MR. CASEY: Well, good afternoon, everybody. Welcome to the end of a fairly long week at the State Department. We're glad to have all of you with us. I don't have any statements or announcements to make, so Barry, let's go right to questions.

QUESTION: All right. Can we start with the story in the newspaper this morning about Israel requesting new rockets with cluster devices, et cetera? It's an anonymous -- it's officials who are not named, but it has a depth and apparent credibility. What can you give us on that?

MR. CASEY: Well, Barry, look, I think it's obvious to everyone that there's a longstanding security relationship that we have with the Government of Israel; that certainly does include arms sales. But certainly I'm not going to speculate or discuss what internal deliberations might or might not be going on with regard to future sales. There is a process that DOD can certainly brief you on in more detail in terms of how these sales are approached and handled. But certainly I don't have any kind of announcements for you on that.

QUESTION: Well, on the, I guess it's touchy issue of clusters, does the U.S. have a view as to whether cluster bombs or cluster devices, which can be extremely harmful to civilians, can be included in armed sales?

MR. CASEY: Well, Barry, again I don’t want to try and, you know, prejudge any requests that might or might not come in or any internal deliberations. But I do want to stress what we’ve said continuously throughout the current fighting in Lebanon is we want to see everything possible done to avoid and to minimize civilian casualties. That’s something that we’ve stressed both in our public and private conversations with the Israeli Government.

Let’s go to, yeah, Paul.

QUESTION: With the fact that Israel’s under the gun currently at war, would that affect the period of deliberation or the processes? In other words, is there a fast track for such things?

MR. CASEY: Again, there’s a standard legal procedure for how not only sales for Israel but other material sales are handled. You know, that’s generally how this process goes. I think the most important thing for us right now, though, is to focus on what we can do to actually end the fighting and end the violence. That’s why the Secretary’s up in New York today. And certainly what we hope to see right now is a need for no one to have any additional arms purchases done related to this simply because we hope to be able to end this conflict as soon as possible.

Yeah, Joel.

QUESTION: Tom, there’s been an unraveling, especially with this diplomatic track. The Lebanese have backed away. The Israelis have backed away and Israel has said that it's -- till this weekend, then all gloves are off. They're going to go up to the Litani River. Yesterday, President Bush in Green Bay, Wisconsin, described this as Islamic fascist. Is that the biggest obstacle in that they're not a government and they're just intent on killing and dismembering all peaceful governments?

MR. CASEY: Well, first of all, I think there's a lot of diplomatic activity that's going on in New York. As I said, the Secretary went up there this morning. She's been consulting with other members of the Security Council and been engaged in a number of activities. She's been in touch with both the Israeli and Lebanese Government today. And as you probably have heard from Ambassador Bolton and for others up there, we think we're very close to having an agreement. We think that's an agreement that's a good basis for ending this conflict and I think that's where our focus is right now.

Certainly, you know, the President spoke yesterday and many other people spoke yesterday regarding the terrorist plots that were foiled by the UK Government. Certainly, I think that's a reminder to us that there are terrorists that are out there. There are those out there that do want to take actions and do want to kill and injure innocent civilians from all over the world and that's why it's important that we continue to work not only with the UK and with European governments, but with our partners around the world in the war on terror.

Teri.

QUESTION: Can we follow-up on the Secretary's --

MR. CASEY: Yeah.

QUESTION: -- the Secretary's activities. She's been in touch with the Israeli and Lebanese Governments, I presume, to try to gauge their willingness to accept the agreement and try to prod them to accept the agreement. Is that what you're saying when you think you are close to an agreement, the language has all been finalized between the U.S. and the French?

MR. CASEY: Well, what I'm saying is that we've come a very long way towards having a resolution that will help resolve this issue, that will end the violence, that will help establish the terms of a political arrangement for a long-term cessation of hostilities and for a long-term solution to the problems at hand that addresses some of those root causes. And that as part of that, there would be the implementation of an international force in conjunction with the Lebanese army. She has had conversations with Prime Minister Siniora, with Israeli Foreign Minister Livni today, and as well as in her discussions at the UN, it's all been focused on making sure that we all come to a common understanding of that resolution and that we're able to move forward with it.

QUESTION: Is the U.S. prepared to accept either a Chapter 6 or a Chapter 7 mandate?

MR. CASEY: There is a lot of discussion that's going on on this. I am hopeful that we'll have a draft circulated from the Security Council or to the Security Council in fairly short order. I think I'll just let that draft speak for itself once everyone has a chance to look at it.

QUESTION: And is it your understanding that the 24-hour period would begin at the point that draft is circulated or would it --

MR. CASEY: Well, again, we are hoping to be able to resolve this issue today. We still believe it's possible to have a vote on this today and that's what we're pushing for. I think, as you've heard Sean and other people say, while the normal standard procedure involving UN resolutions is once something is "put in blue," meaning once it's a final version up for voting, there normally is a 24-hour waiting period that occurs before the vote takes place. That has been waived in the past and certainly, we think it's urgent enough to resolve this issue that we would like to see it waived again in this instance.

QUESTION: And can you say whether the Secretary got the impression from the Lebanese and Israeli sides that they are willing to accept the language as it stands now in the draft?

MR. CASEY: Well, again, I think everyone understands that there's an urgency about bringing this to an end. I think there is a lot in this draft that everyone agrees upon. You know, at this point, I think we just want to see it move forward in the Council and then everyone is free to speak for themselves as to their reactions to it.

QUESTION: But by all accounts, the Israeli Prime Minister's prepared to launch a ground offensive, irrespective, I guess, of the resolution getting done or not getting done? And I understand the Secretary talked to the Israeli Foreign Minister today. Did she talk about that bit of business, that Israel was ready to launch an offensive? And how do you feel about the whole thing -- how does the U.S. feel about an offensive at this point?

MR. CASEY: Barry, I think, you know, again the focus of her conversations was on the situation there and was on our activities in the U.N. to try and bring about an end to the fighting. Obviously, we want to see that occur as quickly as possible. Throughout this conflict, we’ve refrained from making judgments on individual Israeli military action, and I’m not going to start doing that now.

Obviously, though, what we want to see happen is a resolution get passed, a resolution that is acceptable to the parties involved and that does end in a very quick way any ongoing major military or offensive operations.

QUESTION: Well, you -- intentionally or unintentionally, when you say the U.S. is trying to bring an end to the fighting, the clear inference is that you don’t want Israel to launch this offensive. And at the same time you say, which is true, that you have all this through this whole month the State Department hasn’t expressed opinions about Israeli military action except to say be careful about civilians.

So where are we? Is it the U.S. position or the State Department position that Israel at this -- this is not the right time to launch an offensive?

MR. CASEY: Well, it’s the U.S. position that what we want to see happen is a resolution passed as quickly as possible and see the fighting end as quickly as possible. Obviously, that hasn’t happened yet. And you know, until that does, I certainly don’t think we’re going to be issuing prescriptions for the Israeli Government on how they’re conducting their current operations.

QUESTION: Well, without passing judgment, can you at least say whether the Foreign Minister informed Secretary Rice they were going to launch this major ground offensive?

MR. CASEY: I don’t have a detailed enough readout of the conversation to tell you whether that was the subject of the conversation or not.

QUESTION: Not whether it was the subject, but you don’t know whether it was a subject?

MR. CASEY: I don’t have anything more for you than what I gave you.

QUESTION: A small fact check.

MR. CASEY: Yeah.

QUESTION: Is Welch -- he goes back and forth and covers a lot of ground, is he now in Lebanon again? He was in Israel yesterday, Lebanon the day before. Do you happen to know?

MR. CASEY: Yeah, he has been going back forth. And my understanding is right now he is still in Lebanon. He was there -- arrived there a little earlier today local time, and as far as I know, remains there right now.

Mr. Lambros.

QUESTION: Another issue on Cyprus?

MR. CASEY: Okay.

QUESTION: Yes, Mr. Casey, Carol Migdalovitz, specialist on Middle Eastern Affairs, on July 27th released the 22 pages CRS report for Congress on the Cyprus problem, avoiding, however, even to mention one time that the whole issue has to do with the Republic of Cyprus, not just an abandoned island in the corner of the eastern Mediterranean Sea. I wonder if you agree not to be used at all the legal terminology, the Republic of Cyprus?

MR. CASEY: Well, Mr. Lambros, I'm not familiar with the CRS report. Obviously, the Congressional Research Service is an arm of Congress and responds to inquiries or issues related to that branch of government. In terms of the Administration's policy on Cyprus, neither our policy on recognition nor of the ultimate way to resolve this conflict has changed.

QUESTION: And also, on page 4 on the same report, she’s writing "in an interview published on June 17th, Greek Foreign Minister Dora Bakoyianni suggested that a new 'plan for a united European Cyprus' could result from a UN process based on preparation of the Secretary General and the European Union; a reality and on the will of the two communities."

What is the U.S. position, vis-à-vis to the "plan for a united European Cyprus," expressed clearly by the Greek Foreign Minister Dora Bakoyianni?

MR. CASEY: You know, Mr. Lambros, I can tell I've been away from academia long enough that I frankly just lost track of what you were saying mid-sentence there. Look, the U.S. position on this issue is quite clear. We believe that there needs to be a settlement of differences and that there needs to be a united Cyprus, that that needs to move forward based on a terms agreeable to both communities on the island. That's our longstanding position and it hasn't changed.

QUESTION: And now in terms of the report -- on the same report for the first time --

MR. CASEY: Mr. Lambros, I am just going to have to say I haven't seen the report and again, it's not a -- it is a report by a arm of the Legislative branch, not of the Executive branch. And if you -- I'd refer you over to CRS for any details about what's in that.

Okay. Teri, did you --

QUESTION: I did. I have some --

QUESTION: Mine's Cuba.

QUESTION: Okay, but I'm going to go with India.

MR. CASEY: Take India for 200?

QUESTION: Can you tell us what's going on in New Delhi -- actually, India for about a thousand. This is a good one.

MR. CASEY: Okay.

QUESTION: A Warden Message more specific than usual saying that there are threats that may be from al-Qaida in New Delhi. Can you talk more about that?

MR. CASEY: Well, I think most people have seen it. Our embassy did put out a Warden Message warning of the potential for terrorist attacks in India, particularly as we approach India's National Day on the 15th. As you know, we put these kinds of messages out to the American community when we have any kind of information about a potential threat, whether that's a terrorist action or of other kinds of violence or potential concerns to American citizens.

Frankly, I think as you know, there have been previous attacks in India around this time of year in the past. Certainly with the train bombings that have occurred recently, too, there's added concerns since there have been terrorist incidents recently. I guess I would just try and put this in that general category. There -- certainly, again we had information that came to our attention and it came to the attention of the Indian Government that led us to be concerned about this possibility occurring again and that's why we were alerting Americans to it.

QUESTION: The terrorist attacks have generally been related to the Kashmir dispute and not necessarily al-Qaida there. What is different this time that gives you more certainty that al-Qaida is related to these threats?

MR. CASEY: Well, I really don't have much that's beyond what's in the Warden Message, but, you know, this does speak in more -- somewhat more hypothetical terms in saying, you know, possibly including members of. So it's not definitive information that is there and we certainly weren't trying to convey that in the Warden Message. I think we certainly are concerned in general about activities not only of indigenous terrorist groups but of the possibility of those linked, or in any way associated, with al-Qaida, you know, any time there's possibilities like this.

QUESTION: And one last one. Do you have any indication so far that this would rise to the level of a Travel Warning yet? Is that being discussed in the building?

MR. CASEY: I don't have anything at this point to announce for you. Obviously, we'll evaluate the information that we have and see if anything more than this is required.

Barry. Yeah, sure.

QUESTION: You didn't say a lot, maybe you didn't want to, about the Secretary's phone calls to the Lebanese Prime Minister, the Israeli Foreign Minister. But, you know, I'd rather not make assumptions even if you would just say the obvious. Did she discuss with them the course of the diplomacy on the resolution?

MR. CASEY: Yeah, I --

QUESTION: Did she make any requests of him?

MR. CASEY: I would put this -- Barry, I'd simply just put in the terms that we have before on these conversations. These were discussions that were centered on our activities at the UN, our efforts to bring about or achieve an agreement on a resolution. There have been many conversations over the last few days that she and others have had back and forth, again, with fellow members of the Security Council, with other colleagues. And certainly, actively as part of our diplomacy in talking to both the Israeli and the Lebanese Government; that's something David Welch has been doing as well both again in Israel and in Lebanon.

Yeah, Paul.

QUESTION: I have a couple of questions on Cuba, please. We had a briefing this morning about Cuba from ranking State Department officials. Do you have anything definitive on Fidel’s health right now? We have this, since we haven’t seen him that means it’s serious. But what do you have that’s more firsthand?

MR. CASEY: We really don’t. I mean, I think -- obviously as you know, this is a very closed society. The leadership is not generally in the habit of offering up a lot of insights into either Fidel’s health or the state of other senior members of the group.

I think what’s important for us, though, to remember is that whether it is Fidel Castro or Raul Castro or other members of the regime, what we want to see is Cuba move away from dictatorship and move towards democracy. And I know that’s what Caleb McCarry and Tom Shannon, who briefed you folks this morning, talked about in terms of our efforts including our planning for the Committee of Assistance for Free Cuba for what we might be able to do to help move a transition forward, be able to help the Cuban people achieve their own democratic ideals.

Go ahead.

QUESTION: Well, a follow-up question, also out of this briefing this morning --

MR. CASEY: Sure.

QUESTION: -- is what kind of technological support the U.S. might be giving to Cubans who wish to move toward democracy. There was some talk about how to improve open communications within the country of Cuba. Are we doing internet? Are we doing Wi-Fi? Is there some sort of a satellite link-up where these people can receive information as well as transmit it to tip you off that hey, we’re ready for a transitional government, we need your help?

MR. CASEY: Well, two things. First of all, I think the future of Cuba and the ultimate move towards a democratic system in Cuba is something that’s going to be determined by the Cuban people. Neither the United States nor anyone else is going to throw some kind of switch and turn on or off Cuban efforts to change their own political system.

As you’ve seen over the years, there have been many brave people in Cuba who have stood up to this regime and run terrible risks for that and have paid consequences for it in terms of being imprisoned, tortured and suffered at the hands of the regime because of their willingness to stand up and say they want change.

One of the things, though, that's always been clear to us is that, as I said, this is a regime that is very closed and it's one that tries, as part of its efforts to control the Cuban people, to restrict their access to outside information. So one of our longstanding policy objectives has been to find ways to get information that's objective into Cuba, so the Cuban people can learn more, both about what's going on in the outside world as well as have something other than regime propaganda to rely on in terms of what's happening in their own country. Radio and TV Marti were started based on the need to try and do that.

As you've probably seen in recent days, Radio and TV Marti have also used some aerial platforms to be able to broadcast, in part, to try and overcome the jamming that the Cuban Government regularly uses to block their signals. Certainly, both through our Interest Section and other means, we're taking every means available to try and provide information to the Cuban people. We'll use any technologies at our disposal to do that.

Of course, one thing we also are trying not to do is talk in any kind of detail about some of those efforts since, unfortunately, anything the regime knows about what we do is something they will try and stop. But we do want to make as a clear part of this, and a part of our ongoing efforts not only in this time but from the past as well, make it so that the Cuban people have access to free information, to open information. You know, it really is -- really does say something about a regime that it spends huge amounts of time, energy and effort doing things like keeping people from owning satellite dishes, keeping people from being able to hear radio broadcasts, restricting people's access to the internet and doing other kinds of things all because they are afraid that the Cuban people might maybe learn something about their own country and about the rest of the world if they were allowed free and unfettered access to your station, other news media and other sources of information around the world.

QUESTION: One final point on the Cuban thing. It was a good comparison that came out of the briefing this morning that I wonder if you could amplify on a little bit. That with the Cuban Government in place, we've got a revolutionary leader who is very much personifying that revolution as compared to, let's say, Tiananmen Square and the Communist Party who was able to crack down on a dissident movement and those who would move toward democracy. Can you kind of draw that contrast for us, as to what your characterization is right now in Cuba; that the people who speak out won't face the same fate as those who spoke out in Tiananmen Square?

MR. CASEY: Well, I think one thing that's clear is that as long as this regime is in power, the Cuban people are going to be suffering from the same kind of dictatorial practices that any of the worst governments around the world have done.

I do have to say I think most of us find the romanticism of Fidel and of the personality of Fidel to be somewhat strange. I think if you look at the record of the Cuban Government during Fidel Castro’s reign it’s one that has caused economic hardship for the Cuban people, it’s caused political isolation for the Cuban people, and most importantly it’s deprived the Cuban people of their natural God-given right to be able to freely choose their own government, freely choose how they wish to live. And the fact that you have so many people over the years who have fled the country because of its repression or who have faced terrible hardships -- whether that’s jail time, whether that’s torture in prison, whether that’s simply being deprived of their -- the ration cards that provide most Cubans with their limited sources of food and some other basic supplies -- it’s pretty clear to me that this is not a regime that anyone should have any illusions about.

Let’s go back here.

QUESTION: On Mexico. Today in an opinion piece in The New York Times, the leftist candidate for the Presidency, Mr. Andrés Manuel López Obrador has pled to the international community to join his effort in looking for a whole recount in Mexico. Would the U.S. join his pledge?

MR. CASEY: Well, again, I think we’ve spoken to this before and we really don’t have anything new to add to this. We have full faith in the Mexican democratic system and in Mexico’s electoral institutions to make the right choice for the Mexican people on this. But this is an important issue within Mexico, but we believe it’s one that needs to be resolved by Mexicans and by Mexico’s institutions.

On Cuba? Go back to Cuba. Okay.

QUESTION: On Mexico, I have one too.

MR. CASEY: Flip a coin.

QUESTION: This morning we were referred more on this to DHS. But I’m wondering if you have anything more on contingencies for the possibility of mass exiles?

MR. CASEY: I really don’t. The Department of Homeland Security has had in place a number of contingency plans and things that they’ve worked on. But that really does involve domestic law enforcement and migration issues which are really properly handled by them.

I do think the one thing that I can say is that obviously U.S. immigration policy remains constant with respect to Cuba. And certainly as you’ve heard in the messages from the Secretary of State, as well as the President, to the Cuban people, we do want to make sure that no one endangers their lives or otherwise takes unnecessary risks by trying to put out to sea or otherwise illegally enter the United States.

QUESTION: On Mexico.

MR. CASEY: Anybody else on Cuba?

Going once, going twice? Okay, let’s go back to Mexico.

QUESTION: On the earthquake, the 5.9 that was off Mexico City, do you have anything about any American citizens who might have been hurt or --

MR. CASEY: No, I don’t. I only have preliminary reports, but I have no information this time about any Americans involved or injured in that.

QUESTION: What are your preliminary reports? What are they telling you?

MR. CASEY: Simply that there was a 5.9 earthquake, that there are some reports of injuries, but I don't have anything related to American citizens at this point.

Let's go back here.

QUESTION: With the current infrastructure in Lebanon, how concerned is the U.S. in delivering humanitarian needs to the south of Lebanon?

MR. CASEY: Well, I think we're very concerned about the humanitarian situation throughout Lebanon, obviously particularly in the south, given the limited access that's available. We've been working very hard with the International Committee of the Red Cross and the UN and other relief organizations, as well as talking to the Israeli defense forces to make sure that the humanitarian corridors that have been opened up remain so.

Obviously, this is a very difficult situation, there's ongoing military activities, and it's a very dangerous one for everyone involved, but we want to do everything we can to make sure that the humanitarian assistance coming from the United States, coming from various international organizations and coming from other countries gets to the people in need. It is, again, a reminder as well of why it's so important that we do everything we can on the political and diplomatic front too, to get a resolution in New York and to try and bring the fighting to a halt.

A follow-up? Yeah.

QUESTION: Yeah, now in the arrests since 9/11, a lot of Muslim charities recently have been in fear of raising money. What do you think they should -- you know, what is your take on that for the State Department to do?

MR. CASEY: Well, obviously, there have been a number of U.S. domestic law enforcement actions that have been related to not so much legitimate charities as front organizations that have been used to funnel money to terrorist organizations. Certainly, though, if you look at both the State Department website as well as USAID's, there are places that we are recommending people be able to donate funds to, to try and help with the humanitarian relief efforts in Lebanon.

But certainly, we would encourage everyone who is interested in doing so to contribute to the effort of providing humanitarian relief to the Lebanese people. Certainly, there are any number of legitimate organizations that those donations and support can be channeled through, whether that's -- you know, UN-related or through the ICRC or through other sources. But we very much are interested in seeing people make efforts, not only U.S. Government ones, but among private citizens as well. So much of the charitable giving that occurs, so much of the humanitarian aid, in effect, that gets through to people coming from the United States comes not only from the U.S. Government, but of course, from private charities and private individuals. So very much, we want to see Americans, whether in the American Muslim community or more broadly throughout the country, contribute to that effort.

QUESTION: Well, do you think that that Arab and Muslim-Americans in the U.S. -- do you think that they should contribute in cash or in kind by --

MR. CASEY: You know, I'm not going to try and make those kind of value judgments for people. I think the main thing is if people want to contribute, they should be able to do so and again, we've got some advice for American citizens, generally, on both our and AID's website on some recommended places they might be able to contribute, whether that's in cash or in kind.

Anne.

QUESTION: While you were up here, the story about the offensive has changed a little bit. They've announced in Israel that it's started. And Olmert's spokesman just a few minutes ago said the reason is that a cease-fire deal being worked out does not -- it fails to meet Israel's basic requirements, such as stationing robust international combat troops in southern Lebanon once Israel withdraws.

As you all have been describing for a couple of days, there would be a robust force, so what's the disconnect? What are -- what's their objection that you guys --

MR. CASEY: Well, look, without having seen the report or seen the specific comments, again, I think we believe that the resolution that we're working on responds to the basic needs of the situation. And again, as I said a little earlier in the briefing, that's three things. That's the cessation of violence, that's a political arrangement that will deal with some of the fundamental root causes and allow us to help Lebanon move forward with the implementation of 1559 and 1680 as well as doing so with the support of a strong, capable, international force that is able to assist the Lebanese army as it goes forward. It is, as we see it in this resolution, a robust force and one that's capable of meeting the job.

QUESTION: Well, Israel obviously knows what's in this resolution. If they say it fails to meet their demands, is it DOA?

MR. CASEY: Well, again, I haven't seen the comments. As I mentioned earlier, there's ongoing discussions with both the Israeli Government and the Lebanese Government as well as up in New York. And I think let's just see how things play out today before we try and draw any conclusions about this.

QUESTION: Tom, do you know anything about any phone calls this afternoon if the Secretary goes back to it?

MR. CASEY: If there's more, yeah. If there are more phone calls or other things I can give you, we’ll try and get you updated later on this afternoon.

Mr. Lambros?

QUESTION: On Iraq, the Turkish Foreign Minister Abdullah Gul stated yesterday, "The issue concerning Kirkuk can be resolved only via consensus. The point is not to reach unproductive results by holding a referendum, but reaching consensus. The point is producing a consensus by which people living there -- all of the Turkmen, Kurds and Arabs -- will be able to live in peace and quiet, and then taking this consensus to a referendum. Otherwise, a referendum in itself will not be a solution." What do you think about that?

MR. CASEY: I think about it the same thing that Sean told you in response to a similar question yesterday which is this is an issue for the Iraqi people to decide there's a process in the Iraqi constitution that will allow them to do so. Clearly, there are many difficult concerns that people in Iraq have about this. I think our role and the role of others in the international community, though, ought to be to support the Iraqis as they try and arrange a solution that works for all the communities in Iraq.

QUESTION: Can I go to London? Any update on the so-called, "London plot" for which the British Prime Minister Tony Blair has (inaudible) that there's so much noise in the (inaudible) and talking about Muslim fascist terrorists?

MR. CASEY: Anything about the what?

QUESTION: The London plot yesterday.

MR. CASEY: No. I think, you know, we've spoken to this for a number of ways. The plot's something that the -- both the British security agencies as well as our folks at Department of Homeland Security have spoken to amply, and I really don’t have anything new to add for you today.

QUESTION: How do you respond to the Turkish Prime Minister Recep Erdogan's statement that all terrorists not necessarily must be only Muslims?

MR. CASEY: I haven’t seen the comments, Mr. Lambros. I think the main point is terrorists are terrorists whatever religious or ethnic group they belong to, and terrorism has no place in our world.

Okay, Joel, last one.

QUESTION: Yes. Mike Wallace of CBS gave a two-hour interview or conversation with President Ahmadi-Nejad in Iran, and are you looking for feedback from CBS? It’s going to be broadcasted this Sunday on 60 Minutes and undoubtedly, too, on CBS Evening News?

MR. CASEY: I’m sure it will be an interesting program, but I’m not looking for anything specific from it.

QUESTION: Thank you.

MR. CASEY: Thanks.

(The briefing was concluded at 1:15 p.m.)

DPB #135