What's On His Mind?

Relevant excerpts from the press conference by US Secretary of Defense Donald H.Rumsfeld and Gen. Peter Pace, vice chairman, US Joint Chiefs of Staff)

Rumsfeld: I also hope to stop in India and Pakistan before returninghome. The U.S. has a growing defense and security relationship with each of thosecountries. We've been actively working to strengthen our military-to-militaryrelationships with these important South Asian nations. Each is important to us. I lookforward to again meeting with their senior leadership.

And we'd be happy to respond to questions. Yes, Charlie?

Q: Mr. Secretary, you said you hoped to stop in India and Pakistan. Iassume you plan to stop there.

Rumsfeld: I do plan. That's a better word.

Q: And --

Rumsfeld: We're working out dates and times because the schedule'sbeen in a state of some flux, and folks in those countries have travels as well. So we'retrying to mesh schedules.

Q: I see. Do you see any easing of the tension in that area? And mightyou offer some plan or some road map for the two countries, perhaps, to ease the tensionsnow, given the nuclear danger in that area?

Rumsfeld: You know, commenting on the first part of your question, asto whether or not you see some easing, I'm -- suspect General Pace feels the same way --we see several times a day reports on various aspects of the situation in -- between Indiaand Pakistan. And it's quite true that at various times during the day, you might say,"My goodness, that's a good sign," or "My goodness, that's not such a goodsign." And it happens that from day to day it shifts and changes somewhat. So I don'tknow that trying to reach in and comment on the situation at any given moment necessarily,absent a trend -- if there's a trend, it's worth commenting on it. If it's simply a dailyor hourly fluctuation, it probably isn't.

In terms of our country's role there, needless to say, the president of the UnitedStates and Secretary Powell and the -- our ambassadors and leaders from other countrieshave all had a very active interest and involvement. Deputy Secretary Armitage will begoing in sometime in the latter portion of this week. And I think that very likely whatwe'll do is I'll have a chance to meet with him or talk with him after he has completedhis visits. And we'll see what happens.

Q: Mr. Secretary, may I do a follow-up on that, please? As youprobably know, both sides are refusing to meet with Russian President Putin face to face,so apparently he's going to have to meet with them individually.

Rumsfeld: I don't know that that's true.

Q: Okay, well, given that your knowledge is certainly better thanmine, but it's just what I hear. But even if they do, and with the full-courtinternational press to try and resolve the issue between India and Pakistan, with DickArmitage going and then you going, one would have to ask, are you being thrown into thebreach? I mean, we know you're a bright, resourceful guy, but what do you really hope toaccomplish here? What can you do that the rest of them are not or have not done?

Rumsfeld: Well, no, I'm not being thrown into any breach. We have a --I have been to those countries previously. I have met with their leadership there and inthis country, as have other senior officials of our government. It is a continuingprocess. They're important countries in the world, and we have relationships with eachthat we value and that have been strengthening over the past year-plus. And we value them.They're -- the visits that -- and phone conversations and meetings that take place are allpart of a continuum.

Q: One would have to ask why now, sir? I mean, what do you hope toaccomplish as far as, you know, preventing war between those two nations?

Rumsfeld: They are two sovereign nations that are going to make theirown decisions. They're going to do it based on their best information. And they are, as isnot surprising, taking their own counsel and visiting with people from other countries,multiple countries, on a continuing basis.

Q: What's your point in going to Pakistan? You talked a little bitabout efforts to root out al Qaeda in the northwest areas. General Hagenbeck said, Ithink, there are roughly 1,000 al Qaeda up there as well as Taliban and al Qaedaleadership. Can you talk about what's going on to get to those people? Is Pakistan doingthe job, and do you hope to get more U.S. support in there to --

Rumsfeld: Pakistan still has their divisions along the border. And forthat, we're pleased. Pakistan, as you know, we've announced on several occasions -- onenotable one where some 11 different sites were hit by the Pakistan government officials,as well as with some U.S. cooperation. There were, I believe, over 50 people capturedduring that period and a large number of items which add to the intelligence knowledge ofthose who are involved in this coalition.

There have been other such activities of a smaller size, and those types of things havebeen continuing. I don't intend to talk about any current ones or prospective ones, but Ithink it's obvious that Pakistan has been quite cooperative.

Q: Sir, since Pakistan has moved some of its assets away from theborder, are you seeing that the India-Pakistan problem has begun at all to affect thefight against al Qaeda or Pakistan's contributions to the fight against al Qaeda?

Rumsfeld: The elements that have moved away from the Afghan border area have, as Isaid, been relatively small, modest elements and not larger units. The larger units arestill there. And -- is the tension between Pakistan and India a distraction from theefforts against the global war on terrorism? Why, I would say yeah. Has it specificallydamaged in -- oh, precise ways what we're trying to do? Not that I know of.

Yes.

Q: Have you seen any evidence or do you have any concern that elementsof al Qaeda may be trying to exploit that tension, perhaps by creating some incidents inthat area or even in Kashmir, itself, in order to bring about precisely that diversionthat you say has not been -- (inaudible)?

Rumsfeld: Let me think if I can -- (to General Pace) -- I couldn'tspecifically identify anything, could you?

Pace: No, sir. I -- nothing specific, but it would be certainlyreasonable to expect that they would try to exploit this.

Rumsfeld: It would be, you know, most unfortunate if someone saw it intheir interest to create incidents on either side of the LOC or the border in the hopethat those incidents would be judged to be by the other party and thereby incite people toactivities they would otherwise avoid. But I don't know of any instances of thathappening.

Yes.

Q: Mr. Secretary, does the United States have a good feel in India andPakistan for the command and control mechanisms in both countries that are in place andwould presumably be exercised if those two countries were to ever go nuclear? In otherwords, do you have a sense of how the nuclear weapons are controlled and how they would bereleased if it were ever to come to that? Do you have some confidence in those mechanisms?

Rumsfeld: I guess what I would say is, if the import of that questionis, do we have confidence that they have procedures and that they understand theirprocedures, and that they recognize the power of those weapons and the importance of thembeing managed and controlled, I would say yes, I do have confidence that the leadership inthose two countries are fully respectful of the power of the weapons and the importance oftheir being managed and controlled in a way that reflects that fact.

If you're asking, does the United States have detailed knowledge of all of that -- butclearly, countries properly maintain a reasonable degree of security and secrecy about howthey manage things, and that is not surprising -- that each of those countries do that. SoI am sure there's a great deal that nobody knows, except the individual country.

(To the general.) Is that what your estimate would be, Pete?

Pace: Yes, sir. It sure is.

Q: The confidence issue goes to whether or not you have confidencethat these governments, these militaries have full control over the mechanisms for releaseof these small nuclear -- small but deadly nuclear arsenals.

Rumsfeld: And I think I answered that rather well. I did.

Q: Mr. Secretary --

Rumsfeld: Do I have a vote on it? No. (Laughter.)

Pace: I think you did great, sir.

Rumsfeld: (Laughs.)

Q: Yeah, Mr. Secretary. Do you -- are you worried that the -- apossible war in India -- between India and Pakistan could threaten the U.S. troops inAfghanistan, even their very presence there?

Rumsfeld: I think that -- how do I say this? -- clearly no one wants aconflict between those two countries, of any type, in any location. It -- they -- thatthought is something that is what a great many people in this government and othergovernments and, I'm sure, in those two governments are hoping will not happen. And Idon't know that elaborating more than I have adds anything to the discussion.

Yes?

Q: Sir, when you said small and modest elements of Pakistani troopshave been moved away from the Afghan border, are you talking squad-level companies --

Rumsfeld: Oh, handfuls of people -- some reconnaissance people or some communicationelements, but nothing like large elements of troops.

Okay.

Q: Mr. Secretary, I want to follow up on Tom's question about thisnotion that remnants of al Qaeda could be in Pakistan or Kashmir helping the Islamicmilitants foment violence over there. Are you saying you don't -- you have not seen anyintelligence to indicate that fact, to corroborate all these reports that have beenfloating around, or you just haven't looked, or it hasn't been brought to your attention?

Rumsfeld: I can't remember. I've seen speculation that there are --oh, we're reasonably confident that there are al Qaeda and Taliban in Pakistan.

Q: Right.

Rumsfeld: We -- as I'm sure they are in Iran and other neighboringcountries -- that had been in Afghanistan and have been driven out.

To what extent they're involved in the Kashmir situation precisely -- you've seenpictures of that area. It is a tough area. And it's 15 to 20,000 feet high, and it'smountainous, and it's hard to know what's going on up there.

Q: Because the intelligence is unclear or fuzzy in terms of theaction, then --

Rumsfeld: Well, people make -- there's a lot of misinformation thatflies around. People suggest that, you know, Joe did it. So there's that type of thing. Ijust don't know. (To the general.) Do you have better knowledge of that?

Pace: I do not, sir.

Rumsfeld: That's a relief. We must be reading the same things.

Q: The intelligence you're getting, General Pace, doesn't verify one-- it doesn't add -- shed light one way or the other?

Pace: I get the same intelligence the secretary does. And as in anysituation, there is things that you know and things that you know you don't know, and thenthere's a pile of things that you don't know what you don't know, and it's hard to know atany point in time where you are in that -- on that complete spectrum.

Regardless, it would be prudent to assume that there are al Qaeda and Taliban inPakistan and that we should be trying to find ways that they may or may not be trying toinfluence and exploiting this particular problem.

Q: Prudent to assume, but not proven to any great depth byintelligence. Is that --

Pace: I have not seen anything that would lead me to believe one orthe other, black or white, that that -- that there's a truth to be had at this momentabout that, that we know about.

Rumsfeld: Way in the back.

Q: Neither India or Pakistan, for political -- for domestic reasons,can be seen to withdrawn or step back first, before the other, which would suggest -- itseems to suggest that anything has to be done simultaneously or in parallel tracks, as faras any progress. How do you try to synchronize what they do? And is that complicated ifyou can't meet with both countries together?

Rumsfeld: Well, look: I'm not going out there as some sort of amediator, if that's the implication of your question. Secretary Armitage -- DeputySecretary Armitage is going to be there. There are lots of people -- Mr. Putin's beenmeeting with them -- other -- Prime Minister Blair has met with each of the individuals.It is not possible to know how things will play out. But my guess is, and certainly myhope is, that two countries as important as they are will figure out ways to get fromwhere they are to where the world would like them to be, which is in a less-tensesituation.

Yes.

Q: But could you articulate for us what your message to these twonuclear powers will be?

Rumsfeld: Well, I could; it's not clear to me that that's a usefulthing to do -- to -- if I'm going to meet with them, one would think you would want totell them what you had on your mind, and it partly will depend on how things play outbetween now and then and what comes out of the Armitage meetings.

And it is -- let me just re-emphasize what's important: We have a relationship that hasbeen developing well with Pakistan. We have a relationship that has been developing wellwith India. We put value in those relationships. We think they're important for ourcountry. We also believe they're important for their countries. And our hope is that thoserelationships will be useful in having those two countries find their way to rightdecisions with respect to the tension that exists.

Yes.