTION:  Back to the Task Force.  Are they -- you mentioned that there were going to be donor priority discussions, but are they looking to create some sort of new entity that would receive the funds, or are they just looking to have certain reforms within the existing Palestinian Authority?

 MR. BOUCHER:  I don't think I can go that much -- that far into it.  As you know, we don't give money to the Palestinian Authority.  I may have mentioned that before.

 QUESTION:  Oh, I know.  We've gone over that.  (Laughter.)

BOUCHER:  But there are --

This is a task force, though.

 MR. BOUCHER:  Yes, it's a task force.  It's a task force to figure out what to support, how to support it, and how to make sure it contributes to the process of reform.  And they will figure that out and do it.

QUESTION:  Hold on.  Just one more.  You said you can't get into the details of -- you don't want to get too deep into it.  But has that question been resolved or is that still being examined?

MR. BOUCHER:  For us it's been resolved.

QUESTION:  For the United States it's been resolved.  What about for the --

MR. BOUCHER:  I invite you to get on an airplane and go ask them.

QUESTION:  Richard, the letter from Arafat to the Secretary this week -- well, firstly, does the Secretary intend to answer it?  And does he think -- does he agree with that Chairman Arafat that the time is right for the Israelis to start easing back on some of the measures they've taken in the West Bank so that -- which the Palestinians are portraying as an obstacle to reform?

MR. BOUCHER:  The letter that you're speaking of is a letter that we received earlier this week from Chairman Arafat for Secretary Powell.  In it, he discusses recent moves of reform by Palestinians.  We're reviewing the letter.  The Secretary has read the letter.  The staff is examining it and considering it.  We will consider the ideas that are presented.

The Secretary, as you know, has stated he doesn't have any plans for contacting Chairman Arafat.  That remains the case.  I would make clear that the process of reform that's being discussed is one that we have supported and that we will continue to express our support for, both publicly as well as in the meetings that we're having, and it's one that we discuss every day with a whole variety of Palestinians.  So to the extent that we're discussing these issues with Palestinians, I suppose that would constitute a reaction to the letter.

QUESTION:  Does writing a letter constitute contacting Chairman Arafat?

MR. BOUCHER:  As I said, the Secretary has no plans to contact Chairman Arafat.  I'll leave it at that for the moment.

Betsy.

QUESTION:  Someone on a low -- might Mr. Burns respond to the letter?  I mean, I assume you're not going to leave it un --

MR. BOUCHER:  We respond to letters in any variety of ways.  We don't necessarily sit down and say, "With regard to your letter of the 24th," you know, and mail something back.  So these are issues that we do discuss with Palestinians.  But no, I'm not going to speculate on specific pieces of correspondence that may or may not ever be written.

QUESTION:  But the Secretary did read it, as you said.  He opened it up.  It wasn't as if he thought, you know, that anything that's got Arafat's name attached to it he's allergic to, no?

MR. BOUCHER:  He did read the letter, yes. 

QUESTION:  Richard, as you know, some 90 military -- Iraqi military officers are meeting today and over the weekend to try and come up with a plan to topple Saddam Hussein.  What role does the State Department have in supporting that meeting this weekend?

MR. BOUCHER:  I think first it's important to say we do support this kind of broad-based conference of Iraqi military people.  We think it's a useful tool in helping the Iraqi community move closer to the goal of a better people for the -- a better future for the Iraqi people after Saddam Hussein.

We're not supporting the conference financially, but we are very much interested in the conference and the results, and personnel from our Embassy in London will be attending.

QUESTION:  Name, please?

MR. BOUCHER:  Excuse me?

QUESTION:  I didn't hear the name.

MR. BOUCHER:  I didn't either.

QUESTION:  Oh, I thought you said someone from our embassy --

MR. BOUCHER:  I said personnel from our Embassy in London.

QUESTION:  Oh, "personnel."  I thought Pierce -- Pierce Nell I thought you said.  (Laughter.)

MR. BOUCHER:  He goes to a lot of things for us.

QUESTION:  Iraqi specialist.

QUESTION:  We don't give any money to -- we haven't helped put this together, or --

MR. BOUCHER:  We're not financing this conference, no.

QUESTION: Did we help --

QUESTION:  Why not?

QUESTION:  I thought we were going to help meetings in Europe.

MR. BOUCHER:  There's a whole lot of activities of the Iraqi opposition groups.  Some of them we support, some of them we don't.  Some we pay for, some we don't.  I don't think there's a requirement that the US finance every activity around the globe of people who don't like Saddam Hussein.  I think there's all too many people around the globe who don't like Saddam Hussein and altogether too many activities for even us to finance.

QUESTION:  Can you elaborate a little bit on the US -- pick your word, oversight, you know.  Will personnel, as you say, what, attend the meetings or talk to various Iraqis?  And is there any other coordination?  Again, that might not be the word you choose, but tell us to the extent that the US will manifest its interest in this event.

MR. BOUCHER:  We are manifesting it here for you right now. 

QUESTION:  Exactly.

MR. BOUCHER:  Second of all, personnel will attend the meetings, second of all.  Third of all, they will talk to people at the meetings.  And third of all, I think you'll find that -- fourth -- wherever I am -- (laughter).  And furthermore -- which is a lot better.  And furthermore, I think you'll find that many of the people involved are people that we do talk to already and we'll continue to keep in touch with over time.

As you know, we have also been sponsoring financially a series of workshops over the course of the next several months to look at various aspects of Iraq after Saddam Hussein.  We had a workshop on judicial matters just at the beginning of this week.  And we'll continue to support that financially and help organize that over the course of the next few months.

QUESTION:  One more thing.  I didn't have a chance to ask Phil.  We had a very long briefing the other day.

MR. BOUCHER:  I understand you did.  I had a nice lunch.

 QUESTION:  I try to use a minimum of restraint. 

(Laughter.) 

QUESTION:  What I haven't heard in a long time -- and you know why it's relevant.  I haven't heard a spokesman -- and I'm not saying I want (inaudible) -- I haven't got an interest in this.  But I haven't heard a spokesperson say from the podium that we support the territorial integrity of Iraq.  I haven't heard that in quite a long time.  Because there are all sorts of notions about bringing down Saddam Hussein by, you know, kind of dividing the country into sectors and all, and it's effectively divided now.  So how do you feel about Iraq's territorial integrity today?

MR. BOUCHER:  Very well, thank you.  We support the territorial integrity of Iraq. 

QUESTION:  You don't want to see it divided?

MR. BOUCHER:  No.

QUESTION:  Thank you.

MR. BOUCHER:  Okay.

QUESTION:  I just -- I'm a little confused because -- what's your understanding of the agenda of this conference that's going on in London?  Is it actually to plan the overthrow, or is to look at what would happen post-Saddam, not necessarily how to get to post-Saddam?  Or is it -- am I wrong?  I mean, I could be wrong.

MR. BOUCHER:  No, it's a good question but I don't think I can answer it for you.  I think you have to see what the conference organizers say because we're not organizing somebody's agenda.  The workshops that we are sponsoring are about post-Saddam Iraq. 

QUESTION:  Well, what did you say?  You support this kind of broad-based conference --

MR. BOUCHER:  -- as a useful tool in helping the Iraqi community move closer to the goal of a better future for the Iraqi people after Saddam Hussein.

QUESTION:  Okay.  So it's kind of ambiguous.

MR. BOUCHER:  Moving closer to that better future.

QUESTION:  Okay.

MR. BOUCHER:  Okay, we're on to other topics or still on this one?  Betsy.

QUESTION:  No, I just -- you might have already answered my question.  I just want to know what you hope will come out of this conference.  I mean, do you hope that this conference, which seems fairly unprecedented that these different military groups are getting together in one place -- I mean, is that an accomplishment in itself, or do you hope broader things to come out of it?

 R. BOUCHER:  I think indeed the fact that Iraqi military opposition people are getting together in one place is an important development.  It's an important demonstration of the breadth of dissatisfaction with the regime of Saddam Hussein among Iraqis everywhere.  It's a chance for the people who want to see a different future and a better future for the people of Iraq to see how they can coordinate their efforts and work together. 

And any of these efforts at conferences and planning and meetings we think are all worthwhile because they further the prospect that at some point Iraqis will have control over their own future, and they prepare for that future.

QUESTION:  Did you see the documentary last night on PBS on Iraq?

MR. BOUCHER:  I'm afraid I didn't.

QUESTION:  Well, they --

MR. BOUCHER:  If you want something specific commented on, I'd have to go back and check with the experts.

QUESTION:  Well, this documentary filmmaker had on someone who said that he was a defector from Iraq and had served in, I believe, the military in one of their branches, and that he had been present at a time when Usama bin Laden had visited camps outside of Baghdad where al-Qaida were being trained. 

 MR. BOUCHER:  I'm not even sure it's a question I can promise to look into because I suspect, if we have an answer, that it's one that we won't be able to share because it would come from intelligence.  So I'm afraid I can't offer you anything on that at this point.  I've not heard that from any official spokesman from the US Government, those that have tried to brief on these issues.  But I don't think it's something that I can -- whatever we may know or may not know would be related to our intelligence.

QUESTION:  (Inaudible.)

MR. BOUCHER:  I know.  I know.  He's got a good job.  (Laughter.)

All right.  Are we still on this or --

QUESTION:  No.

MR. BOUCHER:  This gentleman had the first right to change the subject. 

QUESTION:  Saudi Arabia.  I guess two questions related to where things are with our relationship with Saudi Arabia.  On Fox News Sunday, I believe about two weeks ago, the Secretary said it was a real problem that -- that's his quote -- a real problem that the Saudi Committee for Support of the Intifada in Jerusalem, which is headed by the Saudi Interior Minister and partly funded by the Saudi royal family -- it was the one who held the $109 million telethon -- that they were sending money to the families of the homicide bombers with specific instructions for the money to go to the families of the homicide bombers.

Between that, and then also the -- with the House committee vote yesterday -- well, I'll get to that in a moment.  But with -- I don't want to have too many questions thrown at you at once. 

MR. BOUCHER:  It's okay, I'll throw them back.  (Laughter.)

As you know, or maybe you don't, from our repeated briefings on this topic here, the subject of Saudi assistance to Palestinian areas has been one that we've pursued on many occasions, and where we have raised it with the Saudi Government, they have taken steps.  They took steps to make sure that none of their official money was going into channels that might be construed as support for terrorism.  They're very careful about their funds and where they go and how they're used. 

 Second of all, we've raised with them the question of the telethon and the question of unofficial monies.  And they have assured us that they were doing everything possible to make sure that these were going for humanitarian purposes, to the legitimate humanitarian organizations.  That's been a subject of repeated discussion.  I think if you look back at the briefings we did around the time that Crown Prince Abdullah was in Crawford, you'll see his statements and our statements on that.  That's been an issue we've pursued, and where the Saudis have now repeatedly assured us that they were taking steps to make sure it was going into proper channels.

QUESTION:  But obviously you don't believe it was entirely going for humanitarian purposes when the payment sheet listed not just the names of the homicide bombers, but the locations of the attacks.

MR. BOUCHER:  I don't know what period you're talking about, but we do know that in the past the money was not always channeled -- the private money was not -- I'm going to say "supervised" in the same way.  And since the last few months of discussion, the Saudis have repeatedly assured us that they are taking an oversight role to make sure it only goes to humanitarian purposes.

QUESTION:  And now my second question.  The House Government Reform Committee voted yesterday to end all third-party screening in Saudi Arabia, and required that all Saudi visa applications must be reviewed first by the Department of Homeland Security before a visa can be issued to any Saudi national or third-country national in Saudi Arabia. 

Does the State Department support that model for screening by Homeland Security of visa applications worldwide?

MR. BOUCHER:  They voted?

QUESTION:  They voted in an amendment yesterday in the House Government Reform Committee.

MR. BOUCHER:  All right, I'll have to check the specific amendment. 

QUESTION:  Okay.

MR. BOUCHER:  I don't have any particular comment on those specific amendments.  We ourselves, as you know, or maybe you don't know, have taken a number of steps in Saudi Arabia to improve and tighten up on the issuance of visas.  Every applicant fills out supplemental information if he's in a particular target group.  Many applicants in certain target groups identified by intelligence and law enforcement already have to wait extra days for their visas so that we can make sure that we do all the appropriate checks.  We're checking against a database that's twice as large as any ever before that we've had, because we've been able to get names, hundreds of names from the CIA, and millions and thousands from the FBI.

So there's a lot of steps that have been taken since September 11th.  We continue to look at that.  Our Ambassador out in Saudi Arabia has looked at the situation and asked that we help them look at further steps that they can take to tighten up on security there for visa processing, and we're sending senior consular management officers out to Saudi Arabia to talk to the Embassy about that.

QUESTION:  Specifically, the Ambassador asked in the cable this week to terminate the program formerly known as Visa Express and to interview all applicants; is that correct?

MR. BOUCHER:  Well, no.

QUESTION:  I have the cable here.

MR. BOUCHER:  Well, I've read the cable, too.  And I think if you read it carefully -- even though it's confidential, if you happen to have it -- you'll find that he says he's asking for resources, he's asking for consular people to go out there, and that's what we're talking to him about. 

I mean, I do have to point out, sir, that you've written a lot of things and said a lot of things recently.  You said that visas are decided by travel agents; and that's not true, is it? 

QUESTION:  I said it was passed on to the consulate or the embassy from travel agents --

MR. BOUCHER:  You said that this is the only country that we do accept documents from third parties; and that's not true, is it?

QUESTION:  That was told to me by the State Department Press Office.  I have the facts.

MR. BOUCHER:  You've said that performance of Foreign Service Officers is measured on courtesy; and that's not true, is it?

QUESTION:  That was a statement said by repeated dozens of consular --

 MR. BOUCHER:  You said that applicants are presumed eligible; and that's not true, is it?

 So let's be careful about the facts.

QUESTION:  Again, I have the cables.  I have the best practices memos to prove this.

MR. BOUCHER:  Let's be careful about the facts.

QUESTION:  I am being careful, and no need to smear the work.

MR. BOUCHER:  Well, I'm just telling the facts.

QUESTION:  Can I ask a related question, because after almost, well, probably more than a week of listening to exactly what the current policy or the current way that visa regulations are decided, I thought I understood it, and then I see in today's Washington Times something that I think --

MR. BOUCHER:  Well, there's your problem right there.

(Laughter.)

QUESTION:  Well, is it right now the job of the State Department to decide on the rules and regulation for the visa process, or is it in fact the Justice Department and the INS?

MR. BOUCHER:  Right now, it is less specific than it will be under the legislation the President has proposed for Homeland Security.  I'd have to go back to some of the law on this.

Basically, the rules and regulatory function for visas now is kind of shared between the Justice Department, the INS, because the INS controls entry into the United States, and obviously our visas are issued based on their rules for entry.  But also the State Department promulgates rules and regulations on visas as well.

The new legislation that the President has proposed would vest all that sort of ruling and regulatory power in the Department of Homeland Security.  And that's what the President has proposed, that's what the Secretary supported, and I think yesterday, if you look on the Hill, that is what essentially, with some amendments that we supported, three committees of the House passed.

QUESTION:  So if and when it passed, the administration's proposal for this passes, what exactly -- what powers exactly is the State Department ceding or giving up to Homeland Security?  As written right now, what --

MR. BOUCHER:  I don't know that I can give you a list because I'd have to go back and figure out exactly which regulatory powers are with the State Department now and which are with INS, which are with Justice.  In some cases there is shared, I think, responsibility as well.  So it's a fairly complicated legal environment right now that would be made much, much clearer in terms of the law that the President has proposed and that we're seeing action on in the House right now.

QUESTION:  Can you ask someone to -- the lawyers to figure out exactly what it would be that the State Department and the Secretary would give up in terms of control over deciding the visa rules and regulations if what the administration is supporting for Homeland Security passes?

MR. BOUCHER:  I'll see if I can get you that.

QUESTION:  Thank you.

MR. BOUCHER:  Teri.

QUESTION:  Richard, also on Saudi.  A Wall Street Journal report is talking again about Americans held in Saudi Arabia against their will, women whose -- children whose fathers took them there and now are of age and not being allowed to leave, people with American citizenship who need a male's permission to leave the country and can't get it.  Is there anything new on this?  Has it been brought up more lately by the Secretary?

MR. BOUCHER:  It's certainly been brought up by the US Government on repeated occasions, particularly in regard to the custody cases that exist.  And these are issues that we pursue both on a case-by-case basis, but we've always also made clear to the Saudi Government the importance of resolving this overall issue.  But no, I'm afraid I can't at this point report anything particularly new on this.

QUESTION:  What's their excuse, except -- well, Saudi law dominates in the country, but can't they be reasonable about this?

MR. BOUCHER:  Yes.  And that's true in any country, and their law applies.

QUESTION:  Right.

MR. BOUCHER:  We can do everything we can.  We can push every way we can.  But in the end, their law applies.

QUESTION:  And dual citizenship doesn't affect that?

MR. BOUCHER:  That's true everywhere.

QUESTION:  But you have custody problems all over the world.  So is there a tougher -- is the Saudi legal structure such that you have more of a problem in Saudi Arabia?

MR. BOUCHER:  Every one of these cases is tough.  It's hard to say which one's tougher.  As you know, we've got cases that are very difficult for families involving Germany and Austria and Saudi Arabia, and there are many others.  Some places we can operate under The Hague Convention that we -- the United States was an important part of negotiating and an important part of trying to implement.  And so that in some places helps, but frankly even that doesn't help resolve the cases.  But in every single one of these cases, there's a lot of difficulty and a lot of hardship involved.

Eli.

QUESTION:  New topic.  Can you comment --

QUESTION:  Can we stay on the Saudi?

QUESTION:  Sure, let's stay on Saudi Arabia.

QUESTION:  Yeah.  Richard, is it standard practice for embassies to keep records of how many applicants there have been, I don't know, on a quarterly or even an annual basis, and what percentage of those applicants have been accepted and what percentage have been rejected?

MR. BOUCHER:  It is -- yeah.  That's both something that's -- I mean, that's tallied on a daily basis at embassies.  It's in our computer systems.  And it's something that we always look at.  Now, before you ask your follow-up question, I'd have to tell you, we do not release refusal rates on particular countries.  I think if you look at what the Secretary said yesterday, we got last year -- we adjudicated ten million applications, and issued about seven and a half million visas, nonimmigrant visas -- tourist, travel, business, school, things like that.

 But those general statistics are really quite a bit different from place to place.  I've been in places where we were turning down 70, 80, 90 percent of the applicants at any given time just because of the overall situation, the economic situation, a whole lot of other factors that made it difficult for applicants for that country to qualify under law.  And as we all know, under US law, no applicant is -- applicants are presumed ineligible for visas until they can establish that they have the qualifications.

QUESTION:  So if I understand you correctly, you're saying not only do you not release the refusals, but you also don't release the percentage of acceptance?

MR. BOUCHER:  That's the same thing, isn't it?

 QUESTION:  Right.  Right.  (Laughter.)  No, no, that's what I'm saying.

MR. BOUCHER:  We know that people know how to subtract. 

(Laughter.)

QUESTION:  Some of us.

MR. BOUCHER:  I think the issue is it's not -- you're not trying to stigmatize any given nation or nationality or individuals.  It's just, in some places, people may or may not qualify for visas.  There may be -- you know, because of sociological reasons, you may have more applicants from various categories and groups of people who don't qualify.  So it's not -- we just don't want it to be used to sort of stigmatize countries in different ways.

There is, for the visa waiver program, a statutory percentage -- it's three percent or two percent -- of refusals that I can't remember.  That's the one place where people qualify under that rule for the visa waiver program, then it's clear that they -- a certain percentage of applicants have not been accepted.

 Now, some of their ineligibilities are permanent, some are serious, some are for lack of proper paperwork, and people can try again.

 QUESTION:  I'm sure you understand the dilemma then, because what you've just said is that it's impossible for us to actually verify independently whether in fact -- I mean, in the case of Saudi Arabia, there were many applications that were just kind of waived through -- or, as you're saying that wasn't the case, that there wasn't special privileges.

MR. BOUCHER:  Well, I mean, "waived through"?  We don't waive them through.  Travel agents don't issue visas.  American officers have to authorize the visa.  No visa can be authorized until it's gone through the name base, the data check.

I can tell you some things.  Overall, of all the applicants in Saudi Arabia, applications that we receive in Saudi Arabia, we interview 45 percent of the applicants.  Of people in the target categories that have been identified by law enforcement intelligence as of most concern, we interview 92 percent.  Okay?  And then those decisions and adjudications are made by American officers.

No, we don't necessarily interview everybody who may be going back on a business trip or goes five times a year and has demonstrated he does legitimate business.  We don't necessarily interview every child that's going on a summer holiday.  We don't necessarily interview every government official that's going on an official trip.

 We use our resources, those that we have, to focus on the targets, on the people who might be problems, on the places where it's necessary to interview, and the facts we need to find out.

 QUESTION:  When you do the interviewing, do American officers do the interviewing?

 MR. BOUCHER:  Yes.

QUESTION:  Or do they -- they literally eyeball the person?

MR. BOUCHER:  Yes.  Because only an American can make that decision.

QUESTION:  I know only an American can make the decision, but I didn't know if he had to do the interview.

QUESTION:  Richard, wasn't there, or isn't there still perhaps a policy, though, within the State Department to give preferential treatment to countries that are perceived to be US allies?  I mean, there were certain countries that they didn't even need to get visas in order to travel here.  So --

MR. BOUCHER:  Canada.  Originally -- for a long time, it was Canada.  Now, under visa waiver, there's quite a few more.

QUESTION:  Yeah, there are a lot of --

MR. BOUCHER:  The qualification for visa waiver is not ally or friend or we like you/ we don't like you.  The qualification is at some point in a nation's history and economic development, you'll find that the refusal rate comes down because of the standard of living, because of the kind of ties that people have in that country, because of a whole variety of other factors.  And once the refusal rate gets below that particular legally mandated percentage, and I have to -- it used to be two percent, and I think the law was changed and I'm not certain if it's three percent now -- once it gets below that level, we can put them in the visa waiver program.

Anybody who's looking to -- you know, for a short visit, business, tourism, that kind of stuff, gets to travel to the United States, present themselves to Immigration, which then looks at their situation and decides whether or not they can come into the country.  There's no guarantee that they'll get in the country, nor is a visa for that matter.

But people who are on different status, some particular working arrangement or some other qualification for status, they would actually have to get a visa anyway.

QUESTION:  A follow-up.  When you were talking about the numbers in Saudi Arabia, just to confirm, the 45 percent figure counts -- for example, if a woman comes in with her three children, that counts as four interviews, if she was interviewed, correct?

MR. BOUCHER:  Yes, I suppose so.

QUESTION:  Okay, right.  So the four -- when you're talking about the people you don't interview, including kids, well, if the parents were interviewed, that counts as the kids having been interviewed.  And if you look at the numbers --

MR. BOUCHER:  Yes, but hold on a second.  If you're going to -- I don't know what you're thinking about this, but if we decide to issue to a family who has gone to visit their mother in the United States every year for three years running, and this year we decide they don't need an interview, then that counts as four on the non-interview side.  So you don't make any suppositions based on the fact that families might be interviewed together.

And when I was doing this, if you were interested in a family's circumstances, you'd at least eyeball the kids.  And frankly, a lot of times you'd ask the kids the questions.  You know, "How long are you going to stay with Grandma?"  "Oh, well, we're going to live there."  You know, well, okay, so bam, you know, you're out of here.  (Laughter.)  You often get better answers from the kids.  So I don't --

QUESTION:  I am shocked.  You (inaudible) students --

MR. BOUCHER:  Yeah, we exploit children.  (Laughter.)  So, you know, it depends on the consular officer.  The consular officer's got the feel for the situation, the consular officer has the local knowledge, the consular officer has the language.

QUESTION:  (Inaudible.)

MR. BOUCHER:  Yeah, it does.

QUESTION:  A follow-up question on the 45 percent.  More than half of those are people who are refused first, so automatically they were granted an interview following the refusal, given a second chance to overcome the refusal in Saudi Arabia.  Since the refusal rate is 23 percent, that means more than half of those people were interviewed were interviewed because they were refused first.

MR. BOUCHER:  No, it doesn't.  Some people get refused and never come back.

QUESTION:  Well, they -- by choice then, right?  But they are granted a second interview --

MR. BOUCHER:  Yeah, there's -- we're in Mark Twain country here.  There's lies, damn lies, and statistics.

QUESTION:  Just because you say they're damn lies doesn't mean they are damn lies.  But the statistics then, of the people who actually get visas, do you know what percentage of them are interviewed?

MR. BOUCHER:  Again, this is --

QUESTION:  -- the number would be less than 30 percent --

MR. BOUCHER:  You're trying to manipulate the numbers in a way that just -- it doesn't --

QUESTION:  No, it's just looking at the statistics a different way.

MR. BOUCHER:  In a way that doesn't correspond to reality.  Okay?

QUESTION:  No, it corresponds very much to reality, because there's a certain percentage of people who get visas who were interviewed.  What percentage is that?

MR. BOUCHER:  I've got to say, it does not correspond to reality.  I've been there, I've issued visas, I've worked on visa lines, I've gone to visa lines.  In my subsequent years, when I was Ambassador and Consul General, I've spent time on the lines with our visa officers.  I know how this works.  And what you're saying does not correspond to the reality of a consular section, and that's the bottom line.

QUESTION:  Richard, what's the status of the reviews that were started a long time ago on the five -- I guess Argentina was taken off the visa waiver program, but there were a bunch of others --

MR. BOUCHER:  They were going to do five a year, and starting last year, I think it was -- I'll have to check.

QUESTION:  Okay.  But as far as you know, no one else --

MR. BOUCHER:  In many cases, we have used -- I don't think anybody has been taken off, but in many cases we've used those to work with the government to improve the security of passports, to improve the various security arrangements involving the program.

QUESTION:  But do you know if those -- if the review for the other -- the other ones other than Argentina are still on --

MR. BOUCHER:  I'd have to see where we stand in terms of the reviews. 

QUESTION:  Because is it possible that they -- the review is over, and it's been decided that they can stay in the program?  Is that possible?

MR. BOUCHER:  In some cases that's true, but I don't know which ones.

QUESTION:  Okay.

MR. BOUCHER:  Elaine.

QUESTION:  I just want to stand back a little bit from this discussion about visas and ask you a wider question.  Does the State Department believe that there was loopholes in visa law that led to September the 11th?

MR. BOUCHER:  I think the State Department, as much as anybody, would have loved to have been able to catch these people and stop them before they were able to carry out these attacks, with the best systems we could devise, the best information that we had.  That applies not just to us, but to other intelligence agencies -- us, the INS in terms of people who pass through our borders, FBI and local officials in terms of what we knew what was going on in the United States.  We weren't able to do that.

As you know, we had a lot of information indicating the possibility of terrorist attacks in that period.  But we didn't have any information about the kind of attack, the location of the attack, or the individuals that were going to carry it out.  When we got information about the potential for individuals to be involved in terrorism, we did, going back many years, put that into our databases and try to stop those people from coming to the United States.  In many cases we've been able to do that.

One of the functions of our visa officers overseas is to collect that kind of information, to work with other agencies at posts to make sure that we work with local law enforcement intelligence officials to gather information on potential terrorists.  But sadly, all the work that we did before September 11th was not successful in stopping it.

QUESTION:  Is it so that Mary Ryan will no longer continue in her position past midnight tonight?

MR. BOUCHER:  I don't know if it's specifically midnight, but generally she was -- this is the --

QUESTION:  Today?

MR. BOUCHER:  Her resignation was going to be effective the end of this week, yes.

QUESTION:  But she's -- didn't you say that she's going to stay on through -- till the time of --

MR. BOUCHER:  Yes.  She resigns from the position as Assistant Secretary for Consular Affairs, but she's also -- as part of her retirement decision to retire from the Foreign Service.  But for the summer, she's doing a very important responsibility, which is chairing some selection boards for us on promotions.  And she'll do that for however long those boards last during the summer, and then presumably do the regular retirement processing when she actually leaves the Foreign Service.  But as of the end of this week, she'll no longer be the Assistant Secretary for Consular Affairs.

QUESTION:  Who do you expect will be doing that job?

MR. BOUCHER:  That would be a presidential announcement, when we --

QUESTION:  No, but who's going to be doing the job in the meantime.

MR. BOUCHER:  Oh, the Acting?  George Lannon is Acting.  I think that's right.

QUESTION:  New topic?

MR. BOUCHER:  Please.

QUESTION:  Okay.  Do you have any comment on the events this week in Iran?  There were these demonstrations that we talked about the beginning of the week that happened.  Is there any message from the State Department to the demonstrators?

MR. BOUCHER:  Let me make the message the general one that we've stated before and that we would continue to state.  I think we've made quite clear over a long period of time our concerns about the human rights situation inside Iran, our concern for freedom of speech inside Iran, including journalism and the right of people to demonstrate and express their views.

The President and the Secretary have expressed quite clearly that Iran aggressively pursues weapons of mass destruction and exports terror, while an unelected few repress the Iranian people's hope for freedom.  Though the Iranian people have expressed a powerful desire for reform, those desires have been thwarted so far.

So we look forward to the day when Iran will play a positive role in the region as a source of peace and stability, but until that day we continue to have grave concerns about Iranian behavior.

QUESTION:  Can I just ask a simple question?  Do you support the demonstrators?

MR. BOUCHER:  We support the process of change that they're calling for.  We support the idea of a more open nation, where the people have a right to decide their own future.

QUESTION:  And finally, I don't know if you can say this, but do you have an assessment now of the stability of the Mullah?

MR. BOUCHER:  No.

QUESTION:  Probably not.  You have no assessment?

MR. BOUCHER:  No, I don't.  I don't have an assessment for you.  I'm sure we have an assessment somewhere, but I don't think it's one that I might be able to share.

QUESTION:  New subject?  China.

QUESTION:  I have one more on Iraq.

MR. BOUCHER:  Okay.  That was Iran, but anyway.

QUESTION:  Yeah, but we're closer to Iraq.  Sorry, my friend.

 I think you've already put out guidance out on this, since I see it on the wires already.  Something about the diplomats who represent us in Iraq not being allowed to travel out of the country, and we felt it necessary to -- I don't know -- issue a note, have we done?

MR. BOUCHER:  Well, this involves travel by the Polish diplomats who staff the US Interests Section in Baghdad and who are assigned there to the US Interests Section and therefore represent us there.

In April of 2002, the Iraqi Government imposed a new ban on overland travel abroad by Polish diplomats assigned to the US Interests Section and further tightened the already rigid restrictions on movements out of the city. 

The new overland travel ban effectively forces diplomatic personnel assigned to the US Interests Section to travel to and from Iraq as passengers on air flights, in contravention of UN resolutions.  The resolutions permit humanitarian flights, but they do not permit normal, regular, commercial air traffic.

Through the Polish Government, we've demanded first in April and again this month, that the Iraqi Government lift these restrictions.  The restrictions have prevented Interests Section personnel from undertaking legitimate travel.  We have not yet received a response to those demands from the Iraqi Government.

Because of the hardship that's been faced by the Polish officials in the US Interests Section as a result of the travel ban, a large number of those officials have departed Iraq.  In fact, the head of the Interests Section is the only diplomat who remains in Baghdad at the US Interests Section.  He is keeping the Section open, and Poland continues to ably represent US interests as a protecting power in Iraq.

And once again, I need to thank the Polish Government, and particularly the Polish diplomats involved, for the efforts that they have made involving personal hardship to represent the United States there.

QUESTION:  Will that stop those diplomats from wanting to take on the added responsibility?

MR. BOUCHER:  I think they've been very diligent in doing this.  They recognize the difficulty of the task, but we very much appreciate what they've done, both as a government and personally.

QUESTION:  Richard, on this subject, your language is a bit different from Phil's when he was addressing this yesterday.  He said that the protests have been raised through the Interests Section.  And you just -- and you said -- you were more generic; you said the protests have been raised through the Polish Government.

MR. BOUCHER:  Yeah, and I'm sure Phil is more detailed and accurate than I am.  But yes, that's true.

QUESTION:  Okay.  So what he said yesterday is --

MR. BOUCHER:  What he said is true.

QUESTION:  Okay.

QUESTION:  Richard, can you tell us on that, did the United States insist that these Polish diplomats do not take commercial flights, which as far as I understand, run regular trips in and out of Baghdad every day to all kinds of places?  Or was this something they -- a decision they took on their own initiative?  Because there is of course some dispute about whether those flights really are a violation of sanctions.

MR. BOUCHER:  Well, I think it's quite clear to us that they are.  They were able to leave on the return leg of a UN-approved humanitarian flight.  So they were able to hitchhike out of the country on a humanitarian flight.

QUESTION:  They took themselves, or is that something you imposed on them or you insisted on?

MR. BOUCHER:  I'm sure we and the Polish Government agree on this, that diplomats -- Polish diplomats representing the United States' interests in Baghdad should not take flights that in our view contravene the UN resolutions.

QUESTION:  If it came to a choice between allowing them to take those flights, the status of which, as I say, is by no means certain, and having no representation in Baghdad, which would you choose?

MR. BOUCHER:  Well, as we've said, there are many who, because of the hardship involved and the difficulties imposed by this rule of the Iraqi Government, have already left.  So we're down to one person representing our interests there.  But he continues to do so ably, and the Polish Government continues to uphold their responsibilities in that matter.

The choice is not -- I mean, we're not going to violate UN sanctions.  That's a pretty clear bottom line.  We're not going to have people -- ask people who represent us to violate UN sanctions.  So the Iraqi Government playing these kinds of political games with Polish diplomats is something that we just can't allow.

QUESTION:  Have you considered sending your own private planes from Amman to take these people in and out, which would be -- which would not violate the sanctions?  I mean, UN officials --

MR. BOUCHER:  I'm sure we've considered all the alternatives.  But remember, the UN sanctions allow for humanitarian flights and humanitarian deliveries.

QUESTION:  I think they also allow for -- they also allow for official travel --

MR. BOUCHER:  I'm sure we would have looked at all the possibilities.  But let's face it, there's still roads and there's still cars and there's still borders, and people every day drive from Baghdad to Jordan.  So this is gamesmanship by Iraq.  This is not some kind of rule that deserves much respect.

Betsy.

QUESTION:  I noticed a little squib in the paper the other day that Iraq has decreased rather markedly in the last couple of months the amount of oil that they are exporting, which means that the amount of money in the UN bank accounts is less, which means that now some contracts that were to be paid for for humanitarian goods can't be paid for, therefore can't be delivered.  Do you think that this is simply another way that he is trying to manipulate -- Saddam Hussein is trying to manipulate this program?  Or is there some other reason --

MR. BOUCHER:  I don't know the exact numbers, but even when there's been a lot of money in the accounts, the Iraqi Government hasn't spent it on the health and education and welfare of their people.  So we'd be very concerned to see that they were not doing that again and that they were really depriving their own people of the opportunity to live better and live healthfully.

QUESTION:  Back on the diplomat question.  Another thing -- and I don't know if you said it, but Phil said yesterday that you were considering appropriate responses to Iraq.  What -- would you punish the Pakistani diplomats who -- or would you seek to impose some kind of restriction on the Pakistani diplomats that represent Iraq's interests in the United States?

MR. BOUCHER:  I don't think I want to speculate at this point.  We are reviewing appropriate steps, but I'm not going to speculate on a hypothetical.

QUESTION:  Well, that's not a hypothetical.  Can you give us an idea of the range of what -- of the responses that you're considering?

MR. BOUCHER:  No, I can't.

QUESTION:  Okay.

QUESTION:  On a neighboring country, Turkey?

QUESTION:  Can I pass the question back to --

MR. BOUCHER:  We did have one in China.  I mean, if we're going to get there step by step, it's --

QUESTION:  Yeah, but Turkey's next to -- next to Turkey --

MR. BOUCHER:  A journey of 10,000 miles begins with a single step to the neighboring country.  (Laughter.)

QUESTION:  Okay, China.  Let it be China.

QUESTION:  I guess then you haven't read the Pentagon report on China yet, have you?

MR. BOUCHER:  It's not out yet.

QUESTION:  Well, I -- well, it's about out this time.  (Laughter.)

MR. BOUCHER:  Well, it's about out.  It's been reported on, but it's not out.

QUESTION:  Well, anyways, I heard -- or some of the content in the report actually has been transported to the State Department sometime before, and they recognize a shift in China's strategy against --

MR. BOUCHER:  Okay, let's let the people who are doing the report finish the report and put it out.  And then we may or may not have something to say about it.

QUESTION:  It's out.

MR. BOUCHER:  On the general topic of Chinese forces, I think you noted that the Secretary answered the question quite completely yesterday when he was at C Street with Alexander Downer.

QUESTION:  Well, okay.  If the State Department recognizes China as increasing military deployment or whatever, maybe in regard to Taiwan, is there going to be more arms sales or more military assistance -- not arms sales, other kind of assistance -- to conquer that --

MR. BOUCHER:  Again, the report's not out.  I'm not going to speculate on that.  We have made quite clear that Chinese deployments across the Taiwan Straits, particularly of missiles, were a matter of concern to us, and they were a factor that we considered as we upheld our responsibilities, consistent with the three communiqués and the Taiwan Relations Act, to supply Taiwan with what they needed for their own legitimate defense.

So without reference to any specific report, whether it is or is not out --my folks just told me it wasn't.  But anyway, I think the policy question that you ask is one that we have been quite clear on.  The Chinese deployments are a factor that we have to consider as we consider regional stability and as we consider our pledge and our responsibilities to continue to supply Taiwan with what it needs for its legitimate self-defense.

QUESTION:  Can I follow on that, please?  This is not about the report.  But does the State Department believe that China's military modernization poses a threat to US allies in the region and US strategic interests?

MR. BOUCHER:  Again, that's a question -- almost exactly the question that the Secretary answered yesterday, and I don't have anything to add to that today.

QUESTION:  This is a bit of a long shot, but things in Turkey have -- seem to have grown -- deteriorated since you last refused to comment on it.  Are you now prepared to say --

MR. BOUCHER:  It's not a long shot, but the situation hasn't changed.

QUESTION:  Well, it's --

MR. BOUCHER:  Fundamentally --

QUESTION:  I mean, there have been more resignations.

MR. BOUCHER:  There have been more -- there have been resignations.  These things happen in democracies.  I can't -- I don't think I need to point out the number of phone calls the Secretary has made in the last week or two to people who are former colleagues and valued colleagues and new colleagues. 

But, you know, our position remains the same.  Turkey is a vibrant democracy, a good friend and a NATO ally.  We're monitoring the unfolding political developments there with interest, but have no comment on what clearly is a domestic political matter.  Turkey's economic reform program, of course, remains on track, and we expect Turkey to continue to implement that program.  It remains very important to us.

QUESTION:  Let me ask you something about Cyprus and Greece, and how that's going to --

MR. BOUCHER:  Yes.

QUESTION:  -- with Papandreou and Cem -- now he's gone, and the whole Middle East thing --

 MR. BOUCHER:  Well, let's not start making grand predictions until we see what the democratic process yields.  Those are subjects we've worked on in the past, and we would look to continue to work on with the Turkish Government.

QUESTION:  Question prior to the talks in New York on -- with the Quartet.  The Israelis said that Barghouti is a terrorist, and they would like to try him.  Yet there are reports that say that he would -- there may be a prisoner swap by Lebanon with Hezbollah, with the ultimate outcome where he would head to Europe and be released.

 Where do you come down on this matter?

 MR.