I do have one topic I'd like to discuss at the outset.  We will release a statement reflecting these comments after the end of the briefing, but I would note that it has been one year since the inauguration of the Afghan Government and we have seen that Afghanistan has moved steadily forward over this past year.  The initial Transitional Government gained the consent of the people through a traditional Afghan institution, the Loya Jirga, in which all shades of opinion were heard, but the loudest message was for democracy.

Over 2 million Afghan refugees have returned to Afghanistan since that time, a dramatic vote of confidence in a better future for their country.  And President Karzai has put together a government that now interacts constructively with the 60 nations of the international community assisting in Afghanistan's reconstruction.  Roads are being built.  Schools have been reconstructed and opened.  Girls are once again in school.  And Afghans are beginning to experience the security that allows for a normal life.

The past year has been a period all Afghans can view with pride and can look forward to a more prosperous, secure Afghanistan. 

We would like to note that Afghanistan's progress towards becoming a full member of the international community took a further step forward yesterday on December 22nd, as Afghanistan and six neighboring countries signed the Kabul Declaration on Good Neighborly Relations.  This is a pledge to respect Afghanistan's independence and territorial integrity, and that signing ceremony marked one year since the establishment of representative Afghan government, which really is an achievement of the international community and the Afghans working together.

The United States strongly supports efforts of the Afghan Government under President Karzai to establish its authority and good governance throughout the country and to secure commitment of both neighboring states as well as local leaders for this goal. 

The United States and its international partners remain committed to helping Afghanistan create a country that is prosperous, democratic, at peace within itself and with its neighbors, possessing a free market and respectful of human rights, especially women's rights.  We will continue to do our part to achieve these goals.  And as one of Afghanistan's many international partners, we congratulate the people of Afghanistan on their first year of freedom.

In that regard, I would also like to remind you that we do have a special briefing this afternoon after this briefing.  The Administrator of the US Agency for International Development, Mr. Andrew Natsios, will be here to talk to you on the occasion of this one-year anniversary of the Interim Government in Afghanistan to discuss rebuilding efforts and review with you some of the progress that's been made in that regard and the US role in those very important efforts. 

So we'll put out a written statement following the briefing.  If there are any questions on this or other matters, I'm happy to defer to Mr. Gedda.

QUESTION:  North Korea.  Could you give us your evaluation of the situation, what the Secretary is doing and how you see the events from North Korea over the last couple of days?

MR. REEKER:  Well, certainly, North Korea's actions over the past three days raise serious concerns by disrupting the arrangements that the International Atomic Energy Agency has in terms of monitoring of nuclear material and facilities at Yongbyon.  This also belies North Korea's announced justification that they want to produce electricity.  Spent fuel rods, I would point out, have no relevance for the generation of electricity,

So we continue to be in very close contact with the International Atomic Energy Agency as well as with our friends and allies, including, of course, South Korea, on these latest moves by the North Koreans. 

We call upon North Korea to respond to the IAEA's repeated calls and requests to hold urgently needed discussions on the safeguard issues at Yongbyon and to allow IAEA to replace or restore the seals and cameras that the North has damaged.

Over the weekend, Secretary Powell has been in touch with a number of his counterparts, with the South Korean Foreign Minister Ch'oe, the Japanese Foreign Minister Kawaguchi, Foreign Minister Tang of China, Russian Foreign Minister Ivanov, and this morning the Secretary spoke again with Foreign Minister Ivanov as well as with Foreign Minister De Villepin of France and Foreign Secretary Straw of the United Kingdom.

The international community is in agreement that North Korea's actions are a challenge to all responsible nations and the international community is making clear that North Korea's relations with the outside world hinge on the elimination of its nuclear programs.  North Korea only deepens its international isolation with these recent actions. 

So, as we've said before, we seek a peaceful resolution of the situation that North Korea has created by its pursuit of a nuclear weapons program, and we're going to continue the consultations with friends and allies that I've just discussed.

Any other questions on this subject?

Yes, ma'am.

QUESTION:  Yes.  Are we negotiating?  Why aren't we negotiating?  Should we be considering military action? 

MR. REEKER:  I think I've made quite clear, as we have before, that it's North Korea's responsibility to, first of all, eliminate its nuclear weapons program verifiably, and more immediately, to focus on talking to the IAEA about reestablishing that which North Korea has dismantled in terms of seals and cameras and other safeguards. 

We will not give in to blackmail.  The international community will not enter into dialogue in response to threats or broken commitments, and we're not going to bargain or offer inducements for North Korea to live up to the treaties and agreements that it has signed. 

The violation of these international agreements will have consequences for North Korea before the United Nations.  And so we call upon them to respond to the request of the IAEA to hold the needed discussions, allow replacement and restoration of seals and cameras that the North has damaged, and we will continue to consult about this with our allies and at the United Nations, I'm sure.  Everyone in the international community is seized with the issue and we will be following it very closely.

Yes, Elise.

QUESTION:  Are you going to be seeking any type of action in the Security Council to hold North Korea accountable for these violations of the Nonproliferation Treaty?

MR. REEKER:  I think, clearly, that remains to be seen as we watch this over coming days and continue to be in touch with friends and allies.  That includes Security Council members.  As I noted, the Secretary has had a number of conversations about North Korea just in the last few hours, in fact, and certainly over the weekend as these events have unfolded. 

We're in close contact with the IAEA to confirm exactly what steps North Korea has taken and to keep monitoring that situation.  And obviously, this is an issue that will be of interest to the United Nations because North Korea is in violation of many of its international commitments, including the International Atomic Energy Agency Safeguards Agreement, the Nonproliferation Treaty, the North-South Agreement on Denuclearization, as well as the Agreed Framework with us. 

So these are serious issues and we want to follow it very closely and we've made quite clear that North Korea is only deepening its own isolation by taking these recent actions.

Arshad.

QUESTION:  What is your reaction to Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Mamedov's statement that essentially blaming the United States for North Korea's recent actions and suggesting that President Bush's comment calling North Korea part of an "axis of evil" may have helped precipitate a series of bad behavior by Pyongyang?

MR. REEKER:  In terms of the Russians, and I certainly noticed their statement today by the Russian Foreign Ministry spokesman reflecting the international consensus that North Korea's relations with the outside world hinge on the elimination of its nuclear weapons program in a visible and verifiable manner.  As I indicated, the Secretary's been in close contact with Foreign Minister Ivanov.  They spoke this morning.  They had spoken earlier over the weekend following their meetings, of course, here in Washington at the end of last week. 

So I think the entire international community, including Russia, is quite unified and clear in the view that North Korea has to take its responsibilities seriously to live up to its international agreements and needs to respond to the International Atomic Energy Agency, as I outlined, and needs to verifiably, visibly, eliminate its nuclear weapons program.

QUESTION:  You don't reject Mamedov's suggestion that President Bush is somehow responsible or to blame for North Korea's actions?

MR. REEKER:  I think that's totally absurd.  North Korea has taken its actions quite clearly in violation of a number of international agreements and North Korea is the country responsible for deepening its isolation with the recent actions.  The international community is not going to respond to this kind of blackmail.  North Korea is capable of taking the appropriate actions to end and eliminate its nuclear weapons program and to work with the IAEA to restore the cameras and seals that they've damaged, and that would be a first sign of trying to reengage with the international community.

We have made quite clear, as you know, that the United States had been prepared to take bold new steps with North Korea and to help North Korea come out of its isolation.  But with the disclosure of their nuclear weapons program, we've also been quite clear that it's not possible to move forward in those steps that we had been prepared to take.

Yes, sir.

QUESTION:  The discussions that you refer to that North Korea should get involved in are only with the IAEA and nobody else?  I'm a little confused.  You referred earlier to a statement --

MR. REEKER:  Well, North Korea took steps in recent days to damage and dismantle certain verification mechanisms that they have agreed to in terms of their relationship with the International Atomic Energy Agency, and they need to respond to the request from IAEA to discuss the safeguards in that regard.

QUESTION:  I see.  So those are the only discussions that should occur now with North Korea, between North Korea and the IAEA?  You're ruling out any other negotiations, discussions with North Korea by the United States or any of its other four partners?  Is that the --

MR. REEKER:  Again, I think I already answered the question when I told you that the United States and others in the international community are not going to sort of give in to blackmail.  North Korea knows what steps it needs to take if they want to engage with the international community.  We don't enter into dialogue with someone as a response to threats or broken commitments, and we're not going to bargain or offer inducements for North Korea to live up to treaties and agreements that they've signed.

QUESTION:  Without -- I mean, I understand that no inducements or bargaining are allowed by -- under US policy by the United States or the countries in the region.  But are you also saying that you don't want any diplomatic contacts of any kind with North Korea until it restores these monitoring devices?

MR. REEKER:  I think any contacts that any country chooses to have should be to reiterate the points that we're all in agreement upon in the international community.  You've seen the statement from the Russians, the statements from other governments.  We've been coordinating, consulting very closely with friends and allies.  I've listed for you the countries where Secretary Powell has been in contact with his counterparts.  And there is a strong unanimous consensus among these countries and in the international community that North Korea needs to live up to its commitments, and we've talked about what those commitments are.  And breaking such commitments is not the way to try to engage with the international community.  Threats and broken commitments are not what we'll respond to.

QUESTION:  But are you convinced that there is also a strong consensus against any negotiations or discussions or diplomatic contacts with North Korea?

MR. REEKER:  Every country has to make their own decisions about their diplomatic contacts and discussions.  And what we've been quite clear, just as our messages from here are quite clear, is that the North Koreans need to hear the concerns of the international community and respond to the IAEA and do what they need to do; that is, end their nuclear weapons program verifiably and visibly.  And that's a message we think everyone in the international community should be and, in fact, is passing to North Korea through whatever form that discussion should take.

QUESTION:  I'm sorry just to keep following up on this.  Senator Lugar seemed to disagree over the weekend and said that there has to, at some point, be negotiations.  Is that -- is he -- tell me, is he misinformed or wrong or -- ?

MR. REEKER:  I didn't see Senator Lugar's remarks.  I doubt very much that he's misinformed.  I think what we're all working on is discussing with allies and friends the concerns we have about the steps that North Korea has taken which fly in the face of their own interests, isolate them further from the rest of the international community, and violate a number of commitments that they have made. 

I'm not exactly sure what you are suggesting one should negotiate.  We don't enter into a dialogue based on threats and broken commitments, and so we are not going to respond to any blackmail.  We have made quite clear that we were prepared to respond to North Korea, prepared to move forward with North Korea in a bold new way until they decided to take the actions that they have, including beginning a nuclear weapons program, and now violating their commitments to the IAEA.

QUESTION:  A follow-up to Steve's question.  Is the New York channel still open?  Can we confirm that?  And did you have some diplomatic exchange through New York channel in recent days and in the future?

MR. REEKER:  By New York channel you're describing the ability to discuss with North Korean representatives in New York through their UN Mission and ours anything with North Korea.  Of course that is open if they choose to discuss or care to pass messages through that.  I'm not aware of any particular discussions that have taken place in that regard in recent days.

QUESTION:   Another topic?

MR. REEKER:  Let's just make sure that we haven't exhausted this.

Yes, ma'am.

We'll come back to you.

QUESTION:  North Korea.  Are you, then, expecting other countries, maybe neighboring countries, to break the isolation first and then US will step in or maybe IAEA, and then --

MR. REEKER:  I think I've made quite clear what we in the international community are calling upon North Korea to do in terms of engaging with the IAEA in discussions on how to replace or restore the seals and equipment that they have damaged in recent days and the steps that they need to take.

If you go back to the statements from KEDO, if you go back to other statements from ministries around the world, everybody is in unison on this that North Korea needs to take these steps.  That's what will help North Korea move away from its complete isolation in the international community.  And we are in very close touch with friends and neighbors, many in the region --  Japan, South Korea, Russia, China -- as well as with others in the international community, and certainly at the United Nations we'll be very seized with this matter.

Charlie.

QUESTION:  New subject?

MR. REEKER:  The gentleman back here had the first dibs on a new subject.

QUESTION:  On Venezuela, can you just tell us anything more about the Secretary of State's proposal to the OAS on possible solutions to the strike?  Would this involve a referendum on the earlier elections?

MR. REEKER:  I guess I'm not quite sure what proposal you're talking about.  Secretary General Gaviria of the OAS has been working in Venezuela to try to foster a dialogue.  We continue to be extremely concerned by the volatile political situation in Venezuela.  Today, I think, marks the 21st day of the national strike that's taking place there.  There are a number of marches expected nationwide.  The oil industry remains crippled. 

Ultimately, as we've said before, and as Secretary Powell has said, the best way to resolve the crisis peacefully is through talks led by the Organization of American States under the good offices of Secretary General Gaviria.  We are disappointed that the Government of Venezuela, Friday, did not attend a scheduled session of dialogue, which ultimately led to the session being canceled.  We understand that talks are slated to resume today in Caracas this afternoon and we are encouraging all parties to attend and to begin a continuous negotiation until Venezuela's political crisis has been peacefully and constitutionally resolved.

QUESTION:  Just a follow-up.  With the expiration of Mr. Reich's recess appointment, who is leading US policy towards Venezuela at the moment?

MR. REEKER:  The Acting Assistant Secretary of State for Western Hemisphere Affairs is Curt Struble, who was the Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary.  Secretary Powell, of course, is very involved in following the situation in Venezuela, as are others in the Department and, of course, at the National Security Council as well.

Charlie.

QUESTION:  On Friday evening, you issued an ordered departure for non-emergency personnel and family members.  Can you tell us if they are -- those people who fall into those categories are all out of Caracas?

MR. REEKER:  As you know, we try not to do a lot of nose counting when we do these types of tasks.

QUESTION:  I tried not to ask for numbers.

QUESTION:  Not toes counting.

MR. REEKER:  Some people have left with their noses and their toes and we'll continue implementing that.  That was something that we decided to -- a step we decided to take on Friday in light of the severe shortages of goods and services in Venezuela.  That includes acute fuel shortages as well as the uncertainty of the political and the security situation.  It certainly remains subject to rapid deterioration and, based on that, we made the decision in terms of prudence to order the departure of all dependent family members as well as non-emergency American employees from Venezuela. 

And the Embassy advised Americans traveling or residing in Venezuela through the appropriate Warden networks.  We posted these notices, of course, on the website and are reminding people through this channel publicly, saying that people should be in touch with the Embassy if they need assistance in terms of leaving the country. 

At last report, the international airports in Venezuela are open and operational.  Commercial airlines continue to offer flights between Venezuela and the United States, although I understand some are operating on reduced schedules.  And so our Travel Warning, which had been in place for Venezuela, was revised to reflect this new administrative status that we have taken for our people in Venezuela.

Yes, Ma'am.  Sylvia.

QUESTION:  Thank you.  Mr. Lugar said last week, also, that the US have to be more involved, more concerned on Venezuela.  Is the US going to do more, specifically because Mr. Powell said that he presented some ideas to the OAS General Secretary Gaviria?

MR. REEKER:  We've been in very close touch with the OAS, with the General Secretary, through our OAS mission, and I would just point you to what I just said.  The importance is dialogue. There needs to be a peaceful resolution to this impasse.  There needs to be a peaceful constitutional solution, and that's why dialogue is going to be necessary. 

And we are urging, along with other members of the Organization of American States, we're urging all the parties to begin this afternoon continuous negotiations to find a resolution to this political crisis peacefully and constitutionally.  We are confident that the OAS can provide the appropriate forum in which all sides can come together and find a resolution for the good of Venezuela and all of its people.

QUESTION:  Are you still urge to elections?  To early elections?

MR. REEKER:  I think what we've talked about is electoral solutions, but that needs to start with dialogue and this afternoon is the perfect opportunity for all the parties to come together under the auspices of Secretary General Gaviria, who's in Caracas, and to begin this very intense discussion aimed at finding a peaceful and constitutional solution to the crisis.

Terri.

QUESTION:  Change of subject?

MR. REEKER:  Anyone else on Venezuela?

(No response.)

MR. REEKER:  Go ahead.

QUESTION:  Okay, on Iraq.  Secretary Powell told us that the US was now prepared to share evidence of Iraq's misdeeds with the inspectors.  Has that transfer of information already begun and can you tell us if there's been any progress on getting solutions in place for interviewing scientists?

MR. REEKER:  As we have stated in the past and as you rightly point out, Secretary Powell reiterated on Thursday when he spoke to you that the inspections should give high priority to conducting interviews with scientists and other witnesses outside of Iraq where they can speak freely.  And in terms of the resolution, UN Security Council Resolution 1441, Iraq is obligated to make witnesses available to inspectors. 

We have been working with Dr. Blix and Dr. El Baradei on putting interview modalities in place.  We're committed to ensuring the safety of interviewees, and we remain in close consultation with our friends and the inspection agencies on how best to accomplish this. 

I think I'm not going to go into any specifics on types of intelligence we're providing to the United Nations Monitoring, Verification and Inspection Commission or to the International Atomic Energy Agency, but consultations with those groups are ongoing, as the Secretary said they would be.  And so without giving you any particular details or schedules of that type of thing, it is an ongoing process.

Cristophe.

QUESTION:  Do you have any reaction to the Iraqi proposal to allow CIA people to come to Iraq to assess the weapons of mass destruction program?

MR. REEKER:  I guess without commenting on matters of intelligence, which we never do, I think Saddam Hussein and his regime should be aware that the mechanisms for monitoring the situation in Iraq have been put into place under a number of UN resolutions, and including most recently 1441, and the full compliance and cooperation by the regime with the UN inspectors and disclosure of the regime's weapons of mass destruction are what is required here.  That has not changed.

QUESTION:  Speaking directly to the offer, is that something that the US would be interested in doing, sending CIA experts into Iraq to --

MR. REEKER:  I wouldn't try to speak for the CIA or comment on intelligence matters other than to point out that there is a mechanism already in place through the United Nations agency, Dr. Blix's agency, which has been put into place to accomplish this, is carrying out the mandate given to it by the Security Council.  And as we have said, as Secretary Powell has said and the President has said, we're committed to supporting those agencies under the UN mandate in every way we can.

In the back.

QUESTION:  Hong Kong.  Tomorrow is the deadline for Hong Kong's --

MR. REEKER:  I'm sorry.  He wants to continue on Iraq.  We'll come back to Hong Kong.  Okay?  Thanks.

Sir.

QUESTION:  What are US demands from Turkish Government for the possible military operation to Iraq?  Mr. Pearce, the US Ambassador in Ankara, gave a letter to Turkish Government on Friday.  So did you get any response about these demands?  Will Turkey support to military operation to Iraq?

MR. REEKER:  Well, as you know, and we've certainly discussed for some time now, the United States is engaged with discussions -- in discussions with a number of likeminded governments about what may need to be done if Iraq does not comply with the Security Council resolution, with 1441 and its requirements to disarm.  This includes, of course, possible participation in and support for a future coalition, including not only possibly military contributions, but other support as well. 

We are not going to discuss particulars of our diplomatic communications with Turkey, or with any other country.  And these discussions are certainly not indications that war with Iraq is inevitable.  Iraq still has a chance to comply with its obligations to the international community.  But I think we've all seen, based on our experience over the past 12 years, that only the credible threat of force and serious consequences, as laid out in the Security Council resolution, those are the only ways to elicit Iraqi cooperation and compliance with the UN Security Council resolutions. 

And so for the weapons inspectors from the United Nations to have the best chance of successfully and peacefully resolving this matter, we must collectively demonstrate that we're prepared to act militarily to disarm Iraq if Iraq does not choose itself to disarm verifiably.  So, in that general regard, we've had discussions with a number of governments around the world. 

Our Ambassador in Ankara has met with Prime Minister Gul.  On Saturday, he updated the Prime Minister, as we do regularly, about our Iraq policy, including reiterating our disappointment with Iraq's UN declaration regarding its weapons of mass destruction and its possession -- and Iraq's possession of weapons of mass destruction, echoing the point Secretary Powell and many, many in the international community made last week in terms of disappointment with Iraq not taking this opportunity to show a strategic change in the way they're approaching the international community.  So the Ambassador and Prime Minister Gul agreed to stay in close contact on the matter, as we are with other friends and allies all around the world.

Anything else on Iraq?  Yes.

QUESTION:  On Thursday, you distributed a document suggesting that Iraq tried to acquire, to get uranium from Indonesia.  And since, the government of this country denied several times that it involved in any kind of such deal there with the Iraqis.  Can you be more specific about your own accusations?

MR. REEKER:  I don't know that our fact sheet suggested that that particular government was involved in that.  I'd have to go back and check and see if there was any more information I could share with you on that.  It raised a point about illustrating one of the questions which Iraq has not answered, something that we think they had the opportunity to do when they made their declaration last week.  I will go back and check and see if there's anything more specific I could share on that particular fact, but I just don't have anything right now. 

Arshad, did you have anything?  No, okay.  The lady at the back had Hong Kong next.

QUESTION:  Are you open out -- following the CIA story, are you open to sending the US inspectors, doesn't have to be CIA, but from other agencies?

MR. REEKER:  I think I made perfectly clear that there's an inspection mechanism that is in place that we are supporting, which is created under the UN Security Council resolutions, under the leadership of Dr. Hans Blix, reporting to the UN Security Council.  We are doing everything to support that monitoring mechanism, and as well as the International Atomic Energy Agency and their monitoring mechanism.

QUESTION:  The US officials have been complaining, including Secretary Rumsfeld, that the UN inspectors can't find anything.  Why don't you send your own people? 

MR. REEKER:  I'm not aware of the particular complaints that you're talking about.  I have seen statement after statement from senior US officials about our support for Dr. Blix, Dr. El Baradei, and their inspection missions and how we are doing whatever we can to support those missions.  And that's what we'll continue to focus on. 

The onus is on Saddam Hussein.  The onus is on Iraq to demonstrate, as required under Security Council resolutions, that they disarm from their weapons of mass destruction program, something they have failed to for many years now, and something we are all very serious about enforcing in terms of the will of the international community as expressed in that Security Council resolution.

The lady in the back had a question on Hong Kong.

QUESTION:  Yes, tomorrow is the last day for Hong Kong's Article 23 legislation, 3-month consultation period.  And this Article 23 legislation will likely endanger the Hong Kong's freedom and the democracy and also Hong Kong's status of being the center of international media and finance. 

In the November 21st press statement, you said United States and Hong Kong share a broad commitment to preserving the greatest possible degree of autonomy of Hong Kong and its success as a model of free market capitalism. 

On December 10th, the Chinese Vice Prime Minister Qian Qichen said Hong Kong's Article 23 legislation has nothing to do with the US and the UK.  So my question is, what's your comment on this and how US is going to keep monitoring or help Hong Kong to keep its free market of capitalism?

MR. REEKER:  I'd refer you back to the statement from which you quoted so eloquently, my statement of November the 21st.  That is still very much our position.  We think that that draft legislation should be made public, that people should have a chance to review that.  We've raised some concerns, not just us, but the international community, and we'll continue to raise concerns as we do about issues that involve human rights and rule of law.  And I think the statement reflected our concerns and our feelings shared by many in the international community about Hong Kong.

We have followed this debate very carefully and we want to see an opportunity for the fullest possible consultation on draft legislation.  So we will continue to make those points, as our Consul General did in Hong Kong, and we'll continue to raise that with other appropriate officials.

QUESTION:  So do you think this has a lot to do with Western countries' economy and, like, Chinese Vice Prime Minister said it has nothing to do with the US and the UK?

MR. REEKER:  Let me just let the statement stand.  It's the same position that we've had for a long time.  We continue to monitor issues in Hong Kong, as many people do around the world, and continue to state our views.  It's in everybody's interests, including Hong Kong's, that Hong Kong be allowed to continue to be an important center for international commerce.  And we've always said that a democratically elected government, answerable to the will of the people, is the best way to ensure the protection of fundamental freedoms in Hong Kong.

QUESTION:  What's your view to the current status that Hong Kong Government's refuse to publicize the draft?

MR. REEKER:  I think I need to just refer you back to the statements that we've made and what I've said to you here today.  I don't really have anything further to add for you at this moment.  But we'll continue to watch that very closely.

Arshad.

QUESTION:  Any quick comment on the failed Montenegro presidential elections?

MR. REEKER:  We did see that although the election in Montenegro was conducted in a peaceful and democratic manner, it is disappointing that the participation of the electorate was below the requisite 50 percent threshold of registered voters required to validate the election of a new president.  And as I understand it, Montenegro's electoral authorities will soon set a date for another presidential election to provide the citizens of Montenegro a second chance to elect a president.  And I think we join with the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe and the Council of Europe in encouraging all eligible Montenegrin voters to exercise their right to vote in the next election.

Yes, Elise.

QUESTION:  One more.  Speaking of elections, the Palestinians are saying that there's no way they will be able to schedule elections in the coming months because Israel is still occupying some of the territory.  Do you have any comment on that?

MR. REEKER:  I think President Bush has certainly been very clear about our support for a new Palestinian leadership brought about through free, fair and credible elections through a process conducted by the Palestinian people.  The new leadership should be transparent, accountable, free from associations with terrorism and violence, and capable of taking the necessary decisions, capable of exercising leadership to prepare the Palestinian people for statehood.  And that includes preparation of a constitution.

As you know, we have been working, along with others in the International Task Force on Reform -- that includes the European Union, the United Nations, Russia, other members of the Quartet, as well as international financial institutions and Japan and Norway -- engaging with Palestinians on recommendations regarding electoral reform so that we can see them take measures that ensure that future elections are free, fair and credible.

We do think it's important that the Palestinians have ample time for the reform measures to be enacted to ensure a free, fair and credible process.  It's also, as we called for in Friday's Quartet statement, important for the Israelis to effect a withdrawal from Palestinian areas.  And so we remain committed to that, committed to the vision that the President has made in June and was reflected in our statements issued after the Quartet meetings on Friday.

QUESTION:  If I could just have a follow-up, then I'll let you go.  But do you think when you talk about the importance of effecting a withdrawal, do you think that this withdrawal has to take place before a real free and fair Palestinian election is able to take place?

MR. REEKER:  I think it's important that there be time to see that happen.  The Quartet statement that we all issued jointly said that as calm is established, Israeli forces should withdraw from Palestinian areas to the pre-Intifada status quo, with -- that status quo on the ground should be restored. 

Of course, specifically, the Quartet called for an immediate ceasefire, a comprehensive ceasefire, and called upon all Palestinian individuals and groups to end acts of terror against Israelis in any location.  And so we'll be watching for that. 

Clearly there's got to be an end to violence.  We've got to see that Israelis -- you know, there's no excuse for the violence and terrorist attacks against the Israeli people that they've been forced to endure.  We're pressing Palestinians to do all they can to end the terror and violence.  And at the same time, we are telling the Israelis, continuing to urge the Israelis to keep in mind the consequences of their actions and to take steps to prevent further civilian casualties and consider steps that can ease the dire humanitarian situation inside Palestinian areas. 

So all of these things need to continue to move forward so that we can move closer to seeing the vision that we all share become reality.