Our Congress has been very supportive. We've seen legislation move now from committees in the House and the Senate. We look forward to seeing votes in the House and the Senate, maybe this month. There are some -- I think the House will be acting, perhaps in the next week, and we hope the Senate will as well.

So the U.S.-India civil nuclear agreement is on track. The legislation is moving forward quickly and the United States is keeping our commitment of turning the President's and the Prime Minister's vision into reality that the companies can use for cooperation and that we can use to help support Indian economic growth and India's economic future.

On Pakistan and Afghanistan: The other area that I'd like to talk about a little bit is Pakistan and Afghanistan, the war on terror. Our relationship with Pakistan is much broader and we have initiated a whole series of dialogues with Pakistan -- the Strategic Dialogue, the Economic Dialogue, the Education Dialogue, the Science Dialogue -- all these areas where we have real practical cooperation going on with Pakistan, helping Pakistan with its energy needs as well.

In addition to that, there's a lot of cooperation with Pakistan in terms of helping the Pakistani Government support its efforts out in the border regions. You have in both Pakistan and Afghanistan a similar process going on of government extending its control, extending its peaceful and beneficial activities to the edges of the frontier on both sides, and we're supporting the Pakistani Government in doing that and on the Afghan side of the border we're supporting the Afghan Government in doing that. So that with the deployment of NATO troops, the deployment of policemen, drug eradicators, but also the building of roads, building of electricity lines, irrigation schemes, government offices, we're helping both Pakistan and Afghanistan extend their authority out to the edges of the country so that these places can't be used by terrorists to fight us, to fight NATO, to fight the Afghan Government and to fight the Pakistani Government; and in the end, in addition to the actual fighting that has to take place, bringing the benefits of government, the benefits of good government and development, to these regions, because I think what we think in the long term will bring peace and security to the people who live there.

So those are some of the big things we're doing. We can talk about any of the countries and specific issues in this region, but I thought at this moment, five or six months after I started and one year after the Indian meetings with the President, it was a good time to come out and tell you things are going quite well in this region and there's a lot of progress in turning the visions into reality.

Question:  Hi. To a more recent and controversial event. Have you seen any evidence to suggest that Pakistan or Pakistani-based groups that are involved in Mumbai blast? And also there is an impression that U.S.-Pakistan relations are on the slide -- that the United States is not very happy with what Pakistan is doing or not doing on the part of Iran's border and also is not doing enough to stop people from crossing over into Kashmir.

Richard Boucher: Well, let me deal with two things. One is the Mumbai bombings were a horrible tragedy. They were obviously well-prepared by somebody with evil intent, by somebody with local knowledge, by somebody with -- or some group, some individuals, some people with a lot of planning and malice, so forth -- you know, and a lot of malice. The evidence, you know, as far as who they were, who was responsible, I don't think we've seen all that yet. That's to be expected. The Indians are conducting the investigation and investigators usually don't talk about their investigations until they've reached firm conclusion. So we look forward to seeing how the evidence develops. We look forward to hearing the firm conclusions of the investigators.

I know there's a lot of speculation out there now. That happens in these cases. But I think we need to be led by the evidence before we start trying to draw conclusions and make policy pronouncements on it. So that would be our attitude and I think that should be the attitude of others as well.

As far as U.S.-Pakistan relations, you know, one of the reasons I tried to mention it in the opening statement, is U.S.-Pakistan relations have been very positive recently. We've been cooperating across the board in things that are -- areas that are important for Pakistan's development, areas that are important for Pakistan's success as a moderate, stable, democratic society. And our goal is to help Pakistan achieve success in all those areas that we're working with them: strategic issues, the fight against terrorism, finding energy supply, educating its population, building a democracy. These are all the areas that have been outlined for President Musharraf in his program of Enlightened Moderation and we want them to succeed. And we're working with Pakistan across the board to try to help them achieve that success.

The fight against terrorism is a tough one. We all have to do more. We all have to make sure that terrorists are not allowed to operate, not allowed to prosper, not allowed to find sanctuary. We're playing an important role in that with the military operations we're conducting in Afghanistan. We play an important role in terms of the development programs we have in Afghanistan, you know, the support that we give to Pakistan for its own development programs. So we are in that together. We're all fighting a common enemy and we're all going to try to keep cooperating, keep improving and keep doing better so that we can beat this threat, the big threat to Pakistan's success.

MR. BAILY: Yes, sir?

Question:  After the dinner in Vienna in March at which the Chinese Ambassador approached you for a nuclear deal with Pakistan similar to the one with India, has there been any further --

Richard Boucher: Who said that?

Question:  I've seen documentation. Has there been any further approaches to you or anyone else in the State Department for a similar deal? And secondly, the G-8 has submitted -- issued a statement on nonproliferation, which is a paragraph, which implicitly endorses the Indo-U.S. deal. Can you reflect on how we have got here, considering that after the 1998 nuclear test the G-8 was the engine for condemning India and the engine behind the Security Council resolution on the Indian nuclear test?

Richard Boucher: As far as things -- discussions taking place within the Nuclear Suppliers Group, we're really not supposed to talk about it and so I don't want to violate the confidences of that organization. But I think in terms of what you've seen, I think it's safe to say that I have not seen any proposal by any government to make a similar sale to another country along the lines of the one with India. We certainly believe that the situation with India is unique. That's the way we've approached this agreement. That's the way we pursued it and I think that remains the view of many other members of the international community. So I haven't seen anybody make a proposal for anyone else along those lines.

As far as the G-8 and nonproliferation, it's truly an interesting question that if you look at, you know, the G-8 countries a number of them have already pronounced themselves firmly in favor of civilian cooperation with India. We also know that the Director General of the International Atomic Energy Agency is strongly supportive of civil nuclear cooperation with India under the terms that we've outlined. So there is, I think very strong desire on the part of many nations in the world to have this kind of cooperation with India to help India meet its energy needs in a clean manner for its future economic development.

But I would point to the other side of this as well; that India certainly has changed its attitude towards many of these organizations and towards the international nonproliferation effort. And it's important -- it's important that India is changing its mindset. It's just a very interesting speech given by the foreign secretary last week about the one year anniversary of the Prime Minister and President's agreement, but also about sort of India's attitude towards the world. And I think as we change our attitude towards India, it's interesting to see the Indians reflect on their relations with others in the world, particularly with some of these organizations that they have had problems with in the past. And it's interesting to reflect how important it is that India is joining the international nonproliferation effort because they understand the importance of that effort to India's future stability, security and safety.

Question:  I have two questions, both are actually linked to each other. I believe President Bush and Prime Minister Singh met on the sidelines yesterday of the G-8 meet. My first question is can you bring us up to speed as to what they discussed? One of the issues apparently was a civilian nuclear deal. And the second question is can you set a timeline for the next stage of the legislative process and where we are with respect to that?

Richard Boucher: I appreciate the question about the meeting between President Bush and Prime Minister Singh. The reason that I didn't mention it in my own remarks was that I don't really have a lot of information on it yet. My State Department people who were out there during the meeting are in an airplane on their way back, so I haven't had a chance to talk to them yet. And so I've seen the statements and I've seen the press reports but that -- I don't have anything more than you have on that one.

On the future timeline, I'm always hesitant to predict how the Congress will act because the Congress decides on its own how and when it wishes to act. But our expectation is the House will take up the matter in about a week. The Senate may take it up soon after. Once each passes legislation, assuming that the legislation's not exactly the same, they'll have to go through conference which would happen after their August recess. So perhaps in September they could put through the final legislation.

In the meantime, we're working with the Nuclear Suppliers Group. India's working with us on negotiating a bilateral agreement. India's working with the International Atomic Energy Agency to negotiate their safeguards agreements. So if all those pieces come together and we have the legislation, you know, it's conceivable that all this could be done by the end of the year. But I can't promise specifically that it will be because each of these factors has to move forward and get concluded on its own track.

Question:  I have two questions, two quick ones. What specific diplomatic effort is the U.S. taking -- undertaking to calm the Indian subcontinent right now, given the current situation after the bomb blasts and encourage dialogue, continuing dialogue, between India and Pakistan? And the second question is, has India expressed its concern over the sale of F-16s to Pakistan and how would the U.S. address Indian concerns regarding this? Thank you.

Richard Boucher: As far as the current situation, you've heard what I said about, I think, basing any conclusions or actions on evidence. And I think that's pretty much been our message to everybody. We have kept in touch with the Indian Government on this. Under Secretary Burns had a meeting last Thursday in Paris with Foreign Secretary Saran and where this was discussed somewhat. President and Prime Minister Singh met today. I don't know how much that was discussed. But I think our message to everybody is let's find the evidence, let's find out who is responsible and then let's look together at what we can do to stop any groups or organizations or support that organizations might be getting to make sure that people can't carry out such actions in the future. And that's something we want to do with all the governments in the region.

We certainly hope that India -- the progress in India-Pakistan relations is not lost and that they find opportunities to cooperate, to cooperate against terrorist groups, to cooperate in stabilizing the region and that's something we'll continue to encourage. It's up to them to decide how to proceed. We realize that they felt it wasn't possible to have the foreign secretaries meetings this week. But I think our outlook remains that India-Pakistan cooperation is important for the region and we hope they will find ways to continue it in the future.

Oh, and F-16s, I haven't heard anything from the Indian Government. That's up to the Indian Government, if you want to ask. If you want to ask them their attitude, go ahead, but our sale is based on what we think are legitimate needs of Pakistan to defensive purposes and we proceed on that basis, not on the basis of what other people think or don't think about it. 

Question:  I'll  just follow up on a couple of responses that you gave. The first one is, of course, on the India-U.S. nuclear deal, I thought you said that the House will take up the issue in about a week. I think the audio here is bad. I'm not sure if that is the correct timeline that you provided. And my second question is again about the Mumbai bombings and the fact that the secretary-level meetings, which was supposed to be held on the 31st of July, they have been canceled. How much -- how much is the U.S. concerned about this development?

Richard Boucher: Well, your second question I think I just answered. And the first question, yes, I did say I think the House will take up the legislation in about a week. And we hope the Senate will do it soon after that.

Question:  Steve Collinson with AFP. Last week the Pakistani Foreign Minister said at his visit to Washington that he thought the blame game was over. He was talking about U.S. officials and U.S. journalists perhaps accusing Pakistan of continuing to support the Taliban and Taliban remnants in Afghanistan. Does the United States agree with that characterization of the relationship, you know, five years after -- nearly five years after September 11th and recruiting Pakistan, you know, into the war on terror?

Richard Boucher: I guess I disagree with the premise of the question, that we've never been involved in some attempt to blame people. We've been involved in a fight that affects us all. The terrorists that we're fighting against have been fighting against Afghanistan, been fighting against Pakistan, been fighting against the United States, been fighting against Europeans and maybe some of them fighting against India as well. So every country in this region has an interest in stopping terrorism. And we want to make that a joint effort. We're always looking for new ways to do more to improve our capabilities, to improve our cooperation. But there's nothing -- I think we have nothing but praise for our partners in this effort.

No country has done more to fight al-Qaida or has lost more people in doing so than Pakistan. We have made that abundantly clear. Are there other things that we and they can do together? Yes, and we're doing them. And it's not just the fight. It's not just the struggle. That's a very important part and that struggle and that fight needs to be taken to every terrorist, no matter what his purported cause. Terrorism is inherently destabilizing for any society and all terrorism needs to be fought. But in addition, we need to stabilize the society. We need to give people hopes and aspirations they have for their children, give them the education they need and the development opportunities they need and Pakistan is equally a partner in that effort as well.