(11:10 a.m. EDT)
QUESTION: Mr. Secretary, thank you very much for this opportunity.
UNDER SECRETARY GROSSMAN: Thank you.
QUESTION: Going back two years ago, September 11th, how do you feel about it now and its importance from a historical perspective on U.S. foreign policy?
UNDER SECRETARY GROSSMAN: First of all, thank you very much for the opportunity to be with you. I think September 11th has had a profound effect, sir, not just on our foreign policy, but on the way we think about our own country and our values.
This is also important between Egyptians and Americans. I know that Egypt has struggled for many years with terrorism, and now we struggle with terrorism. I know Egyptians were greatly impacted by the 11th of September, not just the fact that four Egyptians died in the World Trade Center, but to see the impact of this terrorism and to think about the deaths of these people as the buildings collapsed. And Egyptians also know, like Americans, we're in this for the long haul. We believe in the defeat of terrorism and we believe in the victory of our values.
So when I look back over these two years, I think it's been a time of testing for the United States, a time of testing for Egypt, but that we've passed these tests, and we've passed these tests together.
QUESTION: When we discuss now the war on terrorism, people would say -- and I know you were in the Senate yesterday.
UNDER SECRETARY GROSSMAN: Yes, sir.
QUESTION: I don't like to give you more difficult time. (Laughter.)
Usama bin Laden is still at large, al-Qaida is still there and alive, and people would wonder how's it going now with you, how can you characterize the war against terrorism now in terms of its success in uprooting not just terrorism, but sources of terrorism?
UNDER SECRETARY GROSSMAN: Again, I have to say, especially to people in Egypt, who have struggled with their own fight against terrorism, that this is not an easy battle. And President Bush and Secretary Powell and all of us who have spoken on this issue have said it's going to take a long time, it's going to take resources, it's going to take patience. But we have the will to win, as do the Government of Egypt and the people of Egypt.
But if I look back over two years, what do I see? I see a grand coalition in this world against terrorism. I see that 90 countries have taken in terrorists who were once free. I see that we've taken $150 million out of the international system that terrorists used to have. I see possibilities for more and more effort around the world.
And when you ask me about Usama bin Laden and Saddam Hussein and all these people, all I know is: Is Afghanistan free today? Yes, it is. Are the Taliban defeated? Yes, they are. Do we still have work to do in Afghanistan? Of course, we do. Do we still have work to do in Iraq? Yes.
But there is no Taliban regime in Afghanistan today, there is no Saddam Hussein regime in Iraq today; and although imperfect, and I certainly respect your question and respect your criticism, we are in a much better place two years from the 11th of September than we were on that day.
QUESTION: But, again, you are putting Saddam Hussein and Iraq in the same sentence with Usama bin Laden, al-Qaida and Taliban, which makes this link between Iraq's Saddam Hussein and the problem of terrorism.
UNDER SECRETARY GROSSMAN: Yes, sir.
QUESTION: And in many people's minds, that Iraq maybe was a problem, but it wasn't a terrorist problem, or this at least what Brent Scowcroft has told me once, that we may deal with Iraq as a problem, but not as a problem of terrorism because it is a separate problem. But you put them together in the same package and many people would say that it was a distraction in your war against terrorism.
UNDER SECRETARY GROSSMAN: I don't think so, sir. With all respect to you and General Scowcroft, don't forget that for 10 or 11 years before we had to go to war in Iraq with our coalition, Iraq had been listed in the State Department report on terrorism as a state supporter of terrorism. And that wasn't because there were no facts; it was because there were many facts that Iraq was supporting terrorism.
And as we testified yesterday in the Senate that you were nice enough to refer to, Dr. Wolfowitz talked a lot about the connections, for example, between Zarqawi, Ansar al-Islam and Iraq. And so these are important connections.
And, again, as we tried to convey yesterday, the main battle now in the war against terrorism has centered on Iraq. Was that an expectation of the beginning of our military operation? We always knew that we were going there to free the Iraqi people from what? From Saddam Hussein, from terrorism, from these connections. And so we consider this to be part of our victory -- not a complete victory yet by any stretch of the imagination. Still a great amount of work to do, but a victory nonetheless.
QUESTION: But what's going now that Iraq has become, like many people describe it, a magnet for terrorist groups coming in and trying to find an opportunity against U.S. troops. They couldn't fight United States here, so they are fighting United States in Iraq, which is more convenient for them, and the U.S. troops are exposed there in Iraq, in Baghdad and other cities. So, in other words, Iraq maybe was a problem, you could call it a problem of terrorism, but at least now it's getting closer to be a real problem of terrorism.
UNDER SECRETARY GROSSMAN: Well, again, I think you have to step back and look at this in a slightly larger context. Saddam Hussein no longer rules Iraq. This dictator is gone. And so 300,000, or 400,000 people in these mass graves that you see -- there won't be that any more. Iraqis will have a chance to run their own lives, and Iraqi sovereignty is a very important objective of ours.
Are people coming into Iraq? Are there still terrorists from leftover Baathists and others? Yes, of course.
But I think, as the facts will show, when we have information -- and much of that information now comes from Iraqis who wish to be free of this terrorism -- once we get this information, our military, our units, coalition military units, are able to deal with these people quite effectively and will continue to do so. We will not fail in this effort to return Iraq to its sovereign owners, which are Iraqis.
QUESTION: Just after September 11th, the whole world was very sympathetic with the United States and what happened. You talked about Egypt. It's true. But now, even polls in Europe would tell us that 20 percent more rates of disapproval of U.S. leadership and foreign policy, and less Europeans are convinced of the U.S. leadership in the world. This could be seen around the world now.
Would -- (inaudible) would say that the administration has squandered this sympathy around the world. How do you see it?
UNDER SECRETARY GROSSMAN: Well, I don't see it that way. I don't see all of the statistics working in exactly the same direction.
For example, if you look at the German Marshall Fund poll that has just come out about U.S.-European attitudes, what do you find? Like last year, most Europeans and most Americans see the threat in the same way. We also see the need to deal with that threat in some fashion.
But I will be the first to confess to you that as we have pursued our war on terrorism, it hasn't made every single person happy, nor has it made every government happy. But, how many people are with us in Iraq?
Twenty-nine different countries have contributed 23,000 troops to join us in Iraq. And, you know, some of them are very interesting. They're small countries -- Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia, Bulgaria -- but what links all of those countries?
What links all those countries is they used to be under totalitarianism, they used to be slaves, and now they're free countries. And what is the first thing they do? They go and they join a coalition in Iraq to help other people be free.
So you might look at that list of 29, as some people did yesterday in the Senate, and say, "Oh, they're not very important countries," but I think the values those countries represent are extremely important.
And as I say, America's image in the world is something that we need to work on. But this question of values I think is an important one, and I don't think anybody around the world questions our commitment to our values, and also, as I say, especially in Iraq, our commitment to return Iraq to Iraqis and Iraqi sovereignty.
QUESTION: Talking about values, people would say that United States has been using only its muscle so far since September 11th, and it's very well understood that after September 11th you need to revenge, you need -- you need to revenge, you need to get to those who attacked United States. But now, after two years, did you make the switch to at least use your values in this war against terrorism and less of your muscles?
UNDER SECRETARY GROSSMAN: I think we have tried very hard over these past two years to have a balance. It has required muscle, as you say, and it has required some military force. But as you also know, it has also required us to do a huge amount of diplomacy, in the United Nations, for example, and among the international financial community to take money away from terrorists.
And it has also allowed us to speak more about some of our great values in the United States. And, perhaps we have not done a good enough job and we need to do more to publicize, for example, the Millennium Challenge Account, where we are increasing the assistance of the United States of America by $5 billion over three years, and that is going to have a big impact, I think, on the way people see us around the world; the Middle East Partnership Initiative, for example, $100 million to talk to and work with Arab societies about their own freedom, their freedom of information, the role of women in Arab societies; President Bush's speech of the 24th of June last year -- I know very important to the Egyptian people -- calling for two states in the Middle East, an Israeli state, a Palestinian state.
So we have tried very hard, perhaps not as successfully as you would like or even I would like, but we have tried very hard to not just be a country that is responding to terrorism by military force, and we have not responded just by military force. We are doing many things around the world to try to get at the issues that terrorists use as some false justification for their actions.
QUESTION: The President after September 11 was talking about fighting terrorism with global reach. This was really, in my opinion, very wise and the right thing to do.
But it looks like over time you expanded or broadened this definition of global reach, so now you include organizations which are limited, for example, to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, like Hamas, Islamic Jihad, and even Hezbollah.
Why do you think you have been broadening this definition to include other organizations that way which have no global reach anyway?
UNDER SECRETARY GROSSMAN: With all due respect, sir, I think that certainly in the case of Hezbollah this is an organization with global reach. It's an organization that raises funds --
QUESTION: But more focused on the Middle East.
UNDER SECRETARY GROSSMAN: No, but it raises funds all around the world, it has activists around the world, it plans around the world. And so part of the answer to your question is the more we have learned about these terrorist organizations, the more I think to our horror, and I would assume to the Egyptian people as well, is they aren't just limited in some fashion; they are actually operating on a global scale.
It's not possible, it seems to me, to defeat terrorism if you have just a geographic focus. I'll give you another example. We are very pleased that the European Union the other day has decided now to list Hamas and cut off some of their fundraising activities in Europe. To me, that is a definition, sir, of global reach.
QUESTION: So, not necessarily that they can reach or have attacks against countries around the world, so it's not a requirement or --
UNDER SECRETARY GROSSMAN: Well, it's certainly part of the definition. I'm just asking that you not focus so much on the geography of where people are, but the fact that Hezbollah, a perfect example, has global reach. There are often reports of Hezbollah operatives all around the world.
QUESTION: This would lead me to the final question --
UNDER SECRETARY GROSSMAN: Yes, sir.
QUESTION: -- because I have only one minute to go.
UNDER SECRETARY GROSSMAN: No, please.
QUESTION: It's not just about fighting terrorism or terrorists, but uprooting real causes behind this terrorism. And I'm not sure that the United States was as successful on this as on the tactical level in fighting terrorists or organizations like al-Qaida in Afghanistan in Tora Bora, for example. You are not doing as much effort to uproot causes of terrorism.
What's your take on that?
UNDER SECRETARY GROSSMAN: First, I think it's important that we make a distinction about the causes of terrorism. There were no causes of the people who drove those airplanes into the World Trade Center and into the Pentagon and into the fields in Pennsylvania. They were not for a cause. They were not for Palestinians. They were killers and murderers.
So I think if I talk a little bit about the causes of terrorism, I want it to be clear that I'm not justifying in any way those who carry out these acts because they're just wrong and there's no justification for it.
But if you ask me, "Are there in the world problems, problems of development, problems of freedom, problems of democracy, that feed this terrorism or allow terrorists to say, `This is my justification,'" of course there are. And we need to do more in that regard.
So, for example, if you say to me that we've not invested very much in that end of it, I would say look actually at what we have accomplished in Afghanistan since the end of major conflict there. There's a government in Afghanistan. There was a Loya Jirga. Roads are being built. People are going back to school. And as the President said in his address to the American people last Sunday night, we are going to invest even more money in Afghanistan. The same thing in Iraq.
QUESTION: But they're limited in Kabul, and the whole Afghanistan now is --
UNDER SECRETARY GROSSMAN: With respect -- and I don't mean to debate you on your TV show -- but with respect, I think if you see where we're building roads, I think that President Karzai is increasing his efforts around the country by appointing governors. We're training an Afghan National Army. So there are many things that are happening in Afghanistan that truly make the writ of that government be national.
Same thing today in Iraq. When we took over the responsibility in Iraq, hardly any hospitals were running, and today hospitals are running again in Iraq. Schools are running again in Iraq. There are local councils in most, 90 percent of the cities in Iraq.
Now, is there still a huge effort to be made in Iraq? Of course, there is. But if you look at the basic services that are being built up by the coalition in Iraq, a lot is being done.
And the same applies all around the world. We're fighting terrorism in Colombia. We fight it in the Philippines. We fight it around the world. And it is a combination of military aspects, because sometimes, sadly, that is what is required, but it also is a recognition that there are things to do in societies.
QUESTION: I know my time is up, so I only thank you very much, Mr. Secretary, for your time.
UNDER SECRETARY GROSSMAN: Thank you, sir. And I thank you very much for allowing me to be with you.
QUESTION: It was my pleasure.
UNDER SECRETARY GROSSMAN: Thank you.
