Transcript - December 12, 2001
12:34 P.M. EST

Dergham: Madam, I am going to pretend, sort of, as if I am sort of the voice of those -- not the radicals who are critical and who want to say whatever the United States does is wrong, wrong, wrong, but I'm just going to, at some points, sort of try to be the voice of those who are frustrated with policy, and don't know why. So since there is so much to cover, with your permission.

Dr. Rice:  Fine.

Dergham: If I may start with Afghanistan. The pursuit of bin Laden is going on inside of Afghanistan. If it takes you into Pakistan, are you more worried or more confident that he will be gotten?

Dr. Rice:  We are going to find the al Qaeda leadership and Osama bin Laden one way or another. The President has made very clear that we intend to bring this group to justice, or bring justice to them. We can be persistent and patient about this. I would remind people that we recently arrested a terrorist who more than 12 years ago, murdered an American. And so we're very patient people. And if it takes a year, it takes six months, or two years, we will do it.

Dergham: Where are the stingers?

Dr. Rice:  Well, the real answer is, we do not know for certain. There are -- obviously Afghanistan was a fairly lawless place for a long period of time following the Soviet collapse there. And there may be any numbers of kinds of weapons around. But slowly but surely, Afghanistan is coming under control. The alliance forces are asserting control in various regions, and we believe that this will be a problem that will be taken care of in the course of time.

Dergham: Do you believe that if we -- again, if the stingers are not found, is this a continued danger, even though we probably would have -- of course, even though the Taliban infrastructure has been destroyed. But still, if you don't get the stingers, is this not dangerous?

Dr. Rice:  Well, of course, there are risks in war in any circumstance. And there are risks from any number of pockets of Taliban resistance, or from ordinance that may be there, or weapons that may be there. But those are calculated risks that the President took when he decided that the United States would have to do this in a way that was not just an air campaign. But we're pretty confident that the region is coming under control, Afghanistan is coming under control. There will soon be an interim government and there will soon be an international force there. So we're confident it's coming under control.

Dergham: Dr. Rice, you're aware of a lot of what's next. First, let me ask you, would the next have to wait until Afghanistan business is finished completely, especially that you spoke of lengthy phases?

Dr. Rice:  Well, we do believe that we need to maintain our focus on making certain that Afghanistan can never be a place again from which terrorism can rise. We're also concerned to root out these al Qaeda pockets and al Qaeda cells that may be in any number of countries.
The next phase, in some sense, began before this phase of Afghanistan, because we've been very active in closing down financial networks around the world. We've been very active on the intelligence front, on the law enforcement front. And much of what we need to do now is to make certain that the sleeper cells, sleeper cells that are outside of Afghanistan cannot operate in a way that can cause another terrorist incident. So we are very active in that.
When it comes to the -- when we've achieved the mission in Afghanistan, then we'll have to see what comes next. But I suspect that one of the most important issues will be not to allow the regeneration, then, of this terrorist network in other places.

Dergham: Somalia, Yemen and Sudan have been described as places where they have active cells, not sleeper cells only. Would you let me take Somalia first? Do you have the consent of the Somali government to militarily take care of the active cells within its territory? And in some cases you have the consent of governments. Do you have the consent?

Dr. Rice:  Well, as you know, Somalia is a place where the government is not in control of the entire country. We've not broached this issue with authorities in Somalia. We are engaged in very good cooperation with regional powers around this region. We've been very active with the Kenyans, for instance, in trying to determine whether or not the al Qaeda fighters might be trying to get into other places. But we've not engaged the Somali government on this issue.

Dergham: Why not? Because there is a lot of talk about Somalia next. Why not -- why don't you engage them?

Dr. Rice:  We will look at what needs to be done when the focus on Afghanistan achieves the mission. We are looking for partnership with anyone who wants to actively hunt down terrorist cells in their own countries. And we're getting a lot of volunteers from around the world that don't want to be accused of harboring terrorists, and truly want to root out these cells.

Dergham: Tell me, if you don't mind, if there are active cells in Somalia and Sudan and Yemen, from the administration's point of view, wouldn't you -- would one not think that you're going to tackle those militarily with or without the consent of the concerned governments?

Dr. Rice:  Well, I'm not going to comment on what we may have to do in the next phase. I will say that we have a lot of instruments at our disposal to deal with these cells that may be in other places. Now, we don't want to get into trying to apply, mechanistically, what we've done in Afghanistan to every place in the world. There are some places where we will have principally law enforcement and intelligence operations; others where breaking up the financial network will be the concern. So while I can't comment on specifically what we may do, I will say that we have a number of instruments at our disposal, not just military power.

Dergham: Sudan and Yemen have been cooperating, is that not correct?

Dr. Rice:  We've been getting good cooperation from the Yemeni government in particular, and some from Sudan. With Sudan, we have a larger agenda, of course. It is not just terrorism, although terrorism cooperation is important. But we also believe that Khartoum must deal better with its south. It cannot continue the humanitarian abuses there. It cannot continue bombing innocent people in the south. It has got to find a way to let humanitarian assistance in, and ultimately has to engage in a peace process. So the agenda there is somewhat wider than just terrorism.

Dergham: Syria and Hezbollah. Obviously, the United States now considers Hezbollah a terrorist group. Let me take the issue of Hezbollah through Syria first. What are you asking the Syrians, exactly?

Dr. Rice: We're asking every government to do the same thing, which is to not harbor terrorists, which is to not finance them, train them, encourage them. Because as the President said in his United Nations General Assembly speech, there is no cause that can be served by terrorism. And that's what we're asking of everybody.

Dergham: Dr. Rice, Hezbollah is really a political party right now, and it has a big infrastructure as part of the society. It was a movement that took itself seriously as a resistance to occupation. How are you going to attack Hezbollah as terroristic organization? And again I say that from the administration's point of view. Are you going to bomb Baalbek and different areas in Lebanon?
How are you going to deal with that?

Dr. Rice: Well, we know that Hezbollah has played a number of roles. But it has also been a long time active in international terrorism. After all, Hezbollah contributed to and kidnapped American citizens in the '80s. This is something that we cannot forget. It provided support and expertise in the Khobar Tower bombings. So Hezbollah has a terrorist part. And Hezbollah has got to -- those who support Hezbollah have got to understand that that's why it's on the terrorist list, and it has to be dealt with as a terrorist organization.

Dergham: The government of Lebanon, the government of Syria and the government of Iran support Hezbollah. They don't consider it a terrorist organization. So how does this equate in your relationship with these three governments?

Dr. Rice: Well, we have, in effect, no relations with Iran, for a variety of reasons. And we are -- again, with other governments, we are asking the same thing that we are asking of every government, which is that you not harbor and support and train and finance terrorists. And Hezbollah has got to be in that category.

Dergham: I'm sorry, madam, but Hezbollah is part of the fabric of the society in Lebanon. So please explain to me how is that possible, what you're saying, when it's the family and the political, and it's in the parliament, and it's all that sort of thing? Are you -- please.

Dr. Rice:  Then it should get out of the terrorist business. If it really wants to be legitimate, it should get out of the terrorist business. It is not
out of the terrorist business. It has been in the terrorist business for a very long time. As I said, Americans have been affected by Hezbollah's activities. And so we consider it a terrorist organization for those reasons.

Dergham: So it's not about the past, it's about the future? Is this what you're saying? It's from now on, not --

Dr. Rice:  No, Hezbollah continues, to this day, to be involved in terrorist activities. So it's about the past with us, and about the future.

Dergham: So when the British speak about, say, the IRA's example that there will be a military wing verses a political wing in organizations such as Hezbollah or Hamas, for example, is this also what the administration believes in?

Dr. Rice:  No, these are entirely different histories. And I think we would make a mistake to take an example from one part of the world and try to apply it in another. This is a very simple matter. Hezbollah and Hamas need to stop engaging in attacks on innocent civilians -- some of them have been Americans over the years -- and they need to stop doing this because it is also undermining every opportunity for peace in the Middle East.

Dergham: Okay, I don't want to spend much more time on this, but this is very important, so that I don't misunderstand you. What exactly, right now, is Hezbollah doing right now that is terroristic? Because they are just resisting occupation, from their point of view.
They're not engaging against any American citizens.

Dr. Rice: They have engaged against American citizens in the past, and they are behind the terrorism -- some of the terrorism in the Middle East today against Israel. This is something the United States cannot abide.

Dergham: So you're telling them to do what -- what are you telling the Lebanese government, to do what?

Dr. Rice: To stop supporting, aiding, harboring Hezbollah in its midst. And we're asking the Syrians to do the same thing.

Dergham: And have you gotten any responses to your satisfaction?

Dr. Rice: Well, it's early. And we believe that we're making a very good case that terrorism is not a good business to be in if you are going to be a part of the respected, civilized leadership of the world. We think we're making a good case, and we will see.

Dergham: Iran, you mentioned Iran, madam. And Iran, in as far as Hezbollah, support for Hezbollah. And now, from what we understand, there are people in the administration speaking of inviting Iran's cooperation in terms of Iraq, sort of that resistance in the south of Iraq.
How do you -- try to make sense out of this for me, please.

Dr. Rice: Well, I don't -- excuse me one minute.

Dergham: We were talking about --

Dr. Rice: Iran. We have nothing against the Iranian people. This is a great civilization. It deserves better than it has had in leadership.
The issue for us with Iran is really twofold. First, it is Iran's support for terrorist activities in the Middle East and in other places. And it is Iran's support for terrorism that has actually led to the deaths of Americans. Khobar Towers, when we indicted the people who did Khobar Towers, there was clear indication that Iranian training and money and so forth had gone into that.
So we have a big problem with Iran about its support for terrorist activities against America and terrorist activities in the Middle East. We
also, of course, are concerned about Iranian efforts to acquire weapons of mass destruction. We are in constant discussion with others about the proliferation problem there. So our agenda with Iran is going to be constrained until Iranian behavior changes.

Dergham: So it is not correct then, what we hear, that there is an invitation for Iranian cooperation affecting the situation in southern Iraq?

Dr. Rice: The United States government has not had this discussion.

Dergham: We hear constantly about Iraq, and Iraq next, and Iraq. Tell me, madam, is a military strike against Iran -- sorry -- is a military strike against Iraq inescapable?

Dr. Rice: Well, I don't know. The President has had no recommendation made to him about what to do about Iraq. Before September 11th, we knew that Iraq was a problem, and Iraq is a problem after September 11th. It is, after all, a regime that threatens the region, threatens our interests, threatens the interests of our friends in the region, and threatens its own people. And it's trying to acquire weapons of mass destruction. There can be only one reason that Saddam Hussein doesn't want weapons inspectors, it's because he wants to do
this. So we are focused now on Afghanistan. We're focused on trying to break up al Qaeda. Iraq is on our radar screen, but we have a lot of ways to deal with Iraq, including we are really encouraging members of the U.N. Security Council to change the nature of the Iraqi sanctions, so that they're aimed more squarely at the Iraqi regime.

Dergham: Except that recently -- that was referred to the SMART sanctions. Except that Bush administration has refocused on the return of the inspectors, whereas the Clinton administration really had gone away from that. And so people are reading this as something in a new light. Does that mean if Iraq cooperates, and the Russians were able to deliver the Iraqis, in terms of cooperating with the resolutions, with the return of the inspectors, does that mean you will go ahead and go by 1284 resolution suspending, then lifting the sanctions, in accordance with that?

Dr. Rice: This is a long road, of course, because the weapons inspectors are not supposed to go to Iraq to determine what he's doing. They're supposed to go to Iraq to determine that all of his weapons of mass destruction and his programs have been destroyed. So we are a long way from thinking about what happens at the end of that train. And so far, he has thumbed his nose at the international community about this armistice to which he signed in 1991.

Dergham: If Iraq cooperates with the Security Council and its resolutions, is it still important for the United States to overthrow the government of Iraq?

Dr. Rice: The United States, and I think many in the region, understand that Saddam Hussein is not a cooperative personality; that every time he has had the upper hand, he has used it to hurt someone; and so that the world would be better, and Iraq would be better off without his leadership, I think is indisputable.

Dergham: So cooperation, or no cooperation, inspectors return or no return, the decision is, you need to get rid of the government or the regime of Saddam Hussein?

Dr. Rice: We think it is highly unlikely that you will ever get the kind of cooperation from the Saddam Hussein regime that will make it safe for the region, while he's still there.

Dergham: So a dialogue through the Security Council with the Iraqi government is totally out of the question?

Dr. Rice: We don't need a dialogue with the Iraqi government. The Iraqi government knows precisely what it needs to do. It's spelled out in U.N. Resolutions. He's just been unwilling to do any of it.

Dergham: So there is -- to bring down the regime is a priority, it's not about weapons of mass destruction, or about --

Dr. Rice: Oh, no, these issues are quite linked. I repeat, the Iraqi regime is -- we do not believe that it is likely that the Iraqi regime is one
that will ever find a way to live up to its responsibilities under the U.N. Resolutions. He is not to be trusted. After three years of having no weapons inspectors, it's quite certain -- I'm quite certain that he has hidden programs. It will be a very hard job now to assure that there are no weapons of mass destruction there.

Dergham: You are a Russian expert. Why on earth would Russia go along with the United States in bringing down the regime militarily, when there was an understanding last month in the Security Council -- and they have lots of interests there -- why would they come along five months from now, and go ahead with you on a military strike if there is cooperation?

Dr. Rice: Well, first of all, I want to underscore that I said that the President has had no recommendations and made no decisions about what he's going to do about Iraq. We're currently, with the Russians, focused on getting the SMART sanctions into place. Because the one thing that we do want to be able to do is to make certain that Saddam Hussein cannot acquire the materials for weapons of mass destruction or for advanced conventional weapons. And that's what the smart sanctions should be focused on.
When we were first here, many of our friends in the region -- in Saudi Arabia, in Egypt -- said the sanctions are hurting the Iraqi people; do
something about the sanctions. Even though we believed that the sanctions were not hurting the Iraqi people, we took that to heart, and we began to work on a regime that would make certain that the Iraqi people were not targeted, but the Iraqi regime. Now we need the cooperation of the Permanent Five in order to do that.

Dergham: How much support do you have from the neighborhood of Iraq, as far as military strikes against Iraq?

Dr. Rice: Well, again, we have not gotten to the issue about how to deal with Iraq.

Dergham: What about the fact that there's a State Department delegation in northern Iraq? Is the idea to somehow hope that there will be opposition, armed opposition in northern and southern Iraq, in order to equip them and empower them to do something?

Dr. Rice: Well, the United Nations, of course, has responsibilities for Northern Iraq, in order to protect the population that Saddam Hussein himself so brutally went after in the last stages of the war. So that there is a U.S. Delegation there -- the United States a member of the Permanent Five -- no one should read anything into that. That's not an infrequent occurrence.

Dergham: So whatever we're hearing about Shiite opposition groups in the south being empowered militarily, and the Kurds in the north, this is not true then?

Dr. Rice: The United States has not decided on a course beyond what we have been doing for some time. And that course includes SMART sanctions; it includes the flying of the no-fly zones; and it does include working to support opposition to Saddam Hussein. We've been very open about the fact. We have something called the Iraqi Liberation Act, which, in fact, calls on the United States government to support opposition to him. There is a lot of opposition to him because he's a very brutal ruler. So it's no secret that we support opposition to him.

Dergham: Because of the time, I need to move with you, so that we don't miss the most important point here, the situation between the Palestinians and the Israelis. The United States seems to be, at least from the point of view of several -- a majority of Arab public opinion -- that it gets manipulated by Israel's Ariel Sharon or the Israeli government. Whenever you ask for restraint, there is no restraint. Every time you launch even the vision initiative, it does not sign on. The Mitchell Plan, then he brings in the seven days -- gives them the seven days, in a way torpedoing all of these things. What do you say to this? These people feel frustrated with American policy on Israel.
Will you ever pressure Sharon to do whatever he needs to do?

Dr. Rice: I would first say to all that the President laid out a very positive vision for the Middle East in his United Nations General Assembly
speech. He's the first Republican President to say that there should be a Palestinian state that should live in peace and security with Israel. He has talked about the importance of a region in which people can be prosperous and secure. So he has a positive vision for the region. The problem currently is that we cannot get along the path to that positive vision because terrorism is getting in the way. We went to the extraordinary lengths after Secretary of State Powell's speech of sending a special envoy to the region, General Zinni, who had begun to make some headway with security talks with the two sides. Of course, we talked both to the Palestinians about what they need to do, and to the Israelis about what they need to do, telling the Israelis we believe opening of closures, so that the Palestinian people can have an economic life is extremely important. Secretary Powell talked about how important it is not to have the Palestinian people humiliated by the circumstances of the occupation. So of course we talk to both sides.
But in the middle of General Zinni's efforts there, we had a massive terrorist attack on Israel, for which Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad are apparently responsible. So it's very clear to us that these efforts that we are making and the others are making -- that, by the way, the Egyptians and the Saudis and others are making -- are not going to be able to go forward until somebody does something about the terrorist situation. And the person to do something about that is Chairman Arafat.

Dergham: But he did. It's a very major speech he delivered, that he really did --he followed the script pretty much of what he was asked to do, don't you think so?

Dr. Rice: Well, we welcomed the speech, and we thought the speech was constructive. But what we need now is to have actions, to have the things he said he would do in the speech actually happen on the ground.

Dergham: True, but you didn't really push the Israelis to do something similar. In a way, to Arafat, you say "deliver; otherwise," and to Sharon you say, you know, it's provocative, it's unhelpful. The Israeli part of this equation did not respond positively to what the United States has asked both to do. It seems that Arafat at least took a first step. So are you going to --

Dr. Rice: The Palestinians have said to us, we have to have a positive vision to move forward, in order to be able to do the things that we need to do. We've laid out a positive vision. We have a negotiator on the ground, a facilitator on the ground, to try and help -- or we had, in General Zinni -- to try and help to move this forward. But it's first things first. And what is in the way, right now, is the persistence of terrorist incidents against Israel.
You cannot ask a democratically-elected Israeli government to go back to peace negotiations when there are bombs going off at bus stops -- and of the magnitude that we saw on that night. Chairman Arafat is a responsible leader of the Palestinian people. It goes back to what I said earlier. We are asking all responsible leaders -- not just Chairman Arafat, all responsible leaders -- to get rid of terrorists in their midst, to break up terrorist organizations, to stop financing them, to stop training them. Chairman Arafat has a very large security presence in the West Bank and in Gaza. He can do something to stop these events.

Dergham: Right, but I'm just asking, all the appeals and what you ask Sharon, Mr. Sharon to do, he has not responded. Neither on the closure, nor on stopping the assassination policy, nor on the issue of demolition of homes. Even -- (inaudible) -- the most moderate of men, had to be humiliated. So what do you do? You just wait until terrorism is concluded from the point of view of Mr.Ariel Sharon, and then the Palestinians go on suffering like this?
What does it do to your initiative?

Dr. Rice: When there is a serious move against terrorism in the territories, we believe that we will have what we need to move the parties
forward in the peace process. And we spend time, talk both to the Israelis and to the Palestinians about what they need to do. But in this context, there is not much that we can do until the terrorism -- until these terrorists organizations have been rounded up.

Dergham: Do you think -- don't you think that you're leaving this possibly in the hands of some radicals who want to really fail Arafat, as well as fail the United States policy, because it cannot be totally concluded that is -- these opposition groups to him.

Dr. Rice: Well, of course. And Secretary Powell has said to Chairman Arafat, this is as much a threat to your authority and a challenge to your authority as it is to the peace process. But the fact is, we're not asking for 100 percent result. We are asking for 100 percent effort. And unless you are -- unless Chairman Arafat is arresting these people, locking them up, not locking them up and letting them out a couple of days later, so that they go and carry out more terrorist attacks, that's not locking people up.
So what we're saying is, he is the leader of the Palestinian people. Responsible leadership at this point has to act against terrorist organizations. Close down their offices. Break up their financial networks. When he's done these things, or is showing 100 percent effort at doing these things, then I think we can move forward.

Dergham: But tell me, what are you demanding of Sharon, and how are you backing it? At least Arafat is responding. Sharon is refusing to respond. So what are you demanding of Sharon, and what if he just goes on ignoring what the U.S. wants?

Dr. Rice: Israel has a security problem right now, which is that currently, over the last several months, since the collapse of Camp David and Taba, terror has been used as a weapon against Israel. And we do say to the Israelis, try to think about what will happen tomorrow if you act in a particular way. But we cannot ignore the fact that the terror is there.
It makes it very difficult to demand anything of Israel as long as they are suffering the terrorist attacks, when they believe, and we believe that Chairman Arafat, who is to be their partner, can do more about the situation.

Dergham: Yes, but, you know, madam, the Palestinians are suffering also, under occupation. The settlers are illegal, unless you disagree with me that the settlements are illegal. And they are really being subjected to collective punishment. And in a way, it looks -- the fact that you don't pass this point out in public about the Israelis, and demand more of them, it feels as if you're saying, the life of an Israeli is more valuable than the life of a Palestinian.

Dr. Rice: Every life is valuable. And again, I would point you to Secretary Powell's speech, where he talked precisely and especially about the plight of the Palestinian people and about the importance of getting economic life for them, of prosperity for them. But the security environment here is one in which terrorism is being used as a weapon. It's being used as a weapon against Israel. It's being used as a weapon against peace. And so Chairman Arafat, who has the -- who really does have within his power the ability to do something about these organizations, must do it.
Now, we have pressed the Israelis on closures. And from time to time, when the security situation is not so difficult, they do open those closures. We have pressed them on -- Secretary Powell mentioned in his speech the issue of settlements, and we have said that this is not helpful, cannot continue. But --

Dergham: But in the meantime, they build more settlements, and new settlements

Dr. Rice: But until -- it's a matter of first things first. There is a lot that the United States can do in the peace process to move toward this
positive vision when the terror stops. Until the terror stops, or at least until there are efforts to make the terror stop, we're going to have a very difficult time moving forward. And by the way, this is not just the United States that is calling on Chairman Arafat, and saying this is the moment. This has been true of the Egyptians, who sent their Foreign Minister to Israel. This has been true of the Europeans, who have been calling on him to do this. It's a matter of first things first. Terror is not a weapon that can be used to bring about peace.

Dergham: But there's a difference, Dr. Rice, because the Europeans -- the Europeans, never mind the Arabs, they have diverged from the point of view, because they are trying to pressure both equally. They demand of both equally, whereas the U.S. -- the administration gives the appearance as if -- well, not the appearance. You said, first things first. You said first, we need this, and then we'll look after the Palestinian aspirations and rights.

Dr. Rice: No, no. We have said that the Palestinian aspirations and rights -- the United States is devoted to and very concerned about Palestinian rights and aspirations. That's why the President has said that there needs to be a Palestinian state. The fact is, though, that terrorism cannot be permitted and cannot be condoned by anyone. And so what we are trying to do is to bring down the level of violence, especially to break up the terrorist groups, who as people have said, are as much a threat to Mr. Arafat as they are -- to Mr. Arafat's authority as they are to the peace process.

Dergham: Let me stay with this on you, personally, if you don't mind. Then I'll just take the others quickly. Forgive me to put this impression about you -- bring it to you -- in the minds of the majority of those in the Arab countries, they think of Condoleezza Rice as the one who is very hawkish and really -- she's got a problem with the Arabs and Muslims. She's always sort of stepping away from confronting others, but it's very easy for her to confront the Muslims and Arabs. You're perceived as hawkish. Is this an unfair thing?

Dr. Rice: I think so.

Dergham: Why?

Dr. Rice:  Well, first of all, I'm not going to say I'm not a hawk. I don't know what that means. I will say that I share, with every member of this
administration, and with the President, a concern -- I am as committed as everyone to a Middle East that is good for all of its people. I think this can be a Middle East -- I'm a great believer in the ability of people, if given a chance, to not just be happy and prosperous, but to really contribute to the betterment of humankind. I really do believe that. I'm a tremendous optimist in that sense.
And it's very painful to see in the Middle East this conflict keep people, both Palestinian and Israeli, from reaching their full potential. The
Palestinians are people who are, many of them, well-educated, many of them people who could be great entrepreneurs. Israel is a place that has Arabs within its own boundaries that are living in peace. So there's a lot to work with in the Middle East. And I'm as committed to that vision as anyone else.

Dergham: Last question. I'll lump a couple of things together. I forgot to ask you about the Saudi cooperation. I know there's a lot of people who keep saying that the administration is in one place, and those who are leaking on the Saudi. So, Saudi relations actually -- in fact, how is it, the reality of it?
And do you think this is the time that the United States is going to choose its identity as a superpower, more of an engagement away from isolationists? And finally, do you think this is the end of militant radical Islam? And forgive me for lumping three together. Anna will kill me if I didn't do this.

Dr. Rice: On the matter of Saudi cooperation, it's very good. We have excellent relations with Saudi Arabia. It's a good friend, has been for a lot of years. And we're completely satisfied with our level of cooperation. In terms of American isolation, America cannot be isolationist. We are too big. We are too integrated into the world. And we have never been isolationists. This administration was engaged from the minute that it landed here. And it will continue to be.
So there was no isolationism to overcome. It's a very engaged administration. And in terms of radical fundamentalism, I hope it's the end. But I suspect that we've got a lot of work to do. We've got a lot of work to do to break up the terrorists and their cells. We've got a lot of work to do to address some of the concerns of people who may be somehow attracted to it.
These terrorists are, many of them, wealthy people. The notion that they somehow came from poverty is just not right. They are evil people. Poor people are not evil people. But could we use this as an opportunity, after we have taken care of or pushed aside this most horrible and virulent form of conflict, to make it a better world for other people, to give people opportunities for prosperity, as well as for peace? I think that's an agenda that we should pursue. And hopefully that will also be a bulwark against the reemergence of radical fundamentalism.

Dergham: Thank you very much.

Dr. Rice: Thank you.

END 1:12 P.M. EST