Replies

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2009/01/20090112.html

For Immediate Release
Office of the Press Secretary
January 12, 2009

Press Conference by the President
James S. Brady Press Briefing Room

Video (Windows)
Presidential Remarks
Audio
Photos
In Focus: The Bush Record
9:17 A.M. EST

SNIPPET: “Q Thank you, Mr. President. Do you believe that the Gaza conflict will have ended by the time you leave office? Do you approve of the way that Israel has conducted it? And why were you unable to achieve the peace deal that you had sought?

THE PRESIDENT: Remind me of the three points, will you, because I’m getting —

Q Will it end —

THE PRESIDENT: — I’m getting a little older.

Q Will it end by the time you leave office? Do you approve of the —

THE PRESIDENT: I hope so. I’m for a sustainable cease-fire. And a definition of a sustainable cease-fire is that Hamas stops firing rockets into Israel. And there will not be a sustainable cease-fire if they continue firing rockets. I happen to believe the choice is Hamas’s to make. And we believe that the best way to ensure that there is a sustainable cease-fire is to work with Egypt to stop the smuggling of arms into the Gaza that enables Hamas to continue to fire rockets. And so countries that supply weapons to Hamas have got to stop. And the international community needs to continue to pressure them to stop providing weapons.

Hamas, obviously, if they’re interested in a sustainable cease-fire, needs to stop arming. And then, of course, countries contingent to the Gaza need to work to stop the smuggling. And it’s a difficult — difficult task. I mean, there’s tunnels and, you know, great opportunities for people who want to continue to try to disrupt democracy to provide the weapons to do so.

Second part of your question, please, ma’am?

Q Do you approve of the Israeli conduct in this?

THE PRESIDENT: I think Israel has a right to defend herself. Obviously in any of these kinds of situations, I would hope that she would continue to be mindful of innocent folks, and that they help, you know, expedite the delivery of humanitarian aid.

And third, why haven’t we achieved peace? That’s a good question. It’s been a long time since they’ve had peace in the Middle East. Step one is to have a vision for what peace would look like. And in 2002, on the steps of the Rose Garden, I gave a speech about a two-state solution — two states, two democracies living side by side in peace. And we have worked hard to advance that idea. First thing is to convince all parties that the two states were necessary for peace.

And one thing that’s happened is, is that most people in the Middle East now accept the two-state solution as the best way for peace. Most Palestinians want their own state, and most Israelis understand there needs to be a democracy on their border in order for there to be long-lasting peace.

The challenge, of course, has been to lay out the conditions so that a peaceful state can emerge — in other words, helping the Palestinians in the West Bank develop security forces, which we have worked hard to do over the past years. And those security forces are now becoming more efficient, and Prime Minister Fayyad is using them effectively. The challenge is to develop — help the Palestinians develop a democracy — I mean, and a vibrant economy in their — that will help lead to democracy.

And the challenge, of course, is always complicated by the fact that people are willing to murder to stop the advance of freedom. And so the — Hamas, or for that matter al Qaeda, or other extremist groups, are willing to use violence to prevent free states from emerging. And that’s the big challenge.

And so the answer is — will this ever happen? I think it will. And I know we have advanced the process.

Yes, Suzanne. Finally got your name right, after how many years? Six years?

Q Eight years. (Laughter.)

THE PRESIDENT: Eight years. You used to be known as Suzanne. Now you’re “Suz-ahn.”

Q “Suz-ahn.” Thank you. (Laughter.)

THE PRESIDENT: I’m “Gahge.” (Laughter.)

Q In your 2002 State of the Union address, you identified U.S. threats as an axis of evil — Iran, Iraq and North Korea. Iraq is relatively calm; North Korea is no longer on the terrorist threat list. How would you define, if, in fact, there is an axis of evil? And what is the greatest and most urgent threat when it comes to security that Barack Obama has to deal with?

THE PRESIDENT: The most urgent threat that he’ll have to deal with, and other Presidents after him will have to deal with, is an attack on our homeland. You know, I wish I could report that’s not the case, but there’s still an enemy out there that would like to inflict damage on America — Americans. And that will be the major threat.

North Korea is still a problem. There is a debate in the intel community about how big a problem they are. But one of my concerns is that there might be a highly enriched uranium program. And therefore it is really important that out of the six-party talks comes a strong verification regime. In other words, in order to advance our relations with North Korea, the North Korean government must honor the commitments it made to allow for strong verification measures to be in place, to ensure that they don’t develop a highly enriched uranium program, for example.

So they’re still dangerous, and Iran is still dangerous.

Yes.”