MR. CASEY: Afternoon, ever­ybody. Welcome to the start of a belated week here. Glad to see no snow has interrupted us. I do have one statement that I'd like to start with and this is concerning the bombing of a train in India over the weekend.

We condemn the terrorist attack that killed so many innocent people traveling on the Samjhauta Express on February 18th, a rail line that links New Delhi, India and Lahore, Pakistan. The United States extends its condolences to the families of the victims and to the people of India and Pakistan. There is no political justification for violence against innocent people. Such acts only serve terrorists' efforts to spread fear, generate hate, and limit freedoms. We will continue to support and work with both India and Pakistan in their efforts to halt extremism and counter terrorist threats.

And with that, are there any questions on that or move on to other subjects?

George?

QUESTION: Iran?

MR. CASEY: Sure.

QUESTION: Did you notice the generous offer of President Ahmadi-Nejad for discussions?

MR. CASEY: Well, I guess that would be one way to characterize it. I believe that President Ahmadi-Nejad seems to be missing the point of the international community here. As we've said before, the United States, the other members of the permanent -- members of the Security Council have put forward a very clear opportunity for Iran to do the right thing, for itself, for its people and for the international community. Iran has clearly refused to do that. And those simple conditions are simply suspending their uranium and enrichment activities.

And people forget, I think, that we're not asking Iran to do this out of whim. We're asking Iran to do this because of their clear pattern of deception, of hiding their nuclear activities and the clear concerns that we all have about their supposed civilian nuclear program being a cover for the development of a nuclear weapon. And so while I'm sure we would all like to see Iran accept the positive pathway given, suspend the enrichment and return to the negotiating table. I'm afraid that what we're seeing so far, including these recent statements is just more of the same, defiance. It's clear that Iran is not moving in the right direction and I think that's unfortunate and it's unfortunate not only for the world community, but it's unfortunate for the people of Iran.

Sylvie.

QUESTION: Would you have any reaction to the war games Iran has been conducting today?

MR. CASEY: If I had any information about them, I might. But no, I -- look, I think every country is going to conduct its own military operations. I don't really have any specific comments on what the Iranians might or might not be doing with their own military forces. I think, you know, the Pentagon's made clear what our defensive posture is in the region and certainly I don't view this as anything out of the ordinary.

QUESTION: And you don't see it -- you see it's only by chance that they are conducting these war games the day the new -- the second U.S. aircraft arrived in the Gulf?

MR. CASEY: Well, I think you'll be shocked to learn that the Iranian military doesn't generally communicate with us very much about their plans and activities. Look, they're obviously free to conduct their own internal affairs as they see fit. The Pentagon has spoken and certainly the President has spoken about our concerns about Iranian behavior in the region generally. But again, has also spoken, and I believe Secretary Gates said it best for the umpteenth time, there is no planning or idea that we are going to attack or invade Iran. And certainly nothing in the moves that the U.S. military is making in terms of its regular rotation of forces in the Gulf should be interpreted that way.

Yeah, Nick.

QUESTION: The Secretary talked about next steps on Iran, the nuclear issue with Iran last week. She said that she's already discussing potential follow-up resolution in the Council. Where do things stand? Tomorrow is the deadline. It doesn't look they'll meet it. Have you -- or anybody on the Council began drafting another resolution? Have there been any recent talks? Is the Secretary going to talk about this tomorrow with the Germans and the other Europeans? Where do we stand?

MR. CASEY: Okay. There's a lot in that. We talked about this a little bit on Friday, Nick, and I think where we stand is pretty much what you heard from us then.

We've got a report that's coming due from Dr. ElBaradei in conjunction with the UN Security Council Resolution 1736 and we'll be looking forward to seeing that report. I think it's clear, though, that Iran has not made any moves to date to comply with that resolution either by suspending its uranium enrichment activities or by answering the questions that are still outstanding that the IAEA has about their nuclear program. But we do want to see the report, look at it in full and have a chance to discuss it both here internally and with Security Council partners.

Now, as the Secretary said, we're certainly considering an additional resolution in the Security Council depending on what we see in that report and depending on how we view the next steps in this process. Certainly we want to make sure that Iran understands -- that the government of Iran understands that they're going to continue to pay an increase in price for their defiance of the international community. But at the moment where this stands is that there certainly have been consultations between the Secretary and some of her counterparts on this subject. I know there have been consultations that have been ongoing in New York, understand Under Secretary Burns has also been in discussions about this in a bit of a more formal way with some of his P-5+1 colleagues. But we'll have to wait and see once we get the report, have everyone have a chance to digest it. At that point we'll be in a position to make some decisions about how specifically we want to proceed in the Council.

Kirit. And then we'll go down to Arshad. Sorry, Arshad.

QUESTION: Have you been able to get a readout of Secretary Rice's meetings in Jordan yet?

MR. CASEY: No, I haven't, and frankly I think there was going to be a briefing of one kind or another done to your colleagues on the plane, and I think I'll leave it with them.

Arshad.

QUESTION: Can we go back to Iran for a moment. Are you pleased by the Russian announcement that they will not start up the Bushehr reactor this summer as planned, so that's point one.

MR. CASEY: I just saw some of those statements coming out. Certainly we don't think at this point that it's appropriate to do anything that could potentially help further Iran's nuclear program. Obviously, the Russians, and there has been a long-standing engagement on the subject of Bushehr, but I think what that shows is Russia's own concerns about Iran's nuclear program and Russia's own concerns about what Iran actually is intending to do. Certainly, the Russian Government has supported Resolution 1736. They have moved forward in terms of working with us on the possibilities for follow-on resolutions as well, but I think what this probably does more than anything else, and you certainly can ask the Russian Government themselves, though, is show that they too are concerned, along with the rest of the international community, about Iran's programs.

QUESTION: Why do you think that they are concerned? Because the reason that they have given for this is that they say Iran has not paid them on time and their concern seems to be more with when they get paid. Do you have specific reason to believe that it is, in fact, concern more broadly over Iran's nuclear program than over the money?

MR. CASEY: Well, again, I've seen a couple of different attributions on it and again, you can ask them. But I do think it's very clear to us that the Russians share our concerns about Iran's nuclear program. And regardless of the reasoning behind this, I'm certainly not -- don't think we're anxious to see any aspects of their nuclear program move forward at this point.

QUESTION: And do you know if -- among the consultations that have taken place in New York by Under Secretary Burns and by the Secretary herself, about the possibility of a second resolution, do you know if there have been contacts with the Russians and the Chinese on this?

MR. CASEY: I know there have been contacts among the Permanent 5. As to what level and how frequently and how often, that I really don't have details on, but certainly, we are in conversations with all the members of the P-5 about this.

Michel.

QUESTION: Do you have any information on the abduction of three U.S. women in the Palestinian territories today?

MR. CASEY: I really don't for right now, Michel. We've seen those reports and we are taking them seriously. Our consulate in Jerusalem is actively talking to the Palestinian Authority officials about this, but I don't have any specifics for you in terms of either being able to confirm those reports or give you any sort of readout on them.

QUESTION: Thank you.

MR. CASEY: Let's go here. I'm getting to you, Mr. Lambros.

QUESTION: Okay. Maybe we'll --

MR. CASEY: After -- I'm working down the row.

QUESTION: Okay. Turkey's top military commander was in Washington last weekend. He accused two largest Iraqi-Kurdish groups of support -- fully supporting the PKK. Do you have any information confirming or denying these arguments?

MR. CASEY: Well, I haven't seen his comments, but certainly, we believe that the Government of Iraq, and by that, I would include people like President Talabani and other representatives from the Kurdish region are committed to working with us and with the Government of Turkey to halt PKK activities in the north of Iraq.

So certainly, as far as we're concerned, we believe that the Government of Iraq is committed along with us to taking action against this problem. And we recognize that this is a serious issue. It's why we appointed General Ralston as a special envoy to help work on this concern, to help coordinate better the activities among the three governments. But this is obviously a problem that does need to be addressed and we're committed to working with the Government of Turkey and the Government of Iraq, including officials and certainly officials from the northern part of the country on this issue.

Mr. Lambros.

QUESTION: A follow-up to my Turkish colleague's questions regarding Kirkuk.

MR. CASEY: But of course.

QUESTION: How do you respond, Mr. Casey, to Mr. Richard Holbrooke criticism in Washington Post that the U.S. Armed Forces (inaudible) did not start an intensive mediation on the Kirkuk issue referring to the new Iraqi constitution which calls a referendum this year on whether Kirkuk is to be incorporated into the Kurdistan region and the Turkish Government of Recep Erdogan strongly disagrees?

MR. CASEY: Well, Mr. Lambros, first of all, the issue of Kirkuk needs to be resolved by the Iraqis themselves. There are procedures laid out in the Iraqi constitution for doing so. We certainly are encouraging that those efforts move forward. In terms of the comments of other individual officials on them, well, certainly they're entitled to their views.

We believe that the best way forward on this issue is, again, to have the Iraqis carry out the commitments that they themselves have laid out in their constitution. And certainly, what we want to see happen is this issue be resolved in a peaceful way in accordance to Iraqi law and that is respectful of the rights of all communities there.

QUESTION: What about the Turkish concern?

MR. CASEY: Well, again, I think many of Iraq's neighbors have concerns about different aspects of the situation there, including the situation in Kirkuk. What we, again, want to encourage everyone to do is work with the Iraqi Government and help them as they seek to try and carry out the commitments that they --

QUESTION: And one on Kosovo. Three vehicles today belonging to the UN Mission in Kosovo have been destroyed totally in an explosion in Pristina. Any comment?

MR. CASEY: Well, I heard about this briefly, Mr. Lambros. Certainly, we condemn any acts of violence against the UN Mission or against any of the communities there. As we move forward with the implementation of Mr. Ahtisaari's plan and of the UN plan for Kosovo, we need to see the communities in the area of Kosovo, in the rest of Serbia and elsewhere, work together to implement this plan and to do so in a way that is peaceful and nonviolent. So certainly, any kinds of acts of violence are outside the scope of that and we condemn them.

I don't have information, however, on who may have specifically been responsible for these attacks. I know that's something that the folks at the UN Mission are looking into.

QUESTION: Thank you.

MR. CASEY: David.

QUESTION: Tom, a Russian military figure yesterday made comments that could be construed as threatening toward Czechoslovakia -- excuse me, the Czech Republic and Poland over the missile defense issue. I wonder if you want to get involved in that.

MR. CASEY: Well, look, first of all, I think we find it hard to believe that he's really speaking on behalf of the Russian Government on this issue. You know, the system that's being put in place is designed to counter threats from the Middle East or from other potential rogue states out there and it's something that we're sharing with our European friends and allies and, frankly, with the entire international community, including, we would hope, Russia.

There also seems to be some notion out there that we haven't consulted with the Russian Government about this, but the fact is that we have consulted repeatedly and at some length over the past several years with the Russian Government about this because we want this to be transparent as we move forward with it. So in that sense, I think those public statements are a bit puzzling.

The other thing, I think, as has been mentioned on more than one occasion both publicly and in our consultations is this system is not physically capable of threatening Russia, or threatening any other country for that matter; it's for defensive purposes. And certainly, their defense experts have had extensive consultations with folks on our side and understand that this system is not intended as a threat to Russia and, frankly, is incapable of providing a threat to Russia.

QUESTION: Why do you think Russia has sort of misunderstood these American assurances?

MR. CASEY: Well, I'm not sure quite what the origin, again, of these specific comments were and we do think it's a little hard to believe, again, that he's speaking on behalf of the Russian Government. But I went back and looked at this, and the first briefings that we did on this started for the Russians in 2004 and 2005 through the U.S.-Russia Missile Defense Working Group. That was then replaced by another series of senior-level meetings in 2006. And what I'm told from my friends at the Pentagon as well as back here is that since March of 2006, at which point Under Secretary of Defense Edeleman briefed his Russian counterparts, there have been more than ten instances where we've had senior level officials get together to discuss the details of our missile defense plan, including meeting with the head of the Missile Defense Agency and their respective Russian counterparts.

So, frankly, there's been a lot of information shared back and forth on this issue and again, for that reason I just -- I'm having a hard time understanding how those comments are reflective of that broader discussion. Certainly, those weren't the reactions of Russian officials who heard these briefings.

Yes, Sylvie.

QUESTION: How do you explain the reactions of Vladimir Putin, who has been giving speeches harder and harder against U.S. recently? And even the Russian Foreign Minister Lavrov today said again that it was necessary for hard-hitting conversation with the West, meaning U.S., and he said it's time for a frank and public conversation, not one behind closed door. So how do you explain this aggressivity against you?

MR. CASEY: First of all, I think on the broad range of issues Russia is an important partner and it's a partner that we can have very open and frank discussions with. The President has talked about that in terms of his relationship with President Putin. But I'd, frankly, refer you back to what Secretary Gates said in Munich last week. This is -- Russia is going to be an important partner for the United States over the long term. Certainly we don't think that anything is going to move back the clock towards some kind of renewed Cold War. But obviously, if there are issues that the Russian Government wants to discuss with us, we are more than open to doing so. And again, as I've talked about with respect to missile defense, we've had conversations about a wide range of issues and we're continuing to be open to do so. They can speak for themselves in terms of why their rhetoric may be different in the last couple of weeks than it might be otherwise, but from our perspective we are working with the Russian Government on a number of important areas and we expect to continue to do so.

QUESTION: You are treating that as if it were business as usual, and it doesn't seem like business as usual. It seems you are giving them responses they don't accept. So what do you plan to do?

MR. CASEY: Well, again, I think there are always going to be differences in any relationship with any major country. We have a very broad and complex relationship with Russia, and certainly there will be areas where we disagree. But there are also important areas where we do agree, certainly on cooperation and counterterrorism, cooperation together in the Quartet, cooperation in the Security Council across a wide front of issues, including how we are responding collectively to Iran's nuclear program.

So certainly, I'm not denying that there are concerns that the Russians have or concerns that we have, and actually I think it's healthy that we're in a position to be able to express them to one another. And again, I think there is an extensive series of contacts, consultations and arrangements for us to talk with the Russians and engage with them if there are real questions about what's going on here.

QUESTION: Isn't it incumbent on what you called an important partner to moderate their language sort of in the interests of keeping the partnership alive?

MR. CASEY: Nice try, George. No, I'm not going to start getting into a discussion about my responding to what Russian officials said, to what other people said in response to that. The fact of the matter is on all the practical levels where you look, there's generally good cooperation with the Russian Government and we are going to continue to feel free to speak out when we see things that they are doing that we don't like, and I can certainly imagine that the Russians feel the same way. But the fact that we do have differences shouldn't obscure the fact that we are working with them together in a lot of areas.

Nicholas.

QUESTION: Tom --

MR. CASEY: Want to try to take another crack at this one?

QUESTION: Well, this is not only about differences. I mean, it seems you're talking past each other big time. It seems you're not even reading the same book on this issue. The Secretary says she has no idea why Putin said what he said. The same -- and Dan Fried said the same thing. The President said the same thing. You've been having all these meetings, and suddenly they're saying something and you're saying something and you can't understand each other with all the -- with this huge embassy you have in Moscow, with all these meetings that you've had in the past four or five years, how is that -- business as usual, how is that a disagreement? This is just completely -- I don't know what to call it. I mean, it's --

MR. CASEY: Well, again, on this specific issue of missile defense, I think we've made our views clear. I think there shouldn't be any misunderstanding on the part of the Russian Government about what these systems are designed for, how we're developing them or how it's moving forward. But if there are additional questions or additional issues, we need to discuss then we'll work through them. That's part of what diplomacy is. But again, I just want to make sure that it's clear as well that we are not springing something on the Russians or on anybody else in this matter. These are issues where we have had a transparent and open discussion with them. And certainly if more is required on that front, we'll happily have the discussions again.

QUESTION: But do you think it's an issue of trust? Do you think they just don't trust what you're saying about missile defense?

MR. CASEY: Well --

QUESTION: It is a suspicions from the Cold War? What is it?

MR. CASEY: Nicholas, I have a hard enough time figuring out what's going on in my own head most of the time, much less trying to interpret psychologically the positions of a foreign government. I'd leave it to the Russians to explain to you why they have these concerns, even after they've had these fairly lengthy and detailed discussions with us about it.

Arshad.

QUESTION: In Fiji the military leader has announced that a roadmap for democracy that would lead up to full -- a full general election in the year 2010. I wondered if you -- what you thought about that, whether you thought maybe that should be moved up a little?

MR. CASEY: Yeah. I think we have called for an immediate restoration of democracy and the democratically elected government in Fiji. That is immediate and 2010 -- don't really add up that well. So no, certainly this is not something that we support. We again want to reiterate our call on the government to return to democratic rule, not a year from now or two years from now or three years from now, but now.

QUESTION: New topic?

MR. CASEY: Yeah.

QUESTION: (Inaudible)Fiji.

QUESTION: Okay. No more on Fiji? (Laughter.)

MR. CASEY: Are you picking on Fiji (inaudible.)

QUESTION: There's been reports of al-Qaida resurgence in northern Pakistan and I'm just wondering if you had any sort of comment on that and also on Pakistan's commitment to fighting Usama bin Laden's network?

MR. CASEY: Well, I think I've seen a number of the stories that you're referring to, or where I assume your question's coming from. And a lot of that does get into intelligence assessments. But I frankly am not in a position to be able to offer you. Certainly, though, we continue to be concerned about the existence of al-Qaida's leadership that's out there, Usama bin Laden among others, and we continue to be concerned as you know, about cross border activities from Pakistan to Afghanistan. It's something that we've been working on with each of those governments, the Government of Afghanistan and the Government of Pakistan, to try and be able to put a stop to those kinds of cross-border activities and certainly the hunt for Usama bin Laden and other senior leaders of al-Qaida continue and through a variety of means and a variety of agencies. But I think the main point for us has been that we do believe we have good cooperation from the Government of Pakistan on counterterrorism issues.

Certainly there are concerns, as I've just said, with activities across the border. I think they've been discussed fairly -- in a fairly detailed way both from here and from other buildings and I really don't have a lot to add to that. But we do believe that President Musharraf and his government are committed to fighting terror and to working with us. However, it's very clear to all of us that we and the Government of Pakistan and the Government of Afghanistan all need to do more since the problem is out there and it is continuing.

QUESTION: Some analysts are blaming this recent deal that Musharraf struck with the tribal leaders in North Waziristan for the resurgence of the al-Qaida networks and especially these training camps. Can you speak to that at all?

MR. CASEY: You know, I really can't. I think you've heard from the White House on the subject of the agreement. I think the President's words on that a couple months ago are so far the definitive one. I don't have an analysis to offer you of that agreement beyond what you've already heard.

Mr. Lambros, one more shot.

QUESTION: On the Bulgarian nurses. Mr. Casey, the five Bulgarian nurses sentenced to death in Libya for infecting 426 children with the virus that cause AIDS have appealed their convictions. Their attorney said Sunday, February 18, 52 of the innocent infected children have died of AIDS. A lawyer for the Palestinian doctor lodges an appeal last week keeping in mind that they were sentenced to death twice in 2004 and in 2006 following a court appeal. Any comment since the U.S. is very much involved to release them?

MR. CASEY: No, Mr. Lambros. Our position on this issue remains the same. There are additional, as you noted, judicial appeals available. We certainly hope that in the end a decision will be reached that will allow these Bulgarian nurses and Palestinian physician to be able to return home to their families. We certainly recognize the tragedy that occurred in Libya and share the concerns of the international community about the affected individuals. And again, as you've heard before, supported ideas for providing some form of compensation as well through an international mechanism. But our position on this issue remains the same.

QUESTION: One more question. (Inaudible) AIDS, a global organization of more than 205 -- of more than 2,500 signed this, medical doctors, another based in Canada with a statement today called for the creation of an international commission to investigate the case. Saying inter alia that witnesses alleged that the Bulgarian nurses have given to the children pills and injections, the contents of which remain unknown. Do you have anything to say on that?

MR. CASEY: Mr. Lambros, I think the origins of this case and the history of it are all very well documented. Again, our position on this is quite clear and it remains the same.

Nicholas, one last shot.

QUESTION: On a very different subject. The Vice President is in Japan.

MR. CASEY: Mm-hmm.

QUESTION: There are reports that he's not going to meet with the defense minister who made some comments about Iraq a couple of weeks ago. Are you -- and also interpretations that he's not meeting the minister because of his comments. Are you aware of any correlation between these two things and is the Vice President trying to send a message to the Japanese.

MR. CASEY: I'm not. But I'm honestly not aware of any of the details of his schedule and you'd have to check with his office or the White House about it.

Thanks, guys.

(The briefing was concluded at 1:13 p.m.)