===========================================================================
Press Briefing on the President's Trip to Japan and the G8 Summit
===========================================================================

For Immediate Release Office of the Press Secretary July 1, 2008

Press Briefing on the President's Trip to Japan and the G8 Summit James S.
Brady Press Briefing Room

˙˙Press Briefings


PARTICIPANTS: Dennis Wilder, National Security Council Senior Director for
Asian Affairs
Dan Price, Assistant to the President for International Economic Affairs
James Connaughton, Chairman of the Council on Environmental Quality

3:32 P.M. EDT

MR. JOHNDROE: Good afternoon. This is an on-the-record, off-camera briefing
by Dennis Wilder, National Security Council Senior Director for Asian
Affairs; Dan Price, Assistant to the President for International Economic
Affairs, and Deputy National Security Advisor; as well as Jim Connaughton,
Chairman of the Council on Environmental Quality -- a briefing on the
President's trip to Japan and the G8 Summit. We'll start with Dennis.

MR. WILDER: Thank you. Good afternoon. I'd just like to take a couple of
minutes to brief you on the bilateral agenda with Japanese Prime Minister
Fukuda, as well as the bilateral meeting the President will have with South
Korean President Lee Myung-bak, and Chinese President Hu Jintao.

This will be the President's fourth visit to Japan since taking office, and
his second meeting with Prime Minister Fukuda since he assumed the office
last September. After arriving in Japan on Sunday, July 6th, the President
will have an hour-long meeting with Prime Minister Fukuda, followed by a
joint press briefing. Later that day, Prime Minister and Mrs. Fukuda have
invited President and Mrs. Bush to a small social dinner.

The meeting with Prime Minister Fukuda offers a good opportunity to review
the steps the United States and Japan have taken during this administration
to strengthen our alliance, which is the cornerstone of our security policy
in East Asia. As you may know, we are in the midst of a major force posture
realignment in Japan that will see some American forces transferred from
Japan to Guam, and other U.S. forces consolidated in areas of Japan away
from major urban centers and better suited to military training.

The two leaders will also discuss the way ahead in the six-party talks as
we work to put in place a verification regime so that we can verify that
North Korea has given up its nuclear ambitions and stopped proliferating
nuclear technology.

The President, as he did last Friday, will reassure the Japanese people
that he will never forget the abduction of Japanese citizens by North
Korea, and that we will continue to cooperate closely with Japan to obtain
a swift resolution to the abduction issue.

I'm sure other topics of major international concern will be discussed
between them, such as the situations in Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan, Burma and
Zimbabwe. The two leaders will also certainly compare notes just prior to
the G8 meeting on major global issues such as how to bring the Doha Round
negotiations to closure, and international policy on climate change. They
will also likely give special attention to U.S.-Japan cooperation in the
area of health and food security, particularly in Africa.

Let me now briefly discuss meetings the President will have on his final
day in Japan, that is on July 9th, with President Lee and President Hu. In
each of these meetings the President will have a chance to coordinate U.S.
strategy in the six-party talks, and explore the best ways to move the
process of Korean denuclearization and peace forward. Let me also note that
the meeting with President Lee will be an opportunity to lay the groundwork
for the visit that President Bush will make to South Korea, which is now
scheduled for August 5th and 6th. That is just prior to the President going
to Beijing for the Olympics.

As you may remember, President Lee, when he visited Camp David in April,
said that he looked forward to creating a 21st-century strategic alliance
with the United States. At this meeting in Japan the two Presidents will
begin to put real substance to that goal by discussing ways in which to
expand the peninsular regional and global dimensions of the alliance.
President Bush and President Lee will discuss their commitment to getting
their respective legislatures to ratify the U.S.-Korea free trade
agreement, which will bring important benefits to workers, farmers,
ranchers, and entrepreneurs in both the United States and Korea.

In the meeting with President Hu, President Bush will review developments
and Sino-U.S. economic and political relations since their last meeting at
APEC in Sydney almost one year ago. The President will be eager to hear
from President Hu firsthand about the improvements in cross-strait
relations and what the future holds there. He will also want to hear about
the negotiations between Beijing and the representatives of the Dalai Lama
that are going on even as we speak in Beijing today.

The President will also want to discuss a range of international issues
with President Hu, where we hope to see China play a constructive role,
such as on Darfur, Iran, Zimbabwe and Burma. As always, the President will
remind China's leader of the importance the United States places on human
rights and religious freedom. The two leaders are also likely to touch on
the work of our two governments in forums such as the Strategic Economic
Dialogue and the Joint Commission on Commerce and Trade, aimed at improving
the U.S.-China economic relationship. Finally, the President will stress to
President Hu the need for China to actively contribute to a successful
market-opening Doha Round.

And on that note, let me turn it over.

MR. JOHNDROE: Before I introduce Dan Price, let me just say the President
will also have several other bilateral meetings while he is there in
Toyako, and we'll have those for you tomorrow or on Thursday.

All right, Dan.

MR. PRICE: Well, good afternoon. I'm going to sketch out the kind of
choreography of the summit, what is likely to happen on each day, and then
focus on a few of the critical issues.

The summit will take place in Toyako, on the island of Hokkaido, and it
will cover three days. On Monday, July 7th, it will begin with a lunch and
working session involving the G8 leaders and leaders from seven African
countries: Algeria, Ethiopia, Ghana, Nigeria, South Africa, Tanzania and
Senegal. We expect that these sessions will look at global issues, as well
as development issues. The first day will finish with a dinner for the G8
leaders and spouses.

The second day, Tuesday, July 8th, will be devoted to the meetings of the
G8. Leaders will have four sessions. We expect that they will discuss a
broad range of issues, including development, Africa, food security, trade
and investment policy, energy security, climate change, and issues relating
to the global economy, including oil prices. We also expect that day the G8
leaders will discuss regional political issues, counterterrorism and
non-proliferation.

On the third day, Wednesday, July 9th, it will begin with an outreach
session with the G8 leaders and the leaders of Brazil, China, India, Mexico
and South Africa. These are the five outreach countries involved in the
Heiligendamm process that was launched by Germany last year.

Following this session with those five countries there will be the leaders'
meeting of the major economies. This is the G8, plus the five Heiligendamm
outreach countries, plus Australia, Indonesia and South Korea. The major
economies leaders' meeting will be followed by an outreach session and a
discussion involving the G8 plus all of the outreach countries, and we
expect that issues relating to the world economy and food security will
figure prominently in those discussions.

Now I'd like to focus on a couple of issues that are of particular
significance to the United States and that we think will receive
considerable attention during these three days. The first has to do with
the subject of accountability. The President has underscored the importance
of ensuring the G8 members follow through on meeting commitments that had
been made at previous summits. It's not enough for the G8 leaders to meet
and issue declarations and make good promises; G8 members need to follow
through with actions to make good on those promises.

We, together with our colleagues, have this year been focusing on enhancing
G8 accountability and establishing mechanisms to ensure that G8 commitments
are met. I'm not going to review in detail all of the prior G8 commitments,
but there are some very significant ones that were made with respect to
malaria, HIV/AIDS, polio, assistance to Africa, and committed levels of
funding to fight AIDS, malaria, TB, and other infectious diseases.

The United States has strongly encouraged efforts to produce G8
accountability reports that will provide greater transparency into actions
to implement these specific commitments. We would also like to see
accountability become a fundamental part of the G8 going forward, and are
seeking to ensure that the accountability reports released this year are
updated annually.

Let's start with health. At this year's G8 summit, we expect leaders will
be discussing efforts to fulfill past commitments on HIV/AIDS, malaria, and
polio. The United States is meeting its pledges in all of these areas. To
date, through PEPFAR, the United States has supported lifesaving treatments
for nearly 1.7 million people in sub-Saharan Africa. The President's
reauthorization request for $30 billion over the next five years would
provide treatment for 2.5 million people, prevent 12 million new
infections, and provide care for 12 million people, including 5 million
orphans and vulnerable children.

At least year's G8, the United States challenged the G8 to match our
efforts under the reauthorization request for PEPFAR. The G8 agreed, and is
committed to provide treatment for 5 million people, prevent 24 million new
infections, and provide care for 24 million people.

On malaria, through the President's Malaria Initiative, the United States
is working, itself, to reduce malaria-related deaths by 50 percent in the
15 hardest-hit African countries. At Heiligendamm, at last year's summit,
again, the United States challenged the rest of the G8 to match our efforts
under PMI, and again the G8 took up that challenge, committing to meet the
needs in a total of 30 of the hardest-hit countries in Africa. In 2007,
more than 25 million people have benefitted from the President's Malaria
Initiative, dealing with prevention and treatment interventions such as the
provisions of nets, spraying, and medicines.

There was also a commitment on polio at past G8s. And here again the United
States has honored its commitments by maintaining its level of
contributions. We've provided over $1.4 billion for polio eradication since
1988, almost double what any other country has done. We have urged our G8
partners to honor the pledge to maintain or increase their funding levels.
We are committed to finish the job and eradicate polio.

We also expect that the President will discuss with his counterparts two
new initiatives that he has announced in the area of health care. One is
training of health care workers, and the other is fighting neglected
tropical diseases. Like the malaria and HIV/AIDS initiatives last year,
these initiatives -- we have suggested that these initiatives also include
benchmarks for measurable results.

On health worker training, you may recall that during the visit of Prime
Minister Brown in Washington, the President and the Prime Minister
announced an initiative to increase the number of health care workers in
four African countries, to work towards the World Health Organization's
minimum threshold of 2.3 health workers per 1,000 people. The U.S. and the
U.K. will be working together in partnership with Ethiopia, Kenya,
Mozambique and Zambia towards this goal. And the United States is investing
at least $1.2 billion over five years toward the effort in these five --
these four countries. We expect to discuss this initiative with other G8
leaders.

Similarly, with respect to neglected tropical diseases, as you may recall,
the President announced a U.S. $350 million initiative to fight certain
major neglected tropical diseases. That $350 million figure is a commitment
over a five-year period that would provide treatment for more than 300
million people in Africa, Asia and Latin America.

At the U.S.-EU summit, the European Union announced support for both the
neglected tropical disease initiative and the health care worker
initiative, as did Prime Minister Brown during his visit here. The
President will be discussing this initiative -- or these initiatives with
his colleagues at the G8.

At the Gleneagles summit in 2005, the G8 pledged to double aid to Africa by
2010, and noted this commitment, in combination with other donors, would
result in an increase of aid to Africa by $25 billion in 2010. At that same
summit, Gleneagles, President Bush announced that the United States would
double our assistance to sub-Saharan Africa between 2004 and 2010, and we
are on track to meet that goal and increase our assistance to $8.67 billion
by 2010.

Let me turn now to the subject of food security. We expect that the leaders
will be discussing the G8's response to the rise in food prices and to
efforts to boost food security through short-, medium-, and long-term
approaches. We think it's important that the G8 address immediate food aid
needs, including through the local purchase of food aid and providing
essential non-food assistance such as seed and fertilizers. It's also
important to improve coordination among assistance providers to work
towards the goal of increasing agricultural production and improving
delivery of food aid.

And finally, it's necessary that we address the suite of policies that
inhibit agricultural production, or inhibit the development of open and
efficient agricultural markets, such as restrictions on exports or
restrictions on biotechnology. We hope to discuss among the G8 how we can
work with African-led frameworks, such as the Comprehensive African
Agricultural Development Program to boost agricultural production.

As far as USG actions go, as you know, on May 1, the President announced a
new initiative to provide $770 million to support food aid and development
programs, bringing to nearly $1 billion total additional USG funds
announced to address the food crisis since mid-April. With these additional
funds, the United States is on track to provide a total of nearly $5
billion to fight global hunger in 2008 and 2009.

Let me turn to trade and investment liberalization. We expect the G8
leaders will discuss the necessity of maintaining and promoting open
markets for trade and investment, particularly in the light of growing
protectionist sentiment. With respect to Doha, we anticipate that the
leaders will discuss the importance of achieving an ambitious conclusion to
the Doha Round, focusing on the three market access pillars of the
negotiation: agriculture, industrial goods, and services. The United States
believes that the Doha negotiations have made progress in recent days,
although there is much work ahead of us. The United States will continue
our intensive efforts to resolve differences, and if other developed and
major developing countries work with us in that spirit, we can achieve
success.

With respect to international investment, we think that the G8 leaders are
likely to discuss the benefits of international investment to the global
economy in terms of stimulating growth, creating jobs, enhancing
productivity, and fostering competitiveness. We believe the G8 leaders
should discuss the importance of the G8 countries themselves embracing, and
encouraging others to adopt, certain core principles on open investment,
such as fair, equitable and non-discriminatory treatment; the need for
transparency and predictability; and the importance of ensuring that any
governmental review of proposed foreign investments be focused on national
security concerns.

Let me turn to the issue of climate. As we have prepared for the G8 summit
and the major economies leaders' meeting, we have found increasing
recognition that meeting the challenge of global climate change requires
contributions from all the major economies, and that climate change
policies must be compatible with economic growth and energy security.

In the view of the United States, and increasingly in the view of others, a
post-2012 climate change agreement under the U.N. Framework Convention will
be effective only if all major economies undertake greenhouse gas
mitigation actions reflected as binding commitments in a future
international agreement.

Now let me address some of the issues that could be discussed within the G8
and within the major economies meeting. We think that the G8 countries, due
to their resources and capabilities, have crucial roles to play in
addressing climate change. Technology change is key to achieving our
interlinked objectives on climate change, energy security and economic
development.

At the G8 summit, we are hopeful to see support for the launching of a
clean technology fund that will facilitate the spread of clean technologies
in the developing world. The United States has committed $2 billion to this
fund. In addition, we would like to see G8 governments enhance and increase
their funding for R_

This year alone, the United States alone will make available more than $40
billion in loan guarantees to support investment in innovative clean
technologies. We also hope to find support for a wide range of actions to
accelerate energy efficiency in G8 countries.

Now let me say a word about the major economies leaders' meeting. We think
that the meeting, the major economies leaders' meeting, will be an
important demonstration of leadership on climate change by the world's
largest economies, developed and developing. In support of the U.N.
negotiations, the major economies meetings, or MEM, process can advance
some important themes: First, emphasizing that climate change is
interlinked with energy security and economic development, getting all of
the relevant parties -- all of the major economies that together constitute
80 percent of emissions and 80 percent of energy use, recognizing and
discussing how these challenges interrelate.

We also think that leaders will be in a position to discuss the value and
contribution of the major economies meetings in building confidence,
identifying common ground and making recommendations to the broader U.N.
negotiating group. We also think that it will be possible for leaders to
spotlight the importance of developing and deploying technology in
achieving large-scale emissions over the long term.

Building on the work of the leaders' representatives, -- and Jim
Connaughton, our leaders' representative, is here -- the leaders of the
major economies will, for the first time -- the leaders will meet for the
first time to discuss as a group a range of issues, including the need for
a long-term global goal; national mitigation goals and plans; concrete
early actions, including the desirability of sectoral approaches,
technology cooperation, forestry; intensified WTO discussions to address
trade issues relevant to climate change; and improving measurement methods.
We remain focused on finding outcomes that are ambitious, realistic and
achievable, and we believe that others share this view.

And finally, as the President has made clear, the United States is prepared
to sign on to binding international commitments if all major economies also
are prepared to make binding international commitments, recognizing that
what each economy commits to will differ according to its national
circumstances, demographics, energy needs and other relevant factors.

I think I'll stop there, and while we have the benefit of Jim's presence,
entertain any questions you may have on climate or the other topics.

Q Yes, I was interested to hear you talk about it's time for a long-term
global goal. Is there any possibility at this summit on getting an
agreement of a global goal of a 50-percent cut in greenhouse emissions by
2050?

MR. PRICE: Let me say that there's been a lot of discussion about whether
the major economies leaders' meeting or G8 would establish a numerical
long-term goal for emissions reductions. And we've had good discussion
really in both fora. I think there's broad recognition among all major
economies that having a long-term goal is desirable in pointing us all in
the right direction and indicating the scale of the challenge we face.

There's also recognition that progress toward any long-term goal will
require the efforts of all major economies, not just the G8. Indeed, with
evidence mounting of rapidly rising emissions from emerging markets, action
by the G8 alone will not be effective to address this problem. That's why
we believe that all major economies and indeed all parties to the U.N.
convention need to be part of the discussion on setting a long-term goal.

To us, it is not appropriate for the G8 countries alone to set a goal or to
pick a numerical target and then seek to impose it on major developing
economies. Those countries need to be part of the discussion, and they have
been part of the discussion, through the major economies process.

The Bali Action Plan makes clear that in respect of the shared vision and
long-term goal, it's for all to decide, and here leadership by all major
economies is needed in coming up with that shared goal. What is important,
and what has become important in these discussions, is that all major
economies are moving toward a shared vision on how to achieve a low-carbon
future, again recognizing that what each economy does will differ according
to its national circumstances. And we're making progress on this in the
major economies process.

We've discussed a range of ideas on a long-term vision and goal, including
a 50-percent reduction by 2050, and have been exploring in the major
economies process the implications of particular goals for both long term
and mid term. We've advanced that discussion in the major economies
process. We expect that the advances in this discussion at the leaders' rep
level will be reflected in the discussion among the leaders themselves, and
no doubt reflected in the declaration next week.

Critically, ultimate agreement in the U.N. on a long-term goal will gain
confidence through the work we do together on important topics like global
technology R_

Q Given the President's expression of strong support for the dollar, do you
expect exchange rates to take any role in the discussions, and will the
United States move to try to get the other G8 members to support some kind
of exchange rate stability statement?

MR. PRICE: I have no comment on that at this time.

Q It's not on the agenda, though, is it?

MR. PRICE: Issues relating to the global economy are on the agenda. And
when leaders get together they're, of course, free to discuss whatever it
is they wish to discuss.

Q Thank you, Mr. Price. Earlier this year, at the last World Bank-IMF
meeting here, President Zoellick spoke of a new deal, of putting more money
directly into countries hit hardest by the food crisis, notably Haiti. And
he called for immediate and large aid. Now, twice I have asked in this
briefing, has the United States weighed in in support of the World Bank's
new deal? Will this come up at the G8 agenda? And has the position changed
from the U.S. at all, and does it support it now?

MR. PRICE: Well, I think the issue of food aid will certainly be discussed
among the leaders, and the United States is firmly supportive of the view
that we need to meet immediate food aids. We have midterm developmental
goals that we need to seek to achieve in terms of boosting agricultural
activity. We've got infrastructure bottlenecks we've got to address, and
we've got a set of policy questions that also need to be addressed. So the
issues that you raise will certainly be discussed.

Q So do you back the World Bank's new deal, or not?

MR. PRICE: As I said, the 10-point plan outlined by President Bob Zoellick
has many points that are in common with the U.S. approach, so I do not see
any conflict at all between what the World Bank has suggested as the focus
of considerations and what we are also focusing on.

Q Two questions on HIV/AIDS. First, the President's PEPFAR reauthorization
is kind of stalled on Capitol Hill, so how can he go in there and ask the
other G8 leaders to live up to their commitments when he's having trouble
getting Congress to live up to his commitment here? And then, secondly,
there have been some news reports that say the draft communique on HIV/AIDS
doesn't even mention the $25 billion goal by 2010. And so it that -- is
this communique acceptable to the President?

MR. PRICE: Let me start -- I'm not going to comment on the text of a draft
communique that is not yet public. Let me say that there is no intention by
any G8 member of which I am aware to backtrack on any of the pledges that
have been made. And as I said, we believe it is important not only to make
clear that we intend to fulfill our commitments, but to produce tangible
evidence of that in the form of progress reports.

Q Can I just follow, though? Does it not weaken the President's hand that
he doesn't go into the G8 with a PEPFAR reauthorization signed and ready to
go?

MR. PRICE: I think the G8 and the African beneficiaries of PEPFAR know the
commitment of this administration towards dealing with HIV/AIDS, as well as
other diseases that have had such a debilitating effect on Africa. No
country's commitment is greater than that of the United States.

Q You mentioned that oil prices are going to be on the agenda on Tuesday, I
think. What is it that the G8 can actually do or say that could have any
impact on oil prices?

MR. PRICE: I think leaders will want to discuss the issue of the rise in
oil prices. They may wish to discuss outcomes from the recent conference.
There's a whole set of issues that they may wish to talk about in
connection with oil prices.

Q Two questions, if you will. The first: Why is it that the G8 and the
major economies as a group is not a large enough group to reach some kind
of understanding on a commitment to greenhouse gas emission reductions by
2050? What's the point, if not -- what's the point of the meeting?

MR. PRICE: Well, I think that there are a number of things that have come
out of the major economies process; consideration of a long-term goal is
one of them, and it's an important one. It will be up to the leaders, as
they sit there and discuss, to see how far they wish to go on quantifying a
long-term goal.

Q Are you suggesting they might actually reach one, then?

MR. PRICE: It is up to the leaders to, I think -- and then I'll invite Jim
to comment -- the test of whether the MEM is or is not successful is not
whether, at this stage in July, all 16 agree on a long-term goal. This
process will continue. Certainly from our perspective, to reach an
agreement on a long-term goal is desirable and something we think the major
economies needs to work to. Whether it is in a position to do so at this
point, or make other statements about the long-term goal, that remains to
be seen.

Let me invite Jim Connaughton to offer a comment on this.

MR. CONNAUGHTON: Again, this goes to your -- the reason to get together.
Actually, there's a quite dynamic agenda to the major economies meetings. A
long-term goal is just one piece, but that's a long-term vision. The more
essential aspects of the discussion actually center on each nation's
development of their own midterm plans and goals, and the structure by
which those can be reflected in a new international agreement. That goes to
the core of what we're going to do now and in the mid-term.

In support of that, we've also initiated conversations about shared
sectoral approaches, which is a bottom-up approach: How do we get our steel
sector, our aluminum sector, our transportation sectors focused on the best
outcomes that each of our nations can achieve? We do some things really
well in America that aren't being done in India right now. If India can
replicate that, they can make further progress on emissions. So this is a
very practical set of conversations on pushing for best practices in key
emitting sectors.

With that, then, comes the ability to do much more technology exchange on
the technologies that are central to solving the problem. It's
coal-produced power, it's personal transportation, and it's forestry and
land use. These are the big drivers of climate-related emissions and
activities. The major economies are the ones that engage in most of that
activity. And so we've got very specific conversations going on on
forestry, for example; a very specific conversation about more technology
exchange on carbon capture and storage from coal. We're even talking about
how do we get large-scale renewable projects going, and how do we get
nuclear energy going at a pace that far exceeds the current level of
investment. So these are very practical discussions that, really, this
group of countries will make that happen.

Finally, you may have read a bit about just the issue of measuring emission
reductions. We do pretty good about measurement in America and a few of the
other developed countries, but we've got an accounting system on greenhouse
gases that is not as precise as it could or should be, and even getting
common ground on measures is going to be important in order to demonstrate
the success of different policies.

So just note, you'll see, as a result of this conversation, a fairly
expansive set of activities that this group has generated in the near term
that will help lead to an agreement next year, but also that will sustain a
whole variety of other activities in support of an agreement next year.

Q If I could add a second question, which is the reassurance the President
will give to Japan that the U.S. will never forget the North Korean
abductions. How does that square with the movement toward removing North
Korea from the list of terrorist sponsors? Some members of the Japanese
Diet believe that that is an abrogation of promise.

MR. JOHNDROE: I think you heard Dennis already address that, and you've
heard Secretary Rice and the President address that last week when the
North Koreans made their agreement and -- or presented their declaration --

Q They didn't address whether or not there was an agreement between the
United States and Japan that the U.S. would, in fact, hold off on this
until the abductions issue was resolved. Some Japanese think there was at
least that understanding.

MR. JOHNDROE: No, what the U.S. position has always been -- and the
Japanese and everyone in the six-party process are well aware of this -- is
that the United States would remain committed to the resolution of the
abduction issue. And I think President Bush and Prime Minister Fukuda had a
very good conversation about this last week. Secretary Rice had a very good
visit to Japan this past week, as well. And I think the Japanese government
and the Japanese people should know that the United States will not forget
the abduction issue. And so the Japanese and the DPRK are involved in
discussions, as well, and we want to see those progress.

We'll take two more and then we have to go.

MR. PRICE: Mike, right?

Q Just one on the accountability issue that you talked about, Dan. I'm just
a little bit unclear about specifically what the President is seeking at
the summit from the other members. And secondly, is he -- are you going to
be naming names of other countries that have not met their commitments? Can
you tell us today who those countries are?

MR. PRICE: We, the United States, will not be naming names. We -- and we're
not naming names today and we don't intend to name names. That's not the
point. The point is for the G8 countries themselves to produce reports
showing how each of them is meeting the pledges made in the G8.

Q But what animates the President's concern? There must be -- are the G8
collectively not meeting its commitment right now? Are we not on target?

MR. PRICE: I think it is fair to say that in respect of a certain number of
these pledges, we are challenged in meeting them. As I said, the United
States has met its commitments as made in past G8s. And it's important to
demonstrate for the world and for the beneficiaries of these pledges that
we are meeting the commitment; that we are not, year after year, simply
making promises without looking back to see, are we fulfilling them. And we
think it would enhance transparency, credibility and reliability of what
the G8 says to institute such a mechanism in respect of their core pledges.

MR. JOHNDROE: One last question from Mark.

Q Dan, the President goes to this G8 as his last G8 summit and he goes with
just seven months remaining in office. How does that alter the dynamic of
what he expects to achieve at this summit?

MR. PRICE: I think the President has been fairly consistent in what he has
sought in these G8 summits, in terms of addressing these critically
important health and development issues in Africa; in addressing questions
of global security; in addressing questions of the need to maintain open
economies; the need to promote democracy and growth. I think that at this
G8 the President's messages will be consistent with those that he has
carried to each G8 since he's become President.

Q Is his clout diminished at all?

MR. PRICE: I certainly do not believe so. This is the President of the
United States. He has stood for some very important principles and
policies. He has been a catalyst within the G8 for a number of those
principles and policies, and will continue to do so.

Thank you very much.

END 4:15 P.M. EDT

===========================================================================
Return to this article at:
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2008/07/20080701-7.html