THE VICE PRESIDENT: Again, thank you all for coming. As I said, I know you're all equally as busy as I am. But it's good to have you all here again.

Look, let me begin by thanking you all. I don't -- I've made an awful lot of trips out there around the country, seeing if we're implementing this Recovery Act well. But the other part of it is you all have made multiple trips. And a couple of you have made a few trips overseas that had nothing to do with the Recovery Act, trying to help us put in place a foreign policy that will work on the civilian side. So I know you've been busy as heck. And I really do appreciate it.

One of the things you've accomplished so far is -- we started this Recovery Act process, what, seven months ago? And there were an awful lot of skeptics. Even people who knew we had to stimulate the economy were still skeptical of whether or not this vehicle, $787 billion divided up in terms of making sure we keep people from falling into that black vortex by doing everything from extending unemployment insurance to health insurance, et cetera, and all the way to beginning to build sort of new platforms for an economic recovery. So as we come out of this, we come out of this stronger.

And there were an awful lot of skeptics. But what you've done so far -- and I really mean it, what you've done so far -- is you have made an awful lot of believers. There's a number of independent validators out there now. On the macro side, you have a number of folks on Wall Street and in the financial community -- and Christy knows better than anybody -- than anyone, because she's been leading this effort, acknowledging that I think it was the second quarter, Christy, that something like 2.2 percent of the GDP was attributable to this; third quarter, 3.3 or thereabouts. You have everyone out there, among the professional economists and the econometric model that are being used, acknowledging we've created what we said we would create, actually a little more than we were -- we said we'd be able to create in the first 200 days, we think over a million jobs. Even independent validators say it's somewhere between 750 and a million.

So the point is that you've done two really, really, really, really important things. The first hundred days, everyone said this is going to get screwed up here. What's going to happen is there's going to be -- we're not going to be able to deliver this money without it being wasted, we're not going to be able to get this underway. Well, that's a dog that didn't bite, because of all of you, and because you were hands-on. I know when you signed on to be Cabinet members, just like when I signed on to be Vice President, I didn't think I'd be on the phone once a week, every week, with governors and mayors talking about specific projects, trying to negotiate -- as I've asked some of you to do between governors and mayors -- as to how the money is allocated and so on and so forth, but -- and being able to respond.

I know all except the governors around here probably had apoplexy when I said we got to get an answer within 24 hours to every single solitary question from the field, or if we can't -- don't have the answer, call them in 24 hours and tell them why we don't have the answer and when we'll get it. Well, again, I don't want to exaggerate this, but you really have taken this to a place where there is a consensus -- even in the public now, a consensus that this is an important undertaking. But we're only -- we're only part of the way -- we used to use a metaphor, I don't know, the 9-mile mark on a marathon or whatever it is. I forget what -- where we are exactly.

MR. DeSEVE: That's it.

THE VICE PRESIDENT: But the point is we've got a long way to go, but you got us off to a good start. We're about to now come into a place, because of the work that was done by Earl Devaney and the overseeing board here that watches everything we're doing, as they should, to make sure we're keeping our commitment to transparency and accountability. There's a new Web site going up today. It is pretty incredible. Talk about transparent. I don't think -- in my years in government there's been nothing this transparent where the press and average citizens can go and find out in the first phase here exactly what are we doing with our money. We said this. Are we doing it? They can click on -- they can go to 7th and Vine in their small town and found out whether or not that crosswalk we said we were building is actually being built. That's the good news. The bad news is they can go to 7th and Vine -- (laughter) -- and find out whether that crosswalk being built is actually being built, which gets me to a second place here.

There's -- and that is that, in a sense, I've asked you all to do something that's beyond your job description. And I acknowledge it. But this is a very unusual, unusual moment in our -- in our history. And we've never decided to spend almost a trillion dollars to try to jump-start the economy. And so I've asked you to do things that we haven't had to do before. And that is to follow the dollar in a way that it's not our -- you can't control once you let -- once you obligate to a state for a water project, you can't control -- you don't have the authority to tell the governor when that contract has to be let. What happens is he doesn't get any money, or she doesn't get any money until they send in the bill. They can't send in the bill until they let the contract, and then get a bill from the contractor that it's time to get paid for the first month.

Well, part of our responsibility is -- and this is why I know I'm asking more than is reasonable, is we've got to be, and I am prepared to be, in the face of governors or mayors or whomever if we've obligated the money and we ain't received a bill, it means something isn't going on. And this is all about getting this -- not only doing our traditional job, making sure whatever we're approving is by the numbers; what we're approving is in fact totally within the parameters of the law; what we're approving is a project that makes sense and is going to be looked at closely before we pay for it, but we have to go a step further. We have to go a step further and find out whether the classroom is actually being built -- that's usually not our responsibility -- because we got to get this moving, we got to create these jobs. We've got to get out there and begin to change people's lives in their communities.

So, anyway – so, again, I apologize for being such a nag with you all the time, because you've done such an incredible -- I really mean it, you've done an incredible job. I've been around for a lot of Cabinets. I've not seen one this responsive ever to what -- the needs out there beyond the beltway.

Now, today one of the things that I asked you all to do -- and, by the way, I didn't even have to ask you, you all suggested before I asked several weeks ago -- is we had a goal the first hundred days; we had a goal the second hundred days; and I've asked you to lay out your goals for the next three months, taking us through the end of December 31st.

And so we're going to be talking today about just what some of those goals that you've laid out, just to get -- just to illustrate for the press that's in here today. Just to mention a few that have come in: battery and hybrid electric cars. By the end of the year, the Energy Department will have put in place funding for battery manufacturing plants that can power 400,000 plug-in hybrids and battery-electric vehicles each year, reducing our demand for foreign oil and cleaning up the air we breathe. That's the goal the Department of Energy set. That's the goal we're confident we can meet. And that would be a big deal. And we're going to hold ourselves accountable.

I can't ever remember any group of departments saying, "Hold me accountable for what I'm telling you I'm going to do the next hundred days, or the next three months; providing assistance to small business. The Small Business Administration will provide and leverage $5 billion in capital to more than 12,000 small businesses through two key lending programs in the next 90 days. You're biting off a big chunk here, but that's $5 billion in capital being leveraged so that we can have 12,000 small businesses, through two programs, unlocking investments necessary for small businesses to play what we all know as the vital role. Most of the jobs are created by small businesses.

And another example of the goal we received was from HUD and Agriculture: housing, loans, and rehabilitation. By the end of the year, AG and HUD will have provided housing loans and capital funding to build or rehabilitate almost 100,000 housing units in rural and urban America. Not only is that providing jobs, not only is that stimulating the economy, we're actually in the process going to be like -- make life better for people, actually changing their circumstance.

And so, again, this is just a sampling of the goals we've set. I want to talk more about it here. What we're down to now is -- we talk in -- you guys don't, but we're accustomed in Washington to talk in Washington-speak. The thing I love about all of you, you're all new enough to know no one speaks Washington-speak in this outfit. But we're talking about making sure that we've obligated 60 percent of the CBO estimated $499 billion in the Recovery Act. Translated, that means, hey, look, $787 billion -- close to $500 billion of that is for the things we control. What happens is the rest of that is basically in tax -- on the tax side of the equation.

Now, again, remember the thing we had to wrestle with in the beginning? Everybody thought this was $787 billion worth of public works projects. We finally broke through that and made clear, through Christy's leadership, about how this is actually -- and people, once they begin to understand the act, they went, oh, okay, now I get it. And it's working.

But I -- we've made a deal, and you are meeting it, that of the roughly $499 billion -- roughly $500 billion of the act that we -- you "obligate" -- you go out there and say, here's the money you have to spend in state X, Y, Z, and in certain localities. We're going to actually -- you will have, by the end of the year, obligated 60 percent of that. Because remember what the criticism was, we're not going to get this out quick enough. We're not going to get it in the hands of people who can use it. We're not going to -- well, you're doing it. You've done it the first 200 days.

And so it seems to me that -- that we're in a position to now sort of nail down the progress that we've made the first 200-plus days now. And I think, quite frankly, the only way we can be sure we're filling the pledges -- to go back to what I mentioned before and I'll end with this -- is that we got to go beyond what is ordinarily our charge here. And you guys are doing it, but you got to -- we have some really talented, professional government people who work under you and through one administration and another and they're really good. They're the pros. They're a bureaucracy that we need to function. But it is -- they're not used to you saying to them, by the way, don't just tell me what you obligated, tell me if you haven't received a bill from the state which you obligated -- something ain't happening. Something is not happening.

So the only way we can be sure we're filling our pledge is to make sure this remains transparent and accountable. And I recognize all the effort you have put in place to try to give guidelines to the states and localities who are -- and independent outfits that are reporting in beginning October 1st. There's going to be some glitches there, because unlike even what we demand of corporations, they are having to report everything out there that's obligated and/or spent. We're not going to have the time to scrub it as closely as you ordinarily would, but that you guys are going to be doing, and they're going to be doing as well.

And so, by the end of October, when the 30 days are up, we're going to have a pretty -- or we have to have an absolute, precise accounting as to what we've done. But in the meantime, it's going to get -- we're going to find there may be a little bit missed between the cup and the lip here, because in fairness to the localities, they're not going to have time to go back once it's filed and within the first 24 hours find out whether everything, every I is dotted and every T is crossed, but that's what we're going to do.

So you're keeping our pledge. I'd like to now get into some detail about how we're going to do each of these, what the other projects, what the other goals for -- each of you have set out. You've all given them to me and I want to talk a little bit about it, okay.

END

8:03 P.M. CEST

MRS. OBAMA: Thank you, everybody. So, as my husband would say, we are fired up and ready to go in here. (Applause.) It’s a good thing. Well, first let me begin by thanking my dear friend, my chit-chat buddy, Oprah Winfrey. She talks about me coming here without hesitation. This is a woman who’s got a pretty busy schedule – taping shows, traveling across the globe, a woman with a full plate. I think that folks out there should understand how Chicagoans, even those who weren’t born and raised here, feel a passion about the city, so much so that we dropped everything – dropped everything – to be a part of this team. So I want to give Ms. Winfrey a round of applause as well. (Applause.)

One reporter asked me in a press briefing, "So, what do you think Oprah adds to the team?" I said, "Oprah is Oprah." (Laughter.) What more do you have to say? I said every single city who’s bidding wishes they had Oprah on their team, and we have her, and we are grateful that she is a part of this endeavor. (Applause.)

It is so nice to see so many familiar faces. I mean, we really do miss Chicago. We’ve made a wonderful home in D.C. The girls are great; Grandma is good. Bo is no longer a puppy; he’s a big dog now. (Laughter.) But it’s wonderful to reconnect to my hometown.

When I looked at the bid initially, I was overwhelmed by what a beautiful concept was presented. You know, everything about this bid speaks to what the city has to offer. Having the Games right along that beautiful, glorious lakefront; using the existing park structure to ensure that we’re making the kinds of investments and we’ll have the kind of wonderful leave-behinds that will benefit the city over the long run; the notion that Olympic athletes who visit the city will live centrally, they’ll be 15 minutes from any competition site, that they’ll be able to walk, ride or bus to some of the greatest cultural offerings that this nation, that this world has to offer – it will be an athlete’s paradise in so many ways, and we will have it at a time in the city’s climate that will actually be nice. (Laughter.) The lake won’t be frozen over.

So I am thrilled. I am proud of our bid, and I am proud of this team. And I have to ask you, are we ready to go with this, right? You ready to go? (Applause.)

This bid also means a lot to me personally because, as First Lady, as many of you know, I’ve made it a priority to bridge the gap between the White House and communities across D.C. and across the country. I’ve spent much of my first nine months trying to open the doors to the White House to kids who might not otherwise see themselves having access to these institutions, because that’s where I came from – communities like that where kids never dreamed that they could set foot in the White House, let alone live there.

So I’ve wanted to open the doors of the White House and bring new opportunities to so many young kids – kids living in the midst of power and prestige, fortune and fame, but never really seeing their connections to those institutions.

And Barack and I made a point of doing the same thing when we lived in Chicago – making the concerns of kids in all sorts of communities our own, because we have been on both sides of that bridge. In so many ways, we have lived full lives on both sides of that bridge. And for me, this is one of the best reasons I can think of to bring the Olympics to our city.

We need all of our children to be exposed to the Olympic ideals that athletes from around the world represent, particularly this time in our nation’s history, where athletics is becoming more of a fleeting opportunity. Funds dry up so it becomes harder for kids to engage in sports, to learn how to swim, to even ride a bike. When we’re seeing rates of childhood obesity increase, it is so important for us to raise up the platform of fitness and competition and fair play; to teach kids to cheer on the victors and empathize with those in defeat, but most importantly, to recognize that all the hard work that is required to do something special.

I remember watching the Olympics when I was little. I remember it to the T, some of those memories. And Nadia Comaneci is here, who – (applause) – and so many incredible Olympic athletes. But I remember, I told this story, when you scored that perfect 10, you bounced off the balance beam, off the parallel bars. I thought I could do that. (Laughter.) I didn’t know then that I would be 5’11". (Laughter.)

But it was – it was an activity in our household when it was time for the Olympic Games, all of us gathered around the TV cheering on and being inspired by people who were doing things that were beyond belief. And I just think, wouldn’t it be great if that kind of spirit was happening right down the street in our community? Just think of that. Kids and communities across the city, in Austin, kids who grew up in Cabrini, kids who live so far from the city. Now just imagine if all of that was happening right in their own backyard. That’s what I think about. (Applause.)

It does something to a kid when they can feel that energy and power up close and personal. And for some kids in our communities and our city, around the nation, around the world, they can never dream of being that close to such power and opportunity. So that’s what excites me most about bringing the Games to Chicago – the impact that it can have on the lives of our young people, and on our entire community.

And I know that’s what all of you have been working for for these past few months. As much of a sacrifice as people say this is for me or Oprah or the President to come for these few days, so many of you in this room have been working for years to bring this bid home, and you have put together a phenomenal set of ideas that, no matter what the outcome is, we should be proud of as a city. (Applause.)

So now is the time for us to pull it through, you know. As Barack and I have looked at this, this is like a campaign. (Laughter.) Just like Iowa. (Laughter.) You got to – and the international community may not understand that, but Iowa is like a caucus, and you can’t take any vote for granted. Nobody makes the decision until they’re sitting there.

So the next few days really provide us with a real opportunity to hold some hands, to have some conversations, to share our visions, to make the world understand that this is an opportunity for the United States to connect to the world in a really important way at a very critical time, and for each of us to show them our passion and sincerity to be part of the world in a very special way, and to let people know that we understand that sports saves lives, that it makes dreams come true, that it creates visions in kids’ heads to make them think they can be the next David Robinson, the next Barack Obama, the next Nadia Comaneci, the next Oprah Winfrey. Those dreams have to start somewhere, and for so many, they start when they watch the Olympics. And if we can show people that we understand that power and that possibility, then they will have the confidence that not only will we have the city – the Olympics in a city that works, but will execute this thing with the kind of passion and openness and sincerity that the world so greatly wants to see in us.

So let’s get it done. Thank you so much.

END
8:13 P.M. CEST

12:09 P.M. EDT

PRESIDENT OBAMA:  Hello, everybody.  I just want to welcome Secretary General Rasmussen to the Oval Office.  He and I had the opportunity to get to know each other at the NATO summit in Strasbourg, at which he was nominated and then selected as the new Secretary General of NATO. 

I can say that, given his experience as a head of state, that everybody had confidence in his decisive and effective leadership abilities.  That confidence has proven justified.  In the brief time that he has been in NATO, I think he's already shown himself to be an active and effective Secretary General, interested in reforming and renewing the NATO Alliance, and always rooted in the understanding that this is the most successful military alliance in history and the cornerstone of transatlantic relationships.

We had a very fruitful discussion while he was here.  We talked about, obviously, the most important NATO mission right now, and that is Afghanistan.  And we both agree that it is absolutely critical that we are successful in dismantling, disrupting, destroying the al Qaeda network, and that we are effectively working with the Afghan government to provide the security necessary for that country. 

This is not a American battle; this is a NATO mission, as well.  And we are working actively and diligently to consult with NATO at every step of the way.  And I'm very grateful for the leadership that Secretary General Rasmussen has shown in committing NATO to a full partnership in this process.

We also discussed missile defense, and we both agreed that the configuration that we have proposed is one that ultimately will serve the interests of not only the United States, but also NATO Alliance members most effectively.  It allows for a full collaboration with NATO members, and we are very optimistic that it will achieve our aims and deal with the very real threat of ballistic missiles.

We also agree that it is important for us to reach out to Russia and explore ways in which the missile defense configurations that we envision could potentially lead to further collaboration with Russia on this front; and that we want to improve generally not only U.S.-Russian relations, but also NATO-Russian relations, while making absolutely clear that our commitments to all of our allies in NATO is sacrosanct and that our commitment to Article 5 continues.

Finally, we discussed the process that we're putting forward for a strategic concept review.  NATO has been so successful that sometimes I think that we forget this was shaped and crafted for a 20th century landscape.  We're now well into the 21st century, and that means that we are going to have to constantly renew and revitalize NATO to meet current threats and not just past threats. 

There has been a process that has been put forward; we are fully supportive of it.  I am confident that under Secretary General Rasmussen's leadership that it will ultimately be successful, and that we will continue to see NATO operate in a way that is good for U.S. national security interests, good for our allies, and good for the world.

So, Mr. Secretary General, thank you for the excellent work that you're doing and we appreciate it very much.  And please feel free to share a few words.

SECRETARY GENERAL RASMUSSEN:  Thank you very much, Mr. President, for your kind words. 

The President and I have had a very constructive meeting.  I have thanked the President for his strong support.  I look very much forward to cooperating with the President and his administration on reforming, transforming, and modernizing NATO.  We are going to elaborate a new strategic concept, which I hope can serve as leverage for renewal of NATO.

Of course, our main focus today has been our cooperation in Afghanistan.  I say "our" focus deliberately because our operation in Afghanistan is not America's responsibility or burden alone.  It is and it will remain a team effort.  I agree with President Obama in his approach:  strategy first, then resources.  The first thing is not numbers.  It is to find and fine-tune the right approach to implement the strategy already laid down, and all NATO allies are right now looking at McChrystal's review.

I'm convinced that success in Afghanistan is achievable and will be achieved.  And don't make any mistake -- the normal discussion on the right approach should not be misinterpreted as lack of resolve.  This Alliance will stand united and we will stay in Afghanistan as long as it takes to finish our job.

As the President mentioned, we have also discussed missile defense.  I welcome the new U.S. approach, which will allow all allies to participate, which will protect all allies.  And in fact, I think the proposed new system can serve as an instrument to bind all allies -- new and old -- even stronger together.

Thank you.

PRESIDENT OBAMA:  Thank you so much.  All right, thank you, everybody.

               

END 
12:17 P.M. EDT                                                           

 

5:13 P.M. EDT

THE PRESIDENT: Good afternoon. Let me, first of all, thank Mayor Luke Ravenstahl, County Executive Dan Onorato, and the people of Pittsburgh for being just extraordinary hosts. Last night during the dinner that I had with world leaders, so many of them commented on the fact that sometime in the past they had been to Pittsburgh -- in some cases it was 20 or 25 or 30 years ago -- and coming back they were so impressed with the revitalization of the city. A number of them remarked on the fact that it pointed to lessons that they could take away in revitalizing manufacturing towns in their home countries. The people here have been just extraordinary, and so I want to thank all of you for the great hospitality.

I will tell you I'm a little resentful because I did not get to Pamela's Diner for pancakes. (Laughter.) Although, Prime Minister Yukio Hatoyama of Japan did get pancakes. And I don't know how he worked that, but he was raving about them.

Six months ago, I said that the London Summit marked a turning point in the G20's effort to prevent economic catastrophe. And here in Pittsburgh, we've taken several significant steps forward to secure our recovery, and transition to strong, sustainable, and balanced economic growth. We brought the global economy back from the brink. We laid the groundwork today for long-term prosperity, as well.

It's worth recalling the situation we faced six months ago -- a contracting economy, skyrocketing unemployment, stagnant trade, and a financial system that was nearly frozen. Some were warning of a second Great Depression. But because of the bold and coordinated action that we took, millions of jobs have been saved or created; the decline in output has been stopped; financial markets have come back to life; and we stopped the crisis from spreading further to the developing world.

Still, we know there is much further to go. Too many Americans are still out of work, and struggling to pay bills. Too many families are uncertain about what the future will bring. Because our global economy is now fundamentally interconnected, we need to act together to make sure our recovery creates new jobs and industries, while preventing the kinds of imbalances and abuse that led us into this crisis.

Pittsburgh was a perfect venue for this work. This city has known its share of hard times, as older industries like steel could no longer sustain growth. But Pittsburgh picked itself up, and it dusted itself off, and is making the transition to job-creating industries of the future -- from biotechnology to clean energy. It serves as a model for turning the page to a 21st century economy, and a reminder that the key to our future prosperity lies not just in New York or Los Angeles or Washington -- but in places like Pittsburgh.

Today, we took bold and concerted action to secure that prosperity, and to forge a new Framework for Strong, Sustainable and Balanced Growth.

First, we agreed to sustain our recovery plans until growth is restored, and a new framework for prosperity is in place. Our coordinated stimulus plans played an indispensable role in averting catastrophe. Now, we must make sure that when growth returns -- jobs do, too. That's why we will continue our stimulus efforts until our people are back to work, and phase them out when our recovery is strong.

But we can't stop there. Going forward, we cannot tolerate the same old boom and bust economy of the past. We can't grow complacent. We can't wait for a crisis to cooperate. That's why our new framework will allow each of us to assess the others' policies, to build consensus on reform, and to ensure that global demand supports growth for all.

That's why we've agreed on a strong set of reforms. We will bring more transparency to the derivatives market. And we will strengthen national capital standards, so that banks can withstand losses and pay for their own risks. We will create more powerful tools to hold large global financial firms accountable, and orderly procedures to manage failures without burdening taxpayers. And we will tie executive pay to long-term performance, so that sound decisions are rewarded instead of short-term greed. In short, our financial system will be far different and more secure than the one that failed so dramatically last year.

Third, we agreed to phase out subsidies for fossil fuels so that we can transition to a 21st century energy economy -- an historic effort that would ultimately phase out nearly $300 billion in global subsidies. This reform will increase our energy security. It will help transform our economy, so that we're creating the clean energy jobs of the future. And it will help us combat the threat posed by climate change. As I said earlier this week in New York, all nations have a responsibility to meet this challenge, and together, we have taken a substantial step forward in meeting that responsibility.

Finally, we agreed to reform our system of global economic cooperation and governance. We can no longer meet the challenges of the 21st century economy with 20th century approaches. And that's why the G20 will take the lead in building a new approach to cooperation. To make our institutions reflect the reality of our times, we will shift more responsibility to emerging economies within the International Monetary Fund, and give them a greater voice. To build new markets, and help the world's most vulnerable citizens climb out of poverty, we established a new World Bank Trust Fund to support investments in food security and financing for clean and affordable energy. And to ensure that we keep our commitments, we agreed to continue to take stock of our efforts going forward.

We have learned, time and again, that in the 21st century, the nations of the world share mutual interests. That's why I've called for a new era of engagement that yields real results for our people -- an era when nations live up to their responsibilities, and act on behalf of our shared security and prosperity.

And that's exactly the kind of strong cooperation that we forged here in Pittsburgh, and earlier this week in New York. Indeed, on issue after issue, we see that the international community is beginning to move forward together. At the G20, we've achieved a level of tangible, global economic cooperation that we have never seen before, while also acting to address the threat posed by climate change. At the United Nations Security Council, we passed a historic resolution to secure loose nuclear materials, to stop the spread of nuclear weapons, and to seek the security of a world without them. And as we approach negotiations with Iran on October 1st, we have never been more united in standing with the United Kingdom, France, Russia, China and Germany in demanding that Iran live up to its responsibilities.

On all of these challenges, there is much more work to be done. But we leave here today more confident and more united in the common effort of advancing security and prosperity for all of our people.

So I'm very grateful to the other world leaders who are here today. And with that, let me take a few questions. I'll start with Ben Feller of AP.

Q Thank you, Mr. President. The Iranian President said today that your statement of this morning was a mistake, and that your mistakes work in Iran's favor. What gives you any sense that you can genuinely negotiate with them? And also, when you talk about holding Iran accountable, is the military option growing more likely?

THE PRESIDENT: I think it's important to see what happened today building on what happened in New York. You had an unprecedented show of unity on the part of the world community saying that Iran's actions raised grave doubts in terms of their presentation that their nuclear program was for peaceful purposes. Not only did the United States, France, and the United Kingdom who initiated the intelligence that brought this to light, stand before you, but you had China and Russia as well issue statements calling for an immediate IAEA investigation.

That kind of solidarity is not typical. Anybody who's been following responses to Iran would have been doubtful just a few months ago that that kind of rapid response was possible.

So I think Iran is on notice; that when we meet with them on October 1st, they are going to have to come clean and they are going to have to make a choice: Are they willing to go down the path which I think ultimately will lead to greater prosperity and security for Iran, giving up the acquisition of nuclear weapons, and deciding that they are willing to abide by international rules and standards in their pursuit of peaceful nuclear energy; or will they continue down a path that is going to lead to confrontation? And as I said before, what has changed is that the international community I think has spoken. It is now up to Iran to respond.

I'm not going to speculate on the course of action that we will take. We're going to give October 1st a chance. But I think you've heard that even countries who a year ago or six months ago might have been reluctant to even discuss things like sanctions have said that this is an important enough issue to peace and stability in the world that Iran would make a mistake in ignoring the call for them to respond in a forthright and clear manner, and to recognize that the choice they make over the next several weeks and months could well determine their ability to rejoin the international community or to find themselves isolated.

Last point I'll make specifically with respect to the military, I've always said that we do not rule out any options when it comes to U.S. security interests, but I will also reemphasize that my preferred course of action is to resolve this in a diplomatic fashion. It's up to the Iranians to respond.

Patricia Zengerle at Reuters.

Q You said a couple months ago that the war in Afghanistan is a war of necessity. Do you think it's possible to meet U.S. objectives there without an extra infusion of U.S. troops? And as you consider this, how does the public's lagging support for the war affect your decision-making now? And how has your review process been affected by the allegations of election fraud? Thank you.

THE PRESIDENT: First of all, let me be clear on our goals. We went into Afghanistan not because we were interested in entering that country or positioning ourselves regionally, but because al Qaeda killed 3,000-plus Americans and vowed to continue trying to kill Americans.

And so my overriding goal is to dismantle the al Qaeda network, to destroy their capacity to inflict harm, not just on us but people of all faiths and all nationalities all around the world, and that is our overriding focus.

Stability in Afghanistan and in Pakistan are critical to that mission. And after several years of drift in Afghanistan, we now find ourselves in a situation in which you have strong commitments from the ISAF coalition, our NATO allies. All of them are committed to making this work. But I think there's also a recognition that after that many years of drift, it's important that we examine our strategies to make sure that they actually can deliver on preventing al Qaeda from establishing safe havens.

Obviously the allegations of fraud in the recent election are of concern to us. And we are still awaiting results. We're awaiting the IEC and the ECC issuing their full report. What's most important is that there is a sense of legitimacy in Afghanistan among the Afghan people for their government. If there is not, that makes our task much more difficult.

In terms of the review process that we're going through, the minute I came into office we initiated a review, and even before that review was completed, I ordered 21,000 additional troops into Afghanistan because I thought it was important to secure the election, to make sure that the Taliban did not disrupt it. What I also said at the time was that after the election, we are going to reassess our strategy, precisely because so much of our success has to be linked to the ability of the Afghan people themselves to provide for their own security, their own training, the Afghan government's ability to deliver services and opportunity and hope to their people.

So we are doing exactly what I said we would do in March. I put in a new commander, General McChrystal, and I asked him to give me an unvarnished assessment of the situation in Afghanistan, and he has done that, as well. But keep in mind that, from the start, my belief was -- and this is shared with our ISAF allies, that our military strategy is only part of a broader project that has to include a civilian component, has to include a diplomatic component, and all those different factors are being weighed and considered at this point. And I will ultimately make this decision based on what will meet that core goal that I set out at the beginning, which is to dismantle, disrupt, and destroy the al Qaeda network.

With respect to public opinion, I understand the public's weariness of this war, given that it comes on top of weariness about the war in Iraq. Every time we get a report of a young man or woman who's fallen in either of those theaters of war, it's a reminder of the extraordinary sacrifice that they're making. I know that our partners in Afghanistan feel that same pain when they see their troops harmed.

So this is not easy. And I would expect that the public would ask some very tough questions. That's exactly what I'm doing, is asking some very tough questions. And we're not going to arrive at perfect answers. I think anybody who's looked at the situation recognizes that it's difficult and it's complicated. But my solemn obligation is to make sure that I get the best answers possible, particularly before I make decisions about sending additional troops into the theater.

Jon Delano of KDKA. Is Jon around?

Q Right here.

THE PRESIDENT: Good to see you, Jon.

Q Thank you, Mr. President. Let me ask you, while we were inside this very safe and secure and beautiful convention center, some 5,000 at least demonstrators were on the outside. Some caused some property damage; others just shouted their messages, much of which had to do that while you believe the G20 summit was a success and represents a positive sign, they see it as something devilish and destructive of the world economy, and particularly the economy of the poor. What's your response to those who are demonstrating and those who oppose this summit?

THE PRESIDENT: Well, first of all, I think it's important just to keep things in perspective for the people of Pittsburgh. If you have looked at any of the other summits that took place, I mean, in London you had hundreds of thousands of people on the streets. In most of these summits, there has been a much more tumultuous response. And I think the mayor and the county executive and all the people of Pittsburgh deserve extraordinary credit for having managed what is a very tranquil G20 summit.

You know, I think that many of the protests are just directed generically at capitalism. And they object to the existing global financial system. They object to free markets. One of the great things about the United States is, is that you can speak your mind and you can protest; that's part of our tradition. But I fundamentally disagree with their view that the free market is the source of all ills.

Ironically, if they had been paying attention to what was taking place inside the summit itself, what they would have heard was a strong recognition from the most diverse collection of leaders in history that it is important to make sure that the market is working for ordinary people; that government has a role in regulating the market in ways that don't cause the kinds of crises that we've just been living through; that our emphasis has to be on more balanced growth, and that includes making sure that growth is bottom up, that workers, ordinary people, are able to pay their bills, get -- make a decent living, send their children to college; and that the more that we focus on how the least of these are doing, the better off all of us are going to be. That principle was embodied in the communiqué that was issued.

And so I would recommend those who are out there protesting, if they're actually interested in knowing what was taking place here, to read the communiqué that was issued.

Laurent Lozano. Is Laurent here? There he is.

Q I am here. Thank you, Mr. President. I would like to follow up on Iran. Since Iran seems to be so blatantly in breach of its international obligations and with some of your allies, main allies, obviously growing impatient, why even meet with the Iranians on October 1st? And can you also explain to us what happened between the end of 2007 when an intelligence estimate cast doubts on the fact that Iran was pursuing nuclear weapons and this year? What credit should be given to such intelligence?

THE PRESIDENT: Well, first of all, with respect to the intelligence that we presented to the IAEA, this was the work product of three intelligence agencies, not just one. These intelligence agencies checked over this work in a painstaking fashion, precisely because we didn't want any ambiguity about what exactly was going on there. And I think that the response that you saw today indicates the degree to which this intelligence is solid and indicates the degree to which Iran was constructing an enrichment facility that it had not declared, contrary to U.N. resolutions and contrary to the rules governing the IAEA.

In terms of meeting, I have said repeatedly that we're going to operate on two tracks; that our preferred method of action is diplomatic, but if that does not work, then other consequences may follow. I also said -- and this was debated extensively here in the United States because there were some who suggested, you can't talk to Iran, what's the point -- that by keeping the path of diplomacy open, that would actually strengthen world unity and our collective efforts to then hold Iran accountable. And I think you're starting to see the product of that strategy unfold during the course of this week.

What we saw at the United Nations in the Security Council was a strong affirmation of the principles of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, and as a consequence, the IAEA is strengthened, and those countries who follow the rules are strengthened when it comes to dealing with countries like North Korea and Iran that don't follow the rules. And that means that when we find that diplomacy does not work we will be in a much stronger position to, for example, apply sanctions that have bite.

Now, as I said, that's not the preferred course of action. I would love nothing more than to see Iran choose the responsible path. Whether they do so or not will ultimately depend on their leaders and they will have the next few weeks to show to the world which path they want to travel.

I'm going to take one last question. I've got to call on one of these guys, you know, they're my constituency here. All right, Chip.

Q Thank you, Mr. President. You just mentioned sanctions that have bite. What kinds of sanctions -- and I know you can't get into details -- but what kinds of sanctions at all would have bite with Iran? Do you really think any kind of sanction would have an effect on somebody like Ahmadinejad?

Secondly, some of your advisors today said that this announcement was a "victory." Do you consider it a victory? And if so, why didn’t you announce it earlier since you’ve known since you were President-elect?

THE PRESIDENT: This isn’t a football game, so I'm not interested in victory; I'm interested in resolving the problem. The problem is, is that Iran repeatedly says that it's pursuing nuclear energy only for peaceful purposes, and its actions contradict its words. And as a consequence, the region is more insecure and vital U.S. interests are threatened.

My job is to try to solve that. And my expectation is that we are going to explore with our allies, with the P5-plus-1, a wide range of options in terms of how we approach Iran, should Iran decline to engage in the ways that are responsible.

You just told me I'm not going to get into details about sanctions, and you're right, I will not. But I think that if you have the international community making a strong united front, that Iran is going to have to pay attention.

In terms of why we didn’t come out with it sooner, I already mentioned to Laurent that it is very important in these kinds of high-stakes situations to make sure that the intelligence is right. And we wanted all three agencies -- the French, the Brits, and the Americans -- to have thoroughly scrubbed this and to make sure that we were absolutely confident about the situation there. We are, and now it's up to Iran to respond.

Okay? Thank you very much, everybody. I hope you enjoy Pittsburgh. Thank you. (Applause.)

END
5:39 P.M. EDT