[FREE IRAN Project] In The Spirit Of Cyrus The Great

[ViaDrEtebar]

17 November 2005

State Department Briefing, November 17


http://nato.usmission.gov/Article.asp?ID=C891FEAF-84EE-46ED-8ED2-9D1B9E29D117

European Union, Iran, Iraq, Reports of Secret Prisons/Effect on Relations with Allies, Kosovo

State Department deputy spokesman Adam Ereli briefed the press November 17.

Following is the transcript of the State Department briefing:

(begin transcript)

U.S. Department of State
Daily Press Briefing Index
Thursday, November 17, 2005
12:36 p.m. EST

Briefer: Adam Ereli, Deputy Spokesman

EUROPEAN UNION
-- Open Skies Negotiations/Comprehensive First Step Air Services Agreement

IRAN
-- Next IAEA Board of Governors Meeting
-- Iranian Resumption of Hexafluoride Conversion
-- Under Secretary Burns Travel to London for Meetings with EU-3, Russia

IRAQ
-- Reports of Criminal Charges Involving Employees of the CPA
-- Reconstruction of Iraq/System of Oversight and Accountability
-- Oil-for-Food Program Abuse

DEPARTMENT
-- Reports of Secret Prisons/Effect on Relations with Allies

KOSOVO
-- Talks on the Future of Kosovo/Special Envoy on Kosovo

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE
DAILY PRESS BRIEFING

THURSDAY, NOVEMBER 17, 2005
(ON THE RECORD UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED)

12:36 p.m. EST

MR. ERELI: Greetings, all, and welcome. We don't have any statements to kick off, so we can go to your questions.

QUESTION: Do you have any news, any news to tell us about the Open Sky negotiations?

MR. ERELI: A big issue.

QUESTION: It's a big one.

MR. ERELI: A big issue. Yes, I do. Those negotiations are going on. They began earlier, resuming negotiations between the United States and the European Union on a comprehensive first-step Air Services Agreement. The aim of this agreement would be to liberalize the transatlantic aviation market and replace the Open Skies and other bilateral civil aviation agreements that the United States has concluded with most EU member-states, replace those agreements and be more comprehensive.

Our last meeting, as you might recall, with the EU delegations was on October -- was in October -- late October in Brussels. We made substantial progress there towards an agreement and the meetings here will continue through tomorrow. Leading them is Mr. Daniel Calleja who is Director of Air Transport for the European Commission and John Byerly, our Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Transportation Affairs.

QUESTION: You don't expect anything -- anything concrete to be decided?

MR. ERELI: I'm sure we'll make some important progress. I don't know that we'll have a -- I don't expect us to have a full-blown agreement as a result of this latest round of negotiations.

QUESTION: If nobody asks, I'll ask a question.

QUESTION: Ask.

QUESTION: Hi, nice to see you.

MR. ERELI: Hello. Nice to see you.

QUESTION: Let me ask a question about Iran.

MR. ERELI: Okay.

QUESTION: Are we any closer to having a position for the next round of IAEA talks? What do you want the IAEA to do?

QUESTION: What we want, frankly, is for the international community to remain united, speak with one voice, work together to act on a common concern which is an Iran that seems bent on using a nuclear program to develop nuclear weapons. That is, frankly, what guides our diplomacy both at the IAEA as well as in other fora and on other occasions. I think, let's see where we are ahead of the IAEA Board of Governors meeting and perhaps frame the answer that way.

Now, we have reports, or the IAEA has confirmed, that Iran has resumed conversion of uranium into hexafluoride. This is an unwelcome move, one that we view with concern. It comes in -- it is the latest in a series of moves by Iran that, frankly, go against what they themselves have committed themselves to and what the international community has asked of them. You'll recall that they entered into negotiations with the EU-3, they unilaterally broke off those negotiations in August and walked away from an agreement they made with the EU, the November Paris Agreement. They have publicly committed themselves to having the right to enrich and reprocess. Now, they have moved to resume conversion of uranium into UF-6.

I would say that none of this inspires confidence in Iran. It contributes to the confidence gap and the trust deficit that we all have when looking at Iran's pattern of behavior over the last couple of years. And it certainly contravenes previous IAEA Board of Governors resolutions. The latest one in September, which specifically called on Iran to comply with IAEA inspections, to suspend the conversion of uranium ore and to restart negotiations.

So all of that, I think, will inform us and inform our discussions as we go into the next Board of Governors meeting. I would point to a process that is under way in dealing with Iran's nuclear program and in trying to achieve a goal that we all share, that Iran not be in a position to use technology or capabilities from a nuclear program to develop nuclear weapons. There is a process to achieve that objective. The EU-3 has undertaken a process of negotiations with Iran. As you know, we support that process. We're not a party to those negotiations but we think they can lead to an outcome that serves our interests.

The latest move in that regard is the travel by our Under Secretary for Political Affairs, Nicholas Burns, to London today where he will have the opportunity to meet with the EU-3, the Russians and others to -- and talk about these recent developments, but obviously, within the context of events over the past couple of months and weeks -- hear their views, hear what they think, what their assessments are, and consider, again, as I said earlier, how together we can all act to accomplish our common goal.

QUESTION: A couple follow-ups. There was no former offer that was ever presented to the Iranians by the EU-3 regarding enrichment in Russia.

MR. ERELI: Yeah.

QUESTION: I mean, a lot of reports are suggesting that the Iranians have rejected this but was on* offered --

MR. ERELI: Not that I'm -- not that I'm aware of.

QUESTION: And the other thing --

MR. ERELI: But again, I would -- since it's an EU -- were there to be an offer, it would be an EU offer --

QUESTION: Right. But we won't go into it.

MR. ERELI: Obviously, defer to the EU-3 to speak to what they have said or not said to the Iranians.

QUESTION: And the other thing is that, from your comments, I gather no decision has been made on trying to push for an immediate referral to the Security Council?

MR. ERELI: No.

QUESTION: Adam, criminal charges have in the past day or so have been brought up against two American individuals involving the CPA in post-war Iraq. I don't know if you have any comment to that.

MR. ERELI: I don't.

QUESTION: And you know-- okay, you're not prepared to -- okay.

MR. ERELI: Yeah, I'm not prepared -- since it deals with the CPA and the CPA preceded state's management of the issue, it's not a subject on which I would have the information to comment on.

QUESTION: Are you familiar with the story?

MR. ERELI: Yeah, vaguely.

QUESTION: Okay.

MR. ERELI: Not in all the details --

QUESTION: I'm just wondering if --

MR. ERELI: -- address it in the kind of way you're looking for.

QUESTION: But just these charges in general, I mean, can that -- how will that effect reconstruction in Iraq?

MR. ERELI: Well, the CPA obviously is out of business and has been out of business for about a year. The point here is that we have a -- and we've had from the very beginning -- a very extensive program of assistance to Iraq to help rebuild that country economically, politically and in the area of security. And there's a lot of money at stake here and I think the American people want to know that that money is being well spent and consistent with our laws and our objectives and our responsibilities to the tax-paying public.

So there is a system of oversight and accountability and it's right and good that that system of oversight and accountability does what it's supposed to do. I think that's the broad comment I would have on this specific story or any other story that deals with how the money is spent and whether it's accomplishing its purpose. I mean, we all want the same thing, which is, frankly, the biggest bang for the buck. And it's a lot of money. It's a lot of people. It's a lot of different things going on. Frankly, it's accomplishing a heck of a lot if you look at what we've been able to do with our significant assistance to Iraq in terms of helping repairing infrastructure, building schools, building hospitals, meeting the needs of the Iraqi people.

But you know, in any kind of undertaking like this there are bound to be some kind of slip-ups. I'm not speaking to this particular incident, specific case, or not because I don't have the facts. But that's why you've got inspection and oversight procedures.

QUESTION: Adam, one of these guys is living overseas, though. Wouldn't the State Department have a role in this -- on that count?

MR. ERELI: I don't know the legalities of this -- involved here of how -- of authorities and jurisdictions, so I just can't speak to that.

QUESTION: You had a question?

QUESTION: On that subject, there's been so much brouhaha over Oil-for-Food and all the corruption and so on. This report and others that we've seen suggests that corruption is not exactly unfamiliar in that part of the world, and I'm just wondering whether you see any irony in the fact that we're seeing the same kinds of stories now that we saw before.

MR. ERELI: Really, I think we sometimes indulge ourselves in facile comparisons and I don't know that that comparison is as appropriate or substantiated by the facts of the case. I seriously doubt it, given the scope of the Oil-for-Food program abuse and the systematic subversion of a UN Security Council program and a UN Security Council resolution by Saddam Hussein and allegations of limited wrongdoing in a much more limited program. So again, let's just take a step back and be reasonable about this.

Yes.

QUESTION: Change of subject?

MR. ERELI: Mm-hmm.

QUESTION: Secret prisons. Now there are more reports that some of these same countries have formally asked the U.S. for more information, for explanations. Can you now update us on whether you -- whether the State Department has heard from these countries? Spain is one. Norway is one.

MR. ERELI: Right.

QUESTION: And it's not -- are they just talking to officials in another branch of government?

MR. ERELI: Yeah. It won't surprise you, I think, that I'm not prepared to provide a country-by-country accounting of every discussion we've had at every level on this issue. What I would tell you is this, that we have close relations with our European partners and allies and good cooperation on a whole range of issues -- political, economic, military, security. As a part of that broad engagement, as friends and allies, at various times this issue has come up. That should not be a surprise to anybody. And we have spoken to it. We have spoken to it when asked about it.

What the substance of those discussions are, you know, I can't -- I'm not in a position to get into. But what I would tell you is, and this, I think, is the important point to take away from all this, is that this issue is not jeopardizing our good relations and our cooperation with our European allies or other allies on the broad range of issues including the war on terror.

QUESTION: You're saying you won't provide a country-by-country, as if there were a huge number that you couldn't possibly do that.

MR. ERELI: Well, no, it's just that --

QUESTION: And then yesterday you told us nobody's been asking you about it.

MR. ERELI: No --

QUESTION: So how do those two things square*?

MR. ERELI: No, it's just that every day we're asked about a different country and I cannot provide for you every day answers to this country and that country and whatever the country of the day is. What I can tell you is that the issue does come up from time to time at different levels, and when it comes up we speak to it with our partners. At the same time, it should be -- that kind of conversation should be looked at, number one, within the broader context of our overall relationship with the specific country in question and, number two, bearing in mind that it's not jeopardizing our relationships or, I think, negatively impacting the broad range of our cooperation.

Yes, ma'am.

QUESTION: You say it's not jeopardizing your relationships. We understand that. But when their position will be affected, when the position of these governments will be affected by this cooperation, you will be --

MR. ERELI: I haven't seen that so far. I haven't seen that so far.

QUESTION: Well, they don't look very comfortable.

MR. ERELI: Well, again, you know, there's what you read about in the papers, which I'm not going to comment on because that's other people talking. There's what you hear from me, as the official spokesman of the State Department, which is this issue is not jeopardizing our relationships and not jeopardizing our cooperation, and when it's raised we speak to our partners in Europe and elsewhere as friends and allies who share a common commitment, who share common values and a common commitment to working together in the war on terror.

QUESTION: Adam, when you say that this issue comes up, I mean, if the United States does have agreements with various allies to have these secret prisons, I mean, isn't it implied that it would have come up? So could you please explain a little bit what you mean by that?

MR. ERELI: Oh, well, I think I might have misled you. In all those remarks, I thought we were talking about the issues of -- about planes and landings. The secret prisons issue, two points on the secret -- well, one point on the secret prisons issue and one point only, that that's an issue that I have and we've all sort of refrained from getting into and that I'll continue to refrain from getting into. We don't -- it's not an issue that I'm prepared to discuss because it is -- it deals with purported intelligence matters or activities that are outside my realm of knowledge or responsibility, so I'm not going to talk about secret prisons.

I will tell you with respect to earlier discussions from previous briefings about protests from governments, about flights and uses of airports, that that's the issue that comes up that I was referring to earlier, that that's the issue that's not jeopardizing relationships. And as far as the secret prisons issue goes, just to make things clear, that's an issue that I'm not prepared to speak to. We've been very clear about that from the very beginning of this issue and I don't have anything more to add to it.

Yeah.

QUESTION: I have a question on Kosovo. The talks on the future of Kosovo are going to start soon.

MR. ERELI: Yeah.

QUESTION: Did the State Department decide who is going to be the Special Envoy on Kosovo?

MR. ERELI: I don't believe we've -- we're at the point where we're ready to make an announcement on that yet.

Okay.

(The briefing was concluded at 12:54 p.m.)

(end transcript)

(Distributed by the Bureau of International Information Programs, U.S. Department of State. Web site: http://usinfo.state.gov)

[Oppenheimer]

Daily Press Briefing
Adam Ereli, Deputy Spokesman
Washington, DC
November 18, 2005

(Excerpts)

TRANSCRIPT:

12:40 p.m. EST

MR. ERELI: TGIF, everybody. So first question on the last briefing of the week
goes to --

QUESTION: Iran being the issue.

MR. ERELI: Iran.

QUESTION: More conversion of uranium announced by the Iranian Government.
Anything to say about that?

MR. ERELI: This is a subject we spoke to yesterday. What we're seeing today, I
think just repeats what the information we had yesterday. In my comment on it,
I would repeat what I said yesterday, which is that Iran's announcement that it
is converting uranium is of concern to us. It contravenes commitments made to
the Europeans. It contravenes Board of Governors resolutions. The most recent
one, which was in September -- which called on it to end all enrichment-related
activity. And it is the subject of discussions between Under Secretary Burns
and our partners in the EU, Russia and others, ahead of the next Board of
Governors meeting.

Yes.

QUESTION: I think the question of my colleague was about the fact that the IAEA
was handed by Tehran documents --

MR. ERELI: I think the question was about the --

QUESTION: -- describing how to make explosive core of an atom bomb, so it's a
new step.

MR. ERELI: I think you're referring to the report that Director General
ElBaradei released today about Iran's implementation of its safeguards
obligations. That is a report that we are reviewing. I think that it -- I
wouldn't at this point be in a position to comment on its specifics, but it's
clear that what we see in the report is what we've seen in previous reports;
that Iran continues with its conversion activities. It continues to contravene
its commitments under the Paris Agreement. It continues to fail to respond to
all the questions of the IAEA. There are issues that are raised in the report
that I think are certainly troubling. We will study it. We will, again, consult
with our friends and we'll see what kind of consensus emerges.

QUESTION: Your ambassador in Vienna said that this definitely opens new
concerns about weaponization.

MR. ERELI: Mm-hmm.

QUESTION: You didn't go -- well, you were a little more obscure.

MR. ERELI: He's seen the report.

QUESTION: Right.

MR. ERELI: I haven't.

QUESTION: Oh, you haven't seen the report back here?

MR. ERELI: Uh-uh.

QUESTION: Does this lead you to want to go back and question A.Q. Khan? I mean,
is that matter closed to the United States, because as you continue finding out
more and more things that he did and you don't have access to him personally --

MR. ERELI: I wouldn't make that connection. What I think our -- obviously we
continue to, I think, tie up the loose ends on the A.Q. Khan issue but we've, I
think, pretty much gotten to the bottom of it, although obviously it's an issue
that continues to be of interest to us.

With respect to Iran, however, it's clear that there were activities and
connections with A.Q. Khan. And what we need to see with regard to Iran, which
is different than the A.Q. Khan investigation, is a complete and transparent
accounting from Iran about its nuclear program which we haven't gotten and
which I think has been the substance and import of these director general
reports. And yes there are suspicions, yes there are concerns as articulated by
our ambassador to the IAEA in Vienna and that's why it's important, we think,
that Iran be more forthcoming in responding to the IAEA and the questions that
the IAEA has posed and the IAEA's request for access to facilities. And to
date, it hasn't been.

QUESTION: Since your relationship with Pakistan is significantly better than
your relationship Iran, why don't you try to go that route?

MR. ERELI: I think that we've -- in our dealings with Pakistan, we are
satisfied with the kind of cooperation and the kind of information sharing
we've gotten, but there's another side to this and that side is the Iranian
side, which has information, which is engaged in activities that only Iran can
account for and that's why it's important that they be responsive to what the
IAEA is asking of them.

Yeah.

QUESTION: You spoke about consensus so I suppose you favor a consensus -- the
consensus of the international community, which is to keep open dialogue with
Iran? What do you think you can do if Iran unilaterally decide to cut any
dialogue?

MR. ERELI: Well -- (laughter) -- that would -- that would be pretty bad for
Iran.

QUESTION: But what can you do?

MR. ERELI: If Iran unilaterally decides to cut dialogue? Well, I'll put it this
way, I mean, if a nation wants to -- if a nation thinks that it's in their
interest to tell the rest of the world to go take a leap, they can do that. But
that would certainly be unusual and ill advised.

QUESTION: Adam, that's the first time I've ever heard you take on a
hypothetical. (Laughter.)

QUESTION: If we asked you another one, would you answer it? (Laughter.)

MR. ERELI: Look, I think, the message to Iran from the United States, from the
EU-3, from the Board of Governors is clear: You've given the world cause for
concern. The international community doesn't like what it sees and it doesn't
like the kind of behavior that you've been exhibiting over the last several
years. So you've got a chance to make things right with the world. Take that
chance as opposed to continuing to increase your own isolation and your own --
and your being at variance with the rest of the world. It doesn't do you any
good, it doesn't do your people any good, and it doesn't do the region any
good.

And so in a sense, there is a way forward, a positive way forward for Iran. It
is represented by the process of negotiation that the EU-3 has initiated and
that has our support and the support of others and that's where we're trying to
take things. But as we say in so many examples of international diplomacy, it
takes two to tango. And right now, on one side you've got the international
community and the other side you've got Iran. We're ready to go, but they so
far have not yet proved themselves a willing partner.

QUESTION: It sounds like the U.S. hasn't any cards to play, except shame.
They're not isolated. They do terrific -- business with China, thank you, which
is one reason China's likely to veto anything you try in the UN. You have Iraqi
politicians who think it's good to have good relations with Iran. They're a
neighbor. Iran is -- you're not talking about North Korea.

MR. ERELI: I think if you look at Iran's position in the international
community, you'll see that it is subject of a number of restrictions, a number
of sanctions, a number of -- a lack of participation in international affairs
as a full and respected and accepted member and that that causes them no small
amount of concern.

QUESTION: Do you think?

MR. ERELI: Yeah, I really do.

QUESTION: So, you said, "it takes two to tango;" that the U.S. has no
meaningful dialogue.

MR. ERELI: I said the international community -- that Iran is not responding to
the way forward presented to it by the international community.

QUESTION: There are senators like Chuck Hagel who say that the U.S. should be
having a dialogue with Iran.

MR. ERELI: Don't see a useful point in that in this -- useful point to that at
this time.

QUESTION: Can you give us any update of what Nick Burns has been doing in
London?

MR. ERELI: I don't really have too much new to report to you on that. He
arrived there -- he left yesterday afternoon so he must have arrived there
early this morning. He's been in meetings, frankly, most of the day with his --
with the Russians, with the EU-3, with others, hearing from them their views on
the latest developments on Iran's decision to resume conversion activities,
what that means and how we should respond and what the EU-3's ideas are about
moving forward in negotiations.

QUESTION: Do the Chinese participate in this meeting?

MR. ERELI: We are -- we do discuss this with the Chinese. I don't know if
they're specifically -- if Nick has meetings on this specific trip. But they
are very much a part of our conversations.

QUESTION: Did they talk about Bosnia, too?

MR. ERELI: I'm not sure if the subject might come up but really the focus is
Iran.

QUESTION: Is there a --

QUESTION: This has been asked before but is there a judgment here that Bosnia
needs a constitution, one that's less, in fact, in which -- one of which there
is no sectarian acknowledgement?

MR. ERELI: I don't have anything on that for you.

QUESTION: What about the Russian idea on Iran? That they would construct a
separate facility and that then the -- some conversion could take place in Iran
but the fuel cycle could not be completed there.

MR. ERELI: I think our -- the National -- the President's National Security
Advisor spoke to that just a little while ago and he said it's an interesting
idea. I think without sort of evaluating proposals, specific proposals and
handicapping them and that sort of thing, what I would say is that the, as I
said before, the EU-3 is trying to find a way forward with this. The Russians
are presenting ideas. They're working, I think, productively with the EU-3.
We're supportive of that.

What we want to see, frankly, is assurances that Iran does not have the
capability or technology to use the nuclear fuel cycle to develop nuclear
weapons and that's the goal we're all working toward. Russia certainly has
shown in the past a concern about Iranian activity and an eagerness to take
action to prevent diversion and use of nuclear fuel to develop nuclear weapons,
as evidenced by the Bushehr take-back deal. So they've played a helpful and
important role in this and it certainly is our experience that they continue to
do that.

QUESTION: The Iranians rejected the Russian deal, didn't they?

MR. ERELI: Frankly, I -- for the latest back and forth on the discussions
between the Russians and the Iranians and the EU-3, I'd refer you to them. Our
view on all this is that what the EU-3 and Russians are doing is positive and
useful and important and the Iranians should again resume negotiations with the
EU-3 and suspend enrichment-related activity.

QUESTION: Will there be a U.S. presence at the EU talks with Iran?

MR. ERELI: No.

QUESTION: I mean even a silent presence?

MR. ERELI: Not that I'm aware of, no.

QUESTION: The U.S. isn't going to sit in as an observer?

MR. ERELI: No, no, it's an EU -- we're not a party to those negotiations. We've
made that very clear from the beginning.

QUESTION: Well, you've got a vital interest in them, but all right.

QUESTION: Security Council referral can you -- is this like where you see this
going?

MR. ERELI: It'll be a subject of discussion at the next Board of Governors. I
think that the last Board of Governors, you look at the resolution that said
that they're in noncompliance with NPT obligations and that's a matter for
future referral. And how that plays out will obviously be a subject of
discussion, but I wouldn't want to predict anything, one way or the other.


.................


QUESTION: Adam, I'd like to -- have you seen this ad that Iran took out, this
full-page ad in The New York Times?

MR. ERELI: I must have missed that one.

QUESTION: You missed that one?

MR. ERELI: If you go online, you don't see the ads.

QUESTION: Okay. Yeah, well, it's rather detailed.

MR. ERELI: Small print.

QUESTION: And in it they, you know, kind of lay out their side of the story as
far as they're concerned in terms of Iran's alleged nuclear program or its
alleged nuclear weapons program, and says that the -- all of this is based on
misperception and outright lies. I understand you haven't seen it, but they're
still sticking to their guns that they do not have a nuclear weapons program
and are putting the onus on the EU-3 and the West for the broken promises and,
you know, raised expectations that happened in -- you know, over the last
couple of years.

MR. ERELI: Yeah, and the question is? What do I think of an advertisement I
haven't seen or charges that --

QUESTION: No, I mean, but a lot of it -- you've heard these --

MR. ERELI: Let me --

QUESTION: You've heard these points before.

MR. ERELI: Let's be clear. I think that the international community's position
with regard to Iran is based on a large body of evidence -- documents, findings
by international organizations -- not on hearsay, not on unsubstantiated
charges, but on a well-documented pattern of deception and -- deception and
evasion by Iran documented in nine reports by the Director General, numerous
Board of Governors resolutions, numerous reports by the IAEA inspectors. And
therefore this isn't just something that people are making up. This is a very
clear and well- documented pattern of deception and evasion and failure to
comply with treaty obligations that Iran has demonstrated.

So you know, if you're -- if Iran -- as I said earlier, if Iran is really
interested in addressing this question in a useful and productive way, it would
be better to be forthcoming in negotiations with the EU-3 or in receiving and
allowing access to IAEA inspectors and providing documents that the IAEA has
requested. It would be more useful to do that than to take out expensive
advertisements in The New York Times.

Yeah.

QUESTION: In regard to both Iran and Syria, there was a column someplace I read
today about the hazards of going the sanctions route because if you get to that
point, using Iraq as an example, while it seems like a noble idea to put
sanctions on a country, sometimes the reality is far different from what your
goal was and, you know, you may be enriching some government but while hurting
the people. How do you feel about this thing of ultimately using sanctions as a
tool and how effective it is given the recent history of sanctions?

MR. ERELI: Rather than get into a theoretical discussion of the utility of
sanctions, let's keep the focus where it belongs, which is Iranian actions. And
the response of the international community is going to depend on and be
determined by what Iran decides to do or not to do. And sanctions are a
hypothetical based on a certain course of Iranian action. What we're saying,
what I've been saying since the -- and the State Department has been saying
consistently is; negotiate with the EU-3, provide the international community
assurances that, and confidence that, you are not going to use a nuclear
program to develop weapons and we don't have to worry about sanctions. We don't
even have to have a discussion about sanctions. So that's the issue. Let Iran
-- Iran is in a position to decide its future and its -- and its future
relationship with the international community by what it does and by the
decisions it takes in response to a set of circumstances of its own making.

QUESTION: What about Syrian sanctions?

MR. ERELI: Syria's sanctions are again, first and foremost, taken in response
to actions by the Government of Syria -- actions that support terror, give aid,
comfort, resources, and material to groups that kill innocent civilians and
sanctions are a consequence of Syrian actions that contravene the norms of
civilized society.

QUESTION: Thank you.

(The briefing was concluded at 1:16 p.m.)

###

DPB # 198



************************************************************
See http://www.state.gov/r/pa/prs/dpb/ for all daily press briefings
************************************************************

--------------end excerpts-----------