|
One Year Later:
State Department: Global Partnerships
With Philip Reeker
Deputy Spokesman of the Department of State
Tuesday, Sept. 10 at 4 p.m. ET
One year after unprecedented attacks on the World Trade Center and Pentagon, how has the United States and the world changed? Is the war on terrorism still justified? How is the American political system -- including the presidency, Congress and our system of civil liberties -- responding to the challenges posed by the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks?
The State Department is the "lead federal agency dealing with international terrorism," and responsible for developing, coordinating, and implementing U.S. counterterrorism policy. The Department of State’s counterterrorism task forces also respond to international terrorist incidents. Since the attacks, has the U.S. government been successful in building global partnerships in the war on terrorism?
Philip Reeker, deputy spokesman of the Department of State, will be online Tuesday, Sept. 10 at 4 p.m. ET, to discuss global partnerships in the war on terrorism.
Submit your questions and comments before or during today's discussion.
Reeker, deputy spokesman since May 2000, oversees the Offices of Press Relations, Regional Media Outreach, and Foreign Press Centers in the State Department. He joined the Foreign Service with the U.S. Information Agency in March 1992, serving in Budapest, Hungary and then Skopje, Macedonia.
The transcript follows.
Editor's Note: Washingtonpost.com moderators retain editorial control
over Live Online discussions and choose the most relevant questions for guests and hosts; guests and hosts can decline to answer questions.
Phil Reeker: Good afternoon. It is my pleasure to be back on washingtonpost.com again--I have done several of these chats earlier this year, glad to be back again.
Let me start by noting that tomorrow, September 11, will be a solemn day, as we all remember the innocent people who died. President Bush has declared September 11 to be Patriot Day; here at the State Department, Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage will lead a short ceremony. Secretary of State Powell will be in New York City, at Ground Zero and with the President.
Washington, D.C.:
At a recent State Dept. press briefing, in response to a question about whether law enforcement and intelligence agencies had failed to provide information they had about the 9/11 terrorists to State's visa officers, who issued visas to some of the 9/11 terrorists, State's Mr. Boucher said the following:
“I don't know. You'll have to check with them as to what information they had on the applicants in advance."
Do you, or does anyone, know this answer now? Isn’t this critical information for our nation, our government and U.S. citizens to know, so as to help us learn from and not repeat the past?
This is just one example -- if we want to strengthen America's information sharing and engagement against terrorism, don't we need to start sharing more information and engaging more Americans in this vital cause?
Phil Reeker: Since September 11, 2001, the State Department has been engaged with other government agencies to review visa issuing practices as they relate to security of our borders. Security is the number one priority, and visa applications are now subject to even greater scrutiny. The Bureau of Consular affairs has incorporated over 7 million additional FBI records into the Consular Lookout namecheck system and there are additional security checks. As President Bush said yesterday in Detroit, our goal is to be safer and more efficient.
Washington, D.C.:
The homeland security office just changed the threat level to "orange" (severe). Is
this system an effective change since 9/11?
Phil Reeker: The Attorney General, as well as the FBI Director and the Director of Homeland Security, Gov. Ridge, spoke earlier today about the change in threat level to "orange." For the State Department's part, yesterday we reissued our Worldwide Caution to alert Americans to the need to remain especially vigilant during the period around the anniversary of the attacks of September 11. There is a continuing threat of terrorist actions--we continue to receive credible indications that extremist groups and individuals are planning additional terrorist actions against U.S. interest. As we all know, these groups do not distinguish between official and civilian targets. We've seen attacks on places of worship and schools and other places where Americans are thought to congregate. So we keep our facilities overseas on a state of heightened alert, and we remind the public to think about their travel plans and security. It's important for Americans to go about their business, but to do it carefully--and overseas to keep in touch with the American Embassy or Consulate for any updated information.
Washington, D.C.:
In your opinion, how does a pre-emptive strike on Iraq conflict with the foundations and ideals of our democratic republic? Does your answer change if we act pursuant to a new UN Security Council Resolution?
Phil Reeker: On Thursday at the United Nations, the President will discuss the challenge Iraq presents to the U.N. and how the Iraqi regime can be held accountable for its continuing defiance of UN Security Council directives. Let's be clear--Saddam is a dangerous man and his regime has spent the last decade continually ignoring the agreements Saddam accepted at the end of the Gulf War. Saddam is working to acquire nuclear weapons; his regime stockpiles chemical and biological weapons; he supports terrorism; his regime invaded its neighbors seeking regional domination; and he used chemical weapons against -- and continues to oppress --his own people. As the President and Secretary Powell have reiterated, doing nothing in the face of this grave threat is not an option. There are many tools and options available--and the President will be discussing at the United Nations a way forward.
Orono, Maine:
Why hasn't the U.S. been more vigorous about cultivating ties with the moderate factions in Iran? It seems to me that improved relations with that country would give an enormous boost to our efforts to oust Sadaam Hussein.
We seem inevitably committed to a path of war, when skillful diplomacy might allow us to obtain our ends through less violent -- and less costly -- means. Is this what we should expect from U.S. foregign policy in the future, an emphasis on might over mind?
Phil Reeker: On Iran, let me point you toward what the President said in July: We have seen throughout history the power of one simple idea: when given a choice, people will choose freedom. As we have witnessed over the past few days, the people of Iran want the same freedoms, human rights, and opportunities as people around the world. Their government should listen to their hopes.
In the last two Iranian presidential elections and in nearly a dozen parliamentary and local elections, the vast majority of the Iranian people voted for political and economic reform. Yet their voices are not being listened to by the unelected people who are the real rulers of Iran. Uncompromising, destructive policies have persisted, and far too little has changed in the daily lives of the Iranian people. Iranian students, journalists and Parliamentarians are still arrested, intimidated, and abused for advocating reform or criticizing the ruling regime. Independent publications are suppressed. And talented students and professionals, faced with the dual specter of too few jobs and too many restrictions on their freedom, continue to seek opportunities abroad rather than help build Iran's future at home. Meanwhile, members of the ruling regime and their families continue to obstruct reform while reaping unfair benefits.
There is a long history of friendship between the American people and the people of Iran. As the President said, as Iran's people move towards a future defined by greater freedom, greater tolerance, they will have no better friend than the United States of America.
Atlanta, Ga.:
Osama had a very specific set of objectives in mind when he ordered the destruction of US landmarks. Foremost was to drive a wedge between the US and the Arab world. Based on the Bush foreign policy, it seems that Osama has won this round. Has the man no clue about the ramifications of an unprovoked war with Iraq?
Phil Reeker: On September 11, terrorists attacked civilization itself. The world--including the Arab world--responded by coming together in a determined coalition and together we have made significant progress against international terrorist networks that threaten our security. Our friends, including many in the Arab world, have stood with us--international groups, like the Organization of the Islamic Conference, have expressed their support and solidarity. We realize the need to reach out to many people around the world who lack a clear understanding of Americans, our values, our society, and our national policies. We lost some ground on "public diplomacy" in the 1990s, but we are making progress in our efforts to engage the world. It is a long-term project underpinned by a focus on dialogue across borders and across cultures. Most importantly, it comes down to telling the truth: conveying to the world who we are and what we stand for, and allowing honest arguments on policy to take place. Terrorism has no place in this equation.
Washington, D.C.:
I've seen a few speeches by senior State Department officials talking about this being the "post-post Cold War era." I know it is the "war on terrorism" era too. Couldn't the State Department or others in the US government come up with something a bit more forward leaning to lable what we are fighting for, instead of what we are fight against, or won over a decade ago?
Phil Reeker: After September 11, 2001, Secretary Powell referred to the "post-post-Cold War" era. I admit I haven't thought of a better name than "The 21st Century." Previously, a generation of Americans born to peace and prosperity came to view out victory in the Cold War as making us invulnerable to threats from beyond our borders. So for many, September 11 was a wake-up call. We have brought a new emphasis to ensuring our homeland security, confronting terrorist groups and their state sponsors and combating the spread of weapons of mass destruction, and other non-traditional threats. At the same time, we have not let the terrorists hijack our other foreign policy imperitives--carefully managing our relations with countries like Russia, China, and India; helping developing countries to join the community of market democracies and become the beneficiaries and not the victims of globalization; remaining active in finding peaceful solution to regional crises; and addressing other global issues like HIV/AIDS, human rights, and good governance.
Washington., D.C.:
Mr. Reeker,
On 9/11 last year, I was in Ecuador, and in speaking to a few Ecuadorians, I found a tremendous frustration with the U.S. and it's foreign policy (especially in aiding repressive governments in Latin and South America).
To what extent is the U.S. trying to improve it's image with people abroad, and do you think invading Iraq would irrepairably damage our reputation?
Also, one quick other question: As a U.S. citizen, how can I best express my support or opposition to a particular U.S. foreign policy?
Thanks.
Phil Reeker: Having served overseas myself, I am familiar with some of the real and perceived frustrations you describe. My experience is that these views are often the result of a lack of clear understanding of Americans and their values. So it's important for us to convey to the world what "America" is all about. And that's not easy. Many impressions are formed by our popular culture--which is popular all over the world. And we are working to engage a broad array of audiences world-wide to the reality of U.S. institutions and values, as well as our policies. In the past year, we have made high-ranking U.S. officials available to foreign media on an unprecedented scale: more than 500 appearances on Muslim, Arab and other outlets worldwide. We launched "Radio Sawa" to give direct communication, in Arabic, to listeners in the Middle East. We've continued a vast array of exchange programs -- it's through this kind of person-to-person dialogue that we will make real progress. And we will sustain this effort for the long haul.
The Department of State welcomes your views on foreign policy topics, and we have two e-mail contact points:
askpublicaffairs@state.gov and Secretary@state.gov
Keep those messages coming!
Phil Reeker: I'm sorry I don't have time to answer more questions this afternoon. Secretary Powell is about to depart for New York. Please follow his activities there through our website: www.state.gov, where you'll find photos, transcripts and fact sheets. Thanks for participating. PTR
washingtonpost.com:
That wraps up today's show. Thanks to everyone who joined the discussion.
| |
© Copyright 2002 The Washington Post Company | 
