Replies

MR. ERELI: Here in the briefing room, on camera, on the record.

The second announcement is to tell you that we will be putting out a statement after the briefing today announcing that the United States will be donating, in response to the World Food Program appeal, 50,000 metric tons of agricultural commodities for North Korea. And that will -- that is in response to the 2005 appeal. That is in addition to, as you know, 50,000 metric tons that we gave last year and 100,000 metric tons that we gave the year before.

QUESTION: What made you arrive at that decision?

MR. ERELI: Basically, a review of the need in North Korea, competing needs elsewhere and the humanitarian organizations' ability to have access to all vulnerable groups and monitor the assistance. Those are the three criteria. That's what we looked at in making the decision. It's obviously very important, the issue of access and monitoring. There has been some movement on that issue. I think as you'll see in the statement, there are still concerns. We continue to call for the maximum access, maximum freedom to monitor, so that we can be sure that the vulnerable populations are getting the assistance they need. But based on our assessment of the situation, we decided to go forward with the donation.

QUESTION: Does it have anything to do with U.S. efforts to get North Korea to six-party talks?

MR. ERELI: It's not linked to six-party talks. As you know, our decisions are made on humanitarian considerations solely.

QUESTION: So it is in no way, shape or form should be regarded as a political act or gesture?

MR. ERELI: It is a humanitarian act based on need and not based on political considerations and not linked to the six-party talks.

QUESTION: Thank you.

QUESTION: (Inaudible) to make sure that the people who need it get the food, rather than -- could you finish the thought? Who might be skimming off food? In other words, where is your concern? I know where you want it to go, but you're concerned that who gets it?

MR. ERELI: Our concern is that children who are malnourished who need the food get the food and we want to make sure that others who are not in similar -- others who are not in those conditions don't benefit from it when people who do need it aren't getting it.

QUESTION: I'm just trying to --

MR. ERELI: But I --

QUESTION: I don't want to push you where you don't want to go, but I'm just trying to find out if there is a suspicion that the Government of North Korea harvests this thing.

MR. ERELI: I would put it this way. Food is a scarce commodity. It has a -- and when it's a scare commodity it has a value, and there are those who seek to exploit that value for purposes -- for purposes for which the aid is not intended. And that's why monitoring is so important.

QUESTION: All right. We thank you. Talk among yourselves. (Laughter.)

QUESTION: See you, Barry.

QUESTION: In past years, there have been --

QUESTION: He can't top this one. (Laughter.)

QUESTION: In past years, there have been multiple tranches of aid. Would you say that there was a possibility that there will be more later?

MR. ERELI: I wouldn't want to speculate, frankly. Our actions are taken in response to World Food Program appeals. As I mentioned, last year we provided a similar amount in response to the World Food Program's appeal. We will endeavor to be -- we will respond to the circumstances as they exist. Right now, this is the appeal that's out there and we are acting accordingly.

QUESTION: What can you say about the account of Gregg and Oberdorfer today that they were passed a message asking for direct talks with President Bush?

MR. ERELI: When? In 2002?

QUESTION: Yes, on the 2002 --

MR. ERELI: Don't have anything for you. Don't have anything for you on it. Frankly, I didn't look into it because our focus, frankly, is on getting six-party talks restarted and engaging substantively on it. And what was purported to have happened in that piece doesn't relate meaningfully to the situation we're dealing with now. The situation we're dealing with now is that there is a process underway, there is a proposal on the table, there is a way for North Korea to address its increasing international isolation and achieve an improvement in its relations with its neighbors and the rest of the international community; and that's to address the concerns of its nuclear program through the six-party process.

So, frankly, that's where we're -- that's what we're working on, that's what's behind our diplomacy and that's why suggestions of past actions aren't really relevant to the concerns of the present.

QUESTION: But you said, "purported." Are you casting doubt that this really happened?

MR. ERELI: I'm saying I can't -- I don't have confirmation of it for you.

QUESTION: Why would you not have checked into it?

MR. ERELI: For the reasons I just said.

QUESTION: You don't think it's relevant?

MR. ERELI: For -- yeah, exactly.

QUESTION: One more on the food aid?

MR. ERELI: Yes.

QUESTION: What's the U.S. assessment of the food situation in North Korea? World food price -- World Food Program says that there's such a food crisis that they could be headed toward the kind of crisis that they had in the 1990s. And they said a lot of it has to do with the kind of economic reforms that the North is instituting, which is resulting in less food, actually, for the people.

MR. ERELI: I'll put it this way -- the World Food Program has detailed the need. We have assessed that report -- their findings. We agree with the importance and the necessity of providing assistance and that's what -- that is one of the important criteria for making our decision. If you ask me for details of the food crisis in North Korea, I just can't give you more than that.

One more thing to add in response to Barry's question, who's no longer here, but for the record I think it's important to point out, and it's in the statement. The question was asked: What areas do you want the food to be focused on? What are the specific needs you're targeting and that you want to make sure are not diverted from?" Our -- the focus of our assistance is on health interventions for children and small-scale food security projects in North Korea. And that's where we're going to be working with NGOs and UN agencies to make sure the food gets to.

QUESTION: Even though you're saying this isn't linked to six-party talks on the U.S. -- in the U.S. motivation, do you nonetheless hope that the North will see this as yet one more sign that the U.S. is not pursuing an aggressive policy against the government and that it may, perhaps, soften them toward the idea of coming back to talks, since they have consistently said they worry that you're aggressive?

MR. ERELI: Yeah, our decision is not motivated by what the North Koreans may or may not think. Our decision is made on the basis of what the North Korean people need.

QUESTION: I noted that in my question to you. While you're not motivated by that, do you nonetheless hope that will be a result?

MR. ERELI: What we hope is that the North Koreans will come back to six-party talks because it's in their interest to come back to six-party talks.

QUESTION: Speaking of six-party talks --

MR. ERELI: Yes?

QUESTION: Anything from the New York channel?

MR. ERELI: No.

QUESTION: Any -- have you heard from the Chinese or anybody else that the North Koreans --

MR. ERELI: Nothing new to report. There are obviously, as there are every day, statements by various -- from various places that, you know, there's an eagerness to come back to talks, there's a willingness to come back to talks, there's a possibility of coming back to talks. That's really all in the way of static and speculation. Until we have a concrete date, we don't have one.

Yes. Oh, are we done with North Korea? Because I've got another announcement, believe it or not.

QUESTION: (Inaudible.)