Middle East Digest - October 21, 2008Bureau of Public Affairs The Middle East Digest provides text and audio from the Daily Press Briefing. For the full briefings, please visit daily press briefings. From the Daily Press Briefing of October 21, 2008 MR. MCCORMACK: I haven’t called it that. I called it a text, Matt. QUESTION: No, they called it that. MR. MCCORMACK: Well, the process clearly continues. QUESTION: Well, is this something that -- MR. MCCORMACK: As we have been saying, the Iraqis are considering the text. I’ve seen the press reports about – from the Iraqi Prime Minister’s spokesman, but we have yet to receive any formal comments back. I think we’ll withhold any reaction until we have comments – formal comments back from the Iraqi Government. We believe that this is a good text. We wouldn’t have had the Secretary of State and the Secretary of Defense making phone calls about this text if we didn’t think it was a good text. So we’ll see what the Iraqi comments are. QUESTION: Right. Well, as a general principle, though, are you willing to look at alterations or changes in it? Or was this – what was presented to them, whenever it was, last week, ten days ago, was that a take-it-or-leave-it proposition? MR. MCCORMACK: We believe it’s a good text. We believe it’s a good text. QUESTION: So is it – so is it -- QUESTION: Right. But I mean, if the Iraqis aren’t going to sign onto it, I mean, you may not have much other choice than to work with them on some kind of amendments. MR. MCCORMACK: Let’s see – let’s see what their comments are. But we believe that this is a good, solid text. QUESTION: The fact that it was unanimous, that all of them want changes, means that – don’t you have to give? MR. MCCORMACK: Like we said, we think it’s a good text. QUESTION: Yeah, but I mean, Sean, the Iraqis are saying that they don’t think it’s a good, solid text. So isn’t there some kind of meeting in the middle of the two? MR. MCCORMACK: We’ll see what the Iraqi comments are. And I can repeat that it’s a good text if you -- QUESTION: Do you know if Ambassador Crocker or anyone has plans to – you say you haven’t heard or seen the comments that – or at least formally officially seen them? MR. MCCORMACK: We haven’t gotten that. We have seen the press reports. QUESTION: Do you know if there are meetings? Right, I know. But do you know if there were any meetings or calls set up -- MR. MCCORMACK: Does he have a meeting set up? QUESTION: -- to receive those -- MR. MCCORMACK: I imagine that he does. I’ll check for you. I imagine that he does. I don’t know. QUESTION: In terms of the Secretary’s outreach on this? MR. MCCORMACK: Nothing new on that since the calls that we reported. QUESTION: There’s also a briefing of the Hill and various members of Congress going on. Have they expressed to you that they think that there’s any need for amendments? MR. MCCORMACK: Well, you – I’ve seen various comments in public from, you know, important congressmen and important senators. I’ll let those speak for themself. Lach. QUESTION: Hoshyar Zebari says that it’s unlikely it will be passed by the parliament by November 4th. MR. MCCORMACK: We’re working to get it completed and finally agreed upon as quickly as possible. QUESTION: Is it still your intent to have it done by the end of the year when the UN Security Council mandate expires? MR. MCCORMACK: We’re focused on getting this done. QUESTION: Wouldn’t it be nice, though, for – in terms of if you didn’t have to prepare an extra SOFA briefing book for the transition team? I mean, if this thing was done and taken care of, presumably, there wouldn’t be that much need to -- MR. MCCORMACK: Like I said, we’re – we are working as assiduously and with as much energy as we can to get this done. QUESTION: And have you – and I know I keep asking this, but some (inaudible) a response may be a little different. So no consideration is being given to the possibility of seeking an extension for the Security Council mandate? MR. MCCORMACK: Focused on getting the SOFA done. Yes, ma’am. QUESTION: (Inaudible) about the SOFA, would legislative approval from both the parliament – Iraqi parliament and Congress be required to finalize the elements of the Status of Forces Agreement? MR. MCCORMACK: For the U.S. side, no. For the Iraqi side, they will have their own laws and procedures that govern what they do. QUESTION: I’m just curious. Why wouldn't congressional approval be required? I know they’ve held a couple of hearings probing into why, you know, they’re not included in finalizing the agreement. Why aren’t they? MR. MCCORMACK: Typically, SOFA agreements aren’t subject to congressional approval. QUESTION: Thank you. QUESTION: Can I just follow up on that? MR. MCCORMACK: Sure. QUESTION: It’s clear that there’s no congressional approval needed. MR. MCCORMACK: Right. QUESTION: But are you willing to – obviously, it seems that the Iraqis will need to have some amendments made to the text. Even if you say that you think it’s a good text, obviously, the Iraqis want to reopen it. Are you willing to take the considerations of Congress into account when you’re negotiating this? Or, you know, are you – again, is it clearly like a, we’re briefing the Congress on what our text is and that’s it? MR. MCCORMACK: Look, this is an executive branch responsibility. All of that said, we have briefed the Congress on this. And you know, of course, people on our side of the table hear what they have to say; but first and foremost, this is an executive branch responsibility. QUESTION: I understand. But are they briefings or consultations? MR. MCCORMACK: I would say it’s – they’re briefings. They’re sold and advertised as briefings. QUESTION: Thank you. |
 | |||
|
