Bush radio address 01/13/07 full audio, text transcript

bush radio address 01/13/07 full audio, text transcript. PODCAST and, President's Radio Address .

Subscribe to Our Odeo or podnova Podcast Channel and receive the weekly Presidential Radio Address in English and Spanish with select State Department Briefings. Featuring real audio and full text transcripts, More content Sources added often so stay tuned.

THE PRESIDENT: Good morning. On Wednesday night, I addressed the Nation from the White House to lay out a new strategy that will help Iraq's democratic government succeed.

America's new strategy comes after a difficult year in Iraq. In 2006, the terrorists and insurgents fought to reverse the extraordinary democratic gains the Iraqis have made. In February, the extremists bombed a holy Shia mosque in a deliberate effort to provoke reprisals that would set off a sectarian conflict. They succeeded, and the ongoing sectarian violence, especially in Baghdad, is making all other progress difficult.

Only the Iraqis can end the sectarian violence and secure their people. Their leaders understand this, and they are stepping forward to do it. But they need our help, and it is in our interests to provide that help. The changes in our strategy will help the Iraqis in four main areas:

First, we will help the Iraqis execute their aggressive plan to secure their capital. Eighty percent of Iraq's sectarian violence occurs within 30 miles of Baghdad. The new plan to secure Baghdad fixes the problems that prevented previous operations from succeeding. This time, there will be adequate Iraqi and U.S. forces to hold the areas that have been cleared, including more Iraqi forces and five additional brigades of American troops committed to Baghdad. This time, Iraqi and American forces will have a green light to enter neighborhoods that are home to those fueling sectarian violence. Prime Minister Maliki has pledged that political or sectarian interference with security operations will not be tolerated.

Second, America will step up the fight against al Qaeda in its home base in Iraq -- Anbar province. Our military forces in Anbar are killing and capturing al Qaeda leaders, and protecting the local population. Recently, local tribal leaders have begun to show their willingness to take on al Qaeda. And as a result, our commanders believe we have an opportunity to deal a serious blow to the terrorists, so I've given orders to increase American forces in Anbar province by 4,000 troops. These troops will work with Iraqi and tribal forces to increase the pressure on the terrorists. America's men and women in uniform took away al Qaeda's safe haven in Afghanistan, and we will not allow them to reestablish it in Iraq.

Third, America will hold the Iraqi government to benchmarks it has announced. These include taking responsibility for security in all of Iraq's provinces by November, passing legislation to share oil revenues among all Iraqis, and spending $10 billion of its own money on reconstruction projects that will create new jobs. These are strong commitments. And the Iraqi government knows that it must meet them, or lose the support of the Iraqi and the American people.

Fourth, America will expand our military and diplomatic efforts to bolster the security of Iraq and protect American interests in the Middle East. We will address the problem of Iran and Syria allowing terrorists and insurgents to use their territory to move in and out of Iraq. We will encourage countries like Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Jordan, and the Gulf states to increase their economic assistance to Iraq. Secretary Rice has gone to the region to continue the urgent diplomacy required to help bring peace to the Middle East.

My national security team is now making our case on Capitol Hill. We recognize that many members of Congress are skeptical. Some say our approach is really just more troops for the same strategy. In fact, we have a new strategy with a new mission: helping secure the population, especially in Baghdad. Our plan puts Iraqis in the lead.

Others worry that we are pursuing a purely military solution that makes a political solution less likely. In fact, the sectarian violence is the main obstacle to a political solution, and the best way to help the Iraqis reach this solution is to help them put down this violence.

Members of Congress have a right to express their views, and express them forcefully. But those who refuse to give this plan a chance to work have an obligation to offer an alternative that has a better chance for success. To oppose everything while proposing nothing is irresponsible.

Whatever our differences on strategy and tactics, we all have a duty to ensure that our troops have what they need to succeed. Thousands of young men and women are preparing to join an important mission that will in large part determine the outcome in Iraq. Our brave troops should not have to wonder if their leaders in Washington will give them what they need. I urge members of Congress to fulfill their responsibilities, make their views known, and to always support our men and women in harm's way.

Thank you for listening.

END, For Immediate Release, Office of the Press Secretary, January 13, 2007

Technorati Tags: President Bush and White House radio address or holy Shia mosque and sectarian violence or Baghdad and al Qaeda or Capitol Hill and Members of Congress or Iraq and PODCAST

Discurso Radial del Presidente a la Nación 01/13/07

forre el audio de la dirección de radio 01/13/07 por completo, transcripción del texto. (nota de los redactores: ninguna lengua española mp3 lanzó esta semana, apesadumbrada) PODCAST Discurso Radial del Presidente.

Suscribir a nuestro canal de Podcast de Odeo o del podnova y recibir la dirección de radio presidencial semanal en inglés y español con informes selectos del departamento del estado. Ofreciendo transcripciones audio y con texto completo verdaderas, más fuentes contentas agregaron a menudo así que la estancia templó.

Buenos Días. El miércoles por la noche hablé a la Nación desde la Casa Blanca para detallar una nueva estrategia que ayudará al gobierno democrático de Irak a lograr el éxito.

La nueva estrategia de Estados Unidos viene después de un año difícil en Irak. En el 2006, los terroristas e insurgentes lucharon por dar marcha atrás a los extraordinarios logros democráticos que los iraquíes han logrado. En febrero, los extremistas bombardearon una santa mezquita shia en un esfuerzo deliberado por provocar represalias que hubieran desencadenado un conflicto sectario. Lo lograron. Y la violencia sectaria actual, especialmente en Bagdad, está dificultando cualquier otro progreso.

Solo los iraquíes pueden poner fin a la violencia sectaria y traer seguridad a su pueblo. Sus líderes comprenden esto y están tomando medidas para hacerlo. Pero necesitan nuestra ayuda, y está en nuestro interés proporcionar esa ayuda. Los cambios en nuestra estrategia ayudarán a los iraquíes en cuatro áreas principales:

Primero, ayudaremos a los iraquíes a llevar a cabo su plan agresivo para hacer segura su capital. Ochenta por ciento de la violencia sectaria en Irak ocurre dentro de 30 millas alrededor de Bagdad. El nuevo plan para asegurar a Bagdad soluciona los problemas que evitaron que operaciones anteriores fueran exitosas. Esta vez habrá fuerzas iraquíes y estadounidenses adecuadas para sostener las áreas que han sido despejadas - incluyendo más fuerzas iraquíes y cinco brigadas adicionales de tropas estadounidenses comprometidas a Bagdad. Esta vez, fuerzas iraquíes y estadounidenses tendrán luz verde para entrar a barrios donde radican aquellos que estimulan la violencia sectaria - el Primer Ministro Maliki ha prometido que no se tolerará la interferencia política o sectaria con las operaciones de seguridad.

Segundo, Estados Unidos redoblará la lucha contra al Qaeda en su base principal en Irak - la provincia de Anbar. Nuestras fuerzas militares en Anbar están matando y capturando a líderes de al Qaeda - y protegiendo a la población local. Recientemente, líderes tribales locales han comenzado a mostrar su voluntad de enfrentar al Qaeda. Como resultado, nuestros comandantes creen que tenemos una oportunidad de asestar un golpe serio a los terroristas. Por lo tanto he ordenado que se aumenten en 4,000 tropas las fuerzas estadounidenses en la provincia de Anbar. Estas tropas trabajarán con fuerzas iraquíes y tribales para aumentar la presión sobre los terroristas. Los hombres y mujeres estadounidenses en uniforme desmantelaron el refugio seguro de al Qaeda en Afganistán - y no les permitiremos re-establecerlo en Irak.

Tercero, Estados Unidos esperará que el gobierno de Irak respete los puntos de referencia que ha anunciado. Estos incluyen asumir responsabilidad por la seguridad en todas las provincias de Irak para Noviembre... aprobar legislación para que los ingresos petrolíferos sean compartidos por todos los iraquíes... y gastar 10 mil millones de dólares de su propio dinero en proyectos de reconstrucción que crearán nuevos empleos. Estos son compromisos fuertes. Y el gobierno iraquí sabe que debe cumplirlos - o perder el apoyo del pueblo iraquí y estadounidense.

Cuarto, Estados Unidos ampliará sus esfuerzos militares y diplomáticos para reforzar la seguridad en Irak y proteger a los intereses estadounidenses en el Medio Oriente. Enfrentaremos el problema de que Irán y Siria permitan a terroristas e insurgentes usar sus territorios para entrar y salir de Irak. Alentaremos a países como Arabia Saudita, Egipto, Jordania, y los Estados del Golfo para que aumenten su ayuda económica a Irak. La Secretaria Rice ha ido a la región para continuar la urgente diplomacia necesaria para traer la paz al Medio Oriente.

Mi equipo de seguridad nacional actualmente está presentando nuestro caso en el Congreso. Reconocemos que muchos miembros del Congreso están escépticos. Algunos dicen que nuestro enfoque realmente es apenas más tropas para la misma estrategia. De hecho, tenemos una nueva estrategia con una nueva misión - ayudar a asegurar la población, especialmente en Bagdad. Nuestro plan pone a los iraquíes a la cabeza.

A otros les preocupa que estemos persiguiendo una solución puramente militar que hace menos probable una solución política. En efecto, la violencia sectaria es el principal obstáculo a una solución política - y la mejor forma de ayudar a los iraquíes a llegar a esta solución es ayudándolos a eliminar esta violencia.

Los miembros del Congreso tienen derecho de expresar sus puntos de vista - y de expresarlos energéticamente. Pero aquellos que se niegan a dar a este plan una oportunidad de tener éxito tienen la obligación de ofrecer una alternativa que tenga mejor chance de lograrlo. Oponerse a todo sin proponer nada es irresponsable.

Cualesquiera que sean nuestras diferencias en cuanto a estrategia y táctica todos tenemos el deber de asegurar que nuestras tropas tengan lo que necesiten para lograr éxito. Miles de hombres y mujeres jóvenes se están preparando para unirse a una misión importante que en gran medida serán determinada por el desenlace en Irak. Nuestras valientes tropas no deberían tener que preguntarse si sus líderes en Washington les darán lo que necesiten. Les pido a los miembros del Congreso cumplir con sus responsabilidades, hacer conocer sus puntos de vista, y siempre apoyar a nuestros hombres y mujeres que se encuentren en situaciones de peligro.

Gracias por escuchar.

###, Para su publicación inmediata, Oficina del Secretario de Prensa, 13 de enero de 2007

Etiquetas De Technorati: Discurso Radial del Presidente a la Nación, y Presidente Bush, o mezquita santa de Shia y violencia sectarian, o Bagdad, o Medio Oriente y Miembros del congreso o estrategia y táctica

Secretary Rice, Senate Foreign Relations Hearing (VIDEO)

Secretary Condoleezza Rice "questioned" by Senator Barbara Boxer (D-CA) FULL STREAMING VIDEO (1/11/2006) Running time is 9:56

Full Hearing Running Time is 3:21:49 - Secretary of State Rice at Senate Foreign Relations Hearing on New Iraq Strategy, FULL STREAMING VIDEO (1/11/2006)

Secretary Condoleezza Rice, Testimony before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Washington, DC. January 11, 2007, (10:10 a.m. EST). Title Sen. McCain (R-AZ) on U.S. Policy Toward Iraq.

Artist / Source C-SPAN, Copyright (C) 2007 National Cable Satellite Corporation.

As I come before you today, America is facing a crucial moment--indeed, as the Chairman has put it--a pivotal moment concerning our policies in Iraq and concerning our broader policies in the Middle East. I think that we all know that the stakes in Iraq are enormous and that the consequences of failure would also be enormous not just for America and for Iraq, but for the entire region of the Middle East and, indeed, for the world. And so we agreed that the stakes in Iraq are enormous. And as the President said last night, Americans broadly agree and we in the Administration count ourselves among them that the situation in Iraq is unacceptable. On these two points, we are unified, the enormousness of the stakes and the unacceptability of the current situation.

The President has therefore forged a new strategy that speaks both to our stakes in Iraq and the need to change the way that we are doing things. The Iraqis have devised a strategy that they believe will work for their most urgent problem, that is, to return security to Baghdad. We are going to support that strategy through the augmentation of American military forces. I think Secretary Gates will say more about that in his committee.

But I want also to emphasize that we see this not just as a military effort, but also as one that must have very strong political and economic elements. In order to better deliver on the governance and economic side, the United States is further decentralizing and diversifying our civilian presence and I will talk a little bit more about that and in greater detail.

We're further integrating our civil and military operations and, as Senator Lugar has noted, it's extremely important to see Iraq in a regional context and I would like to talk a little bit about the regional strategy that we want to pursue that supports reformers and responsible leaders in Iraq and across the broader Middle East. Let me be very clear. We all understand that the responsibility for what kind of Iraq this will be rests with Iraqis. They are the only ones who can decide whether or not Iraq is, in fact, going to be an Iraq for all Iraqis, one that is unified, or whether they are going to allow sectarian passions to unravel that chance for a unified Iraq.

We know historically that Iraq rests on the region's religious and ethnic fault lines. And in many ways, the recent events in Baghdad over the last -- almost a year, that Baghdad has become the center of that struggle. The Samara mosque bombing provoked sectarianism and it set it aflame at a pace that threatens to overwhelm the fragile and yet promising process of reconciliation, a process that has produced successful elections and a new constitution and substantial agreement, as we sit here today, on a law to share Iraq's oil wealth fairly, as well as a commitment to a more reasonable approach to de-Baathification and to hold provincial elections. Iraqis must take on the essential challenge, therefore, that threatens this process of natural -- of national reconciliation and that is the protection of their population from criminals and violent extremists who kill in the name of sectarian grievance.

The President last night made clear that the augmentation of our forces is to support the Iraqis in that goal of returning control and civility to their capital. He also noted that there are also very important strategic, important economic and political elements that must be followed up if "clear, hold, and build" is to actually work this way. And so I want to assure you that we in the State Department recognize the importance of surging our civilian elements and our civilian efforts as well as the surge that would be there on the military side.

This is a comprehensive policy. Iraq has a federal government. We need to get civilians out of our embassy, out of the green zone, into the field across Iraq. We have had, over the last year-and-a-half, the establishment of provincial reconstruction teams that are operating outside of Baghdad. And the importance of those teams should be understood in the following way. It is extremely important to have an effective and functioning government in Baghdad and we have worked with them on ministries, on budget processes, on the technical assistance that they need to have a functioning government.

But it is equally important to have local and provincial governments that can deliver for their people. And indeed, this gives us multiple points for success; not just the government in Baghdad, but the people with whom we're working in the provinces. I might just note that we believe that this is having an effect in places like Mosul, an effect in places like Tal Afar. But it's having a very good effect even in some of the most difficult places. And one of the other elements of the President's policy last night was to announce that 4,000 American forces would be augmented in Anbar, the epicenter of al-Qaida activity.

That is, in part, because we believe that the efforts that we've been making with local leaders, particularly the sheikhs in Anbar, are beginning to pay fruit. For instance, they have recruited from their own ranks 1,100 young men to send to Jordan for training. And these sons of Anbar, as they call them, will come back to enter the fight against al-Qaida. And so I want to emphasize we're very focused on the need to return control to Baghdad, but we're also very focused on the need to build capacity in the local and provincial governments and to be able to deliver economic and reconstruction assistance there.

Finally, let me just say one point about our regional diplomatic strategy, one word about our regional diplomatic strategy: Obviously, Iraq is central now to America's role in the Middle East, central to our credibility, central to the prospects for stability, central to the role that our allies and friends and Iraq's neighbors will play in the Middle East. But we have to base our regional strategy on the substantially changed realities of the Middle East. This is a different Middle East. This Middle East is a Middle East in which there really is a new alignment of forces.

On one side are reformers and responsible leaders who seek to advance their interests peacefully, politically, and diplomatically. On the other side are extremists of every sect and ethnicity who use violence to spread chaos, to undermine democratic governments, and to impose agendas of hatred and intolerance. On one side of that divide, the Gulf countries, including Saudi Arabia and the other countries of the Gulf, Egypt, Jordan, the young democracies of Lebanon, of the Palestinian territory led by Mahmoud Abbas and in Iraq. But on the other side of that divide are Iran, Syria, and Hezbollah and Hamas. And I think we have to understand that that is a fundamental divide. Iran and Syria have made their choice and their choice is to destabilize, not to stabilize.

And so with all respect to those who talk about engagement with Syria and Iran, I think we need to recognize that if Iran and Syria wish to play a stabilizing role for their own interests, then they will do so. If on the other hand, they intend to offer a stabilizing role because they believe that in our current situation in Iraq we are willing to pay a price, that's not diplomacy, that's extortion. And I would just ask you what that price might be.

I have a hard time believing that Iran will, on one side, talk to us about stabilizing Iraq and [on the other] say, "Oh, by the way, we won't talk about what you're doing in the Security Council to stop our nuclear program. That's not part of the price." Or that Syria will talk about stabilizing Iraq while they continue to destabilize it and say, "Oh, we aren't actually interested in talking about the fact that we are irreconciled -- we have not reconciled to the loss of our position in Lebanon or to the existence of a tribunal to try those who are responsible for the assassination of Rafik Hariri." These two will most certainly come into contact with each other. The destabilizing activities in Iraq and the desires of these states to have us pay a price that we cannot pay.

We do have a regional approach. It is to work with those governments that share our view of where the Middle East should be going. It is also to work with those governments in a way that can bring support to the new Iraqi democracy. It is to support the very normal democracy that Iraq itself may engage in with all of its neighbors and it is to have an international compact which is a bargain between the international community and Iraq for support in response to Iraqi reforms, economic and indeed some that are political. In that Iraqi compact both Syria and Iran have been present and will continue to be.

Let me just conclude by saying that we all understand in the Administration that there are no magic formulas for Iraq, as the Baker-Hamilton commission said. I want you to understand that I personally, too, understand and know the skepticism that is felt about Iraq and, indeed, the pessimism that some feel. I want you to know that I understand and, indeed, feel the heartbreak that Americans feel at the continued sacrifice of American lives--men and women who can never be replaced for their families--and for the concern of our men and women who are still in harm's way, those in uniform and those civilians who are also on the front line, civilian diplomats and civilian personnel who are also operating in places like Anbar and Mosul.

That said, I know, too, how carefully President Bush and the entire national security team considered the options before us, and I'd like you to understand that we really did consider the options before us. The President called on advisors from outside, he called on the advice of the Baker-Hamilton study group, and of course he discussed the policies with his advisors like me who have been there from the beginning and therefore bear responsibility for both the successes and failures of this policy, and new advisors like Secretary of Defense Gates who came with a fresh eye.

After all of that, he came to the conclusion, and I fully agree, that the most urgent task before us now is to help the Iraqi Government--and I want to emphasize help the Iraqi Government--establish confidence among the Iraqi population that it will and can protect all of its citizens whether they are Sunni, Shia, Kurds, or others, and that they will in an even-handed fashion punish those violent people who are killing innocent Iraqis, whatever their sect, ethnicity, or political affiliation.

We believe that the Iraqi Government, which has not always performed, has every reason to understand the consequences now of nonperformance. They, after all, came to us and said that this problem had to be solved. They came to us and said that, yes, they would make the necessary decisions to prevent political interference in the military operations that need to be taken to deal with the Baghdad problem. They came to us and said that this government will not be able to survive if it cannot reestablish civil order. And they gave to the President, and not just Prime Minister Maliki but many leaders, an assurance that this time they're going to make the difficult choices in order to get it done.

The situation in Iraq is unacceptable, but Iraq is also, at this point in time, of very high stakes to this nation. This is a time for a national desire and a national imperative not to fail in Iraq. We have faced crucible tests as a country before and we've come through them when we have come through them together. I want to pledge to you, as the President did last night, that we want to work with all Americans, here particularly in the Congress--the representatives of the American people--as we move forward on a strategy that will allow us to succeed in Iraq. This is a strategy that the President believes is the best strategy that we can pursue, and I ask your careful consideration of it and your ideas for how to improve it. And of course, understanding that not everyone will agree, I do believe that we're united in our desire to see America succeed. Thank you very much.

2007/021, Released on January 11, 2007

Technorati Tags: President Bush and White House or Secretary Condoleezza Rice and Senate Foreign Relations Committee, or Senator Barbara Boxer and Secretary of State, and VIDEO,

John McCain, policy toward Iraq (VIDEO)

Senator John McCain (R-AZ) holds a news conference on U.S. policy toward Iraq. FULL STREAMING VIDEO, Senator McCain (R-AZ) Briefing - 1/11/2007: WASHINGTON, DC: 8:41 min. Title Sen. McCain (R-AZ) on U.S. Policy Toward Iraq. Artist / Source C-SPAN, Copyright (C) 2007 National Cable Satellite Corporation.

U.S. Senator John McCain has a long career of public service.

After graduating from the Naval Academy in 1958, John McCain began his career as a Naval aviator. In 1982, he was elected to Congress representing what was then the first congressional district of Arizona.

In 1986, he was elected to the United States Senate to take the place of Arizona's great Senator Barry Goldwater. Senator McCain is currently the senior senator from Arizona.

In 2000, Senator McCain ran unsuccessfully for the Republican nomination for President of the United States. He is currently the Ranking Member of the Senate Committee on Armed Services. He also serves on the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation, and the Senate Committee on Indian Affairs.

Senator McCain has seven children and four grandchildren. He and his wife, Cindy, reside in Phoenix.

United States Senate, 241 Russell Senate Ofc. Bldg. Washington, DC 20510, Main: (202) 224-2235, Fax: (202) 228-2862

Technorati Tags: President Bush and White House or Senator John McCain and Naval Academy, or U.S. policy Iraq and Arizona, and Congress,

President to Welcome Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon (PODCAST)

President Bush to Welcome United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon to the White House. PODCAST FOR THIS ARTICLE.

President Bush will meet with United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon at the White House on January 16. There are many important issues on which the United Nations is deeply engaged,

ranging from U.N. reform and protection and promotion of human rights to the preservation of international peace and security and the provision of humanitarian and development assistance. The President looks forward to discussing these and other topics of mutual concern with Secretary-General Ban.

# # # For Immediate Release, Office of the Press Secretary, January 12, 2007

Technorati Tags: President Bush and White House or Security Council and Republic of Korea, or Ban Ki-moon and General Assembly, and Secretary-General,

State Department Daily Press Briefing, 11/11/07 (VIDEO)

Daily Press Briefing, Spokesman Sean McCormack, FULL STREAMING VIDEO, file is windows media format, running time is 28:47.

Department Spokesman Sean McCormack (shown during the Daily Press Briefing) was sworn in as Assistant Secretary for Public Affairs and Department Spokesman on June 2, 2005.

Immediately prior to returning to the State Department, Mr. McCormack served as Special Assistant to the President, Spokesman for the National Security Council, and Deputy White House Press Secretary for Foreign Policy. State Department Photo by Michael Gross. TRANSCRIPT:, 12:45 p.m. EST.

MR. MCCORMACK: Good afternoon, everybody.

QUESTION: Good afternoon.

MR. MCCORMACK: Good afternoon to you, Lambros. How are you?

QUESTION: Very well. Happy New Year.

MR. MCCORMACK: Good. Happy new year to you. I don't have any opening statements, so we can get right into your questions.

QUESTION: We'll let Lambros ask his question and get it out of the way.

MR. MCCORMACK: All right, Lambros. (Laughter.)

QUESTION: May I?

MR. MCCORMACK: You're a leadoff hitter.

QUESTION: Oh, there is a new era in here. (Laughter.)

MR. MCCORMACK: You have the floor. You have the floor, Lambros.

QUESTION: Okay. Mr. McCormack, yesterday Under Secretary Nicholas Burns during a visit at the Greek Embassy with the presence of Greek Ambassador Mallias, in answer to a question of Cyprus stated inter alia, "We think, we hope that 2007 could be a year of Cyprus. And UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon is now putting together a team. We hope that there will be even senior Americans on that team in the new UN effort to try to resolve finally the problems that have stemmed from the invasion of Cyprus 30 years ago." A similar statement was made by Deputy Assistant Secretary Matt Bryza before yesterday, in answer to a question of mine with the presence of the Turkish Ambassador, Mr. Sensoy, during a conference at Sofitel Hotel here in Washington. I'm wondering based on what you are so optimistic, so clear that 2007 will be the Cyprus year for a final solution.

MR. MCCORMACK: Well, we hope that all the relevant parties can come together to once again try to find a solution to this very difficult long-standing problem. Secretary General Annan made tremendous efforts to propose a solution that was put to the test of the voters and ultimately the Greek Cypriots decided against it. They voted against it. And so I think that in the wake of that there wasn't much interest among the members of the international community for reenergizing efforts to try to come to a solution. But I think we have gotten to a point now where enough interested parties in the region have expressed an interest in maybe trying again to find a solution; that the UN has taken another look at this issue and they may consider what it is that they might do. We support them in those efforts. And should they decide to move forward with a new effort to try to find a solution, we would certainly support them in those efforts, but we would be in a supporting role.

Yeah, Sylvie.

QUESTION: Can you confirm a new U.S. raid in south of Somalia today?

MR. MCCORMACK: I can't, no. There are -- let me -- in terms of any questions about ongoing operations, you can talk to the Department of Defense about that. We do as a U.S. Government have an ongoing interest in seeing that those who are involved in terrorism, members of terrorist organizations, those who are known to have perpetrated acts of terrorism against the United States, U.S. interests or its friends and allies. We want to make sure that those individuals are not able to flee Somalia, where they previously had enjoyed safe haven or at least, at the very least, the protection of some individuals in Somalia.

So as a U.S. Government, do we have an interest in seeing that they aren't allowed to leave Somalia and that, if possible, they are brought to justice? Absolutely. But I'm not going to comment on any particular effort in that regard. You all know that we do have military assets in the area. It's been publicly acknowledged that we do have naval assets off the coast of Somalia in that Horn of Africa region. We do have an active anti-terrorism effort in the Horn of Africa based out of Djibouti, and that's a cooperative effort with neighbors in the region. But it's not my role to really talk about any sort of ongoing or planned operations that we may have.

Sue.

QUESTION: Could you comment on criticism from the European Union, Italy and others about the U.S. military action in Somalia? They say that all this will do is stoke up hostilities in the region and cause further problems.

MR. MCCORMACK: Well, you know, of course we're sympathetic to the idea that you don't want to -- in your counterterrorism efforts you don't want to create more problems for yourself. But also senior policymakers, senior officials involved in our counterterrorism efforts are paid to make difficult judgments about those sorts of tradeoffs. When do you have actionable intelligence? When do you have an opportunity to either prevent a terrorist act or to go after those who either are planning them or have perpetrated them? And those are -- there's not a cookie-cutter answer to that. They do it on a case-by-case basis.

And all of these various considerations go into deciding how to approach a given situation and there may be criticism of that, but of course that comes with the territory. And we would hope that after -- inasmuch as we can provide information and facts to our friends and allies about what it is that we have or plan to do, then we'll do so. There are obviously constraints on that. And if they are not supportive of those efforts, well then that's sometimes just the way it works out. But of course we -- of course we're sensitive to the idea that in protecting the United States and its interests we also have to do the cost-benefit analysis. But at the end of the day, we're going to err on the side of protecting the American people and protecting American interests.

QUESTION: And there are also conflicting reports on the ground as to the death toll. Are you going to at some point be able to release a U.S. estimate as to how many died? The Somalis say it's many -- could be up to 50.

MR. MCCORMACK: Right. If there's any information to be provided in that regard, if it's appropriate to come from the State Department, then I'll be happy to talk about it. But if others -- if it's more appropriate for others to talk about it, then others will talk about it, but I don't have any additional information that I can offer you.

Nicholas.

QUESTION: Sean, I think part of the criticism that she was talking about has arisen out of the fact that your allies say they didn't know about what was going to happen militarily in Somalia. Yesterday you said that you hadn't spoken to the Secretary to see whether she knew about it in advance, but are you aware of any contacts with European allies to --who are involved in Somalia to inform them that such a strike was --

MR. MCCORMACK: I don't know. You can talk to DOD about that.

QUESTION: But you are in charge of diplomacy with --

MR. MCCORMACK: Well, I know but they are also mil-to-mil relationships as well and those would be actually the appropriate channels more likely than not, that those communications would go through. I can't tell you whether or not there was any discussion beforehand. Very frequently in counterterrorism operations you have to maintain a certain amount of operational security around them. That doesn't mean that there's a lack of trust there, but those are the hard facts of conducting counterterrorist operations.

Yeah, Kirit.

QUESTION: Can I change the subject?

MR. MCCORMACK: Anything else on Somalia?

QUESTION: Iraq?

MR. MCCORMACK: Sure.

QUESTION: Senior Administration official just said that there's a plan to double the number of PRTs in Iraq. I'm wondering if you have any information about that.

MR. MCCORMACK: I would recommend that you stay tuned to the President's remarks tonight. If there's anything more to say about expanding the number of Provincial Reconstruction Teams that we have on the ground in Iraq, then we'll be happy to provide you more details on it. Currently there are -- I think the last count is seven U.S. PRTs and three coalition PRTs, meaning they were staffed by other members of the multinational force, so there's a total of ten right now.

QUESTION: Do you have any -- I mean, could you give us an assessment of their progress so far?

MR. MCCORMACK: We think it's a very important part of certainly the State Department's efforts in Iraq to really get out to work with provincial and local leaders to -- on a whole variety of different issues, whether that's talking with them about building up the governing institutions in the outlining areas outside of Baghdad, working with them on local projects, working with them on, you know, individual entrepreneurs, with microfinance. That's another very interesting program that is ongoing has really shown results. And it's the kind of program that has demonstrated positive returns all around the globe. As a matter of fact, the latest Nobel Peace Prize Laureate is actually the person who started the programs in Bangladesh several decades ago.

So the PRTs are a very important element not only in getting out beyond Baghdad and working at the state and at the provisional and local level, but they are also important for the fact that they are the nexus in the field outside of Baghdad, outside of the headquarters elements, of the State Department and Department of Defense, that civil-military cooperation that is very, very important anytime you're dealing with counterinsurgency operations; that once you are able to confront the bad guys, whoever they may be, that you are able to flow in behind that with civil-military reconstruction efforts, efforts to work with local leaders to promote projects that are of interest to the local population, whether that's cleaning up the streets or painting schools or building schools or those kind of projects.

So that's a big chunk of what the PRTs -- these are the people that are really on the ground out there in the provinces, in the cities and the small localities working with Iraqis at the grassroots to help them build up those democratic institutions outside of the capital.

Sue.

QUESTION: I think the U.S. Government has disbursed over $16 billion so far in reconstruction assistance. I think it's about 16 billion of the -- I know we've got 22 billion in total but --

MR. MCCORMACK: It's about 80 percent has been -- 80 percent, I think, of the 20 billion --

QUESTION: Mm-hmm, or 22 billion.

MR. MCCORMACK: -- has been spent and I think the other -- the remaining 20 percent has been obligated. Roughly.

QUESTION: Right. Now, the President is suggesting another billion or so which will go into reconstruction and jobs. Why do you think that this extra billion or so will make any difference at all in turning the situation around?

MR. MCCORMACK: Well, first of all, as for any --

QUESTION: Or do you think additional reconstruction funds --

MR. MCCORMACK: First of all, as for the details of the President's speech and the strategy that he's going to outline, I suggest you wait until 9:01:30 tonight. You can tune in and you can hear it. But again, as I pointed out with Kirit, it is very important in counterinsurgency operations, and you can look at -- talk to all the experts, look at all the manuals, it's very important that once you have a cessation of the military operations in an area, in a small area, that you're able to flow in with the civil-military teams behind them, work with the local leaders, work on the local small-scale construction projects that have a real effect on people's daily lives. It is very important to help the Iraqis both rebuild their large-scale infrastructure -- we're talking power plants and power lines and oil, the oil pipelines and roads and sewage treatment and water plants, all of those things -- because they were really neglected under Saddam Hussein. It was really a decrepit infrastructure, and particularly outside of Baghdad. So that was important money to have spent.

We made a transition, I don't know, about a year or so ago, about a year, year and a half ago, to focus more on the smaller-scale projects because we understood that these are the projects that will have an immediate effect on people's lives. You know, building the power plant it may take some time and eventually they may get more hours of electricity, but they don't see any immediate benefit to that. And what we have learned and what we know is that there needs to be an immediate -- a more immediate demonstration of the benefits of working with the central government, working with the coalition forces as you're fighting insurgents, terrorists or sectarian militias, demonstrate to them that there are positive benefits that will flow from investing in that political process.

And you can do that over the short term, which is what we're talking about with the PRTs, but there also has to be some long-term expenditures to help with the large-scale infrastructure. And there are still a lot of needs in that regard and the Iraqis, I think, are going to be stepping up to that as well as perhaps others in the international community.

Yeah, Kirit.

QUESTION: The Secretary and President Bush met with or at least via videoconference a few of the PRT leaders, I think three in Baghdad and then one here last month.

MR. MCCORMACK: Right, right.

QUESTION: Can you say whether this decision came out of that discussion or what they --

MR. MCCORMACK: No -- well, I'll let the President talk about his own decisions. First of all, the predicate to the question is that there is the expansion, so nice try. But I think it is safe to say, because the President has spoken in public about this, that he was -- how impressed he was by the effectiveness of the program but also by the people who were leading these teams. These were experienced people who have a lot of years in dealing with just these kinds of issues and they were able to give him a real view from what's going on on the ground outside of Baghdad.

And it's also a program that has the full support of Secretary Rice. She went to Mosul to announce the startup of this program and introduced the first PRT to the media and to the rest of the world and to the Iraqis. So it's a program that she is very keen on and thinks it is very effective. And I think that the President in being able to talk one-on-one with these individuals also came away impressed by the dedication and the skill and the effectiveness of not only the program but the people.

Yeah, Joel.

QUESTION: Sean, in the recent past we've seen where following the war in the Middle East between Hezbollah and Israel, following the destruction of the section in south Beirut Hezbollah raced into that area and handed out gobs of money to people to rebuild their particular homes and apartments. Now, obviously that may have been for political purposes. What's to say that right now the way the -- in Baghdad the way the population, and Sadr City and other locations within the city are thinking -- now, this is not just for Baghdad but I would assume also for country wide -- Fallujah, Najaf, elsewhere. What's to prevent the Maliki government who cannot contain some of this violence to suddenly see other groups, Sunnis and Shiites, funneling money in there for those political purposes to maybe derail the infrastructure plans?

MR. MCCORMACK: Well, you do have outside groups and countries meddling in Iraq's internal affairs in a negative way and we've talked about that. Iran and Syria are two prime examples of that. It is important that the central government, any central government, demonstrate to the people that they should invest in the political process and support the political process, support the democratic institutions that are part of that political process. But as in any democracy the government has to respond to the needs of the people and if those needs are not being met in some regard in these fledging democracies, they're going to look elsewhere.

So certainly there are a bunch of different components to this. There needs to be responsible effective government that provides for the needs of the people and you also need to work to make sure that those outside groups in countries that are trying to negatively effect the situation in the country aren't able to do so, either by getting them -- requesting that they stop or conducting -- engaging in actions that will make them less effective in their ability to negatively influence a situation in the country.

Sylvie.

QUESTION: Do you have any detail on the controversy in the UN over the Hariri probe? Apparently, Russia wants to identify ten countries which didn't comply or didn't participate in the inquiry and the U.S. doesn't want to identify these countries. Why?

MR. MCCORMACK: Well, you can talk to the Russians what their motivation is. But look, we -- you know, our position is that we defer to Mr. Brammertz as to whether or not he thinks it's useful to identify these countries. If he thinks it's useful, then we would support his decision to do so. If he decides that it is not in the interest of the investigation to make this information public, then we support his decision not to release those names.

The fundamental question here, and people shouldn't become distracted by it, is what does Mr. Brammertz think is most useful in allowing his investigation to move forward. We have and will continue to support him and the investigation in whatever ways we possibly can to see that those responsible for the murder of Prime Minister Hariri -- former Prime Minister Hariri -- are brought to justice.

QUESTION: But don't you think there is a risk this inquiry could be seen as partial because Syria has been criticized because they didn't comply enough to the inquiry and now we learn that ten countries didn't and nobody cares?

MR. MCCORMACK: Well, I'm not sure -- first of all, you also don't know all the details and you're taking one snapshot in time. So again, you know, it shouldn't be about finger-pointing at this time. The fact that Syria has been cited as not being fully cooperative in the past with the investigation was important because -- let's be frank -- the signs pointed to some Syrian involvement in some fashion. Those were some of the initial indications that came out of Mr. Brammertz's predecessor, Mr. Mehlis, in conducting the investigation.

So let's distinguish here between those who may or may not have played a role and their cooperation, played a role in the assassination of Prime Minister Hariri and their cooperation, and perhaps others who are not in any way thought to be complicit in the murder of former Prime Minister Hariri. So there are two different categories here, I think, and I think Syria quite clearly falls into a category of its own so I wouldn't try to lump them all together.

QUESTION: You don't think it could slow the probe in its --

MR. MCCORMACK: No, I think that at the end of the day when Mr. Brammertz has concluded his investigation that he will lay out for all the information that he has and people can look at the body of evidence that he has amassed and they can then look at the conduct of the tribunal that will be put in place to assess this evidence and then also hold to account those responsible for the murder of former Prime Minister Hariri. So there will be plenty of time to consider the evidence and people will be able to make their own judgments about it. But again, the most important thing here is the integrity of the investigation, and that means allowing Mr. Brammertz to do what he thinks is best in achieving the goals that he -- achieving the objective that he has been charged with by the Security Council.

Yeah.

QUESTION: The East Asia summit takes place this weekend in the Philippines. Is the United States unhappy about being excluded from this, and what do you hope the summit might produce in the way of support for the Doha WTO talks or various anti-terrorism measures?

MR. MCCORMACK: I don't think we have any particular consternation about being left out. There are plenty of regional groupings.

And as for the Doha round of trade talks, I don't know. I have to admit I'm not fully briefed up on what it is the East Asia summit might or might not produce, but we would hope that as a general concept that states take quite seriously the importance of trying to reach some accord in this round of talks. Free trade has greatly benefited nations around the world, and most especially those nations in East Asia who have seen their economies grow by leaps and bounds over the past several decades. That has been in large part because of free trade.

And it is very important that we continue our efforts as an international trading community to not only maintain that system of free trade but to expand it and to try to go after remaining impediments that exist to free trade. We are committed to that. We have made some important proposals. We have made some important concessions as part of this. Unfortunately, however, in a couple rounds of discussions that are part of the Doha -- overall Doha round. We have not succeeded as a free trading community in coming to full agreement, but we certainly have not -- we have not given up on efforts to try to come to a successful conclusion of the Doha round and we would call upon others, including those attending that East Asia summit, to do what they can to see that we succeed. It's important.

QUESTION: And on the anti-terrorism issue, which is another major theme of the conference?

MR. MCCORMACK: Again, I confess I don't know what it is that they're -- is exactly on their agenda, but clearly we hope that there is an attitude of working with -- among themselves as well as with us and other countries to fight terrorism around the world. It's certainly an appropriate topic given that this conference is being held in the Philippines, which has suffered from terrorism from the Abu Sayyaf group as well as others. And we all know about the other terrorist activities in Southeast Asia as well. So I think certainly given the location, geographic location, an appropriate topic for them to talk about.

QUESTION: We have a speech by the Secretary shortly. I don't know if there are others, but can we --

MR. MCCORMACK: Yeah, I mean -- what, you want to throw me over for the Secretary, Charlie? Gosh almight. Let's go to Gollust here.

QUESTION: Richard Boucher -- is he on the road this week?

MR. MCCORMACK: Is he where?

QUESTION: Is he on the road this week?

MR. MCCORMACK: Yeah, he is out of the building. I'm not sure exactly where. Beyond the borders of the United States.

QUESTION: We have reports that he was in Afghanistan and I just wonder, if he was, what he was up to.

MR. MCCORMACK: I don't know. We have to have a Boucher tracker. I don't know. He's on the road quite a bit. I can't tell you.

QUESTION: And just one more. Khaled Mashal, the militant leader of Hamas, has made seemingly some disarmingly conciliatory remarks about Israel today.

MR. MCCORMACK: You know, I've seen some snippets of those reports and I have to confess I haven't seen all the remarks and I have to -- I have to check with the experts who follow these things on a minute and daily basis for whether or not these are significant in any sort of positive way. I can't tell you if they are or not.

QUESTION: (Inaudible.)

MR. MCCORMACK: Well, you know, sometimes I'm tempted, George. (Laughter.)

Yeah.

QUESTION: Iraq Foreign Ministry yesterday said that he turned down a request by the government to delay the hanging of Saddam. I just wanted to know if you had any comment on that.

MR. MCCORMACK: You know, again, these are decisions for the Iraqis to make in terms of the timing. Our admonition has been to do this in a way that meets Iraqi laws and regulations.

QUESTION: Do you know if the Secretary has seen the cell phone video of Saddam's hanging at all?

MR. MCCORMACK: I don't know. It's been on TV pretty much non-stop for the past couple of weeks, so I'm sure that she probably caught some of it on the TV.

QUESTION: Do you think you can follow up on Iraq?

MR. MCCORMACK: Well (inaudible), yes, ma'am.

QUESTION: Latin America. Barbara Slovin recently in USA Today had an article --

MR. MCCORMACK: I think it's Slavin.

QUESTION: Slavin, is that correct? Yeah, I wasn't sure. Concern about leftist victories in Latin America has prompted President Bush to quietly grant a waiver that allows the U.S. to resume training militaries from eleven Latin American and Caribbean countries. The 2002 U.S. law bars countries from receiving military aid and training if they refuse to promote immunity from prosecution to U.S. service members who might get hauled before the International Criminal Court. The law allows presidential waivers. Do you know which countries have granted immunity so far?

MR. MCCORMACK: I don't. We'll try to get you an answer.

Lambros, last one. Make it short.

QUESTION: On Iraq, it's important. Mr. McCormack, it was reported by Nation magazine that Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and former Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld met with Saddam Hussein during their last visit in Iraq and they asked him --

MR. MCCORMACK: When?

QUESTION: -- for his cooperation to defuse the resistance, but the late Iraqi dictator refused. I'm wondering is that true.

MR. MCCORMACK: That is just --

QUESTION: It was the last issue of the Nation magazine.

MR. MCCORMACK: That's just crazy. I don't know where they made that -- who made that up.

QUESTION: Even they underlined this in capital letters.

MR. MCCORMACK: It doesn't make it right. It just means they underlined it.

(The briefing was concluded at 1:15 p.m.), DPB # 6, Released on January 10, 2007

Technorati Tags: State Department and Secretary of State or Secretary Boucher and LEBANON, or Israel and Hariri Investigation or Condoleezza Rice, or Cyprus and Somalia,, or President Bush, and Provincial Reconstruction Teams, or Execution of Saddam Hussein, and Prime Minister Siniora, or Secretary Rice, and VIDEO, or Khaled Mashal, and Reconstruction Assistance to Iraq

Martin Luther King, Jr., Federal Holiday, 2007

Martin Luther King, Jr., Federal Holiday, 2007, A Proclamation by the President of the United States of America, Martin Luther King Jr. January 15, 1929-April 4, 1968, I Have a Dream Address at March on Washington, FULL STREAMING VIDEO. August 28, 1963. Washington, D.C. MLK, Public Domain Clip Art

PODCAST FOR THIS ARTICLE. On the Martin Luther King, Jr., Federal Holiday, Americans honor the memory of a man who stirred the conscience of a Nation. We also recommit ourselves to the dream to which Dr. King devoted his life

an America where the dignity of every person is respected; where people are judged not by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character; and where the hope of a better tomorrow is in every neighborhood.

When Martin Luther King, Jr., came to our Nation's Capital in the summer of 1963, he came to inspire America and to call on our citizens to live up to the principles of our founding. His dream spread a message of hope, justice, and brotherhood that took hold in the hearts of men and women across our great land, and it continues to speak to millions here at home and around the world.

We honor Martin Luther King, Jr., and remember his strength of character and his leadership. We also remember the work that still remains. America has come a long way since Dr. King's time, yet our journey to justice is not complete. There is still a need for all Americans to hear the power and hope of Dr. King's enduring words so that we can hasten the day when his dream is made real. Last year, I was proud to sign the "Fannie Lou Hamer, Rosa Parks, and Coretta Scott King Voting Rights Act Reauthorization and Amendments Act of 2006." This Act renewed the 1965 bill that reaffirmed our belief that all men are created equal, broke the segregationist lock on the ballot box, and helped bring an excluded community into the center of American democracy. Our Nation will continue to build on the legal equality championed by Dr. King and all the heroes of the civil rights movement, and we will continue our work to protect the promise of our Declaration and guarantee the rights of every citizen.

As we observe Dr. King's birthday, let us honor his legacy and go forward with confidence as a Nation united, committed to destroying discrimination, and dedicated to extending the full blessings of liberty and opportunity to all Americans.

NOW, THEREFORE, I, GEORGE W. BUSH, President of the United States of America, by virtue of the authority vested in me by the Constitution and laws of the United States, do hereby proclaim Monday, January 15, 2007, as the Martin Luther King, Jr., Federal Holiday. I encourage all Americans to observe this special day with appropriate civic, community, and service programs and activities in honor of Dr. King's life and legacy.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this eleventh day of January, in the year of our Lord two thousand seven, and of the Independence of the United States of America the two hundred and thirty-first.

GEORGE W. BUSH

# # #, For Immediate Release, Office of the Press Secretary, January 11, 2007

Technorati Tags: President Bush and White House or Martin Luther King, Jr. and Federal Holiday, 2007 or Voting Rights Act and I Have a Dream Address or March on Washington and Dr. King's Birthday or Fannie Lou Hamer and Rosa Parks or Civil Rights and PODCAST

President's Address to the Nation 01/10/07 VIDEO, PODCAST, TEXT

Pres. Bush Address to the Nation on Iraq (1/10/2007), FULL STREAMING VIDEO, Title Pres. Bush Address to the Nation. PODCAST FOR THIS ARTICLE,

ADDRESS BY THE PRESIDENT TO THE NATION, The Library, 9:01 P.M. EST

THE PRESIDENT: Good evening. Tonight in Iraq, the Armed Forces of the United States are engaged in a struggle that will determine the direction of the global war on terror -- and our safety here at home. The new strategy I outline tonight will change America's course in Iraq, and help us succeed in the fight against terror.

When I addressed you just over a year ago, nearly 12 million Iraqis had cast their ballots for a unified and democratic nation. The elections of 2005 were a stunning achievement. We thought that these elections would bring the Iraqis together, and that as we trained Iraqi security forces we could accomplish our mission with fewer American troops.

But in 2006, the opposite happened. The violence in Iraq -- particularly in Baghdad -- overwhelmed the political gains the Iraqis had made. Al Qaeda terrorists and Sunni insurgents recognized the mortal danger that Iraq's elections posed for their cause, and they responded with outrageous acts of murder aimed at innocent Iraqis.

They blew up one of the holiest shrines in Shia Islam -- the Golden Mosque of Samarra -- in a calculated effort to provoke Iraq's Shia population to retaliate. Their strategy worked. Radical Shia elements, some supported by Iran, formed death squads. And the result was a vicious cycle of sectarian violence that continues today.

The situation in Iraq is unacceptable to the American people -- and it is unacceptable to me. Our troops in Iraq have fought bravely. They have done everything we have asked them to do. Where mistakes have been made, the responsibility rests with me.

It is clear that we need to change our strategy in Iraq. So my national security team, military commanders, and diplomats conducted a comprehensive review. We consulted members of Congress from both parties, our allies abroad, and distinguished outside experts. We benefitted from the thoughtful recommendations of the Iraq Study Group, a bipartisan panel led by former Secretary of State James Baker and former Congressman Lee Hamilton. In our discussions, we all agreed that there is no magic formula for success in Iraq. And one message came through loud and clear: Failure in Iraq would be a disaster for the United States.

The consequences of failure are clear: Radical Islamic extremists would grow in strength and gain new recruits. They would be in a better position to topple moderate governments, create chaos in the region, and use oil revenues to fund their ambitions. Iran would be emboldened in its pursuit of nuclear weapons. Our enemies would have a safe haven from which to plan and launch attacks on the American people. On September the 11th, 2001, we saw what a refuge for extremists on the other side of the world could bring to the streets of our own cities. For the safety of our people, America must succeed in Iraq.

The most urgent priority for success in Iraq is security, especially in Baghdad. Eighty percent of Iraq's sectarian violence occurs within 30 miles of the capital. This violence is splitting Baghdad into sectarian enclaves, and shaking the confidence of all Iraqis. Only Iraqis can end the sectarian violence and secure their people. And their government has put forward an aggressive plan to do it.

Our past efforts to secure Baghdad failed for two principal reasons: There were not enough Iraqi and American troops to secure neighborhoods that had been cleared of terrorists and insurgents. And there were too many restrictions on the troops we did have. Our military commanders reviewed the new Iraqi plan to ensure that it addressed these mistakes. They report that it does. They also report that this plan can work.

Now let me explain the main elements of this effort: The Iraqi government will appoint a military commander and two deputy commanders for their capital. The Iraqi government will deploy Iraqi Army and National Police brigades across Baghdad's nine districts. When these forces are fully deployed, there will be 18 Iraqi Army and National Police brigades committed to this effort, along with local police. These Iraqi forces will operate from local police stations -- conducting patrols and setting up checkpoints, and going door-to-door to gain the trust of Baghdad residents.

This is a strong commitment. But for it to succeed, our commanders say the Iraqis will need our help. So America will change our strategy to help the Iraqis carry out their campaign to put down sectarian violence and bring security to the people of Baghdad. This will require increasing American force levels. So I've committed more than 20,000 additional American troops to Iraq. The vast majority of them -- five brigades -- will be deployed to Baghdad. These troops will work alongside Iraqi units and be embedded in their formations. Our troops will have a well-defined mission: to help Iraqis clear and secure neighborhoods, to help them protect the local population, and to help ensure that the Iraqi forces left behind are capable of providing the security that Baghdad needs.

Many listening tonight will ask why this effort will succeed when previous operations to secure Baghdad did not. Well, here are the differences: In earlier operations, Iraqi and American forces cleared many neighborhoods of terrorists and insurgents, but when our forces moved on to other targets, the killers returned. This time, we'll have the force levels we need to hold the areas that have been cleared. In earlier operations, political and sectarian interference prevented Iraqi and American forces from going into neighborhoods that are home to those fueling the sectarian violence. This time, Iraqi and American forces will have a green light to enter those neighborhoods -- and Prime Minister Maliki has pledged that political or sectarian interference will not be tolerated.

I've made it clear to the Prime Minister and Iraq's other leaders that America's commitment is not open-ended. If the Iraqi government does not follow through on its promises, it will lose the support of the American people -- and it will lose the support of the Iraqi people. Now is the time to act. The Prime Minister understands this. Here is what he told his people just last week: "The Baghdad security plan will not provide a safe haven for any outlaws, regardless of [their] sectarian or political affiliation."

This new strategy will not yield an immediate end to suicide bombings, assassinations, or IED attacks. Our enemies in Iraq will make every effort to ensure that our television screens are filled with images of death and suffering. Yet over time, we can expect to see Iraqi troops chasing down murderers, fewer brazen acts of terror, and growing trust and cooperation from Baghdad's residents. When this happens, daily life will improve, Iraqis will gain confidence in their leaders, and the government will have the breathing space it needs to make progress in other critical areas. Most of Iraq's Sunni and Shia want to live together in peace -- and reducing the violence in Baghdad will help make reconciliation possible.

A successful strategy for Iraq goes beyond military operations. Ordinary Iraqi citizens must see that military operations are accompanied by visible improvements in their neighborhoods and communities. So America will hold the Iraqi government to the benchmarks it has announced.

To establish its authority, the Iraqi government plans to take responsibility for security in all of Iraq's provinces by November. To give every Iraqi citizen a stake in the country's economy, Iraq will pass legislation to share oil revenues among all Iraqis. To show that it is committed to delivering a better life, the Iraqi government will spend $10 billion of its own money on reconstruction and infrastructure projects that will create new jobs. To empower local leaders, Iraqis plan to hold provincial elections later this year. And to allow more Iraqis to re-enter their nation's political life, the government will reform de-Baathification laws, and establish a fair process for considering amendments to Iraq's constitution.

America will change our approach to help the Iraqi government as it works to meet these benchmarks. In keeping with the recommendations of the Iraq Study Group, we will increase the embedding of American advisers in Iraqi Army units, and partner a coalition brigade with every Iraqi Army division. We will help the Iraqis build a larger and better-equipped army, and we will accelerate the training of Iraqi forces, which remains the essential U.S. security mission in Iraq. We will give our commanders and civilians greater flexibility to spend funds for economic assistance. We will double the number of provincial reconstruction teams. These teams bring together military and civilian experts to help local Iraqi communities pursue reconciliation, strengthen the moderates, and speed the transition to Iraqi self-reliance. And Secretary Rice will soon appoint a reconstruction coordinator in Baghdad to ensure better results for economic assistance being spent in Iraq.

As we make these changes, we will continue to pursue al Qaeda and foreign fighters. Al Qaeda is still active in Iraq. Its home base is Anbar Province. Al Qaeda has helped make Anbar the most violent area of Iraq outside the capital. A captured al Qaeda document describes the terrorists' plan to infiltrate and seize control of the province. This would bring al Qaeda closer to its goals of taking down Iraq's democracy, building a radical Islamic empire, and launching new attacks on the United States at home and abroad.

Our military forces in Anbar are killing and capturing al Qaeda leaders, and they are protecting the local population. Recently, local tribal leaders have begun to show their willingness to take on al Qaeda. And as a result, our commanders believe we have an opportunity to deal a serious blow to the terrorists. So I have given orders to increase American forces in Anbar Province by 4,000 troops. These troops will work with Iraqi and tribal forces to keep up the pressure on the terrorists. America's men and women in uniform took away al Qaeda's safe haven in Afghanistan -- and we will not allow them to re-establish it in Iraq.

Succeeding in Iraq also requires defending its territorial integrity and stabilizing the region in the face of extremist challenges. This begins with addressing Iran and Syria. These two regimes are allowing terrorists and insurgents to use their territory to move in and out of Iraq. Iran is providing material support for attacks on American troops. We will disrupt the attacks on our forces. We'll interrupt the flow of support from Iran and Syria. And we will seek out and destroy the networks providing advanced weaponry and training to our enemies in Iraq.

We're also taking other steps to bolster the security of Iraq and protect American interests in the Middle East. I recently ordered the deployment of an additional carrier strike group to the region. We will expand intelligence-sharing and deploy Patriot air defense systems to reassure our friends and allies. We will work with the governments of Turkey and Iraq to help them resolve problems along their border. And we will work with others to prevent Iran from gaining nuclear weapons and dominating the region.

We will use America's full diplomatic resources to rally support for Iraq from nations throughout the Middle East. Countries like Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Jordan, and the Gulf States need to understand that an American defeat in Iraq would create a new sanctuary for extremists and a strategic threat to their survival. These nations have a stake in a successful Iraq that is at peace with its neighbors, and they must step up their support for Iraq's unity government. We endorse the Iraqi government's call to finalize an International Compact that will bring new economic assistance in exchange for greater economic reform. And on Friday, Secretary Rice will leave for the region, to build support for Iraq and continue the urgent diplomacy required to help bring peace to the Middle East.

The challenge playing out across the broader Middle East is more than a military conflict. It is the decisive ideological struggle of our time. On one side are those who believe in freedom and moderation. On the other side are extremists who kill the innocent, and have declared their intention to destroy our way of life. In the long run, the most realistic way to protect the American people is to provide a hopeful alternative to the hateful ideology of the enemy, by advancing liberty across a troubled region. It is in the interests of the United States to stand with the brave men and women who are risking their lives to claim their freedom, and to help them as they work to raise up just and hopeful societies across the Middle East.

From Afghanistan to Lebanon to the Palestinian Territories, millions of ordinary people are sick of the violence, and want a future of peace and opportunity for their children. And they are looking at Iraq. They want to know: Will America withdraw and yield the future of that country to the extremists, or will we stand with the Iraqis who have made the choice for freedom?

The changes I have outlined tonight are aimed at ensuring the survival of a young democracy that is fighting for its life in a part of the world of enormous importance to American security. Let me be clear: The terrorists and insurgents in Iraq are without conscience, and they will make the year ahead bloody and violent. Even if our new strategy works exactly as planned, deadly acts of violence will continue -- and we must expect more Iraqi and American casualties. The question is whether our new strategy will bring us closer to success. I believe that it will.

Victory will not look like the ones our fathers and grandfathers achieved. There will be no surrender ceremony on the deck of a battleship. But victory in Iraq will bring something new in the Arab world -- a functioning democracy that polices its territory, upholds the rule of law, respects fundamental human liberties, and answers to its people. A democratic Iraq will not be perfect. But it will be a country that fights terrorists instead of harboring them -- and it will help bring a future of peace and security for our children and our grandchildren.

This new approach comes after consultations with Congress about the different courses we could take in Iraq. Many are concerned that the Iraqis are becoming too dependent on the United States, and therefore, our policy should focus on protecting Iraq's borders and hunting down al Qaeda. Their solution is to scale back America's efforts in Baghdad -- or announce the phased withdrawal of our combat forces. We carefully considered these proposals. And we concluded that to step back now would force a collapse of the Iraqi government, tear the country apart, and result in mass killings on an unimaginable scale. Such a scenario would result in our troops being forced to stay in Iraq even longer, and confront an enemy that is even more lethal. If we increase our support at this crucial moment, and help the Iraqis break the current cycle of violence, we can hasten the day our troops begin coming home.

In the days ahead, my national security team will fully brief Congress on our new strategy. If members have improvements that can be made, we will make them. If circumstances change, we will adjust. Honorable people have different views, and they will voice their criticisms. It is fair to hold our views up to scrutiny. And all involved have a responsibility to explain how the path they propose would be more likely to succeed.

Acting on the good advice of Senator Joe Lieberman and other key members of Congress, we will form a new, bipartisan working group that will help us come together across party lines to win the war on terror. This group will meet regularly with me and my administration; it will help strengthen our relationship with Congress. We can begin by working together to increase the size of the active Army and Marine Corps, so that America has the Armed Forces we need for the 21st century. We also need to examine ways to mobilize talented American civilians to deploy overseas, where they can help build democratic institutions in communities and nations recovering from war and tyranny.

In these dangerous times, the United States is blessed to have extraordinary and selfless men and women willing to step forward and defend us. These young Americans understand that our cause in Iraq is noble and necessary -- and that the advance of freedom is the calling of our time. They serve far from their families, who make the quiet sacrifices of lonely holidays and empty chairs at the dinner table. They have watched their comrades give their lives to ensure our liberty. We mourn the loss of every fallen American -- and we owe it to them to build a future worthy of their sacrifice.

Fellow citizens: The year ahead will demand more patience, sacrifice, and resolve. It can be tempting to think that America can put aside the burdens of freedom. Yet times of testing reveal the character of a nation. And throughout our history, Americans have always defied the pessimists and seen our faith in freedom redeemed. Now America is engaged in a new struggle that will set the course for a new century. We can, and we will, prevail.

We go forward with trust that the Author of Liberty will guide us through these trying hours. Thank you and good night.

END 9:21 P.M. EST. For Immediate Release, Office of the Press Secretary, January 10, 2007

Technorati Tags: President Bush and White House or Address by the President to the Nation and Middle East or VIDEO and Iraqi Elections or War on Terror and Iraq or al Qaeda and terrorists or global war on terror and PODCAST

5th Fleet Moves off Somalia

The U.S. 5th Fleet moved the aircraft carrier USS Dwight D. Eisenhower into the waters off Somalia in an effort to capture al Qaeda terrorists attempting to flee the country. High Resolution Image

United Nations-recognized Somali government officials said the strikes were aimed at al Qaeda terrorists who planned the attacks against the U.S. embassies in Kenya and Tanzania in 1998.

The Ethiopian military entered Somalia Dec. 24 with the mission of neutralizing the Council of Islamic Courts, a Muslim extremist group that took power in the Somali capital of Mogadishu. The Ethiopian forces took the capital in 10 days and terrorists and their sympathizers allegedly moved south toward the border with Kenya to escape.

More U.S. ships are moving in to the waters off Somalia to reinforce the maritime interdiction effort there. "Due to rapidly developing events in Somalia, U.S. Central Command has tasked USS Dwight D. Eisenhower to join USS Bunker Hill, USS Ramage, USS Anzio and USS Ashland (Prisoners are reportedly being held aboard the Ashland) to support ongoing maritime security operations off the coast of Somalia," said Navy Lt. Cmdr. Charlie Brown, a spokesman for 5th Fleet in Bahrain.

The ships will stop vessels and search them for al Qaeda terrorists attempting to escape from Somalia.

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE, American Forces Press Service, By Jim Garamone

Technorati Tags: Somalia and 5th Fleet or al Qaeda and USS Dwight D. Eisenhower, or USS Ashland

Condoleezza Rice, new UN, Iraq, Ambassadors, VIDEO, PODCAST

Announcement on Presidential Nominations for U.S. Permanent Representative to the United Nations and U.S. Ambassador to Iraq, FULL STREAMING VIDEO, Secretary Condoleezza Rice, Washington, DC. January 8, 2007 (1:22 p.m. EST), PODCAST OF THIS ARTICLE

SECRETARY RICE: Good afternoon. Today I would like to formally announce two very important personnel changes that will strengthen our diplomacy. First, I am pleased to announce that President Bush intends to nominate Zalmay Khalilzad to serve as America's Ambassador to the United Nations.

The past year has shown how clearly important the UN is for America and the world and how important American leadership is to the UN. Together with our partners on the Security Council, we have passed important resolutions on major international challenges like the nuclear weapons programs in Iran and North Korea, the ongoing violence in Darfur and the extremist threat to a free Lebanon. Much still remains to be done. We are eager also at the UN to advance UN reform and we look to continue this important work under the leadership of the new UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon.

This work is a tall order. It demands a skilled and experienced diplomat with proven ability to lead from principle, to build consensus and to get results. And few Americans have distinguished themselves in this regard as much as Zal. As our Ambassador to Iraq these past 18 months, a time of extraordinary change and extraordinary challenge, Zal has performed heroically and at great personal risk to help Iraqi reformers and responsible leaders build a foundation of democracy in their country.

Prior to serving in Iraq, Zal played much the same role as our Ambassador to Afghanistan, where he helped the people of his ancestral homeland to step out of the shadows of conflict and to begin building a new future of hope. Zal has also held senior positions on the National Security Council, where, of course, he worked with me and where he gained my trust and confidence, as well as that of President Bush.

Following Zal is not an enviable task, but there are people who can do it and there's one person who is especially qualified to do that and to lead that challenge and to lead our team in Embassy Baghdad and that's Ryan Crocker, one of our most distinguished Foreign Service officers. So today, it is my pleasure to announce that President Bush intends to nominate Ryan to be our new ambassador to Iraq.

The next two years may well be the most significant ones in this mission so far. New challenges on the ground call for changes to our strategy and in two days, President Bush will speak to the nation and announce a way forward to achieve success in Iraq. There will be new leadership of both our military and our diplomatic efforts. And the man President Bush wants to lead Embassy Baghdad is Ryan Crocker.

Few diplomats have the kind of experience in the broader Middle East that Ryan has amassed in his three decades of service. He has held the position of ambassador four times: in Lebanon, Kuwait, Syria, and most recently in Pakistan. After the fall of the Taliban, Ryan was one of our first diplomats into Afghanistan, where he helped to reopen our Embassy in Kabul. In Baghdad, Ryan rose to the same challenge and to others with equal success after the liberation of Iraq.

Ryan Crocker is known and respected throughout our government, throughout the Middle East, and throughout the world. He knows the language and the culture of the region, as well as the leaders and the societies that they lead. He will work well and effectively with the leadership of our military as he has done in Pakistan. He will work well with our coalition partners and he will work well with the new Iraqi Government. Ryan will be a demanding boss in our embassy, you can be sure of that, but a fair and inspiring one.

If confirmed, Ryan and Zal will have two of the hardest and most consequential jobs in the world, but President Bush and I have the utmost confidence that they are more than equal to the challenges of their posts. They have our unwavering support for the difficult work that lies ahead and President Bush looks forward to submitting their nominations and to early action on their confirmations.

Thank you very much.

2007/008, Released on January 8, 2007

Technorati Tags: State Department and Secretary of State or U.S. Permanent Representative to the United Nations and U.S. Ambassador to Iraq, or Zalmay Khalilzad and Ryan Crocker or Condoleezza Rice, or Taliban and Middle East,, or President Bush

AC-130H Spectre, al Qaeda, Somalia

Aircraft attack al Qaeda haven, Air Force AC-130 gunships struck al Qaeda targets in Somalia Jan. 8, news sources reported last night.

Press reports said the AC-130 attacks hit an area called Ras Kamboni, a heavily forested area near the Kenyan border. The area is allegedly a terror training base. The AC-130 gunship's primary missions are close-air support, air interdiction and force protection. (U.S. Air Force photo) Download Full Image

The AC-130H Spectre gunship's primary missions are close air support, air interdiction and armed reconnaissance. Other missions include perimeter and point defense, escort, High Resolution Image

landing, drop and extraction zone support, forward air control, limited command and control, and combat search and rescue. These heavily armed aircraft incorporate side-firing weapons integrated with sophisticated sensor, navigation and fire control systems to provide surgical firepower or area saturation during extended periods, at night and in adverse weather. The sensor suite consists of a low-light-level television sensor and an infrared sensor. Radar and electronic sensors also give the gunship a method of positively identifying friendly ground forces as well as effective ordnance delivery during adverse weather conditions. Navigational devices include an inertial navigation system and global positioning system.

Technorati Tags: Somalia and AC-130H Spectre or al Qaeda and Ras Kamboni,