 We have six folks on their feet ready to ask questions. We're approaching the hour of a nice reception, so let's try to take brief comments or questions rather, please. Now, Dr. Rice, I'm the North Korean News Report. It's the Korean Korean News Network. And the Secretary of State's nominee, Mr. Power, told this morning, the United States will review a totally relationship with North Korea. And President-elect Bush mentioned about the possible missile agreement with North Korea in the New York Times interview. So is there any possibility for the new Bush administration to make missile agreements with North Korea? I think that General Paul's point is the best one to make. We're a new administration, and we now have to review a whole range of policy issues before it. I think we have a lot of due diligence to do, and it's important that we take the time to do it. So I would not put this in any different category. I think there are a number of issues that we have to review. Thank you. Kurt Busiener from the U.S. and Assistant Secretary Pete Spaulding's commission. Ms. Rice, recently the President's question to Yugoslavia has been pretty dismissive of the international war crime tribunal at the Hague and Yugoslavia's obligations toward it in dealing with the indicted war criminal, President Slobodan Milosevic, and others. Will this war crimes accountability issue be a fundamental pillar of American policy in the Bush administration toward the ball? Well, of course, the United States is on record as believing that Milosevic should be apprehended and turned over to the Hague. That's clear. And I wouldn't expect any change in that. The question of exactly how to manage this will hopefully move Democratic Serbia. I think we will want to lead to the management of the issue. I don't think that pronouncements now are going to be helpful for that process. We do want to encourage, and I want to say very clearly, that we have a great interest in the emergence of a Democratic regime in Belgrade as a potential partner for stability in the region. And there is a lot to do to clean up the mess that Milosevic left in a variety of ways, including Milosevic himself. But I think that the issue of exactly how to best deal with the Krasnice regime about this, I think we need to lead to self-discretion. Barbara Slavin of USA Today. I wanted to press you a little bit more on Iraq. Hugh and Colin Powell have both talked about re-energizing sanctions. But as you speak today, the Iraqis are sending oil into Syria, which I believe is allowing the Syrians to export more of their own oil for hard currency. They're signing new trade agreements with Jordan, which vastly increased the amount of oil that's going to Jordan and Jordanian goods going back. They are busting out its sanctions all over. How do you propose to put your finger back in all of these sites and somehow put this regime back together when it is clearly eroding? Barbara, I think that it's obviously very clear that we have a big job in trying to re-energize the sanctions. There's no doubt that it has eroded considerably over the last several years. The President-elect spoke to this in his interview, saying I think that they've become something that was cheese, I think he called it. But this is what diplomacy is about, and I think that you're just going to have to convince the important powers here, and I mean not just the term five, but the important powers in the region that we need to rededicate ourselves to making certain that Saddam Hussein does not turn himself into a terrorist through his weapons of mass destruction or that he does not threaten his neighbors. He signed on to certain obligations under UN revolutions in 1991, and he needs to be held to them. So this is a major diplomatic effort I'd be to first admit, but I think that we're going to have to take it on if no one wants to see Saddam Hussein escape his spot. Jonathan Landay with Knight Ritter Newspapers. During the campaign, Governor Bush pledged to increase military spending by $45 billion over a decade. That money did not include additional funds for national missile defense. He's made national missile defense deployment a prime objective. How do you intend to increase spending for national missile defense if so by how much and how are you going to do it given the $50 to $100 billion mismatch per year in the Pentagon spending plan? Well, first we're going to get in office and take a look at where we are. I've said several times on the campaign trail. You do not have the resources on the campaign trail to do a careful and thoughtful analysis of what your defense spending plans ought to be. He's simply done it. And what the president-elect has pledged in the campaign and has pledged again is that he intends a thorough review of the requirements of the military modernization. He's concerned about the troops and issues for the troops and that he intends to have a strategic plan from which to proceed to make important spending decisions and important allocation decisions between the many competing priorities in the defense budget. And I think until he's had an opportunity to do that, it's going to be rather difficult to talk about what we're going to spend precisely here and precisely there. So he is committed to doing that review. I was tempted to say welcome to Washington but the last two questions. Hello, Dr. Rice, Emily Woodworth from Defense News. Just wanted to ask for your quick comments on remarks by Ari Fletcher at press briefing earlier this week about the move to bring the senior international economics advisor to directly report to you as a means of enhancing the relationship between international trade and national security. Yes. Yes, again, the President-elect spoke to this as well. The kind of lexuna in American foreign policy particularly as it's developed over the last several years is how to better integrate economic issues with other foreign policy issues. And I think that it's, every commission report that I've read about our national security decision-making focuses this as one of the problems. And I think you can read just about any of the independent bodies that have been out there and people focus on this issue. It is not easy. There's not a tradition of very good integration here. But frankly, the economic issues have become so much more important to our foreign policy as a whole that the challenge really has to be taken on. Now what we will do, and I want to just caution here, that we're still trying to figure out exactly how to work out the details. There will be a Deputy Assistant to the President for International Economic Affairs. That person will report jointly to Larry Lindsay, the Assistant for National Economic Affairs, and to me. And we're going to try to have a kind of seamless single staff that will be responsible for the whole range of issues from those that are more traditional foreign policy with an economic content to those that have probably been traditionally thought of as economic but clearly have a strategic overlay. And so I'm certain that there are some international economic issues that don't follow either of these categories. But Larry and I are committed to making this work. This is a joint idea. It's a joint proposal that we made to the President-elect who himself had identified the problem. And one of the reasons I think he was aware of the problem is that he's dealt a lot with Mexico, and so he could see all the various pieces that have to be put together. So I think that we will try to make this work. I'm quite confident that we can because we have a lot of commitment to making it work. But it could be one of the more important innovations that we try to make. Thanks, Mike. Valerie LeVanne, Voice of America. You emphasize the importance of forming good relationships with our allies and also with other great powers. And I was wondering how you would reconcile the importance of this with plans for a national missile defense system given the criticism and the opposition that this has gone at an international level? Strong relationships don't mean that you'll always agree. And it's important to make that distinction. But it does mean that particularly with allies and friends you will always be committed to talk and consult and try to understand each other better and where possible to move toward agreement. And on national missile defense, the president-elect is committed to doing what he believes he needs to do as commander-in-chief. He has set as one of the criteria for any national missile defense that it has to protect not just us but our allies. He does not want to be coupling. This will take diplomacy. I think that it also probably takes understanding the entire complex of nuclear issues. There's national missile defense with proliferation concerns and of course what we will do with offensive forces is to defend. And so we're in a different world than we were when the American nuclear arsenal faced off against the Soviet threat of thousands of nuclear warheads. The threats are different. And we'll take some time with our allies and friends and indeed with other interested parties including the Russians to talk about this new world and to figure out how to address it in an intelligent way. As you join in thanking Dr. Rice, let me just again say you've been a terrific audience and we've had a long day and we invite you as you exit to turn slightly to the right and enjoy some receptions, refreshments, and we'll have a little bit of a ceremony about the five minutes from now. Thank you.