Diary Prequel Package — page 268

was driving things that affect many others outside of USA. I agree. Therefore I agitated and accomplished that WHO (Keiji Fukuda) should hold a meeting in Geneva to add an international component to this situation. Importantly, on Wednesday, Feb. 18 I called Ron Fouchier in his home in Rotterdam (actually I e-mailed him and asked him to call me) at 4:30 PM DC time - 10:30 PM Rotterdam time. I strongly suggested that he call a moratorium on this work and encourage his flu colleagues to also do so. He was not totally convinced and said that he would consult with the others tomorrow (Feb. 19) AM and get back to me. I emphasized that it is likely if he does not do it voluntarily that forces beyond our control (i.e. the security people) would force us to defund the work. The next morning he called me and said that they had agreed to call a moratorium for 60 days and see what the Geneva meeting brings. Furthermore, Francis Collins and I called Bruce Alberts (Science) and Phil Campbell (Nature) and convinced them to delay the publication until at least March. Fouchier came out with a press statement on Feb 20 and Francis Collins and I came out with an NIH statement the same day applauding their decision. This was a good example of my having to take the bull by the horns since things were not going in the right direction. Now we wait to see what happens. There was wide coverage in the press about this "breakthrough" in negotiations with big stories in Washington Post, NY Times, Wall Street Journal, etc. Jan. 23, 2012 - Went to Situation Room in the White House at 3:15 PM. Cold, very damp, gray day. Purpose to discuss the H5N1 situation and brief the National Security Staff (NSS) about my upcoming trip to the Geneva meeting scheduled for Feb. 16-17, 2012. Present at the meeting: John Brennan (Chief, NSS), Heidi Avery (Deputy Chief), Francis Collins, Amy Patterson, Bill Corr (Deputy Secretary-HHS), Sally Howard (Chief-of-Staff to Sebelius), Bill Shultz (OGC-HHS). NSS concern was what we would agree to or not at the Geneva meeting. I tried to explain that the information was already out there and multiple papers have already described the methodology. I explained that what I wanted to get out of the meeting was a transparency to others about what we are trying to do in order to get away from this USA-centric perception. Of note, after the meeting, Heidi sent an email to Bill Corr saying that there are certain "redlines" that we should not give in to at the meeting. I fear that she is not fully getting what I want to accomplish at the meeting. Also, of note, she mentioned in her e-mail that she does not want total unbridled availability of the information in the papers (her "redline") even though she knows that certain USG scientists do not agree with her. I am certain that she is referring to me. Feb. 11, 2012 - The past couple of weeks have been intensively involved in discussion about the H5N1 issue. Extraordinary "legal" issues come up about what can and cannot be discussed in public. I pushed for and it will happen next week for a WHO meeting to make all of this more transparent and international. The issue is what can and cannot be discussed at this meeting. There are 2 options to allow discussion at the meeting: 1) an "export control license" from the Dept. of Commerce that restricts discussion to the people listed on the license, i.e. all the attendees at the meeting or; 2) An advisory opinion from the dept. of Commerce saying that the information is intended to be published by the journals and therefore the expert control requirement does not exist. Some subterfuge has gone on with HHS in getting the journals to