So with that out of the way, I'm happy to say I have no formal announcements.  Mr. Schweid, if you'd like to begin.

QUESTION:  Well, has there been time enough for the State Department to verify -- the AP says it's true that an American was killed at Hebrew University?

MR. REEKER:  We have seen that report, including the report from the AP, and I am not able at this point to confirm whether American citizens were among those killed in this absolutely tragic and outrageous terrorist attack at the Hebrew University in Jerusalem.

As you heard, President Bush this morning described the outrage and sadness that we feel regarding this terrorist bombing.  Hebrew University is an institution of higher learning that attracts young people from around the world and is dedicated to the promotion of greater understanding between Arabs and Israelis and to the cause of peace in the Middle East.  And again, we condemn this act in the strongest and most unequivocal terms. 

Our deepest sympathies go out to the students and their families.  We would reiterate that the needless loss of life must end now.  We call upon the Palestinians to do everything possible to stop violence and terror attacks.  And we've asked regional and international leaders to underscore this message, as well.

As the President said, these actions were perpetrated by the enemies of peace.  These killers, terrorists -- these actions will not stop us from fighting terror or working toward our vision of peace and we will endeavor throughout the coming hours to confirm those reports that American citizens were among those killed in this latest attack.

QUESTION:  Can I follow up on the question about the Americans?

MR. REEKER:  Yes, Barry. 

QUESTION:  I wondered if there's anything the US is attempting to do diplomatically to protest or to condemn, whatever, this attack, whether you have anything at work at the United Nations, whether you have talked to any Arab governments, any of the European governments which regularly accuse Israel of bad behavior when terrorists are killed.  But now children have been -- students have been killed in Hebrew University, and I wonder if there will be silence except in Washington, or if the State Department is trying to do anything to inspire other governments speak out and to take action.

MR. REEKER:  Barry, there certainly hasn't been silence coming in from Washington --

QUESTION:  Not from Washington. 

MR. REEKER:  Certainly in our diplomatic posts abroad we reiterate the same point that I just made now; that is, calling upon regional and international leaders to underscore the message that the President reiterated this morning; to underscore the objectives we have for peace there and the need to end this type of terror, this needless loss of life which is perpetrated by the enemies of peace who are undermining the hopes and aspirations of the Palestinian people, as well as causing this needless death of young people. 

And so we will continue making those points known around the globe.  Certainly, the President's remarks I think have already been widely reported and we'll continue to make clear our views and our visions through our diplomatic contacts today and in coming days as we continue with the strategy that the President reiterated again this morning.

Terri. 

QUESTION:  Now, is it -- one last thing, please.

MR. REEKER:  Yes, Barry.

QUESTION:  I'm sorry if I'm trying you all, but I was excluding the US from the silence.  I was wondering if the US was trying to do anything to break the silence, and you've answered the question.

MR. REEKER:  Thank you.

QUESTION:  All right.  Now the question is the President's statement, if you -- though I'm sure you saw it, a close reading, he's calling for the ouster of Palestinian security officials who really are not interested in security.  And I wondered if, again, the same old question with new meaning now:  When the Secretary of State meets next week in Washington with people appointed by Yasser Arafat to their posts, will the Secretary of State meet with Palestinian security officials without questioning whether they are committed to change, or have they already been put through some process of examination before they would be welcomed here? 

MR. REEKER:  As the President indicated, we will be continuing our contacts with a number of leaders regarding the strategy that has been agreed to by the parties, that is, by the Israelis, by Palestinians and by the Quartet, the international community.  As you know, Jordanian King Abdullah II will see President Bush and Deputy Secretary Armitage in meetings tomorrow.  Israeli Foreign Minister Peres will also arrive for separate meetings, both here and at the White House. 

And as you also know and mentioned, Barry, Secretary Powell is planning to meet with a Palestinian delegation after he returns to Washington.  He'll be focusing on Palestinian civil reform efforts, indeed a renewal of security cooperation and the resumption of a political dialogue.  I still don't have any more specifics for you on that delegation or individuals that may be in that at this juncture, but we'll endeavor to let you know when we have a better idea of them.

Terri.

QUESTION:  How do you feel about Jesse Jackson's mission there?  Although he's of course not governed by US Government decision not to meet with Arafat, do you find that this is helpful at all? 

And also, could you comment on the Israeli cabinet's decision to go ahead with the deportation of a family member of one of the bombers? 

MR. REEKER:  Sure.  First on Mr. Jackson.  As you indicated, Terri, Jesse Jackson is a private citizen and he does not represent the United States or US policy.  Because of the attack this morning, we have conveyed to Mr. Jackson the security concerns about meeting with a Hamas leader, which had been proposed at one point, and what that would entail.  I understand from press reports that Reverend Jackson announced that this meeting with that figure was canceled.  We believe that was the right decision.  We don't think that meeting with Sheikh Yassin or other leaders of Foreign Terrorist Organizations is a good idea.

Certainly our broad position on those types of meetings with figures from Hamas, for instance, are known to you in the sense that we've long considered Hamas a foreign terrorist organization.  We have no contacts with that organization precisely because they support and undertake heinous, unconscionable acts such as that that was inflicted upon the innocent young people at Hebrew University today.

On your second question, which had to do with -- remind me, I'm sorry.

QUESTION:  Deportation of family members.

MR. REEKER:  Right.  I think that's something that we discussed earlier.  We've said before that we expect Israel 's actions in its campaign against terror to be based on information related to an individual's culpability, not to a personal or family relationship.  Taking punitive action against innocent people will not solve Israel's security problems.  I think that's what we've said in the past and certainly, if relatives of those who committed terrorist acts were involved in these activities, they should be dealt with through the normal legal procedures.  We've made these views known to the Israeli Government as we have before.

QUESTION:  Okay.  Can I clarify?  They're saying that there is one relative that they know was involved in planning this attack.  The United States, then, doesn't have a problem if that person is deported?  Or do you feel that even that person who does have culpability in Israel's eyes should be dealt with in a different way?

MR. REEKER:  I don't know about the specific charges in these things.  It would be exactly as we've said before.  Our view is that if relatives of those who've committed terrorist acts are involved in these activities, they should be dealt with through normal, legal procedures.  That's our view and that's what we've made well known to the Israeli Government.

Eli, and then Elise.

QUESTION:  Do you have a view of the perception that some people have expressed, particularly Hamas, that these attacks are in retaliation for Israel's attacks last week?

MR. REEKER:  There is no justification for terrorist attacks --

QUESTION:  I'm not saying it's a justification, but --

MR. REEKER:  And the President was quite clear in our condemnation of these attacks and saying that they must stop.  The people that perpetrate these attacks are the enemies of peace.  They're undermining the interests of their own people and undermining all of the efforts of the responsible people in the international community to work on the strategy that the President has outlined, that's been agreed to by the Quartet, by the Israelis, by Palestinians as the way forward to end this tragic violence.  And it's got to stop now.

QUESTION:  Follow-up on Jesse Jackson.  Although you said he's a private citizen, when you conveyed the security concerns about meeting with Hamas, did you tell him what you thought of the idea of him meeting with Hamas?  Because then you said you believe it was the right decision.  But before he left or in -- I don't know, has he had contacts with the administration while he's gone?  Have you said, "Listen, we don't think it's helpful for you to be meeting with these characters"?

MR. REEKER:  I think we've been through this before and I don't know exactly the sequence of any contacts that the Reverend Jackson has had with government officials before or during his trip.  Certainly we've been quite clear, and it's no surprise to anybody, our view of Hamas, a Foreign Terrorist Organization that perpetrates activities like those that we saw today in Jerusalem.  So we don't think meeting with the likes of Sheikh Yassin is a good idea.  And we conveyed that to the Reverend Jackson and it's certainly a view we've had for a long time.  But obviously we also conveyed, since he is an American citizen, our concerns about security in any of these matters as he makes his own decisions.

QUESTION:  Did you -- when you conveyed to him about the Hamas leader, did you convey to him that you didn't think it was a good idea for him to meet with Yasser Arafat, either?

MR. REEKER:  I'm not sure if that specific question came up.

Yes, sir.

QUESTION:  Can I go back to the Palestinian delegation?

MR. REEKER:  Yes.

QUESTION:  Although you said there's no -- nothing to announce at the moment, have you told the Palestinians the sort of people you are prepared to meet?  After all, they're going to need visas to get here, presumably.  You know, have you told them if this person comes, we believe he's tainted by terrorism and therefore we're not going to meet him?  How's that going to work?

MR. REEKER:  I just don't have any details on the Palestinians that will be coming that we anticipate meeting with after the Secretary is back in Washington.  When I have anything more on that, I'd be happy to share it.

Ben.

QUESTION:  With all due respect, that's not the question that both of us have been trying.  First of all, the names are out there, but if they're not official I'll accept that.  The question is whether, especially in light of what the President said today, whether the US is applying some standard for whoever they meet with who purports to be a Palestinian security official.  The President has said we have to sweep out those who haven't --

MR. REEKER:  I listened to the President.  Yes, Barry.

QUESTION:  Okay, all right.  So the question is can they send over whoever they please, whoever was appointed by Yasser Arafat, or are you asking that they send only people who you are convinced, as best you can, are interested in reform and security? 

MR. REEKER:  We are discussing with the Palestinians who may come, individuals who may come to meet, as the Secretary has described.  I just don't have anything to offer for you on who those individuals may be at this point.  It's something we discuss.  Obviously we have standards about with whom we meet.  We want people, as the Secretary said, who are empowered by the Palestinian people to speak on behalf of the Palestinian people who are dedicated to taking the responsibilities that the President has talked about, responsibilities that rest on all sides in this matter in terms of moving forward on reform, including security reform, moving forward on transparency and development of the institutions that President Bush talked about today that are so vital if we're going to move toward the goal, toward the vision of an independent Palestinian state living in peace with Israel. 

QUESTION:  Can I follow up on that? 

MR. REEKER:  Yes, Elise.

QUESTION:  Maybe even more pointed, are they submitting a list to you and you approve it, or they say we're coming and you say okay?

MR. REEKER:  Neither of the above.  As Richard likes to say, I'll take C.  We're discussing with the Palestinians, as I just described in response to your colleague's question, I don't have anything further for you on that delegation.

Yes, Ben.

QUESTION:  Regarding this -- the attack today at the University, an American was killed.  Will the United States seek to apprehend those responsible for it? 

MR. REEKER:  I'll have to look into the facts as we develop them in terms of confirming whether Americans were killed, and then look at the legal situation that's involved with that and get back to you.  I just don't -- couldn't go down that --

QUESTION:  But isn't the US policy to seek to apprehend terrorists who kill Americans abroad?

MR. REEKER:  Yes. 

Yes, sir.

QUESTION:  You just said that there is no justification for today's bombing in Jerusalem, but (inaudible) at least among the Palestinians and the Arab world, is it that last week's attack in Gaza contributed in a way to large acts of retaliation, like today and like yesterday and like the days before.  And do you, in fact, encourage the Israelis to stay away from retaliating and adding more to the cycle of violence? 

MR. REEKER:  We made quite clear our views after the attack on Gaza, and I can refer you back to all of the commentary that we made on that.  In terms of understanding Israel's need to defend herself against terrorist attacks, we've been quite clear about that.  But we've always said to think about the steps that are taken and whether they contribute to security, whether they in fact are the appropriate steps.  And so that's something we've suggested Israel always think about. 

There is no justification, as you indicated and as I said earlier, for the type of attack we've seen today.  It robbed innocent lives.  It took away the lives of young people who were at an institution dedicated toward working out these problems, dedicated toward looking at how the peoples of the region can live together in peace, along the lines of the vision that President Bush has expressed and what we've been trying to work for.  So it's counterproductive.  It undermines the goals of the Palestinian people and undermines their own future.

QUESTION:  Yes, but you said as well that your calling about the Palestinians to stop these acts of terror and violence.  You just said that.  Do you expect Israelis to stop that?  Do you carry the same message to the Israeli side?

MR. REEKER:  We've been quite clear in our views on that matter.  What happened today was an absolutely outrageous attack on innocent civilians at a university.  There is no justification for it.  And as I said, it undermines all of the goals of the people of the region.

Yes, Eli. 

QUESTION:  Back to the discussion over this delegation coming next week to meet with Secretary Powell, who are the -- who is the State Department talking to?

MR. REEKER:  The people we are talking to. 

(Laughter.)

QUESTION:  All right, fair enough.  But you're not talking to Arafat, so who are you talking to?

MR. REEKER:  I don't have anything to share with you on that, Eli.  I'd be happy to look into it, if we have anything else we want to say.

Carol, who is sitting in the wrong row.

QUESTION:  I just wanted to keep you off guard.  Can you shed a little bit more guidance on the question that Ben raised?

MR. REEKER:  I really can't.  I don't have anything on that.  I'd have to go back and check our laws and the situation on that.

QUESTION:  So you can't say that that's actually something that's under active consideration by the administration? 

MR. REEKER:  I am not aware of any confirmation of American citizens being killed.  It's something we're looking into.  The entire incident is a horrible incident, it's an outrageous incident, and we've expressed our sympathies to the families of those killed and wounded.  But I'll have to look into the details before I can then speculate or go down the road of next steps. 

QUESTION:  Okay.  You probably don't know this offhand either, but there have been Americans killed in previous attacks.  Do you know what you did then -- the woman who was killed --

MR. REEKER:  I'll have to go back and look.  There have been a number of legal things.  It becomes a law enforcement matter.  There are US laws that are involved in this, and we'll certainly look into that as it pertains to American citizens if we're able to confirm that. 

Sir.

QUESTION:  Phil, on the Secretary's trip next week --

MR. REEKER:  Are we changing subjects here? 

QUESTION:  Well, not -- partly. 

MR. REEKER:  Is there anything else on the Middle East? 

(No response.)

MR. REEKER:  Okay, please go ahead. 

QUESTION:  Okay.  On the Secretary's trip, he's expected in Indonesia and there's an Indonesian militant, Jafar Thalib, who has been released from an Indonesian court.  He was jailed.  And he is demanding a meeting with the Secretary -- meaning Secretary Powell -- and he's also blaming America.  Where do you call -- do you have any comments?  He's been causing Muslim incitement.

MR. REEKER:  I'm afraid I'm not familiar with the case of the individuals, and any questions on the Secretary's specific schedule in Indonesia you'd need to direct to the traveling party out there.

QUESTION:  In other words, because of this particular gentleman asking for Muslim incitement, is it a good thing that -- or will we state that the Secretary won't meet with him?

MR. REEKER:  I'm not familiar with the case of the particular individual.  I have no facts on the subject that you're raising.  In terms of the Secretary's meetings or schedule, I'd refer you to the traveling party.  The Press Office can attempt to tell you what meetings he's having during the course of his visit to Indonesia when that occurs.  But in terms of that specific gentleman, I have nothing for you.

Elise.

QUESTION:  I don't know if you'll have anything on this, but --

MR. REEKER:  But give it a try.

QUESTION:  It's on Brazil.  There's a terrible currency problem there right now, a lot of economic woes that are -- is actually affecting other countries like Uruguay and Paraguay.  And are you worried about the economic stability of the region?  And a follow-up to that is are you worried that the economic problems that the United States is having right now with the stock market could additionally negatively affect the region?

MR. REEKER:  I don't comment on US economic situations or stock markets, or any other markets for that matter.  In terms of Brazil, I don't have anything specific.  Mr. Fleischer had some remarks about Brazil yesterday at his briefing, and I'd just refer you to that.  And certainly we keep well abreast of the economic situation in countries.  Economic and business diplomacy is an important part of our mandate.  And so the Bureau of Western Hemisphere Affairs as well as Economic and Business Affairs works closely with the Department of Treasury and others in the US Government as well as international financial institutions to monitor these situations, but I don't have any specific comments for you on that.

Yes.  Behind Terri, and then we can come back to Terri.

QUESTION:  I have a question on Georgia.  Does the State Department have anything to say on those bombing raids by Russian military helicopters, the act of military aggression as the Georgian Foreign Minister named them?

MR. REEKER:  We are closely following the situation on the Russia-Georgia border, that is, the border of Russia with the Republic of Georgia.  As we've made clear previously, the United States strongly supports the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Georgia.  We would therefore be seriously concerned to learn of any violations of that sovereignty.  So we're closely monitoring reports of clashes between Russian troops and armed Chechen groups along Russia's border with Georgia.

In that regard, our position remains that only a negotiated solution can end the conflict, and we've urged both the Russians and the Chechens to seek such a solution.  So we've been in regular contact with the governments of both Russia and Georgia, making clear our unequivocal support for Georgian sovereignty and territorial integrity, and we'd like to facilitate stable, constructive relations between Russia and Georgia.

QUESTION:  Can I have follow-up?

MR. REEKER:  Sure, Dmitri.

QUESTION:  As referring to Mr. Ivanov, after meeting with Secretary Powell today, told Russian press that basically this incursion of Chechen and presumably foreign fighters from Georgia to Russia was an act of aggression, calling the international community to -- and basically comparing the situation in Pankisi Gorge and the Russian-Georgian border to Kashmir.

Later, as far as I remember, Russians submitted some kind of statement to the United Nations Secretary General.  Basically, can you suggest -- can you give me the broader point of view of US administration to hold this thing -- not on the alleged incursion of Russian aircraft to Georgian territory but the coalition?

MR. REEKER:  Well, I think in the broader issue, if you want to look at that, we've encouraged Russia and Georgia to find ways to cooperate on counterterrorism, just as we've been working with a broad coalition of countries around the world to fight terrorism.  And we strongly support the territorial integrity of Georgia, as I said before.

Regarding the Pankisi Gorge, we believe that the problems there should best be addressed by the Georgian Government.  We're working with Georgia to improve its capacity to provide better border security.  As you know, we have a train and equip program that will assist Georgia in developing its own capability to control its own borders and conduct limited counterterrorism operations.  And so that's an area where we feel we can contribute to helping in the situation.

QUESTION:  If I may just add.  Later, Georgian Ambassador to Moscow, speaking at "Echo of Moscow" radio station said that basically, at this point of time, Georgian authorities can do nothing about Pankisi Gorge.

MR. REEKER:  I'm not aware of those particular comments, but I think I've tried to outline our position in terms of Georgian territorial integrity and also the steps we're taking to assist Georgia in fighting terrorism in terms of the train and equip program and helping them to develop their own capacity in that regard, and also encouraging Russia and Georgia to work together to find ways to cooperate on counterterrorism.

We'll go back to Terri.

QUESTION:  Thanks.  "Axis of Evil" category.  One, could you give us any more of a readout, possibly, on the meeting between Powell and North Korea, the North Korean Foreign Minister.  The North Koreans came out saying that they were -- something like they're resuming -- the two sides are resuming dialogue.  Whereas, Powell's comments, as we've seen them, didn't say exactly that. 

And on Iraq --

MR. REEKER:  Why don't we do one at a time, if we could?  It would be a little easier.

QUESTION:  Okay.

MR. REEKER:  I really can't add to what the Secretary said and what's come from the traveling party on that.  The Secretary had a 15-minute informal chat, as the Secretary said, over coffee with the North Korean Foreign Minister.  That was early today at the beginning of the ASEAN Regional Forum meetings.

As we had before, he noted to the Foreign Minister the recent statements that North Korea has made and reaffirmed the President's policy and discussed what we wanted in any further future discussions.  I think as the Secretary indicated and as other US officials with the traveling party have indicated, the Secretary expects to come back to Washington, discuss this with the President and the national security team, and then we'll look at next steps at that point.

So I don't have really anything else I can add to you from the party on that.  And you had another? 

QUESTION:  Let me get my other quick one in, and people can follow up on North Korea. 

MR. REEKER:  Please, sure.

QUESTION:  Yesterday, Donald Rumsfeld said that there is evidence that al-Qaida has a foothold in Iraq, and I wanted to know if this building has come to the same conclusion.

MR. REEKER:  Well, we work as an administration in coming to those conclusions, so I would refer you to whatever Secretary Rumsfeld said.  I don't have this exact --

QUESTION:  Well, how about our own words? 

MR. REEKER:  Our own words?  Well, as an administration we come to these conclusions.  We work closely with the Defense Department, with all the other elements in the national security architecture.  It's long been a matter of public record, for instance, that Iraq developed chemical and biological weapons and long-range ballistic missiles.  That's a matter of record, for instance, based on UN inspectors. 

And so our issues and concerns with Iraq and their support for terrorism, their continuing attempts to develop weapons of mass destruction and the means to deploy them, their longstanding threat to their own people, to their neighbors, to the region and to all of us in the civilized world are well documented, and we'll continue to pursue options that we have in terms of dealing with that threat.

QUESTION:  No specifics on al-Qaida from this building?

MR. REEKER:  I don't have anything additional to add for you, no.

Carol.

QUESTION:  Can we get a read-out on Under Secretary Bolton's meetings in Russia? 

MR. REEKER:  I don't have any particular readout on that.  When I was able to last check shortly before coming out here in the noon timeframe, the meetings were still going on, that is, Under Secretary Bolton and Energy Secretary Abraham in Moscow, as we discussed yesterday, following upon the discussions that President Bush and President Putin have had on their agreement to continue nonproliferation discussions and concerns that we have had, particularly regarding Iran and their nuclear programs.  And I think you may have noticed as well that in Brunei, Secretary Powell mentioned that that subject, the issue of Iran's nuclear programs, was raised in his talks with Foreign Minister Ivanov. 

QUESTION:  Do you know where Bolton is going after Moscow? 

MR. REEKER:  I have an idea, but I'm not sure, so let me check on that and get back to you where his next stop may be.

QUESTION:  Phil, speaking on meetings, is Mr. Armitage going to see, or has he seen or is he seeing, the King of Jordan separately from the President's meeting? 

MR. REEKER:  Yes, I think I mentioned that earlier when we were talking about the Middle East.  Deputy Secretary Armitage expects to call upon the -- call on the King of Jordan, King Abdullah II, tomorrow morning.  That would be prior to the King's meeting with President Bush at the White House.

Did you have a follow-on to that? 

QUESTION:  Yeah, with Peres.  What did Peres say yesterday? 

MR. REEKER:  I don't have a detail of Peres' schedule.  "Don't have times" is what I wrote in my notes.  So we'll endeavor to get you those as well.  I think he may be arriving tonight, but I'll double-check on that.  If you want to keep in touch, we'll see if we get something this afternoon. 

Yes, ma'am. 

QUESTION:  Since the talk with North Korea has canceled, has postponed, US Government has repeated that they are reconsider talk with North Korea sometime later, so the meeting -- Powell's meeting with North Korean Foreign Minister and your statement, does it mean that now is -- now is that sometime later?  Or is it just a repetition of the previous policy?

MR. REEKER:  Again, I don't think I can add much to what the Secretary said and the statement that Ambassador Boucher put out from Brunei on that.  The two foreign ministers, our Secretary of State and the North Korea Foreign Minister, had this informal 15-minute chat on the margins of the meetings there in Brunei, and the Secretary reiterated the President's policy, which remains the policy of this administration, and indicated that he will be coming back to Washington, discussing with the President and others in the national security team the next steps in this process.  So our policy remains the same and where we'll go in terms of that dialogue discussion is something I just can't add to at this point.  But we'll be following up and after the Secretary is back we'll see what the next steps are. 

QUESTION:  Another subject? 

MR. REEKER:  Barry.

QUESTION:  Thirty-five groups, I think, in -- I think they total 35 faith-based, et cetera, are writing or have written the White House opposing the appointment of the designated, if that's the right word -- she hasn't been nominated yet -- successor to Mary Ryan, saying various things about the operation of the office, including her work.  And I wondered -- you know, I could go through the whole thing but that would just take a lot of time, the point being is the State Department prepared to say anything about these -- this mountain of allegations which, you know, is being flaunted in the conservative press of America? 

MR. REEKER:  I can't obviously make any comments on nominations by the President that may or may not come out of the White House.  That's where you have to look for that.  In terms of your reference to Ambassador Hardy, who is the Executive Secretary of the Department of State, I would just note in response to some of the press reports that we have noted as well that Ambassador Hardy has always been an agent for change and a tremendous defender of overseas citizen services in her career at the State Department. 

She, in fact, was responsible for creation of the Office of Children's Issues.  That's an office that we've talked about before that handles at any given time approximately 1,000 cases that include abduction cases that we've talked about, parental child abduction, as well as access cases.  In 2001, that office handled 432 prevention cases and they partner very closely with the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children that itself handled additional cases.  The office was actively involved in 2001 in the return of 170 children from foreign countries.

And one of the first steps that Ambassador Hardy took when she was involved in that office and helped create the Office of Children's Issues was working on implementation of the International Child Abduction Remedies Act that brought The Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction into force in the United States so that our laws could apply to that.  And that convention provides parents with an important tool in seeking the return of or access to children taken to other signatory countries. 

And so, as I mentioned, we've been working closely with the Department of Justice and the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children on those types of issues, and Ambassador Hardy has been one of the most vocal in support of doing everything we can in these tragic cases where often one parent has taken a child to a foreign country in contravention of child custody agreements and laws here in the United States, and we work very hard through our embassies overseas and through our officers here to try to bring back those American children in what are clearly very tragic cases.

QUESTION:  There's another -- just one more.  There's another element to this, the general theme here.  And the general theme is that people -- you mentioned Saudi Arabia particularly -- but American officers abroad are inclined almost instinctively to defend the practices of, you know, what's called in basketball "Homeritis", you know, to defend the practices of the government they're assigned to rather than to be sensitive to the needs of Americans.  It's a rather sweeping accusation, although there are specifics alleged.

Is there such a reflexive instinct among American diplomats?  They talk about, you know, Christians who are being persecuted and of course trying to reunite ex-spouses, trying to get in touch and be reunited with lost children, abducted children.  Is there any basis for that kind of accusation? 

MR. REEKER:  I would give it a sweeping no in the broadest sense.  American diplomats, who are a well trained group of Americans representing almost every segment of our society, go abroad to represent this country, our values, our security, promote our prosperity and the security and safety of American citizens is our number one priority and always has been, and will continue to be.

We work very hard on often emotional cases like this -- representing the interests of Americans, using the laws and treaties that we have to do what is right, to bring home American children, for instance, in these tragic cases.  We outline every year in an enormous report on human rights practices, laws in foreign countries that we think contravene human rights, that contravene the values that we hold dear.  And we make that quite public, we brief about that, we talk about that, and we take the heat on that.  And that's something that we've been quite clear in all of our diplomatic relations, is fundamental to us, and we will always stand up for what is right and for American law and do everything we can to support American citizens overseas.  And my colleagues and I work everyday in that capacity. 

Many of these cases are difficult and tragic, but we continue working on them because we want nothing more than to see, for instance, a parent united with his or her child.  That's fundamental to the human spirit and the suggestion that people have underlying goals under that is repugnant and not at all appropriate.  There's a hardworking group of people who are out there on the front lines, in dangerous situations, working around the world on behalf of all Americans, and doing what we can.  And we understand the difficulties and the emotional sensitivities of many of these cases, and we'll continue in spite of that to work with everybody we can to see that these cases are handled properly and to make sure that we do the right thing.

QUESTION:  Thank you. 

MR. REEKER:  Sir.  And then Joel.   And we've got a few more, please.

QUESTION:  Yesterday the American Embassy back in Cairo released a statement criticizing this court verdict against Egyptian-American activist Saad Eddin Ibrahim, if you remember.  And just in today's Cairo press the Egyptian Foreign Minister was quoted as criticizing the US Embassy release, saying it's a bit unusual for a foreign embassy to weigh on a court verdict in their host country.  From your knowledge of diplomatic norms, is it legitimate for --

MR. REEKER:  Perhaps this goes straight to Barry's question.  It's not at all unusual for the Department of State, as well as our embassies abroad, to weigh in on a matter involving an American citizen, in particular in terms of what our concerns have been about this case.  And we've talked about it a great deal here.  We've raised it at the highest levels here in Washington, where the Egyptian Ambassador was called in to hear our views on this matter earlier this week and in Cairo, where we've raised it to very high levels from our embassy there. 

So we remained very seized with the matter.  We are pursuing regular consular access to Dr. Ibrahim and are in close touch with his family on that matter and are continuing to raise it with Egyptian officials, and we will do that because it's the right thing and the appropriate thing to do. 

Joel, and then --

QUESTION:  In Nigeria, there is a sizeable protest against Chevron-Texaco with their pipelines and it's starting to get out of hand.  Have you spoken either to the corporation and/or to the Nigerian Government?  And the protestors are looking for better payments, housing, other types of humanitarian type --

MR. REEKER:  We've certainly seen those reports.  We've talked about them before here.  They do seem to involve employment opportunities, and I don't know of any particular conversations we've had with the company or with the Nigerian Government.  Our Assistant Secretary for African Affairs Walter Kansteiner was just in Nigeria.  He briefed about that earlier this week.  I don't think that specific subject came up, but the broader issue of development in Nigeria, economic opportunity, reforms, promotion of democracy -- those were all themes that are important certainly to us, and we feel they're important for Nigeria and the Nigerian people.  So while I don't have anything specific on those individual situations, our broad views and our dialogue with Nigeria will continue. 

This gentleman, and then Ben. 

QUESTION:  Change of subject?

MR. REEKER:  Please.

QUESTION:  Ambassador Pearson met some Turkish authorities in Ankara.  Do you have anything about his meetings?  And are the air base (inaudible) from Turkey during the course of operation to --

MR. REEKER:  First of all, I don' t have any information on Ambassador Pearrson's individual meetings.  You'd have to check with the Embassy in Ankara for that.  I can check with the European Bureau to see if they'd have any read-out, but I don't always have something everyday on that. 

And in terms of your second question, it's just completely speculative.  We've been quite clear.  Our concerns about Iraq, we've shared those concerns with allies, friends and others in the region, obviously.  But I just wouldn't have anything to add on that type of hypothetical question.

Ben had something.

QUESTION:  There was a report by the Council on Foreign Relations yesterday saying that the US is doing, particularly the State Department, is doing a very bad job in promoting a positive image of the United States abroad, that it's basically failed to do its job in this area and it's recommending the creation of a new office at the White House to supervise these activities which were actually taken over by the State Department when USIA was absorbed in '99.  Can you confirm reports that this office is under consideration at the White House, and also, can you react into the allegations in the CFR report.

MR. REEKER:  Clearly I see you've missed most of our briefings this week, because we did talk about that report.  We had a chance to review it.  We certainly found a slightly different interpretation than the spin you're putting on it in your question, but we welcome the input from groups like the Council on Foreign Relations as very important.

I spoke at some length about our public diplomacy programs, about what we've talked about here in terms of the need to expand our programs, to have a broader, deeper, younger audience and approach in different parts of the world where we've tried to increase opportunities for exchange of ideas to clearly counter the misinformation and disinformation that is out there about American society, American culture and American policies to help people in the rest of the world better understand what the United States is all about.

These are things we do in conjunction with the private sector. And in terms of the White House office, the office that we talked about, I think, just yesterday that is sort of a continuation of what we developed in the early days of the war on terrorism, the Coalition Information Center idea, where the White House helps to coordinate all of the US government efforts because there are a number of agencies involved in this, but the State Department continues to have the lead in public diplomacy as Mr. Fleischer said the other day.

We have the experts on the ground.  We have an entire group of Foreign Service Officers trained in these fields.  And these are things that, that take time to implement major programs to do what I just described.  And certainly, we have a track record going back over the decades of the Cold War where we fought against a lot of other misinformation and misunderstanding to make quite clear to populations around the world what America stands for, what America is, what our policies are and why.  And we'll continue to do that utilizing the latest technology, new opportunities, public - private partnerships and working with others and using all the resources of the US Government to pursue that.

Elise.

QUESTION:  So do you think it's unfair for these critics, and there are a lot of --

MR. REEKER:  Well, of course there are.

QUESTION:  Well, but what I'm saying is -- do you think it's unfair of people to expect that since September 11th that the United States would completely kind of turn the tide of particularly Arab opinion on the US.  They say that, you know, polls come out.  They say that, you know, opinion of America is very low.  Do you think it's unfair to expect that the United States would have been able to turn this around?

MR. REEKER:  I think it's probably unfair and impractical.  What we have to focus on is what we're doing.  What we had been doing even prior to September 11th, and the things that we were aware of that perhaps were not getting the same kind of press attention that they do now in the post-September 11th era.

I talked before, earlier in the week, about resources that have been diverted away from some of these programs, some of the public diplomacy efforts that we made after the end of the Cold War.  But now it's a different world and we have new challenges.  We have new issues, including terrorism and including the importance of setting the record straight about what the United States is, what we stand for, and why.  And I think, you know, polling aside, you'll find that in many areas there's still a great admiration for the fundamental values of America.  There's still a great desire to come here to our country, to be a part of this, to pursue the dreams and opportunities that this country provides.

So we'll continue doing what we do on the ground and working in the public - private partnerships and working to get that word out, but it does take time.  This is shaping opinion, this is getting the facts out -- using the media to do that for us, but also doing our own direct effects and we're very dedicated to that.

(The briefing was concluded at 2:10 p.m.)

###