MR. MCCORMACK: Good afternoon. How are you? We have some additional visitors in the press room this afternoon. We have a number of students from area high schools and middle schools who are visiting the State Department as part of a national effort -- this is Job Shadow Day. So we have 100 of these students here in the State Department, and I believe there are three of them that are working with members of the working press here at the State Department. Thank you very much for participating in this great program. This allows these students to learn what we do here at the State Department and see what life is like in the real world -- (laughter) -- so to speak. It encourages them to study and go back to school.

QUESTION: Exactly. Stay in school.

MR. MCCORMACK: Indeed.

QUESTION: Why don't we start with a shadow asking a question?

MR. MCCORMACK: Hold on. I'm not done yet, Barry. We have an opening statement. But instead of my doing it, I'd like to turn it over to Rachel May. Rachel is a junior at the School Without Walls. It's a high school here in Washington, D.C. She's a resident of Washington D.C., and I think after you hear from her, some of you might see her back here at some point in the future as a --

QUESTION: Tomorrow possibly. (Laughter).

MR. MCCORMACK: Oh, I'm I getting the hook? Oh, my God. It's true. She might be that good. Rachel, why don't you come on up?

QUESTION: Is this a senior State Department official speaking?

MR. MCCORMACK: No, this is on the record. (Laughter.)

MS. MAY: Good morning. There will be an on-the-record, on-camera briefing on Sudan with African Affairs Assistant Secretary Jendayi Fraser and International Affairs Assistant Secretary Kristen Silverberg in the press briefing room at 10:30 a.m. on Friday, February 3rd.

QUESTION: Very good.

QUESTION: Thank you.

QUESTION: Is that true? (Laughter.)

MR. MCCORMACK: Barry, you should know everything that is said at this podium is true. And you should just write it -- just take it down and put it in the stories. Okay. All right.

QUESTION: Well, we have some shadows, let’s --

QUESTION: My name is James Soller and I'm also from School Without Walls. My first question is how concerned are we about Iranian's threat to cut off the IAEA's cooperation, as minor as it is?

MR. MCCORMACK: You correctly --

QUESTION: -- because of the referral.

MR. MCCORMACK: No. You correctly cite the fact that Iran has not been very cooperative with the International Atomic Energy Agency, the IAEA. Nor have them been very cooperative over the past several years with those in the international community that have sought to engage them in a serious and constructive manner on this.

What the world is trying to do is trying to prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon because we believe, as do many other members of the international community, that introduction by Iran of a nuclear weapon into the Middle East would be a terribly destabilizing event. So we're working in conjunction with our fellow board members in the IAEA on a resolution now that would report, refer Iran to the Security Council that's currently under discussion. Now, Iran has threatened to take some actions in retaliation to a potential referral to the Security Council. We'll see what they do.

They will have an opportunity to consider their actions once the referral to the Security Council has been made. That vote has not yet been taken. I expect it will happen the next day or so. So Iran will have an opportunity to respond and we'll see whether or not they take the opportunities that have been put before them by the international community to realize what they have been asking for -- that is to have peaceful nuclear power, while also providing objective guarantees to the international community that they won't try to use those peaceful nuclear power programs to develop a nuclear weapon.

Now, the IAEA resolution, as it is currently written, has a series of conditions that the Iranian regime has to meet. I expect that, although the resolution isn't final at this point that those conditions will remain as part of the resolution. So once this passes and Iran is reported to the Security Council, we'll see what kind of reaction they have. They will have, as part of the agreement that we worked out this past Tuesday in London, permanent members of the Security Council agreed that the Security Council would not seek to take any action concerning Iran until after they hear from Director General ElBaradei after the next Board of Governors meetings of the IAEA, which will be on March 6th. So we'll see; we'll see what the Iranian reaction will be.

QUESTION: ElBaradei today said that there's no crisis. That's his description of what I thought -- it seems to contrast with what we've been hearing here about Iran having crossed the line. I guess anybody can choose his words. But aren't we in a crisis situation with Iran?

MR. MCCORMACK: Well, Barry, clearly this is very serious. The fact that Iran is seeking to develop a nuclear weapon is a serious matter. You've heard from the President on this, you've heard from the Secretary of State on this and the level of seriousness with regard to this matter, I think is indicated by the level of effort and attention that has been paid to the matter by the Secretary of State, the State Department as well as the foreign ministers and foreign ministries of other countries. We wouldn't be working this hard and focusing so much of our energy on this issue if it weren't serious and if it weren't important to the future of stability of the region as well as to the national security of the United States as well as other countries around the world.

QUESTION: I know you want a strong vote. Can you -- you're canvassing for support. You want to give us an idea of how well you think the U.S. --

MR. MCCORMACK: I'm not going do it, Barry. I'm not going to do vote counts, Barry. But I would say right now that we believe that we have a solid majority and that's based on the resolution that we -- we have a solid majority for the resolution that has been put forward by the EU-3.

QUESTION: Okay.

QUESTION: That sounds a little less confident than you were several weeks ago, when you were quite definitive that you had the votes that you needed. I mean, the --

MR. MCCORMACK: Well, majority implies that it's going to pass, so that would mean more than half.

QUESTION: But, I mean, you seem to think that most countries, you know, yes, the majority but you seem to think almost all countries would vote last -- a couple of weeks ago.

MR. MCCORMACK: They said that we -- that the resolution would pass. In order for a resolution to pass under the IAEA rules, you have to have a majority, which is more than half, one more than half. We have 35 members of the board, so that means more than 18 -- what is it? -- 18. We believe that we have more than that. We have a solid majority of countries that will vote in favor of the resolution.

QUESTION: Well, do you think you have enough votes to pass or do you think you have --

MR. MCCORMACK: Yeah. Majority is passing.

QUESTION: I know majority means passing, but do you think that you have most -- do you think that it's going to be, you know, you're going to squeak by with enough votes or you're going to have -- it's going to be all countries except for Venezuela again?

MR. MCCORMACK: We'll see. You know, we'll see. It's up to the individual countries how they're going to vote. Last time around it was only Venezuela that voted with Iran. Other countries -- there was a majority that voted for finding them in noncompliance and then there were some others that abstained. There are some new members to the board, including Cuba, so we'll see what sort of company Iran has this time around. But I expect it to be a very small -- low in the single digits numbers that would vote with Iran.

Okay.

QUESTION: New topic.

MR. MCCORMACK: Yes, sure.

QUESTION: The last time in September there was a question of the Non-Aligned -- Malaysia and the Non-Aligned. Have you been dialoguing with them and what's the sense you're getting from them?

MR. MCCORMACK: Sure. We have touched base with many members of the Board of Governors. I can't say all, obviously. In terms of countries that associate themselves with the Non-Aligned Movement, you know, we'll see how they vote. At this point, I can't predict how each company will vote. We think we have a solid majority right now in favor of reporting Iran to the Security Council.

QUESTION: The last time you were getting some blowback from them, they were a bit reluctant last time. Do you feel that that has been overcome or any sense you're getting from them?

MR. MCCORMACK: I'm not going to, at this point, try to predict how any particular country or group of countries is going to vote.

QUESTION: A few minutes ago you spoke of -- I don't mean to split hairs, but you spoke of a vote in the next day or so. Is there any slight delay anticipated --

MR. MCCORMACK: No.

QUESTION: -- or you're just speaking roughly?

MR. MCCORMACK: Just speaking roughly. The last Board of Governors meeting in which the Board of Governors voted to pass the finding of a noncompliance, I think, lasted three days. A lot of this is -- are procedural issues. What happened today is that there was a report from the Deputy Director General of the IAEA and he gave an oral interim report that I think everybody expected him to give. The Chairman of the Board of Governors opened up the meeting to statements from each of the national representatives. I'm not sure if we got all the way through all of those; there's 35 of them. And then I believe the next step would be individual countries offering comments on the particular resolution and then there will be a discussion of the finally approved resolution. We have one now that's been tabled by the EU-3.

So I expect this, you know, this process to take a day or so to complete. But again, I expect that at the end of the process of this particular Board of Governors meeting that we're going to end up with a strong resolution referring, reporting Iran to the Security Council.

Teri.

QUESTION: Yesterday you mentioned that you thought the text was pretty much in its final form and that countries would be expressing their opinions through a vote, which made it seem that there was no longer really room for negotiating on the language of the resolution which we've now seen. Is that still the case or are countries coming back and asking you to change a word here and there and is that something that you and the EU-3 are willing to do?

MR. MCCORMACK: Well, of course, we're not a co-sponsor of the resolution. But of course, we will all listen to various comments about the draft text, including suggestions for changes. I think I said yesterday that there may be people -- some people who raise their hands, who have some suggested changes. We'll see what those suggested changes are. But in terms of the core of the resolution, which is to set out certain conditions that Iran must meet, as expressed by the wishes and desires of the IAEA Board of Governors, and reporting Iran to the Security Council along with all previous resolutions, that will, we believe, remain at the core of this resolution and won't change.

QUESTION: You can't tell us at that point if that's one of the reasons why you're saying the vote will probably not take place today? Well, it's late there now but --

MR. MCCORMACK: I think they've already closed down --

QUESTION: Right, yeah.

MR. MCCORMACK: -- closed down for today. These sort of --

QUESTION: But why it couldn't sail right into a vote?

MR. MCCORMACK: Because there are certain procedures that govern these meetings. There are 35 members of the board and they are all understandably want to have their say. They want to be able to make national statements. They want to be able to offer their particular comments on the resolution. I think that is perfectly reasonable, understandable, certainly given the seriousness of the matter, so whether it takes one day or two days or three days is not important, I think, at this point. But what is important is that the IAEA Board of Governors act. And we expect that that's what will happen at the end of this Board of Governors meeting.

Yes, sir.

QUESTION: Another subject?

MR. MCCORMACK: Anything else on Iran? Okay.

QUESTION: I have a question on Belarus. There will be presidential elections there next month and what's the current U.S. position vis-à-vis the current regime in Belarus and these upcoming elections?

MR. MCCORMACK: We will have a statement coming out this afternoon concerning Belarus, so if you can hang on for just a bit we'll get that out after the briefing.

QUESTION: So are you going to read it on camera or not?

MR. MCCORMACK: No. That would be after the briefing.

QUESTION: Okay. But could you -- are you just -- I'm from a TV station, so we just need something to show. (Laughter.)

MR. MCCORMACK: You know, what I can tell you; I don't have the statement here now.

QUESTION: You don't have concerns? I mean, obviously this isn't a thing that just pops up at the last minute.

MR. MCCORMACK: We have longstanding concerns regarding the function of democracy in Belarus. We have previously stated those concerns. Secretary Rice on a trip to the region met with members of the Belarus opposition. The European Union has also expressed its concerns about the functioning of Belarusian democracy. So those concerns remain. We encourage the current government to open up the political process to those voices that have been stifled. We believe that it is important in any country that aspires to truly be a democracy that the government not only hold elections but govern democratically, and that the electoral process unfold in a way so that the people voting, deciding upon who is going to rule them, who is going to govern them, will have a full opportunity to express their will across the spectrum of political views.

QUESTION: Sean, (inaudible) hypothetical, if there is a sort of Ukrainian style scenario of people there on the streets, what U.S. position would you anticipate in that sort of set of circumstances?

MR. MCCORMACK: I'm not going to comment on hypothetical situations.

Yes, George.

QUESTION: On Nigeria, you issued a statement yesterday in which you seem to endorse the concept of gay marriage in Nigeria and you expressed concern about restrictions on several outcomes. That does not seem to be consistent with Administration policy. Just wondering whether you have anything to say?

MR. MCCORMACK: Well, I guess the statement had a different intent. I can go back and read it. But the stated concern in yesterday's statement was with respect to freedom of assembly, freedom of expression. It didn’t in the statement or intend in the statement to make a judgment about the legal status of unions, which is, I think, what you're referring to in terms of the current domestic debate here in the United States. So the statement on Nigeria concerned freedom of expression, freedom of assembly.

QUESTION: But the legislation that the Nigerians are pushing not only restricts the freedom of assembly and the freedom of speech for sexual orientation or gender, but also restricts gay marriage. So you're saying that you only have a problem with the part of the legislation that restricts those things, such as freedom of assembly and freedom of speech, as you say, but you don't have a problem with the part of the legislation that restricts gay marriage?

MR. MCCORMACK: I don't have anything to add beyond what was in the statement yesterday.

QUESTION: Well, are you going to clarify the statement then?

MR. MCCORMACK: I think the statement is clear.

QUESTION: Well, the statement says that you reject the legislation on certain grounds because of certain things that it restricts. So are you against restricting all those things or just some of those things?

MR. MCCORMACK: I don't have anything to add beyond the statement. I think it's very clear.

QUESTION: On Cyprus. Any response to my taken question regarding U.S. naval bases in Karavostassi in the Turkish (inaudible) area of Cyprus?

QUESTION: The statement is out.

MR. MCCORMACK: Mr. Schweid had the answer. The statement is out. We have an answer for you on that.

QUESTION: Okay. The other is --

MR. MCCORMACK: No. No basis for those accusations.

QUESTION: Thank you.

Last Monday, terrorists bombed a Turkish-American friendship association in (inaudible) Turkey, where (inaudible) Air Force Base, where American military forces are stationed. Today, we learn from the Associated Press of a Turkish movie "Valley of the Wolves Iraq" (inaudible) out across Turkey that depicts American soldiers -- according to Associated Press -- in Iraq crash a wedding and pumped a little boy full of lead in front of his mother. They killed dozens of innocent people with random machine guns fire, shoot the groom in the head and dragged those left alive to Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq where a Jewish doctor cuts out their organs, which he sells to rich people in New York City, London and Tel Aviv.

My question: What does this intense (inaudible) on Americans in Turkish society say about the State Department's effort to win back the support of the (inaudible) population, as well as Muslims across the world?

MR. MCCORMACK: I guess, given that description, you're not going to go see the movie. I don't do movie reviews.

Yes, ma'am.

QUESTION: On North Korea. North Korea has been refusing to come back to the six-party talks because of the sanctions that the U.S. has put on for their counterfeiting -- counterfeit currency production. The South Korean intelligence agency said today that we have no -- I mean, that South Korea doesn't have evidence of North Korea producing fake money after 1998. I wonder if you have anything to say on that.

MR. MCCORMACK: The only thing that I could say is -- well, a couple of things. One, these issues are completely separate: the issue of the six-party talks and the United States taking actions to defend itself, in this case, its currency, and to act against illegal acts committed by North Korea and its agents, those acting on its behalf. In terms of the information that underpins these actions, the Department of Treasury and other U.S. Government agencies very carefully went through this evidence, assembled it and based on the evidence took action. So we are fully confident of the actions that we have taken. And as President Bush has made clear, the United States will continue to act to defend itself, to defend its currency against those who would try to counterfeit U.S. money.

Yes.

QUESTION: Has the U.S., given that you're such strong allies with South Korea, have you asked to see their evidence which they say proves that North Korea has not done this since '98? Or has South Korea volunteered the evidence to you?

MR. MCCORMACK: I can't speak to that. I can't speak to what sort of intelligence exchanges may or may not have taken place. We have provided briefings by Treasury Department officials to South Korean officials, as well as Japanese officials and Chinese officials on this topic.

QUESTION: Which would make me think that there was some exchange of information or at least the South Koreans would have brought it up.

MR. MCCORMACK: Check with the Department of Treasury. I can't speak to it.

QUESTION: Sean, can I ask you about --

MR. MCCORMACK: Anything else on this?

Okay. Charlie hasn't had a question. We'll come back to you, Barry.

QUESTION: A different issue just to make sure -- can you update us on any calls the Secretary's made or received with foreign leaders perhaps in the Middle East, perhaps she's reached out to Hamas and we don't know about it? I just want to check and make sure that there haven’t been any calls.

MR. MCCORMACK: Thanks for checking in. No, nothing to report on that.

QUESTION: But no others, no Palestinians, Israeli leaders, anything like that?

MR. MCCORMACK: No.

QUESTION: In that same vein, the violence Israel encountered in removing Israeli residents from an outpost -- well, settlers I guess. Has Israel laid out for the Administration either specifically or at least in general terms -- after all there is a new acting prime minister -- how would it -- the extent to which it intends to go in removing additional people from the region? And have you said anything – and has the State Department said anything to them about their efforts?

MR. MCCORMACK: Certainly, we're aware of the news reports; we all saw it, Barry. These are certainly very difficult issues for the Israeli public. We understand that. I think we saw evidence of that yesterday. We understand that the Israeli Government is acting according to Israeli law and we have certainly on this, as well as other topics, been in touch with the Israeli Government but I don't have anything particular to offer on those exchanges.

QUESTION: On Hamas, Sean, forgive me if you addressed this yesterday, but the reaction to Russian President Vladimir Putin's statements on Hamas, specifically, that they do not recognize them as a terrorist organization and two, that they are opposed to any cutoff of aid. Do you have some reaction to that?

MR. MCCORMACK: Well, on the second of those, all I can say is the Quartet statement is very clear and Foreign Minister Lavrov was there, looked over the language very carefully and it's an agreed Quartet statement. In terms of designation of Hamas as a foreign terrorist organization or as a terrorist organization, those are obviously decisions that each country is going to have to make for itself -- organizations. The U.S. has made that decision, that finding based on the evidence. I think it's very clear evidence. The EU has found that Hamas is a terrorist organization as well.

So you know, again, each country will make those decisions for themselves based on the evidence available. We have come to the conclusion that they are a terrorist organization and we feel confident in making that judgment.

QUESTION: Can I follow-up on that? I mean, in the last couple of days what we've had is we've had the U.S. making its statements, but we've had Russia -- Putin -- making his statements that it's not a terrorist organization and they don't want aid cutoff. We have the Europeans talking about two or three months delay to give Hamas a chance to mend its ways. To what extent do you think that you still need to shore up -- that you have an actual unified tactical approach to Hamas as opposed to needed to shore up the tactics?

MR. MCCORMACK: Well, I think we do have a unified approach. We saw that quite clearly in the Quartet statement. I won't bother -- I won't bore you by going through and reading it again. But in that statement it said -- what it said was that -- a few things.

One, it laid out very clearly the conditions that Hamas should meet. It talked about the fact that we supported this interim caretaker government and that the other countries around the world, we would encourage them to find ways to support President Abbas in this interim period. And thirdly, it talked about the fact that each -- inevitably with a new government, after this caretaker government, inevitably each country would have to -- organization would have to evaluate its aid programs based on whether or not that new government had met out the conditions that were laid out by the Quartet statement -- renunciation of violence, adherence to previous commitments, international commitments made by the Palestinian Authority and recognition of the state of Israel.

So each individual -- as we move forward here, we have a -- there's a statement of principles. There's a common operating statement of principles from which each state, organization is going to proceed. I expect in the weeks and months ahead, as each country, the U.S. included, makes its evaluation of its aid programs, we're going to continue talking at the Quartet level, as well as at the bilateral level. But at this point, there aren't any final decisions regarding specific aid programs beyond what we have right now in supporting the interim government.

QUESTION: I have a couple of questions. President Carter gave an interview yesterday in which he said that since the U.S. is, you know, promoting democracy and promoted the elections, that the Palestinians deserve to let -- and the international community -- deserves to let Hamas form their government. And if you were to do so, that there's a good chance that given their -- at least some of their history on (inaudible) and things that this could actually be what guides them towards more policies of nonviolence and that the U.S. and the international community really need to nurture -- need to be actually more hands on in this.

MR. MCCORMACK: Well, quite clearly, the Quartet has a unified view on this. We believe that it is -- and you've heard from President Bush on this matter -- that it is incumbent upon Hamas to make some decisions now, based on what the world is calling upon them to do. Certainly, the Quartet thanked President Carter for his observations in his report, based on his experiences as an election observer on the ground.

The Quartet has spoken. It is very clear. And I think you've also heard from President Bush on this matter.

QUESTION: Sean, can I have one more on --

MR. MCCORMACK: Sure.

QUESTION: -- one more on the aid? Several pieces of legislation in Congress right now-- the Senate passed a resolution and now some in the House are sponsoring legislation, which would prohibit U.S. assistance to the Palestinian Authority when the new government takes over. Now, I know you're doing reviews of all your aid programs, but do you think it's responsible of Congress to try and legislate that? Does that limit Presidential power in terms of any decisions that you feel that you might consider --

MR. MCCORMACK: Well, these are questions that arise in a number of different issue areas, and in each of those areas we work very closely with the Congress -- very strongly held views, understandably, about this issue up on Capitol Hill. These are serious issues. And we look forward to working with members of Congress, members of the Senate, on this issue as they put forward their ideas how to deal with what is a unique set of circumstances. And we continue -- and will continue to work with them on those issues.

You've cited the fact that we're currently doing a review of all our aid programs and that review is not yet complete. We’ll see where that review comes out and we'll certainly be in contact with members of Congress, based on the findings of that aid review.

Yes, sir.

QUESTION: My Reuters colleagues up at the United Nations say that Ambassador Bolton has not followed the custom of the Security Council by starting his presidency with a big news conference. And I'm sort of wondering is that a new change of style or is there any significance to that situation?

MR. MCCORMACK: I don't know the sort of rules of the road up there at the UN. I know Ambassador Bolton engages very often with the press. He just had a briefing with our State Department press corps here earlier this week -- was it last week? -- late last week. So he certainly makes himself available to the press on a relatively frequent basis. As for whether or not he plans to do a formal press conference, I don't know. You'll have to check with him up there.

QUESTION: Change of subject? The Serbian government is now acknowledging that its military has protected Mladic in the past for years and years, including retired defense officials. What's your reaction to this, especially in light of the assurances that Nick Burns was given that they would be handing him over any minute now?

MR. MCCORMACK: Well, he has been captured. He has been sent to The Hague and that's a positive development. We call upon --

QUESTION: Mladic?

MR. MCCORMACK: Oh, excuse me. Not Mladic, no. No, not Mladic. I'm sorry. I was thinking of somebody else. I was thinking of somebody else.

QUESTION: Yeah, Mladic.

QUESTION: So he's still on the run.

QUESTION: Stop the bulletin.

MR. MCCORMACK: Stop the bulletin. Yes.

QUESTION: Okay.

MR. MCCORMACK: We have called upon all those who might have information concerning those wanted by The Hague for war crimes, to provide that information or to turn those individuals over and that is true today, unfortunately, for Mr. Mladic, as it was when these indictments were sent out. So we continue to urge all of these countries to turn over those who are wanted so that they may face justice for what they did.

QUESTION: That seems to be a fairly passive response to the government saying that it officially hid Mladic for years -- years that the United States, that NATO was searching for him.

MR. MCCORMACK: That would certainly be very disturbing if, in fact, it were true.

QUESTION: Would you check on -- I mean, Burns has had numerous discussions specifically on this subject with the Serbian government.

MR. MCCORMACK: If we have anything else to add I'll let you know.

QUESTION: And also, while you're checking, isn't there still a question of certification for Serbia coming up now?

MR. MCCORMACK: I'll check on it. I don't know.

QUESTION: Also, if you can check that. Okay.

MR. MCCORMACK: Sure.

Yes.

QUESTION: This is on Bulgaria and Iraq. The Bulgarians are saying that they're going to be sending troops back into Iraq. Can you provide any details on that or --

MR. MCCORMACK: Right now, we're talking to the Bulgarian government about what kind of contribution they might make to efforts in Iraq, how best their troops can make a contribution to the multinational forces’ ongoing efforts in Iraq, what sort of contribution would be most useful. There are at this point, no decisions yet. The Bulgarians have not yet made a decision on what their troops might do in Iraq. There are a number of different options that have been discussed with them. But at this point I'm not aware that they've made a final decision about what they may be doing.

QUESTION: Is it correct that they had troops and then they withdrew some of them? Is this a kind of practice you're going on to other former coalition members to say that, you know, now that the major combat is over, maybe you can send some troops back in different contingencies to do other things or is this something specific to the Bulgarians?

MR. MCCORMACK: Well, what we -- what a number of different countries have done is they have drawn down their level of combat troops as Iraqi forces have become more capable or as they were no longer needed in particular areas. That's based on the judgment of multinational force commanders on the ground.

Now, what we have asked each of these countries to do, as they have drawn down that kind of contribution, to consider what other kinds of contributions they might make, whether that would also involve combat troops perhaps doing something else or different types of troops that might be involved in training, for example. Or we've asked them to consider other kinds of contributions, whether those be financial contributions or contributions in expertise, for example, training in ministries -- how to run ministries. So those are the kinds of things that we've talked to various members of the coalition about. We've talked to the Bulgarians about, in this particular case, what kind of contribution their troops might make, as opposed to what they were doing before.

QUESTION: Is it premature the reports that they would come back to be guards at Camp Asraf?

MR. MCCORMACK: Again, as I said, I'm not aware that Bulgaria has made that decision. We have not heard from them about what they have decided their troops might be doing and as I said, there were a number of different options. So they may, in fact, have made that decision but we have not been informed of it.

QUESTION: Well, just as a side note. And what's the status of the Iranians that are now held at Camp Asraf?

MR. MCCORMACK: The Camp Asraf is still operating. As for the details of that I'd refer you over to the Department of Defense. They're responsible for that.

QUESTION: Follow-up on this – (inaudible) your bases in Bulgaria, which has been announced a long time ago but so far it has not been materialized from this region.

MR. MCCORMACK: Our military bases?

QUESTION: Yes. Yes.

MR. MCCORMACK: Check with my colleagues over at the Department of Defense.

QUESTION: And one more –very short -- any response to my pending question regarding the agreement between Russia and Turkey for a joint naval military fleet in the Black Sea to fight international terrorism?

MR. MCCORMACK: We checked this out and we can't find any details that would underpin this question. So if you have anything else that you can offer to us in way of details it -- after the briefing I'd be happy to explore -- explore with our colleagues here in the State Department --

QUESTION: It did not come to my imagination. It was said specifically in the Russian parliament that --

MR. MCCORMACK: I'm not saying it came to your imagination. I'm just saying that in our consultations within the Department here, we have not been able to pin down exactly what it is that these people you are quoting are referring to.

QUESTION: Thank you, Mr. McCormack.

MR. MCCORMACK: Okay.

(The briefing was concluded at 1:17 p.m.)

DPB # 18