29 March 2001

Background Briefing Following Bush-Schroeder Meeting

A senior administration official briefed reporters March 28 on the meetings between President Bush and German Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder, saying that the two leaders "agreed to work together to reduce greenhouse gases and agreed to disagree about the Kyoto Protocol," but that their differences "did not infect the rest of the discussion."

The official pointed out that in the joint statement issued by Bush and Schroeder, "there was no attempt to hide the disagreement or to obfuscate it in bureaucratic language." The meeting "was extremely cordial" and "relaxed."

The major topics of discussion, said the official, who was briefing on background, included the expansion of the European Union, ESDP (European Security and Defense Policy), NATO enlargement, and the situation in the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia.

The two leaders expressed satisfaction at "the very restrained and responsible use of force by the Macedonian military and, in parallel, the efforts to accelerate a political dialogue between the government and the ethnic Albanian political parties in the country. President Trajkovski has shown leadership in this," the official said.

However, Bush and Schroeder recognize that the situation could worsen and that "we need to be very, very active, bilaterally and through NATO, in working to make sure that the progress we've seen in the last few days is maintained and that we move ahead in the right way."

Following is a transcript of the background briefing:

(begin transcript)

THE WHITE HOUSE

Office of the Press Secretary

March 29, 2001

BACKGROUND BRIEFING BY SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL ON PRESIDENT'S MEETING WITH CHANCELLOR SCHROEDER OF GERMANY

The James S. Brady Briefing Room

2:23 P.M. EST

MS. COUNTRYMAN: Hello. We're going to have a BACKGROUND briefing, if you don't mind, by a senior administration official. He's going to give you a readout of the meeting with Chancellor Schroeder.

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: Okay, so this is all ON BACKGROUND. Yes? All right. Senior administration official reminds that there was a lunch, which was a very -- they met, then went immediately into a lunch. This was restricted -- the President on our side -- it was the President, Secretary Powell and [National Security Advisor] Condoleeza Rice, plus one interpreter. From the German side, it was the Chancellor, Michael Steiner, who is his national security advisor, and their ambassador, plus interpreter.

This broke up and they went into a full plenary session. From our side, the Vice President was there, [White House Chief of Staff] Andy Card was there, Secretary Powell, Condoleeza Rice -- in other words, the people from the lunch -- [Deputy National Security Advisor] Steve Hadley, myself, and our Charge in Berlin, Terry Snell. And the German delegation included the people in the lunch and some others.

You've seen the joint statement, and if you're -- the conversation actually followed the joint statement pretty closely, although not all the areas covered in the joint statement were covered during the meeting.

Yes, they discussed Kyoto, but that came up rather in the lunch, but I got a readout from Condi Rice. They agreed that global warming is an important issue. They agreed to work together to reduce greenhouse gases and agreed to disagree about the Kyoto protocol. This was done -- as you see from the joint statement, there was no attempt to hide the disagreement or to obfuscate it in bureaucratic language, but it did not infect the rest of the discussion.

The meeting was extremely cordial. It was relaxed; that is, as between friends and between leaders that have a great deal in common. So the Kyoto issue was bracketed and very much contained. It did not infect the rest of the relationship.

During the plenary meeting, the major topic they discussed can be called Europe whole and free, the elements including an expansion of the European Union, which Chancellor Schroeder talked about at some length; ESDP, which is the European Security and Defense Policy. The President affirmed, as he affirmed in the joint statement and with Tony Blair last month at Camp David, that the United States supports ESDP, provided it strengthens NATO, not weakens NATO, and provided that it lead to a real increase in European capabilities.

This has been our position, and the Chancellor agreed with it. They also, under the rubric of building a Europe whole and free, they reaffirmed their commitment to continued enlargement of NATO. There was a discussion of the importance of this issue. They agreed that this is an open process, and that all countries -- all European democracies who are able to contribute to NATO, who measure up to the standards, should be considered for membership, and agreed that there are no red lines, no countries that are excluded by reason of geography.

But they did not discuss the details of the who or the when. As we've said repeatedly, it's early to get into this question. It's important to understand why we're doing this, what we're doing, and the thinking and reasoning behind it, so that when we get into those discussions later, we are prepared.

Finally, they discussed Macedonia. Both expressed, actually, some satisfaction with the way things have been going the past -- over recent days, including the very restrained and responsible use of force by the Macedonian military and, in parallel, the efforts to accelerate a political dialogue between the government and the ethnic Albanian political parties in the country. President Trajkovski has shown leadership in this. He's been quite forward-looking. And that situation, in the immediate term, looks better than it did, let's say, 10 days ago.

On the other hand, both leaders expressed a clear understanding that this could turn, and that we need to be very, very active, bilaterally and through NATO, in working to make sure that the progress we've seen in the last few days is maintained and that we move ahead in the right way.

Finally, just a little bit about the atmospherics. The Chancellor spoke German, though occasionally broke into English, which he understands. His staff speaks English. And there was a lot, as in the case with all the meetings I've seen, there was a lot of give-and-take, back-and-forth. This was not a hideously boring meeting, as some can be, with set speeches on both sides, laboriously reading from notes. This was a very free exchange between people who know the issues and are working according to a lot of common understandings and a tremendous amount of common ground.

I think that covers about what I needed to cover. But I've got time for a couple of questions.

Q: As for the European rapid reaction force -- Chancellor Schroeder, at the stakeout, referred to some misunderstanding, that he could clear up some misunderstanding between the U.S. and Germany and the European Union on the European rapid reaction force. We didn't have a chance to ask questions there, so I just assumed that he was speaking about that the force doesn't go -- wouldn't go against NATO, but it would be integrated in some way to NATO, or NATO would be above it. What did they really talk about that, and how did the President see if the Rapid Reaction Force would be sort of a military arm of the EU?

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: Well, actually, you put it pretty well. That is, the Chancellor wanted to explain to the President that the concern expressed by some Americans that this is somehow intended by the Europeans as a competitor to NATO, or to weaken NATO, or to undermine NATO, to do something bad to NATO is not the case. And he said quite forcefully, this is the German position. We want to see NATO strengthened. We see this is as a way to strengthen NATO, and I want to assure you that this has nothing to do with any of those concerns that some have expressed.

So it seemed to me the Chancellor was clearly prepared to send that strong and reassuring signal to the President. And our position -- and you'll find this in the joint statement -- is that the United States supports and welcomes ESDP, provided it does what the Chancellor says it does. And as we -- we all know that as we work through the details of ESDP, we have to keep that in mind.

Q: But is the U.S. open to let the reaction force go under EU, and not necessarily go under NATO umbrella?

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: Well, what we have said is that ESDP needs to be coordinated with NATO, compatible with NATO and transparent with NATO. And that means no duplication that would be both wasteful and it would create the problem that the Chancellor so strongly stated we all hope to avoid. So that's what I would -- that's the language we've been using.

Q: So it's not a question of prestige or who is the boss here?

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: The question is, is it going to work in a way that serves all of our interests and makes NATO stronger, makes Europe more capable, and actually, let's not forget, the purpose is to advance European security and transatlantic security. NATO is to us the primary arm of -- it is the transatlantic relationship, but within that, we certainly support an ESDP which is going to, as the President said, going to be within those parameters.

Q: Did the President tell Chancellor Schroeder that the United States does not intend do abide by the limitations on CO2 [carbon dioxide] emissions, et cetera, laid out in Kyoto?

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: The details of the discussion in Kyoto -- the discussion on Kyoto happened at lunch. I wasn't there. But I think the administration has been -- and the President have been pretty forthright about it. I can't characterize it. I wasn't there. But what I was told was that they didn't engage in a -- they didn't fight about this. The Chancellor knew our position, we knew his position. And so they emphasized what we do agree on, which is that greenhouse gas is an important issue. We're going to work together, and we simply will agree to disagree on Kyoto.

You also remember at the press availability, at the top of the meeting, the President talked about new technologies, and mentioned that Germany has a lot of technologies, and this is one area that we can productively proceed in.

Q: Do you know whether the Chancellor urged the President not to withdraw from Kyoto?

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: If it happened, it happened at the lunch. I wasn't there, and I'm sorry.

Q: Did either side bring up the level of defense spending in Germany? Did they talk about --

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: The Chancellor brought up the issue, himself. And he made -- it's the German delegation that described this, but since I'm on background, he did make the point that Germany's contribution to European security and the definition of security should be seen more broadly. He said, you shouldn't just look at our military budget, you should look at what we've done to integrate the former East Germany; look what we've done to try to help bring democracy to Russia. These are also related to European security, and we're making a tremendous contribution. We're also contributing through the EU to the unification of Europe through EU enlargement.

So he raised this issue. I'm characterizing as fairly as I think I can the Chancellor's position. He was quite articulate on the subject.

Q: Did the Chancellor bring up U.S. executions policy at all, and German opposition to --

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: I don't think he did. He certainly did not in the plenary meeting. If he did, he did so in the lunch; but I don't think so. I do not believe -- I have not heard that he did, and I asked what topics came up. So that's the best I can do. I do not believe so.

THE PRESS: Thank you.

END 2:37 P.M. EST

end transcript