The administration spokesperson was unable to say. My thought is, does that designation allow the President to order the assassination of the group's members or leaders?
Or does the President already have that power, since some the the Network's leaders are already on the list as designated as Specially Designated Global Terrorists?
Or does none of that make any difference in proscribing the President's power to kill?
MR. VENTRELL: You know that we had the trilateral Core Group meeting. This was the first time at the foreign minister level, where Secretary Clinton and her counterparts from Afghanistan and Pakistan sat down in Tokyo. So that was a chance to discuss the wider security issues and cross-border issues and commitment to stopping terrorism on both sides of the border that affects Afghan interests, Pakistan interests, America’s interests.
So – and then, of course, Secretary Clinton met with Foreign Minister Khar in a bilateral setting. And I can assure you that (inaudible) said the Haqqani Network was something that was raised at the forefront. And now that we’ve obviously moved past the issue of getting the GLOCs open, we’re going to continue our discussion on cooperation on counterterrorism. And we want the Pakistanis to put the squeeze on the Haqqani Network, and we’ve been very clear about that.
QUESTION: And put the squeeze on them for what exact purpose?
MR. VENTRELL: Well, we’re talking about a group that’s --
QUESTION: Either it’s run them out of town or get them to the table?
MR. VENTRELL: We’ve got to get this group to stop – this is a group that has taken – that has made heinous attacks against Afghan civilians, against Americans as well, and we want them to be stopped and we want the squeeze to be put on.
QUESTION: The U.S. House of Representatives is due to vote sometime this evening, Washington time, on a bill that would compel the Administration to put the Haqqani Network on the FTO list. The Senate’s already passed it. It’s assumed the President will sign it. The question is: Since the designation just about 13 months ago of the top leadership of the Haqqani Network, why hasn’t the network itself been designated an FTO?
MR. VENTRELL: Well, Ros, you know where we are on this. We’ve designated a number of the leading individuals of the Haqqani Network with the full brunt of U.S. sanctions. We haven’t taken a decision on the wider issue that’s still under review, but clearly, we’ve put the pinch on all the key leaders. And so that’s where we are. I just don’t have an update for you at this time.
QUESTION: Maybe you could explain to people here in this room or, more appropriately, on the Hill, where this is – what difference it would make in terms of the actual sanctions, if you put them on the FTO list.
QUESTION: And why is there – if you could explain to us, Patrick, why is there hesitation to put them on it? Tell us, if you could, from the podium, a little bit about --
QUESTION: If, like he just said, Part A of the question, I believe the answer is there isn’t much. So you can answer Part B for Indira, but I’d like to know the answer to Part A. Is there a tangible difference between putting them on the FTO list as opposed to just having the group’s known leadership and members designated as individuals?
MR. VENTRELL: Well, again, I’m not a lawyer or a sanctions expert.
QUESTION: Right.
MR. VENTRELL: I’d be happy to look in --
QUESTION: So maybe you take the question and get back to us with someone --
MR. VENTRELL: I’d be happy to look into it further. Obviously, Dan Benjamin's [State Department Coordinator for Counterterrorism] shop, which follows counterterrorism issues, I’m sure has some more information we could provide, but --
QUESTION: So the question is: What specific additional sanctions would be involved with an FTO listing that are not currently already in place --
MR. VENTRELL: Right.
QUESTION: -- under the SDGT --
MR. VENTRELL: From here at the podium, I don’t know. We’ll obviously have to look into it for more information. But, I mean, we’ve been very aggressive about sanctioning their top individuals, and we’ve seen that as the most effective way to go about this. But the review is ongoing, and is actively ongoing.
QUESTION: And is the concern --
MR. VENTRELL: Go ahead, Indira.
QUESTION: Sorry. Is the concern about designating them as FTO – I mean, a lot of people have talked about that that would then force us to designate Pakistan as a state sponsor of terrorism. Can you speak a little to that?
MR. VENTRELL: Again, I’m not going to get into our analysis of the review as it’s ongoing, but obviously we look at each case individually and carefully and apply the law appropriately. So I just don’t have anything further for you.