MR. ERELI: Hello, everybody. I don't have any announcements so we can go straight to your questions.

QUESTION: Well, you guys are pleased by the latest congressional action on the India nuclear technology legislation. Are there other things that Congress needs to do for the deal to be pushed forward?

MR. ERELI: Well, we're very pleased and we welcome the strong bipartisan support that has been expressed so far for the civil nuclear cooperation initiative. As you suggest, the Senate Foreign Relations Committee voted 16-2 for the legislation and the House International Relations Committee voted 37-5 in support of it. So what we've seen is a strong and positive reception to date. Both committees have worked hard on this legislation and we certainly appreciate that and value the partnership and cooperation that we've enjoyed with them so far.

The legislation will now be considered by the full House and the full Senate. We will continue to work with Congress, as we have in the past, to address remaining issues in the legislation, in the bill. Obviously it has to be -- it has to go through some more work, but we're confident that will be a cooperative and a good process and it will end up with something that everybody can support and that serves the interests of the United States and our strong partner, India.

QUESTION: I'm still not clear, though. If the -- maybe I misunderstand. Is there some collateral legislation or some amendments that are necessary or will be considered?

MR. ERELI: No, I don't think so. I think that there's one legislative package and this is it. It's not finalized. It's been approved by committees. It has to be approved by the full House and Senate. There might be -- there will be some, probably, changes based on consultations with those two chambers. There are a couple of remaining issues to be addressed. Discussions are ongoing. I'm not in a position to really get into any detail. But as I said, the package we have before us is what we're working on and we think it'll -- and we're confident that it will end up positive and end up fulfilling the vision of President Bush and the President of India -- I'm sorry, the Prime Minister of India, consistent with the statements they made in July of 2005 and March of this year.

QUESTION: Exactly. Now you are confirming that there will be changes and there are issues to be resolved, and I'm trying to get at what these issues are. Do they go to safeguards? Do they go to -- is the legislation still pinned on we trust India, they're great guys? Is there something there? Are there hurdles, other things that have to be approved? And if you change the legislation, doesn't it have to go through the process all over again?

MR. ERELI: Yeah. No, Barry, the way I'd -- again, the way I'd put is there are a few remaining issues to be worked out and we think we'll be able to do that without reopening or -- reopening the whole process or changing the path that has been outlined so far.

QUESTION: New topic? New Usama bin Laden tape. It's an audio message but shows his picture.

MR. ERELI: Right.

QUESTION: He pays tribute to Zarqawi and vows more attacks against the Middle East and Africa. Are you attaching any significance to this tape? Any particular reaction?

MR. ERELI: My reaction would be -- our reaction would be what it has been in the past, which is that al-Qaida remains active, it remains a threat. They've suffered, obviously, setbacks, significant setbacks. Most of their leadership has been killed or is in jail. Their capabilities have been lessened but they still remain a threat. The fight against al-Qaida and others who practice terror is going to be a long one. This tape demonstrates that we still have our work cut out for us.

But I think the important point to make is that, you know, you're talking about Zarqawi -- he was talking about Zarqawi and the fact of the matter is those who advocate terror and practice terror I think are finding, particularly in Iraq, less and less support, less and less room to maneuver, stricter and stricter constraints. The people of Iraq have voted for democracy over -- have chosen democracy over violence, have voted with their feet, are participating in a common national endeavor. And that's bad news for the terrorists, but we must remain resolute, we must remain committed, we must remain engaged, and that's certainly what we're going to do.

Yes.

QUESTION: Adam, I know Africa Secretary Frazer just came out with a statement concerning Somalia, but apparently the Islamists today say they now have full authority in the country. And you probably heard our questions a week ago with the -- perhaps a border clash with the Ethiopians. But what has to be done in order to make certain that that government does come to a democracy or some sort of even keel and maybe not put Sharia law in and other -- slide backwards?

MR. ERELI: Well, you've seen the number of developments over the last couple of weeks, I think that all of which answer your question. You've seen the statement out of the Somalia Contact Group, which said that the Transitional Federal Charter and the institutions are the legitimate framework for the continued process of reestablishing governance in Somalia. You saw the statement coming out of the consultations in Khartoum between the factions of Somalia, talking about commitment to strengthening the institutions of the Transitional Federal Charter and committing to dialogue.

So that's the process that we see as the way forward for dealing with the issues of Somalia. I've seen the statements. We've seen, obviously, the statements coming out of the Islamic Courts today. Our response would be the political future of Somalia is and must be the product of dialogue between the parties of Somalia in the context of the Transitional Federal Charter and through the institutions of that charter.

QUESTION: Yesterday, Assistant Secretary Frazer said that the U.S. would try and boost the credibility of the transitional government in Baidoa by helping it out, et cetera. How, on a practical level, do you intend to help this government and to make it stronger so that it's not sort of cowering in Baidoa?

MR. ERELI: I think you've seen the -- you have an indication of how we're going to do that and the way we're going to work this issue through the statement of the Somalia Contact Group and in support of the dialogue between the parties and its support of the Transitional Federal Charter and its support of those institutions.

Now, you obviously -- you've got a fluid situation in Somalia. You've got different groups in control of different territories with a variety of ambitions and agendas. The way to deal with this is for the United States and for the Somalia Contact Group is to work through the institutions of the Transitional Federal Charter to have a process of peaceful dialogue so that political and economic stability can be restored and obviously so that the humanitarian needs of the Somali people can be addressed in an environment of stability. Again it's fluid. It's dynamic. The situation is changing all the time. But the key element here is a process of dialogue that is sustained and that's what we're working toward.

QUESTION: But this -- I mean, it might be very helpful to encourage dialogue and all that, but they also need a proper police force and they need to be able to protect themselves. Does the U.S. have any plans to provide funding for a Somali police force and to try and improve these institutions?

MR. ERELI: Yeah. I don't know really how far along we are in our sort of thinking on that. I think it is important to note that we have for some time been working with different Somali groups and factions in a concerted effort to prevent Somalia from being used as a safe haven for terror and that's an important interest in the United States, an important interest of all us who are concerned about that part of the world. As far as specific programs or resources devoted to developing Somalia national institutions, frankly I think the question is a little bit premature.

QUESTION: Which particular groups have you been helping to prevent it from being a safe haven?

MR. ERELI: I don't have anything more to say.

QUESTION: Because you're just saying that, you know, you've been helping these particular groups. So maybe if you could take that as a question, which groups --

MR. ERELI: I'll see if we've got any more to say on it than we've already said in the past.

QUESTION: And also I asked about three weeks, as a taken question, is to comment on John Prendergast assertion from the Crisis Group that the U.S. is funding, or has been funding, these anti-terror warlords to the tune of $100,000. So if you could take --

MR. ERELI: I don't know if that's a -- if the answer to that question lies at the State Department, but --

QUESTION: Well, if you could take it and then come back and say it doesn't lie in the State Department.

MR. ERELI: I'll see what I can get for you.

QUESTION: Thank you.

MR. ERELI: Yeah.

QUESTION: Can we change the subject?

MR. ERELI: Mm-hmm.

QUESTION: Iranian Foreign Minister Motaki said yesterday at the UN that they are going August. On the other hand, the P+1 they said that we need your answer before G-8 summit.

MR. ERELI: Right.

QUESTION: With this conflict, what you are going to do?

MR. ERELI: Well, we've seen statements like this before. I will simply repeat what the United States, as well as the other members of the P-5+1 consensus have already made clear mostly recently in the G-8 communiqué issued in Moscow yesterday, which is that we expect an answer from -- a substantive and considered response from the Iranians on July 5th.

QUESTION: What is the next occasion, the next venue, for the group -- a group, not necessarily a mechanical group -- to get together and --

MR. ERELI: As I said yesterday, the plan is for Larijani and Solana to meet on July 5th and for the P-5+1 foreign ministers to meet on July 12th.

QUESTION: Do you have any indication where they're going to meet yet?

MR. ERELI: I don't have, you know, details on that at this point.

QUESTION: The Iranians have indicated they have --

MR. ERELI: I'm sorry.

QUESTION: No, the P-5+1.

MR. ERELI: Yeah.

QUESTION: This is not the G-8 group.

MR. ERELI: No. P-5+1.

QUESTION: And July 12th.

MR. ERELI: Yes.

QUESTION: The Iranians have indicated they have further questions that they want to ask Mr. Solana on July 5th at that meeting. So do you think it's realistic to expect that they will -- that Larijani himself, without going back and discussing things more, would actually be able to give a response?

MR. ERELI: Again, I'd refer you to the G-8 communiqué for specifically what we're looking for. I think we've made it clear that we believe that they've had a reasonable period to look at this proposal and we think that it's -- that the time has come for a response and we look forward to that on July 5th.

QUESTION: To your knowledge, have they gotten back to Mr. Solana in the meantime and asked any questions by phone or anything like that?

MR. ERELI: I don’t know. I don't know. I mean, I don't have details that I can report to you about communications between Mr. Larijani and Mr. Solana. I think that the meeting on July 5th is where they will present where they are at the present time.

QUESTION: But you can't even say if there's been any communication?

MR. ERELI: I just -- I don't have that information.

Yeah.

QUESTION: Okay. Are there any plans between July 5th and July 12th for political directors to meet? I mean --

MR. ERELI: I'll check and see if there are any plans to have meetings between July 5th and July 12th.

QUESTION: You would assume that before the ministers meeting that once they -- if they're taking that time to assess. Okay.

QUESTION: Along the same lines, I mean, this is so important to you all, so there are two things that --

MR. ERELI: And then they may do it by phone.

QUESTION: Yeah.

QUESTION: Well, that's right. That's the question. Do you know of anything in the works so far as --

MR. ERELI: I'll put it this way, Barry, that first of all --

QUESTION: It's a long weekend.

MR. ERELI: First of all, the foreign ministers were all together yesterday. So it's not as if the sort of trail has gone cold on this.

QUESTION: No, and it's not as if they convinced Iran of anything.

MR. ERELI: Second of all, Under Secretary Burns, Under Secretary Joseph, the Secretary, on any given day, in contact with a number of their P-5+1 counterparts. So I would expect the sort of the pace of those contacts to, at a minimum, continue. Whether it's in the form of a conference call or whether it's in the form of a meeting somewhere, I wouldn't want to say. I don't know. But I think that you can be sure that consultation will be continued, close, ongoing and fully adequate to take meaningful action on July 12th.

QUESTION: All right. Now, what about Russia and China? I mean, this format -- the G-8, of course, had Russia involved. Now --

MR. ERELI: And the P-5+1.

QUESTION: Oh, that's right, excuse me. I beg your pardon, my mistake.

MR. ERELI: Yes, Dmitri.

QUESTION: I actually wanted to go back to the issue of new bin Laden tape.

MR. ERELI: Okay.

QUESTION: Do you know what happened to the body of Zarqawi? Who is in the possession of his remains?

MR. ERELI: I don't know.

QUESTION: Is it the coalition or given to a relative?

MR. ERELI: I'll check. I doubt it, but -- actually, two points. One is, if you want to ask if the MNFI has it, ask the MNFI. I don't know. I'd refer you to the MNFI. I don't know the disposition of the remains and I'd refer you to the Iraqis for that.

Yeah.

QUESTION: A day ago it's been in the news. Is there an ongoing policy dispute between the Russians and us? Apparently, some words between Secretary Rice and Lavrov were said after or in the Moscow meetings concerning security in Iraq. Has that been resolved or --

MR. ERELI: I think you saw a common position in the G-8 communiqué which represented, again, a common view among all participants in the meeting. And that view holds that democracy and stability in Iraq is important to all of us and that we are going to work together in support of that.

QUESTION: One more?

MR. ERELI: Mm-hmm.

QUESTION: Have you received an official communications from Moscow explaining what exactly President Putin ordered the special services?

MR. ERELI: No, don't have anything new for you on that.

Sir.

QUESTION: Mr. Ereli, on Armenia. We need your philosophy today. Why are DOS officials prohibited to use the word "genocide" and speak truthfully when discussing the Armenian genocide? This happened before yesterday in the Congress during the testimony of a new U.S. Ambassador to Armenia. Senator Norm Coleman, a Republican from Minnesota, stated, "I am not sure how we can continue to have an ambassador to Armenia who can be effective unless they give recognition to the genocide."

And the veteran senator Joseph Biden against Senate approval of new ambassador until the Department of State responds to question on Ambassador Evans' recall.

MR. ERELI: What's the question? What's the question?

QUESTION: The question: Any comment since you know, very, very well the issue?

MR. ERELI: I don't have any comment. I think that as far as the senators' questions go, we will respond as we normally do in formal channels to the members of Congress, should they ask for that. And as far as our stand on this issue goes, there's no change. And if you'd like a restatement of it, I'd refer you to the record.

QUESTION: A follow-up. Why any U.S. ambassador to Israel would not have credibility if he refuse to talk about the Holocaust by the Nazi Germany and in the case of Armenia is happening exactly the opposite.

MR. ERELI: I reject the premise of the question.

QUESTION: Why?

MR. ERELI: Because I think it's fallacious.

QUESTION: And one more. May we have a copy of the Department of State's "background papers" on the Armenian genocide that Ambassador Hoagland stated the other day he started reparation for his possible post to Armenia?

MR. ERELI: No, I think that what is available in the public record is what we can provide.

QUESTION: Does the State Department have a judgment about the arrests Israel has made of Palestinian cabinet members, et cetera? The Palestinian officials are calling it kidnapping, by the way. But I wonder if you think they were justified in making the arrests or at least it's their decision, or did they kidnap people?

MR. ERELI: I will limit my comments on this matter to what was put out in the G-8 communiqué yesterday, which I think you've seen and which I spoke to yesterday. It is -- the arrest of these -- the elected members and ministers raises particular concerns. I think as you know we continue to be engaged with the Israelis, with the Palestinians, with the Egyptians and with others, first and foremost to get the release of the soldier and to ensure that restraint is exercised by all and innocent civilians are protected and humanitarian concerns are addressed. And that's what's guiding our actions in this and that's the way we view this particular -- that particular action.

QUESTION: Do you have any comment on the description "kidnapping"?

MR. ERELI: No.

QUESTION: Did the Israelis kidnap these people?

MR. ERELI: You know, Barry, I'll just limit myself to what we said in the G-8 communiqué.

QUESTION: And are you seeing the kind of restraint generally that you've been asking for?

MR. ERELI: Well, I think, you know, obviously we would like to see this situation resolved and a return to peaceful dialogue. That I think is in the interest of all parties. It's important to remember that this crisis was precipitated by hostage-taking and that hostage-taking needs to end, and that is the goal to which we are all -- I think to which we are all devoting so much effort and energy from the Secretary, again, from the Secretary on down.

Israel has taken actions it deems necessary for its defense. We recognize Israel's right to defense -- right to defend itself. We also urge restraint and urge that innocents be protected. So far I think in terms of the protection of innocents, its performance has been pretty good.

QUESTION: Adam, President Mubarak of Egypt has demanded Hamas be expelled from Syria. Is that his view or is that your view also or --

MR. ERELI: Who said that?

QUESTION: President Mubarak of Egypt.

MR. ERELI: I think -- I didn't see that statement. I think that we all recognize that Syrian support for Hamas, both by having a Hamas office in Damascus and both material and diplomatic and other forms of support, is support for terror and is wrong and needs to end. We've made that clear for some time. We've made -- we've told the Syrians that it's important that they shut down the offices of Hamas and they shut down the offices of those who support terror. To the extent that the Egyptians are saying the same thing, I think it shows a unanimity of views.

QUESTION: Does this call for restraint extend to your possibly calling for the release of the cabinet ministers?

MR. ERELI: I will -- again, I'll just leave it where it is.

QUESTION: But you're concerned about them?

MR. ERELI: It is -- the detention is -- raises issues of particular concern, yes.

QUESTION: And could you go a little bit beyond that? Because I can think of at least two possibilities. There must be myriad reasons for your concern. I wonder if you consider it unjustified, illegal --

MR. ERELI: I don't want to -- I'm not going to --

QUESTION: Or do you figure it's going to escalate tensions or what? What's worrying you, the State Department, the NEA?

MR. ERELI: What we would --

QUESTION: What's worrying the NEA about this?

MR. ERELI: Again, what we would like to see, frankly, is a resolution of this crisis. I'm not going to get into a broad or detailed characterization of every action that's been taken. I think what -- the way we view events has been made quite clear; that they were provoked by an unjustified act of hostage-taking, that Israel has the right to defend itself and take the actions necessary for its defense. The detention of the lawmakers raises particular concerns. Innocents should be protected. Restraint should be exercised. And most importantly, the hostage, the innocent soldier, should be released.

Yes.

QUESTION: I believe a Hamas leader today said that the goal of the Israelis was to take down the Hamas-led government and it was a premeditated goal all along here. What is your reaction to that?

MR. ERELI: Again, I'm not going to -- I don't want to offer a running commentary on every move that's taken in this crisis. I think you know --

QUESTION: But --

MR. ERELI: I'm sorry. I think you know what the U.S. position is. I think you know what the U.S. -- United States has been trying to accomplish here. We are guided by, number one, our firm and utter rejection of terrorist practices and our respect for innocent life and our desire to see that life respected and our commitment to doing everything we can to bring about a peaceful resolution of this through diplomacy.

Yes.

QUESTION: What's your view on a possible vote at the United Nations on a statement condemning Israel, what they're going to call Israel's aggression?

MR. ERELI: This is an issue that we're working on in the United Nations. I think our views on one-sided actions against Israel at the United Nations are well known. Any move, any vote, any measure needs to clearly and explicitly recognize the terrorist dimension to what's going on.

QUESTION: Do you know -- have you seen a text yet?

MR. ERELI: I have not.

QUESTION: Has John Bolton?

MR. ERELI: I think it's being worked. I don't know if they've gotten to the point of having a text.

Mm-hmm.

QUESTION: Change of subject if we're done with this. Do you have any comment in advance of the Mexican election on Sunday?

MR. ERELI: I don't, other than this is a sign of a vibrant and dynamic and successful democracy in Mexico, which is something good for Mexico and good for the hemisphere, and we wish the Mexican people well in exercising their democratic rights to elect their leadership. And we'll respect their choice and work with whomever they choose.

QUESTION: There have been reports in past elections of votes being bought, especially in rural areas. Does that concern you in this election?

MR. ERELI: I think as I said, Mexico has a vibrant and dynamic democracy and Mexican institutions are fully capable of dealing with any -- you know, with any irregularities and ensuring the principles of rule of law and transparency.

QUESTION: Do you have comment on the resolution possibility? You know, that it must recognize the U.S. view on terror, factor in your mind how the U.S. almost always has blocked -- vetoed one-sided resolutions. You want to go a step further, maybe? Do you want to say if it -- if a resolution recognizes the terrorist dimension and also criticizes Israel for responding to it, the U.S. would vote for it?

MR. ERELI: No, I don't want to speculate on what may or may not come out of the UN. I would tell you that -- again, as you know -- the United States has firm views on these types of issues and we will make them clear in this debate, as we have in the past.

QUESTION: And also, you have no objections to getting into this subject at the UN? You think -- it seems to be the UN, once again, is absorbed in the Arab-Israeli conflict, as it is ,by no stretch of the imagination, by any other issue. They seem to have a compulsion to rap Israel on the nose.

MR. ERELI: Well, I think that --

QUESTION: Would you rather they stay out of this?

MR. ERELI: We believe that for those who are truly interested in peace in the Middle East, they would do well to work energetically to fight terror and to prevent those seeking to undermine peace and undermine a two-state vision from engaging in the kind of activity that they've historically engaged in.

Yes, sir.

QUESTION: The UN spending cap being lifted, what's the U.S.'s position on that?

MR. ERELI: I think I would refer you to the statement by our Ambassador to the UN, Ambassador Bolton, that was made yesterday, I believe, in which the United States disassociated itself from the consensus. We believe that management practices and reform are long overdue and that raising the spending cap doesn't necessarily support moving in that direction. And I think our views are explained in more detail in that statement.

QUESTION: But your Assistant Secretary Silverberg had said that he didn't support --

MR. ERELI: She.

QUESTION: Hmm?

MR. ERELI: She.

QUESTION: She, sorry. That she didn't support limiting -- cutting off funding to the UN if that --

MR. ERELI: That's a different issue. The United States will continue to fund the UN, but at the same time we believe that based on our level of contributions, we have a -- there is a strong reason for the UN to undertake reform and to manage its resources responsibly and that we have a big stake in that as the largest contributor.

QUESTION: On the long ride home, are you aware -- do you happen to know if the Secretary has made any significant telephone calls to Livni, to Abbas?

MR. ERELI: The Secretary has called Foreign Minister Livni again today.

QUESTION: From the plane?

MR. ERELI: I believe so.

QUESTION: She could have done it from Shannon. En route?

MR. ERELI: En route.

QUESTION: And again, not Abbas?

MR. ERELI: Not Abbas.

QUESTION: So that's the fourth or fifth?

MR. ERELI: Fourth, I think, in the last three days.

QUESTION: Yeah.

QUESTION: What about the Egyptians?

MR. ERELI: No.

QUESTION: Okay. Thank you.

MR. ERELI: Well, just if I might?

QUESTION: Yeah.

MR. ERELI: This is my last briefing.

QUESTION: Oh.

QUESTION: Oh, yeah.

QUESTION: Good luck.

(Laughter.)

MR. ERELI: I want to thank you all for three great years. You're great professionals and you're true friends. And I also want to pay tribute to a group of people who don't get much coverage, but without whom none of us could really do our job. And those are the brave men and women working in our embassies overseas. They are the Foreign Service Officers, the Foreign Service Nationals and the civil servants abroad who, day in and day out, are doing the hard work of diplomacy. Their work may make the news, but they don't and I think it's important that we take a moment to recognize them.

Every day all over the world there are hundreds and there are thousands of them who are putting themselves in harm's way, who are often separated from their families and their loved ones and that are engaged in great personal sacrifice to work on behalf of the American people.

This includes, for instance, we talked about it today, our staff at the Consulate in Jerusalem who, frankly, probably hasn't a weekend in a long time, as they try to help the Palestinian people.
It includes a lot of people in Baghdad who, I can tell you from personal experience, work 12 to 18 hours a day for seven days a week and have mortars falling on them pretty regularly. It includes USAID personnel going out to refugee camps in Darfur, living in incredibly difficult conditions, trying to keep thousands of people from starving and trying to get them back to their homes. It includes DART teams who go on a moment's notice to earthquake sites or tsunami sites and spend days without, very little food, very little sleep, very little shelter to try to save lives and bring relief to people in need.

These are, again, the men and women of the State Department working overseas, putting themselves in harm's way, sacrificing for their country and trying to make the world a better place. They represent the very best of America and, frankly, they're a lot like you, the journalists, who have your colleagues in similar situations in similarly difficult places, making similar sacrifices, all for a higher purpose and a noble cause, and I think we owe them all a debt of gratitude. It has been an honor to serve with them and with you. And it's been a privilege to try and faithfully represent to you their accomplishments and to work with you to present to the people of the United States and the world the wonderful work they and all the dedicated men and women of the State Department do on behalf of this great country. Thank you.

QUESTION: Well, we owe you a debt of gratitude for being responsive, your veracity, for your patience and for your willingness to take sometimes terribly redundant questions -- (laughter) -- and deal with them and for not making speeches from the rostrum, which is sometimes the case in other situations, for just responding to the reporters' needs and questions. And we are grateful and we wish you the very, very best and I think everybody feels that way.

MR. ERELI: Well, I'm going to congratulate you, Barry, on outlasting another spokesman. (Laughter.) So put another notch in your pencil.

QUESTION: Thank you.

QUESTION: May I make a comment?

MR. ERELI: Yes.

QUESTION: Mr. Ereli, I would like to thank you very much for your services to us. Mr. Ereli, without exaggeration, you were for three years always a very decent and human being as well as devoted U.S. senior official by all means. Good luck to you in your new position in order to promote the best of the U.S. foreign policy.

Once again, thank you very much.

MR. ERELI: Thank you. (Applause.)

(The briefing was concluded at 1:22 p.m.)