'Liquidating The Cold War Legacy Of Nuclear Hostility'

President Bush: President Putin, thank you very much. Laura and I are so grateful for your hospitality andyour friendship. It's an historic and hopeful day for Russia and America. It's an historic day for the world,as well.

President Putin and I today ended a long chapter of confrontation, and opened up an entirely newrelationship between our countries. Mr. President, I appreciate your leadership. I appreciate your vision. Iappreciate the fact that we've now laid the foundation for not only our governments, but future governments towork in a spirit of cooperation and a spirit of trust. That's good. It's good for the people of Russia; it'sgood for the people of the United States.

President Putin and I have signed a treatythat will substantially reduce our nuclear -- strategic nuclear warhead arsenals to the range of 1,700 to2,200, the lowest level in decades. This treaty liquidates the Cold War legacy of nuclear hostility betweenour countries.

We've also signed a jointdeclaration of new strategic relationship that charts a coursetoward greater security, political and economic cooperation between Russia and the United States. Our nationswill continue to cooperate closely in the war against global terror.

I understand full well that the people of Russia have suffered at the hands of terrorists. And so have we.And I want to thank President Putin for his understanding of the nature of the new war we face together, andhis willingness to be determined and steadfast and patient as we pursue this war together.

President Putin and I agree also that the greatest danger in this war is the prospect of terroristsacquiring weapons of mass destruction. Our nations must spare no effort at preventing all forms ofproliferation. And we discussed Iran in this context today. We'll work closely with each other on this veryimportant issue.

Our nations also agree on the importance of a new NATO-Russia Council that will be launched in a few daysin Rome. And, Mr. President, this council is also a tribute to your leadership and your vision. For decades,Russia and NATO were adversaries. Those days are gone, and that's good. And that's good for the Russianpeople, it's good for the people of my country, it's good for the people of Europe and it's good for thepeople of the world.

Russia and the United States are also determined to work closely on important regional challenges.Together, we will work to rebuild Afghanistan. Together, we will work to improve security in Georgia. We willwork to help end fighting and achieve a political settlement in Chechnya.

Russia and the United States are committed to economic cooperation. We have launched a major new energypartnership. Private firms will take the lead in developing and transforming the vast energy reserves ofRussia and the Caspian world to markets through multiple pipelines such as the Caspian Pipeline Consortium andBaku-Jihan. And I want to thank you for the cooperation and the willingness to work together on energy andenergy security.

Russia is building its market economy, opening new opportunities for both our countries. I'm impressed bythe level of entrepreneurial growth here in Russia. It's a significant achievement. Again, it's a testimony tothe leadership of Vladimir Putin.

In a while, we're going to meet with Russian and American business leaders to discuss how we can continuefostering good relations and fostering opportunity. We want Russia to be a part of the world economy. We lookforward to one day welcoming Russia as a member of the World Trade Organization. President Putin and I alsoagree that we'll work to resolve disputed areas of trading, such as poultry or steel, in a spirit of mutualrespect and trust.

America welcomes the dramatic improvement in freedoms in Russia since Soviet days, including the newfreedoms of Russia's Jewish community. In recognition of these freedoms, I am determined to work with Congressto remove Russia from the Jackson-Vanik amendment. It is time our Congress responded to my request, PresidentPutin's desire, that the Jackson-Vanik amendment be removed pertaining to Russia.

I also discussed with President Putin the important role of free press in building a working democracy. Andtoday we will meet with media entrepreneurs from both countries. It's an issue we discussed before. ThePresident said it makes sense to have a forum where media entrepreneurs can meet and visit. And it's going totake place today. Mr. President, I appreciate that.

I am pleased with our relationship. I am confident that by working together, we make the world morepeaceful. I'm confident that by working together, we can win the first war of the 21st century, and that isthe war cold-blooded killers -- against cold-blooded killers, who want to harm nations such as America andRussia. And I'm confident that when we work together in a spirit of cooperation on all fronts, both ourpeoples will benefit.

Mr. President, thank you for your hospitality.

President Putin: Distinguished American colleagues, and distinguished Mr. President, ladies and gentlemen.We've just accomplished the official part of our talks with U.S. President George Bush, for our distinguishedcolleagues of the visit in Moscow and St. Petersburg, but now we can name the major result of our talks --first of all, the logical development and practical implementation as seen by our agreements reached inCrawford last year. I mean the signature of the treaty between Russia on strategic defensive reductions and,first of all, this document.

It's the statement of our countries to reduce our nuclear arsenals and the joint work for nonproliferationof weapons of mass destruction. It's the decision of two states which are particularly responsible forinternational security and strategic stability. We're on the level of adopting the declaration on newstrategic relationship which determines the basic directions in the security and international policy.

It will have a positive impact for economic cooperation and development of our relations between theinstitutions of general public, and together with Mr. President, we discussed especially this aspect, thecivil society between the people of our countries. The declaration formulates the principles of our dialogue,anti-missile dialogue. That is the transparency and openness and exclusion of potential threats. We confirmedthe Genoa agreement on offensive and defensive systems in all their aspects.

A separate issue, the mechanism of NATO-Russia cooperation within the framework of 20, it presumes a newlevel of joint responsibility and confidence between all its participants.

I would like to stress especially that is the international novelty. And it happened because of thestrengthening of Russian-American relations, including in joint confrontation to international terroristsstruggling with international terrorism. Russians work together with American people in September the 8th andwe're grateful for sincere feelings of compassion headed by President Bush on behalf of American peoplebecause of the recent events in Kaspiysk. The memory of terrorism victims and the responsibility for thesecurity of our people means joint struggle against this evil, as well as the struggle against Nazism. Thespirit of our cooperation will mean fruitful results even today.

That's why the agenda has very concrete issues of interaction against terrorism on the basis of uniquestandards against any manifestation of terrorism and extremism. We need close contacts through all agenciesand services, including special services. Here we have very positive experience we've accrued over the pastyears. And we see today -- we feel it today during the negotiations.

The bilateral working group on Afghanistan has demonstrated its efficiency. And we, Mr. President, wouldlike to transform it on a group to combat terrorism, especially chemical, biological, nuclear terrorism.

Russia and the United States are oriented to build new relations in economic activity. Our businessmanmentality is much alike, that their qualities and their joint work is based on free trade and supporting theinitiatives. That's why our task is to open new opportunities for business community.

We need to avoid obstacles of the past. Here we mean not only the market status of the Russian economy --and I'm grateful to Mr. President that he has given a very positive signal during our talks. And it does alsomean such things as Jackson-Vanik amendment, we have to remove administrative obstacles, which encurls bothcountries to cooperate, especially in the high-tech sphere, which determined the economy of the 21st century-- that is the aeronautics, telecommunications, science and technologies, new sources of energy. I would liketo focus on energy, especially nuclear energy. We paid much attention to it today. And the large format of ourcooperation will be a great element for the global economy on the whole.

I would like to stress, in conclusion, that, of course, not all ideas, not all initiatives, are on paperand in the form of official documents. But a serious move forward in all these issues is quite evident for us.Today we together counteract global threats and challenges and we're going to form a stable world order thatis within the interests of our peoples and our countries. And I think it's in the interest of all thecivilized human society.

Thank you.

President Bush: Name your agency.

Q I have a question for both Presidents, please. If we've truly entered a new era, why do you each need1,700 nuclear weapons? And, President Putin, why does Russia need to continue producing nuclear warheads? Andto, President Bush, why does the United States need to keep some 2,000 of these weapons in storage, ready fordeployment?

President Bush: First of all, remember where we've come from. We've come from 6,000 to 1,700 in a veryquick -- or to 1,700 to 2,200 in a very quick period of time. You know, friends really don't need weaponspointed at each other. We both understand that. But it's a realistic assessment of where we've been. And whoknows what will happen 10 years from now. Who knows what future presidents will say and how they react.

If you have a nuclear arsenal, you want to make sure they work. It's -- one reason that you keep weapons instorage apart from launchers is for quality control. And the thing I think it's important for you to know,Ron, is that we've made tremendous progress from the past. And the treaty is setting a period of time in therear-view mirror of both countries. And I am not only confident that this is good for world peace, I'mconfident this sets the stage for incredible cooperation that we've never had before between our countries.

President Putin: I concur with the assessment given by my colleague, Mr. Bush. And naturally, our positionis well-known, we are guided by the facts that it's more worthwhile perhaps to eliminate a certain part ofnuclear potentials. At the same time, I'd like to point out another thing here. Any man who has at least oncein his career dealt with arms, had arms in his hands, at least to hunt or a rifle or whatever, he knows thatit's much better, much safer to have it in stock disarmed, disassembled perhaps, rather than to have it inyour arms and charged with bullets in it and with your finger on the trigger at the same time. This is adifferent state of affairs, as it were.

And the fact that we agreed with President Bush regarding such detente, in such manner, this is a seriousmove ahead to ensure international security, which is a very good sign as regards the relationship between ourtwo countries.

Now, as to why Russia should continue to produce nuclear arms, I'd like to say that this is not ourpriority. But in addition to Russia and U.S. out there, there are other states who possess nuclear arms. Whatis more concerning, there are countries who want to acquire weapons of mass destruction. Experts in the areaof international security are aware of the fact, and they have been talking a lot about nuclear arms asdeterrent.

Moreover, many of them assert -- and it is difficult to dispute this fact -- they say the existence of thenuclear arms was an impediment, an obstacle which contained the world from large-scale wars over the pastdecades, let's say. And I think we should take that into consideration while building a new quality ofrelationship within the two main nuclear states of the world.

We also should pay attention to the whole set of relations currently in the world out there and we shouldtake into account the prospects of development of the world in the realm of security, bearing in mind thosepotential threats I've mentioned here.

Q Mr. Bush, when we can hope that Jackson-Vanik will be rescinded, which currently is very out of place?That's, you know, a remnant of the Cold War here. And will the U.S. -- can you use it as a leverage ofapplying pressure on Russia? And when Russia will finally be recognized as a marketplace country? And what'sthe prospect of Russia's accession to WTO?

And now to Mr. Putin, Russian President. What's your idea of how U.S. Boeings can help Russian civilaviation?

President Bush: I couldn't make myself clearer during my opening statement about how I feel about Jackson-Vanik-- not much action by the Congress of the United States and I hope they act. The market-based economy is anissue that the President and I talked about. It is a regulatory matter, the responsibility of which resides atthe Commerce Department. Secretary Evans and I have to talk about this subject, and we'll have an answer tothe President soon.

And in terms of success of Russia ascending into the WTO, it's something that we want. It's in our nation'sinterest that Russia be a part of the WTO. And we look forward to working with the President and respectiveministers, to see that that happens. It's in our interest that that happen. So it's hard for me to predict thetimetables on all the issues you mentioned. Those over which I have got direct control will happen relativelyquickly.

President Putin: Well, you know, while talking about the whole set of commercial and trade ties between ourtwo countries, today we've mentioned more than once that we are facing somewhat an unusual situation in thisarea today, which has to do with the fact that while improving relations in disarmament matters, buildingconfidence and so on and so forth, at the same time, we're expanding the whole set of relations in economicarea. And, naturally, we'll face new problems we never had to deal with before.

The position taken by the U.S. administration and the President is known to us as regards Jackson-Vanik.It's precisely the administration who initiated its rescinding. And business communities of our two countries,American and Russian business communities, and their interaction together with the interaction of theparliamentary issues, will be able to remove similar problems in automatic manner, I guess.

Now, as regards your specific question on purchase of Boeings, I must say that the best lobbyist of theinterests of U.S. companies will be American President standing here, since both Boeings and poultry and othermatters very often have been told by my colleagues. People usually say, well, it's not on our level, but Imust say -- and then there will be a lengthy monologue on specific matters.

Anyhow, you've posed a very acute and very specific question. Why it's acute, because it's on the agenda orpractical interaction. And it's very specific since it has a bearing to very specific matters. And since it'sacute and specific, I'll answer as one should in gentlemen's society, in a very general manner.

First and foremost, our carriers, in my opinion, should be primarily guided towards Russian aircraftproducers. Why? Because Russian manufacturers, you know, don't have anywhere to sell their products,otherwise, because they are not let anywhere, or with a lot of difficulty. They only can sell it domestically.That's the first thing. And here we can talk about interaction on the market. Now, the second thing, primarilyAeroflot, should be competitive on the market, and should have advanced technology in their hands. Therefore,they both have American Boeings today. They also have European Airbus aircraft. And the question has beenraised currently on additional purchase, on replacement of old equipment with those foreign aircraft.

Now, I should say, depending on the decision to be taken by economic structures, this is not a politicalquestion, mind you. The economic structure should decide on it. A lot will depend on it in regards of thestate of our political interaction, of course. And our American colleague's proposal today is a little bitcostlier than the European's proposal. Had Americans bought our cheap aluminum and steel, then their aircraftwould have been cheaper and more competitive, including in our market.

So all of this jointly has been a subject of our discussions with the President here, and our good friendand partner, Secretary of Commerce and economy. And I think that in the course of normalization of trade andcommerce relations, all these issues will be addressed in a most mutually advantageous manner.