News & Policies
History & Tours | Kids | Your Government | Appointments | Jobs | Contact | Graphic version
|Printer-Friendly Version Email this page to a friend|
For Immediate Release
Office of the Press Secretary
September 8, 2007
Press Briefing by Deputy Press Secretary Dana Perino and Senior Administration Officials on APEC Meetings
Jim Jeffrey, National Security Advisor
Dan Price, Deputy National Security Advisor for International Economic Affairs
and Jim Connaughton, Chairman of Council on Environmental Quality
4:45 P.M. (Local)
MS. PERINO: Good afternoon, on our last day here in Australia. We're going to have, again, Jim Jeffrey from the National Security Council here, and Dan Price, who was in the meetings this afternoon. Jim was in the meetings this morning -- and then Jim Connaughton, who will be able to talk to you about the climate change agreement. And they'll all take questions, and I can do anything else that you have at the end.
MR. JEFFREY: What we'll talk about today is the three side meetings that the President had before we began the formal APEC program of events. These were, first of all, the breakfast with the Japanese and Australian Prime Ministers, hosted by Prime Minister Howard, followed by the bilateral with the Japanese Prime Minister, and then a bilateral with the President of Indonesia.
On the three leaders' breakfast, the three reviewed the state of play at the Sydney APEC meeting. The President and Prime Minister Abe thanked Howard for his organization and his management of the conference. They discussed a variety of issues that are out there -- climate, Doha and other areas that they were in agreement in. They also talked about the situation generally in the region, in the Asia-Pacific region, future developments, how to use APEC more effectively as a premier regional institution, the importance of India and China to the region and the need to, in various ways, work with both countries on, for example, climate and Doha.
The President stressed that no important Asian constellations should be without the United States for two reasons. First of all, we play a unique role in regional security, democracy and the support for the market economy. And, secondly, Americans need to be continuously engaged in this important region where we do half of our trade and we have so many ties.
The three reviewed the status of the six-party talks with North Korea and again they discussed climate change and the need to integrate developing -- major and developing countries, again, such as China and India into this process in a way that they could be part of the solution and they could participate and not have provisions -- not have regulations imposed on them from outside.
What I'll do now is the political security side of the Abe and the Indonesia meetings and Dan Price will, as Dana said, come up and do the rest.
On the Abe meeting, the two leaders discussed the Japanese support for the global war on terrorism. The President in particular was very appreciative of the Japanese presence in both Iraq and especially in Afghanistan where the Japanese as I think you know, have tanker ships supporting Operation Enduring Freedom. The President urged that the Japanese find a way to continue this very, very important support for our forces.
The two discussed the six-party talks on Korea. On nuclear disarmament, they both agreed that the talks are going well. The President reiterated his support -- you'll remember just before he came out here he went into great detail on this for the abductions of his support for the Japanese position on the abductions by North Korea, and he expressed understanding for the sensitivity of this issue for the Japanese.
The two sides discussed both of their recent bilateral meetings with the Democratic People's Republic of Korea, under the aegis of the six-party talks, the developments out of them, and the prospects for future contacts, once again as part of this overall process of denuclearization and turning Northeast Asia into a peaceful and stable region as called for in the 2005 and the 2007 agreements.
The U.S. force posture in Okinawa and in Japan generally, and military issues between the two countries were discussed briefly. The President thanked Prime Minister Abe for his support on Iran. He underlined once again the very serious threat to peace that we are currently facing with Iran, particularly with Ahmadinejad at the helm. Prime Minister Abe noted the very rapid Japanese support to carry out the sanctions called for in U.N. resolutions 1737 and 1747.
Let me turn now to the meeting with the Indonesian President Yudhoyono. The President expressed admiration for Indonesia's role in the global war on terror, not only as he -- not only the various steps taken to go after the Jammat Islamiya in the last several years, and the successes that the Indonesian government has achieved, but also the program of education, the President of getting at the root causes. The President went over this in his speech to the APEC Business Council yesterday, but he went over it in somewhat more detail with the Indonesian President.
The President urged Indonesia to support fully the Asia Pacific Democracy Partnership that was a major element in the President's speech of yesterday.
On Burma, the two exchanged views. The President urged Indonesia to continue the pressure that we've seen Indonesia exercising vis a vis Burma, and the President once again expressed his very strong concern about the situation with Burma. And the Indonesian President stressed that Burma must meet its international commitments.
The President extended an invitation to President Yudhoyono to attend the ASEAN summit in Texas, following up on the ASEAN luncheon yesterday, where the Indonesian President had not yet arrived.
On Darfur, the two exchanged views -- also Lebanon, and the situation with the Palestinians and the Israelis were discussed in some detail. The President expressed his support and appreciation for the Indonesian forces in Lebanon, including President Yudhoyono's son, who is serving as a lieutenant with the UNIFIL forces.
On the Middle East peace process, the President described the state of play, what he hopes for in his -- in the meeting -- the international meeting that he called for for the fall of this year, between the Israelis and the Palestinians, the need for a way forward, through a two-state solution, and in particular, the need to get other Arab countries to support the process more effectively than they have in the past.
I'll stop there, turn it over to Dan Price, and we'll come back for questions after he's finished. Thank you.
MR. PRICE: Thank you, Jim. Good afternoon. I'm going to cover the economic aspects of the Abe bilateral and the Yudhoyono bilateral, and then I'll talk about the ABAC dialogue with business leaders, and then the APEC leaders retreat.
First, the bilateral with Prime Minister Abe. President Bush again underscored that the United States was absolutely committed to a successful conclusion of the round and was prepared to show the necessary flexibility on the condition that others were flexible, as well. He underscored the seriousness of the United States in moving the process forward. Prime Minister Abe echoed those sentiments and indicated that all countries must be flexible in order to achieve a balanced outcome.
President Bush also raised the issue of beef, insisting that restrictions on U.S. beef need to be removed, and that covers all ages and all cuts.
The discussion next turned to the issue of climate change and energy security. Prime Minister Abe welcomed the United States' major economies meeting to be held later in this month and thought that it was an opportunity to build on and make good progress from the work that had been done by the G8 at Heilingendamm, and that it would be a good contribution to the U.N. framework.
Both President Bush and Prime Minister Abe identified technology as the key to dealing with the twin challenges of energy security and climate change, and the two leaders noted that U.S. and Japan are, of course, leaders in the technology field. They also both discussed the need to ensure that that technology is deployed successfully in developing countries.
Let me turn to the bilateral with Indonesia. With respect to the Doha Round, President Bush explained that Indonesia was in a unique position to play a leadership role with the G33 countries. He underscored that all countries need to make concessions, that the United States was prepared to make concessions, but that it needed to obtain market access. The leader of Indonesia responded quite positively, saying that Indonesia was prepared to play a positive role to achieve a balanced result.
There then ensued a quite far-ranging and rather detailed discussion on the issue of climate and energy security. Indonesia welcomed the U.S. major economies initiative, indicating that it planned to send two ministers to this conference. The leader of Indonesia explained activities underway there in respect to clean development, halting deforestation, moving forward on reforestation, and explained a number of other initiatives.
President Bush praised Indonesia for its work and leadership on deforestation, as well as for its new Coral Triangle Initiative, to deal with the challenges of the coral reef. And Jim Connaughton will take the podium to respond to questions about that.
The President also raised with Indonesia the importance of having a good reporting in other systems with respect to avian flu.
Let me turn next to the ABAC -- that's A-B-A-C -- dialogue with leaders. These are business representatives. They met with the leaders of the United States, Brunei, Vietnam and Chile. By convention, these discussions are off the record, so I won't get into any details of what they discussed. I will tell you that it was a vigorous exchange of views, very interesting exchange of views that covered the issues of trade and investment liberalization, regional integration, the Doha Round, climate change and energy security, globalization, and labor mobility.
The leaders then moved to lunch, to the photograph, the traditional photograph, where they were wearing -- Dana, help me?
MS. PERINO: "Driza-Bone" coat.
MR. PRICE: Where they were wearing "Driza-Bone" coats and hats.
Q I didn't see too many hats.
MR. PRICE: Okay. They then moved to the leaders' retreat. The first topic at the leaders' retreat was climate change and energy security. And at that session, I'm happy to say, Prime Minister John Howard, President Bush, and the other APEC leaders really forged quite a bold new direction for global efforts at addressing climate change. They adopted a very, very ambitious statement. I will give the highlights of that statement in a moment. I believe the statement will be released tomorrow. And Jim Connaughton will come up and brief on it in some detail.
Let me just say that in the discussions preceding the adoption of the statement, there was universal recognition that multiple approaches concerning the problem should be adopted, including energy efficiency, renewable energies, alternative energies, including nuclear, clean energy technology development and employment. There was discussion of the importance of market mechanisms; also discussion of the need to discuss deforestation, reforestation, and the need to reach agreement on a long-term emissions reduction goal, as well as the need to liberalize trade and investment regimes as they relate to environmental goods and services.
As you will see, this declaration is really quite an extraordinary statement for these 21 countries to make. In this declaration, there is agreement of the need to explore and reach agreement on a long-term aspirational goal to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. This more or less represents an emerging consensus to determine the parameters of a post-2012 climate change arrangement. Of course this is precisely what the major economies meeting in Washington is to be about.
The APEC leaders and the declaration welcome the major economies meeting and the initiative of the United States. The declaration will call for parties to work towards a goal to reduce energy intensity by 25 percent by the year 2030, and to increase forest cover by 20 million hectares by the year 2020.
As I indicated, there was also acknowledgment, as there will be in the declaration, of the importance of reducing trade barriers and liberalizing trade in environmental goods and services as an essential means of achieving the collective climate and energy goals.
The next topic at the retreat was the Doha Round. And here, too, when you see the statement, I think you will see that, in fact, sends a remarkably strong and clear message of the commitment of the APEC members to make a true contribution to progress at a time of real urgency, as negotiations resume in Geneva.
This is a consensus statement from APEC. That's significant when you look at the 21 economies there represented, it includes both developed and developing economies, large and small countries, and they are all underscoring the need for ambitious results that will deliver real and substantial new market access for goods and services, that will achieve real and substantial reductions in trade distorting subsidies, and create new trade flows.
We think that this is a very important signal to key trading partners around the world as the economies here gathered pledged to demonstrate the will, ambition and flexibility to move these negotiations along and called on others to do the same.
Significantly in the view of the United States and, I think, in the view of many other countries, the APEC economies accepted the current draft texts on agriculture and industrial goods as the basis for the resumed negotiations in Geneva.
During the leaders' retreat the President took the opportunity to raise the importance of North Korea verifiably abandoning its nuclear program and he also emphasized the importance of the Burmese regime showing greater respect for basic human rights.
Finally, at the retreat, the President offered that the United States would host the APEC summit in the year 2011. And the chair of the meeting noted that with thanks, responding enthusiastically. I think it's fair to say that this offer to host reflects the commitment and dedication of the United States to this region and to this organization.
As those of you who were there for the briefing in Washington before we left, we noted that in the United States' view, APEC is the preeminent regional economic forum. President Bush has participated in every APEC leaders' meeting since he entered office. We remain dedicated to this region, committed to furthering economic integration, and this is further evidence of that.
We haven't yet begun the process of deciding exactly where the APEC summit will be hosted in the United States, but I think it is fair to say that the city of Sydney, its residents and the Australian people have certainly set a very high bar for us to meet.
With that, I would like to invite Jim Connaughton to the podium to brief further on the developments on climate, and then we'll take questions.
Q Can I ask real quick, was there a specific statement on Doha? Was it a statement like the climate change statement?
MR. PRICE: Yes. There is a stand-alone statement on Doha, just as there is a stand-alone statement on energy security and climate change.
CHAIRMAN CONNAUGHTON: Great, thanks. Let me give a little more background, and then a little detail, on the declaration, which we think will be called the "Leaders Declaration on Climate Change, Energy Security and Clean Development."
For those of you who follow this issue closely, this was a fairly remarkable display of constructive and cooperative diplomacy by Prime Minister Howard and his team -- they achieved all of their objectives, something I have not seen before in the climate setting.
This is going to be a major step forward in terms of the ability to even accelerate progress at the major economies meetings that President Bush is going to host in Washington at the end of this month because nine of the 13 major economies coming to this meeting are from the APEC region. And if you take the G8 leaders' commitment, and now link in the commitment of the APEC region as a whole, including these nine countries, that's a very substantial convergence, not just a commitment to moving forward, but actually a convergence around the essential elements moving forward.
The elements of the Sydney declaration actually largely align with the elements the President outlined last May when he proposed to the world a way forward on a constructive outcome for a new framework after the Kyoto Protocol expires in 2012. Dan highlighted two very substantial elements of this declaration, which was energy intensity goal. This is the first time APEC has ever announced a shared goal in the area of energy and climate, as well as a goal related to 20 million hectare increase in forest cover by 2020.
But underlying these goals is a series of practical actions. So it wasn't -- the declaration didn't stop at a goal, it went forward with a means of working toward those goals. So there will be created a new Asia-Pacific network on energy technology, which is going to be an ongoing process that will help share technologies and work to get them to the marketplace. There is a strong emphasis on pursuing technologies for low and zero-emission electricity generation, especially coal, and actually there's also a strong statement related to nuclear. There will be a discussion on force and land use.
Indonesia and China, in particular, were very strong leaders in the establishment of the practical work programs in this document. That was a very important commitment from two very important countries when it comes to forestry. And in keeping with that, a new Asia-Pacific network for sustainable forest management has been created, as well. The document will discuss -- give guidance from the leaders on how we address the issue of aviation, about the energy needs of aviation, as well as the greenhouse gas profile aviation. And that will be a very important guidance for leaders as we deal with that issue in the context of the U.N. framework convention on climate change. And I would note that on trade, trade is emphasized in this declaration, and it is the single strongest statement on the importance of open trade to advancing clean development and reducing greenhouse gases that I have seen. And that is very welcome from this region, which has so much in its future related to its growth and opportunity in trade and clean energy technologies.
Related to clean development, under the leadership of Indonesia, they are advancing what is called the Coral Triangle Initiative. There are three components to that. One is coral reef conservation and better management of coral reefs, the second is sustainable fishing, and the third is food security.
You may recall in the States we did a major effort on coral reef conservation in the Keys, and last year announced the single largest act of coral conservation by creating the Papahanaumokuakea Marine National Monument, and we also enacted last year in the States the most aggressive fishing legislation to end over fishing in America.
What we have done in the States will only work if other parts of the world do the same thing. And that is why this coral reef initiative -- this Coral Triangle Initiative is so important, because complementary action in this part of the world, that also supplies America with a lot of fish and seafood, is going to be important so that we do this in a way that does not destroy these ecosystems, but in fact enhances them.
So I'll stop there.
Q I just want to confirm what's in athis statement that we're seeing from Howard, that -- the statement on climate change says the world needs to, "slow, stop, and then reverse greenhouse gas emissions." Is that --
CHAIRMAN CONNAUGHTON: I'm going to actually just read the exact language to you. Yes, the declaration lays out the principles for future international action to slow, stop and reserve the growth in greenhouse gas emissions. Let me see if I can find the exact language on it. Actually, Dana was emphasizing, this expression of slow, stop and reverse greenhouse gases is a concept the President first articulated in 2002. It has since then taken hold, and this will actually be the first time in the Asia-Pacific region that the leaders have come together with that kind of a commitment. So we're not just slowing the growth, but it's a commitment to reverse the growth of emissions. And that includes key components of what we're going to do to get there. And that's nice to see after many years of hard work and diplomacy.
Q Do you mind just going through real quick, if you can, what those are?
CHAIRMAN CONNAUGHTON: Sorry?
Q What those steps are?
CHAIRMAN CONNAUGHTON: The slow, stop -- let's read it exactly -- let's read the whole thing. Here we go: "The world needs to slow, stop, and then reverse the growth of global greenhouse gas emissions." And this area will include improvements in energy intensity -- that's the amount of energy you use per unit of GDP, that's an efficiency measure; it includes work on reforestation, so addressing deforestation combating, and combating illegal logging; it will include the work together on advancing zero emission technologies, especially in the area of coal, which is a very heavily-used energy resource in the Asia-Pacific region. There's an emphasis on nuclear, which has been in some question in this region. But the commitment of those countries who are choosing to pursue clean nuclear energy strategies is an important one.
And then there is a section that will deal with transportation. I mentioned aviation, but there's also discussion of advanced biofuels, and a particular standard setting, so we can actually have a common market and common standards for the introduction of biofuels, especially biodiesel, which not only is a renewable fuel, but is also much more fuel efficient than gasoline, so you'll be able to save a lot of fuel, and at the same time save a lot of greenhouse gasses. There's a dozen other pieces in the document which you'll see tomorrow.
Q How does this square with what other non-APEC nations are doing, like in Europe, for instance? Do you think they'll be accepted well by European countries, or are they going in a different direction?
CHAIRMAN CONNAUGHTON: I'm actually quite pleased that when you align this document with the G8 declaration from this past summer, you'll see a major convergence not just in philosophy, but also in the specific elements that the leaders believe would be important to a future framework, and then beyond that, the specific priority areas for action -- low-carbon power systems, low-carbon transportation systems, sustainable forestry, and efficiency in conservation. And when you look at the sub-components of that, you'll see a quite remarkable convergence, too.
So what's nice about this declaration in this region is we now have 21 leaders here, you have the eight G8 leaders, you have the plus-5 outreach countries from the G8 -- you're talking about the major economies of the world coming together on these essential elements. It's a good foundation for the future discussions.
Q It was 20 million hectares by 2020? Is that right?
CHAIRMAN CONNAUGHTON: Yes, that's increased forest cover by 20 million hectares by 2020.
Q I've got a question about Burma. There are reports that Bush and Yudhoyono called on India and China to bring their clout to bear in dealing with the human rights situation in Burma. Is that correct?
MR. JEFFREY: The President raised Burma not only with Yudhoyono, but with many other leaders here. As we just heard from Dan, the President took the lead at the actual conference today, calling on all of APEC to deal with this pressing human rights problem. I wouldn't want to single out specific actions. We want everybody to take the Burma situation seriously. We are working in a variety of ways, in a variety of channels, to make that. I wouldn't single out any single country, but we would be delighted if both of those countries would do more. Everybody needs to do more.
Q Do they have an especially important role to play, given their clout?
MR. JEFFREY: They're all very important countries that have very significant economic ties with Burma. They both rely on natural resources from Burma, so they're in a good position to be influential, as are other countries.
Q The APEC meeting is in the U.S. in 2011? When was the last one in the U.S., and where?
MR. JEFFREY: 1993 at Blake Island in Washington state. That was the first summit level, wasn't it?
Q I have an econ question. On the beef, Japan, the President said he wanted entry for all ages and all cuts, and I understand there are some restrictions now. What was Japan's response to that? Has anything changed?
MR. PRICE: Since when?
Q Last December?
MR. PRICE: I guess I --
Q It's been going on for about three years.
MR. PRICE: Yes. We've had a dispute for some time. What has changed is that we have a determination from the OIE that all cuts and all ages of U.S. beef are safe, and that there is no sound scientific basis for keeping them out. And therefore we are urging our trading partners to open their markets and comply with OIE standards.
Q And has Japan accepted that yet? That's the problem.
MR. PRICE: That is the problem. President Bush explained what it is we were seeking. It's now up to the Japanese to respond.
Q Did they indicate how they would respond?
MR. PRICE: They took it on board, and we will see what happens.
Q You say you offered the invitation; does that mean it's a done deal, APEC will be coming? Is that how that works?
MR. PRICE: I think it's safe to say that the invitation will be accepted. As I said, it was noted with thanks and enthusiastically by the present chair, Prime Minister Howard, during his summing up of today's meeting. It may be recorded more formally in a chair summary tomorrow. But I think it highly unlikely that the offer would not be accepted.
Q Do you have an idea of which city maybe? Have you narrowed it down at all?
MR. PRICE: No.
Q There's a possibility that the Japanese opposition parties may vote down a bill to extend the refueling operations in the Indian Ocean. And I'm just wondering, how concerned are you about that, and what would be the implications for the security alliance if that were to happen?
MR. JEFFREY: The Japanese tanker commitment is absolutely essential, not only to the refueling of our own ships, but of the ships of many other countries that are participating in Operation Enduring Freedom, including Pakistani ships and vessels of other allies of ours involved in the Afghanistan operation. We would be very, very concerned. The President made this very clear.
And he hopes that Prime Minister Abe can find a way forward. We're well aware of the current position of the Senate with what they call the anti-terrorism law, which is the basis under which the Japanese are engaged in that particular operation, and we hope that they would rethink it, because it is absolutely essential to the global war on terror.
Q Can you talk about what the President is going to be doing in Hawaii, give us a little rundown of that?
MR. JEFFREY: Sure. He'll be meeting with leaders of our Pacific Command, and he'll also be meeting with wounded warriors and their families and loved ones.
Q Is there anyone from the command on the ground in Iraq who might be there?
MR. JEFFREY: No. No, there's no plans to do an Iraq-related event, other than the fact that many of those who have been wounded, of course, were wounded in Iraq.
Q I have one more quickly here. Was there any talk about the goal of a free trade zone? A couple years ago I think there were actually dates that were set tentatively. But you hear less and less about specific goals anymore.
MR. PRICE: I think what you may be referring to is the so-called Bogor Goals, of reduction of trade barriers for developing countries by a date certain and by developed countries by an earlier date. But that was a generalized goal.
The free trade -- let me answer your question -- yes, there was discussion of regional economic integration. There was discussion in the President's bilaterals today of the Free Trade Area of the Asia Pacific. And in a number of the sequential interventions by the 21 leaders, reference was made to the vision of this free trade area. And I think in the third statement that you will three, which is the overall leaders declaration, you will see reference made to certain concrete steps to be taken towards the realization of the FTAAP.
And there was also a very strong report to leaders on realizing that vision. That will be the subject of discussion tomorrow. But after that's discussed, and when it's briefed to you, I think you will see that this is not simply laying out generalized statements; that there are very concrete sectors, very concrete measures to be taken by the parties by next year to be included in a report to leaders then. And saw some very specific work plans in the obvious areas of trade liberalization, investment regime liberalization, capital and financial markets development, and a variety of other areas that I think we'll get into more detail tomorrow.
If I can take this opportunity simply to underscore -- this summit and these meetings were about two principal things, and those principal things were trade and investment liberalization, both Doha and regionally, and the challenges of energy security and climate change. Lots of other topics may have been discussed, important topics from time to time among the leaders bilaterally or collectively, but as we indicated, this is the premier economic organization and our economic engagement with this organization is critical and permanent.
Q One more. Did the President have any discussions about the need to accelerate India's accession to this group or membership in this group?
MR. PRICE: No.
Q Could I ask, on the language on Doha, how does it compare to the language of last year? Is it sort of an escalation of rhetoric? Or how would you describe it?
MR. PRICE: The characterization of "escalation of rhetoric" is a little pejorative. I would say if you laid those two side by side, you will see that this declaration is far more specific, far more energetic, far more -- it reflects a much higher level of determination to actually make tough political choices; to move these negotiations forward not hypothetically, not in principal, but on the on the basis of texts that are laying out there. And those texts contain ranges. Those texts contain numbers and rules.
So when you say, resume negotiations on the basis of the texts, you are not starting from scratch. I would say this is an incredibly powerful statement, particularly given the variety, the diversity of countries who signed on to it.
MR. JEFFREY: Hold on just for a second. If I could respond to the question. During the breakfast there was a brief discussion on the future of, as I said, APEC. And the U.S. position is that for the moment we need to work on all of the things that Dan and others have described to make this a more operational, more effective institution. And we don't want to burden it with additional members at this time. We'll review this in several years. We think that that's our general -- not our complete view, but it's the view of many other countries.
So it did come up in general terms. It's not looking at any specific nation one way or the other, it was simply our general view on this, which was consistent with what we said in the past.
Q On climate change, these are commitments -- goals, but there's no penalty for nations if they don't meet them -- I just want to make sure that's --
CHAIRMAN CONNAUGHTON: The goals will be carried out through national programs. There's an emphasis within the document on the need for nationally established programs, very consistent with the approach the President outlined in May. It is fully anticipated that within the context of national programs, those will include regulatory programs, depending on the country and the way in which they carry out their objectives.
China, for example, has a very aggressive program of reforestation that is a mandatory program. It's one that they carry out through management directives, not through regulation, if you will. The United States has very stringent regulatory requirements on vehicle fuel efficiency and alternative fuels. Those are mandatory and carry penalties, and very strict penalties, in fact.
So the structure of this is the shared goals, translated into national programs and actions, which can include elements that have enforceability and binding characteristics.
I would also just observe, on Doha, this is the first time that the leaders have called out a piece of Doha that is overlooked, which is the liberalization of markets for energy -- clean energy technologies and environmental protection technologies. There's a very substantial list of technologies that we've been working on in Doha for almost five years now. And we want to get the tariffs down and then eliminated through that process. And so the leaders reflected that in the climate statement, in addition to the strong Doha statement.
MS. PERINO: Anything else for me? I don't know if I can top any of that.
Q Will there be any families of the fallen in Hawaii, or just wounded?
MS. PERINO: I think it's just wounded.
Q Is any part of the event in Hawaii, are any parts of that open to the press?
MS. PERINO: At this point, no. So if that changes, we'll let you know when we're on the plane, on the way there.
Q He's going to go to Pearl Harbor as well as Hickam?
MS. PERINO: The lunch is at Pearl Harbor. I've never been there before, so I don't know where everything is.
MR. DECKARD: It's at the admiral's house.
END 5:28 P.M. (Local)
Printer-Friendly Version Email this page to a friend