U.S. Department of State Daily Press Briefing #98, 97-07-02
From: The Department of State Foreign Affairs Network (DOSFAN) at <http://www.state.gov>
1590
U.S. Department of State
Daily Press Briefing
I N D E X
Wednesday, July 2, 1997
Briefer: Nick Burns
ANNOUNCEMENTS/STATEMENTS
1 Welcome to Visitors
1 Summary of Vietnam Trip
2 Summary of Hong Kong Trip
2-3 Albright's European Travel Plans
3-4 Jacques Klein UN appointment to Sarajevo
4 Thanks to Michael Steiner
4 US-Jordan bilateral investment treaty
BOSNIA
4-5 NATO peacekeeping forces
5 Amb. Gelbard
5 Karadzic's effect
5-6 War Crimes Tribunal and War Criminals
NATO
6-7 Czech Republic and admittance criteria
HONG KONG
8 China's commitments
8 US interests
CHINA/TAIWAN
8 Future of Taiwan
9 Diversion of Supercomputers
10 Inspections and Verification of Commitments
CUBA
11 Alleged Crop Dusting incident
11-12 CIA/Mafia plans to Kill Castro
KOREA (N.)
13 Talks in New York
13 Water reactor project in Sinpo
Afghanistan
13-14 Embassy Recognition
RoCONGO (B)
14 French and US role in cease fire
DRCONGO (K)
14-16 UN investigation of atrocities
15 Control of forces
SAUDI ARABIA
16 Boycott of Doha Economic Summit
TURKEY
16-17 DOD statement on Turkish Action in Aegean Sea
UN
17 Republic of Macedonia-Skopje
CYPRUS
17-19 Talks in Amenia, New York
18 Holbrooke
18-19 UN Contributions
TURKEY
19-20 US relations with govt.
ARMS CONTROL
20-21 Attempted sale of nuclear weapon
21 Russia and China
ALBANIA
21 Italy's role
TERRORISM
22 Cameras in Kansi Trial
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE
DAILY PRESS BRIEFING
DPB #98
WEDNESDAY, JULY 2, 1997 1:15 P.M.
(ON THE RECORD UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED)
MR. BURNS: Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen. I'm looking around to
see anybody who was traveling with the Secretary of State. I don't see any
journalists. I think they're all home, sleeping.
QUESTION: No one's as crazy as you.
MR. BURNS: No one is as crazy as I am; exactly. I'd like to welcome a
group of journalists from Bulgaria who are here as part of the
U.S. Information Agency's international visitors program.
Thanks very much for coming. You don't have to just observe; you can ask
questions if you'd like. Feel free to participate.
Secretary Albright returned last evening from Hong Kong, after about a
21-hour flight back. She is in good form; she's working today, thinking
about her next trip, which is with President Clinton to Europe. But just a
word on her trip to Asia - she had, I think, one of the most interesting
trips I can remember a Secretary of State having in Hanoi and Ho Chi Minh
City - very important meetings with the Vietnamese leadership, very
successful meetings.
We are on the road to rebuild our relationship with Vietnam. We have an
outstanding American ambassador, Peter Peterson, there, who really
impressed everybody on our delegation and who I believe has impressed the
Vietnamese as well. We have normalized our political relationship. The
objective now is to normalize the economic relationship. We believe that
as a result of the Secretary's meeting, we have the road clearly ahead of
us to do that. She would very much like to waive the Jackson-Vanick
Amendment for Vietnam.
We need to see, however, some concrete actions by the Vietnamese on the
issue of ROVER, which is the issue of the potential refugees who need to be
interviewed. These are refugees to the United States - interviewed before
they can be considered for refugee status in the United States. If that
can be done, we believe we can move forward.
The Secretary also believes that there is a foundation now for further
investment by the United States in Vietnam and trade between the two
countries. There's a very large American business community there. She
met with that business community. We're hopeful that the Vietnamese will
do everything they can to engineer the right kind of governmental policies
that will attract investment.
On Hong Kong, the Secretary was terribly impressed, I think, by all of the
leaders that she met - people who will be running Hong Kong, participating
in political life there. It was a deeply moving series of events for
everybody involved - certainly for those of us who watched it unfold. We
hope very much, as the Secretary said repeatedly, that Hong Kong today and
tomorrow and the next couple of months will look like Hong Kong as it was
on June 30th, Monday, as the British left it.
The British did an enormous amount for Hong Kong. The legacy that they
leave is one of stability and economic progress. We hope very much now
that democracy and the rule of law and autonomy will be maintained in Hong
Kong. It was an extraordinarily important trip and important visit to Hong
Kong. The Secretary leaves it knowing that the United States will continue
to be very active in looking at the human rights situation, in making sure
that the joint declaration is adhered to by the Chinese Government in the
months and years ahead.
Now, after a couple of days here this week, the Secretary will be
accompanying the President to Europe. She will actually be leaving on
Sunday, July 6th. She will by flying on her own, on her own plane, because
the President will be in Majorca.
She leaves at 9:00 a.m., Sunday morning. She will be flying to Madrid.
On Monday, July 7th, she will have some meetings in Madrid, I think, in
advance of the President's arrival in Madrid itself. Then when the
President arrives, she will participating with him in the NATO summit
meetings on Tuesday and Wednesday, July 8 and 9.
On Thursday, July 10, she will depart with the President for Warsaw and
participate with him in events there. On Friday, July 11, she will be in
Bucharest, Romania, with the President. Then she will separate from the
President on Friday afternoon and fly to Ljubljana in Slovenia for meetings
and discussions with the Slovenian leadership to brief them on the results
of the NATO summit and brief them on our very strong hope that Slovenia
will continue to be a member of the Partnership for Peace and very closely
tied to those of us in the West who wish to see Slovenia continue on its
present democratic reform orientation.
On Saturday, July 12, she will leave Ljubljana for St. Petersburg.
She'll spend the afternoon and evening, Saturday evening, in St.
Petersburg. She is going to be meeting Russian Foreign Minister Yevgeniy
Primakov for dinner. There will be other events yet to be announced in St.
Petersburg. She is looking forward to this. She had an excellent meeting
with Foreign Minister Primakov in Hong Kong two days ago. They discussed
the CFE agreement, the negotiations currently underway in Vienna that show
such promise and that are so important for the future security of Europe.
They discussed START II, which is a priority issue for both of our
governments. So they will continue those discussions in St. Petersburg.
On Sunday afternoon, she leaves St. Petersburg for Vilnius. She will be
meeting with the Lithuanian leadership. We hope very much to have a
broader meeting between officials of all three Baltic countries with the
Secretary in Vilnius. Then on Sunday evening she will travel to Prague for
meetings and events nearly most of the day on Monday, July 14th in Prague.
I expect she will leave Prague late in the afternoon to return back here to
Washington. So, no respite for the Secretary of State, who will embark in
a nine-day trip to Europe starting this Sunday.
There is a sign-up sheet available to all of you, if you would like to
accompany the Secretary on Sunday, or to join us post- Madrid.
If you are interested, you need to sign up today. I am sorry for the short
notice. We have tried to give those of you who have called some advance
notice on this. We have to procure visas and make sure that you get the
chance to travel with us because we will not be open for business on
Friday, it being a national holiday.
QUESTION: Two questions about the trip. When the Secretary is traveling
with the President, do journalists then go on the President's plane? Or
what is the --
MR. BURNS: Well, you would have to integrate yourself into the White
House press corps. We are not going to maintain a separate State
Department press corps in Madrid, because we will be integrated ourselves
into the President's trip. So if you would like to go on Sunday, then we
will help work with the White House press office to integrate you into the
press office operations.
QUESTION: I have to ask this question. In Prague, is she going to do
anything private, such as go to the Pinkas Synagogue?
Or anything of that sort?
MR. BURNS: As I was coming out here, there was a conference call underway
discussing her schedule. She has not made any final decisions about her
schedule in Prague, or in any of the other cities that she will be
visiting.
Now, as decisions are made, as she makes them, I will report them to you.
I may have more to say -- I am sure I will have more to say --tomorrow
about some of the specifics of her schedule.
But I don't believe she has made a decision about everything that she will
be doing in Prague or other places. Betsy.
QUESTION: Nick, if you are going in progress, you would go to Bucharest
and join her there? Or you would join her --
MR. BURNS: If a journalist wanted to join in progress?
QUESTION: Right.
MR. BURNS: I would suggest that you meet us in Bucharest.
Yes, meet the team in Bucharest.
Now, a couple of other announcements before we go to questions.
You may note the Secretary General of the United Nations announced today
that Jacques Klein, Ambassador Jacques Klein has been appointed to be the
principal high deputy - deputy high representative in Sarajevo, the
principal deputy to Carlos Westendorp, who is the high representative
there.
Jacques Klein is an American foreign service officer. By everybody's
account, I know, including Secretary Albright's, he has been an outstanding
United Nations transitional administrator for Eastern Slovonia. He will
now, at the end of July, early August, move on to be the number two man in
the hierarchy in Sarajevo, running the international effort to sustain the
peace in Bosnia.
The United States Government wishes to express its appreciation for the
distinguished performance of Ambassador Klein in Eastern Slovonia. We're
anxious to see him now join Ambassador Carlos Westendorp in Sarajevo.
We're certain he'll make a valuable contribution there.
We'd also like to take this opportunity to thank Michael Steiner, a German
diplomat, who has been the number two international diplomat in Sarajevo
for the last year and a half. He is an outstanding individual who deserves
as much credit as anybody for the Dayton Peace Accords and for the
resulting peace that has followed the peace accords.
The United States is committed to seeing the U-N-T-A-E-S, UNTAES mandate
successfully completed in Eastern Slovonia. The United States calls on the
Republic of Croatia and the local Serb community in Eastern Slovonia to
work closely with UNTAES to ensure that this mandate is successfully
completed. We expect that Ambassador Klein's position in Eastern Slovonia
will be filled very shortly.
That's a high priority position for us.
I have one final announcement, and that is to tell you that the United
States is pleased to announce that the United States and Jordan signed a
bilateral investment treaty today in Amman, the capital of Jordan. The
treaty strengthens economic ties between our two countries. It complements
our other efforts to support Jordan as it undertakes the difficult but
necessary steps to revitalize its economy.
You know that the United States will be increasing its aid to Jordan by
$100 million. This is to give credit and support to His Majesty King
Hussein's leading effort to bring peace in the Middle East, to bring peace
to Palestinians and Israelis in the Middle East. We applaud Jordan's
continuing measures to create an investor-friendly business climate. We
welcome recent economic reforms adopted by the Jordanian Government,
including the streamlining of investment procedures, the creation of tax
and investment incentives, the reduction of tariffs and the liberalization
of foreign currency regulations.
The treaty signed today - the bilateral investment treaty - and Jordan's
commitment to economic reform we hope will make Jordan an even more
attractive place for American investment and American-Jordanian trade.
And with that, I'll be very glad to go to your questions.
QUESTION: In Bosnia today, the NATO peacekeeping forces have increased
security around the Bosnian Serb president, who's engaged in some sort of
power struggle, it appears, with Karadzic.
I'm just wondering if the United States has been made aware of that, and if
there's some concern that there may be trouble over there right now.
MR. BURNS: Well, I think there are a lot of indications that the
situation in the Republika Srpska is very much unsettled.
There seems to be some kind of leadership struggle underway.
You all are aware of that. I would refer you to NATO, to SFOR.
But I believe that SFOR announced from Sarajevo that they've increased
their patrols in Banja Luka and in some other towns because one of the
mandates that SFOR has had is to be responsible for security. We don't
want to see any fighting break out, and SFOR is responsible for making sure
that does not happen. Therefore, I believe patrols in Banja Luka have been
increased.
We're following the situation very closely, as you would imagine.
Ambassador Gelbard was in Banja Luka last week. He's in The Hague today
for a contact group meeting, but he'll be returning to the region, to
Sarajevo, and to Belgrade to see Mr. Milosevic.
We do expect all parties to observe legal and constitutional norms in the
Republika Srpska. Our interest is that the Republika Srpska will dedicate
itself to what it has not been dedicated for the last year and a half - and
that is the full implementation of the Dayton Accords.
Now, without getting involved in the politics - we don't wish to insert
ourselves in the politics, certainly I think what we can see is that Mr.
Karadzic continues to inject a poisonous influence in the politics of that
region. He is a snake in the grass in many ways. He has proved himself to
be that way politically.
He has, just recently, in the last week, tried to violate his own personal
pledge not to participate in elections by attempting to register himself in
an illegal way for the elections. That's not going to be recognized by the
high representative or by Mr. Frowick, who's responsible for the elections
there. Karadzic is not going to be able to vote because he's an indicted
war criminal.
Karadzic, his place in history is to end up on trial, end up in a docket on
trial - hopefully in The Hague - on the charge of war crimes. That's his
ultimate destiny. And even though he has not been put in a position where
that destiny can be fulfilled, we are confident that one day he's going to
face charges.
QUESTION: Nick, the contact group meeting in The Hague, combined with
these new arrest orders that The Hague is issuing to arrest people before
they announce indictments - is there a new, if you can talk about it - some
sort of new effort now to go after these war criminals? I mean, Gelbard is
then going on to Belgrade after The Hague. Why are they meeting in The
Hague?
What's going on with that?
MR. BURNS: Well, The Hague is a beautiful European city and it happens to
be a place where there are many international meetings. We work very
closely with the Dutch Government on these issues because the Dutch are
concerned about justice, as we are, in Bosnia.
We have, for some time, been looking for ways to strengthen the ability of
the War Crimes Tribunal to do its job; and that is to prosecute and
hopefully convict indicted war criminals. We're very pleased about the
arrest of the alleged criminal in Vukovar last week. That was important
because this man is responsible, we believe, for the deaths of many
hundreds of people from the take-over of Vukovar several years ago.
The War Crimes Tribunal is going to have to do what it has to do to bring
people to justice, and we very much support that.
Ultimately and fundamentally, it's really the responsibility of people in
Pale and in Belgrade and in Zagreb to fulfill their own personal
commitments in writing to turn these people over.
Most of these people in Belgrade, Pale and Zagreb have failed the test -
Tudjman and certainly the Pale leadership and certainly Mr. Milosevic.
President Izetbegovic has been true to his word.
He has fulfilled his commitments; the others have not. Really, we have to
continue to shine the spotlight on them; don't you think?
QUESTION: So there's no rethinking SFOR's role in apprehending --
MR. BURNS: Not that I'm aware of, no. I'm not aware of any change in
SFOR's rules and regulations, procedures on the issue of indicted war
criminals.
QUESTION: Well, maybe it's not SFOR. It's some other group,
subcontractor to NATO, local police, whatever. Has the contact group now
agreed on a plan, or are they going to be discussing a plan to go after
these people?
MR. BURNS: I'm not aware of any plan by the contact group on the issue of
war criminals. All I can tell you is that we have been looking for ways
for the tribunal to strengthen itself.
The fact that the international police task force and members of the
tribunal staff were able to apprehend this criminal who was responsible for
the deaths of so many people in Vukovar is a very good thing. We applaud
it, and we hope more of that continues.
But I can't give you anything more specific than that, Sid, on that
particular issue.
QUESTION: Back on NATO, if I may, this morning at the White House, we had
a review of what's going on and --
MR. BURNS: I understand it was an utterly brilliant presentation by Sandy
Berger --
QUESTION: It was --
MR. BURNS: -- and Secretary Cohen and Strobe Talbott.
QUESTION: We learned the new acronym, SNUG. Anyway, the three criteria
for new invitees would be that they make political progress, economic
progress and military progress. The United States' view is that of the
potential invitees, only Hungary, Poland and the Czech Republic meet those
criteria. Since these decisions have been made, the Czech Republic's
economy appears to have run into some severe problems. Is there any
concern on the part of the Secretary or the Administration in general that
the Czech Republic may no longer meet the financial criteria, which will
include considerable financial burdens?
MR. BURNS: There's no concern whatsoever. You have to, I think, measure
the Czech performance in a relative sense. It's hard to find a government
in Central Europe - beyond, perhaps, the Estonian Government - that has
done so much to reform its economy since 1989 as the Czech Republic.
Now, it's normal for economies - countries sometimes have trouble with
their economies. That's not been an unknown phenomenon here in the United
States, if you think back to our economic troubles of the late 1970s. All
of our NATO allies have had economic problems from time to time. If we
started to establish a standard that you have to have both low inflation
and low unemployment to be a NATO member, I'm not sure anybody in NATO
would qualify, except for the United States these days. So we can't have
that as a standard.
The Czech Republic has an outstanding record of economic success.
And although there are troubles right now, we hope very much that the prime
minister, Prime Minister Klaus and others will be able to put the house
back in order and move forward. So there's no reason to question our
decision to support the Czech Republic for membership. Secretary Albright
will be in Prague next Monday, a week from next Monday, to congratulate the
Czech people on the fact that they have certainly done everything that they
- they're going to be recognized for NATO membership because they deserve
it.
QUESTION: And you have no concern that because of these economic
problems, the Czech Republic may have difficulties in meeting the financial
burden of upgrading its military establishment?
MR. BURNS: We have no present concerns. We believe the Czech Republic,
which will undertake commitments to NATO as a member of NATO, will be able
to fulfill those commitments.
QUESTION: On Hong Kong --
QUESTION: On NATO --
MR. BURNS: Let's just keep on NATO, yes, Mr. Lambros.
QUESTION: Yes. How did you secure the votes of the other 15 members for
the expansion of NATO into Poland, Czech Republic and Hungary for the
upcoming Madrid Conference? And what will be the role of Western Europe
under the new NATO structure?
MR. BURNS: Well, I would refer you, Mr. Lambros, to the brilliant
briefing given at the White House this morning by our leadership here,
first of all. Second, NATO operates on the basis of consensus. So the
NATO leaders, led by Secretary General Solana, will work out a consensus,
and the United States believes that consensus should be of three members.
That's our considered opinion.
QUESTION: Hong Kong?
MR. BURNS: Yes, Hong Kong, yes.
QUESTION: Let's say China doesn't follow the rules and agreements signed
with British authorities. What action do you think U.S. will take with the
rest?
MR. BURNS: Well, with all due respect, this is not a political science
class, this is the State Department briefing. I don't want to anticipate
that China will not meet its commitments. We expect that China will meet
its commitments. You saw President Jiang Zemin, Premier Li Peng, Vice
Premier Qian Qichen all say publicly in Hong Kong on Monday and Tuesday
that China would meet its commitments. Therefore, we expect that China
will meet its commitments. But the United States - a country with enormous
political and economic interests in Hong Kong - will be watching very
closely. We will support the rights of the people of Hong Kong to continue
to participate freely in the political system; to say and think and write
what they want.
That's one of the reasons the Secretary met with a broad cross-section of
the Hong Kong political spectrum on Sunday, and one of the reasons she met
with Martin Lee on Monday - to demonstrate our interest - not that we take
sides in the politics of Hong Kong, we don't - but our interests in the
promotion of democracy there.
The British left a legacy of democracy, stability and economic success.
It's hard to find a better legacy of any colonial power of recent time.
The Chinese must live up to that legacy. The Chinese must ensure the
people of Hong Kong what Governor Patten was able to assure them over the
last several years - they are free to think and say and do what they want
to do. That has to be the standard to which China is held.
QUESTION: Now that Hong Kong is gone, what are the future of Taiwan? Is
the next Taiwan?
MR. BURNS: What is the future of Taiwan?
QUESTION: Mm-hmm. Are the Chinese going to take over Taiwan?
MR. BURNS: Would you want me to predict what the future of Taiwan is, or
to give you -- or are you asking a specific question?
QUESTION: Well, are they going to have an army in Taiwan next?
MR. BURNS: Well, I am not quite sure what the - you mean, are the Chinese
hoping to --
QUESTION: Take over Taiwan.
MR. BURNS: Take over. Okay, I understand the question now. Our long-
standing position, the long-standing position of the United States is that
these are matters for the Chinese people themselves on both sides of the
Taiwan Strait to resolve. Our abiding interest has been that any
resolution that is reached be peaceful. That has been our long-standing
position all the way back to1979 on that issue. Sid.
QUESTION: Speaking of your confidence in Chinese commitments, do you have
anything to say about the refusal --
MR. BURNS: Our expectation that China will meet its commitments.
QUESTION: -- to allow the Clinton Administration to verify any use of
supercomputers?
MR. BURNS: I said that we had - I want to make sure the record is correct
here - I said we expected China to meet its commitments. In diplomatic
language, you know what that means.
On the issue of supercomputers, I can tell you that there were come sub-
Cabinet discussions in Hong Kong between American and Chinese officials on
the issue of supercomputers.
Secretary Albright at the end of her meeting with Vice Premier Qian raised
the issue of supercomputers as one that had to be tracked very closely.
She did not, however, get into the substance of any of the recent concerns
that we have had about supercomputers.
But I think we have been open with you about them. But we are concerned
that there have some recent diversions of supercomputers from civilian to
military use in China.
We are looking into all of those. We are talking to the American companies
involved, and we are talking to the Chinese Government.
These are supercomputers with an MTOP level which is quite low, which does
not lead us to believe that the most advanced supercomputer technology has
been diverted to military use. But, nonetheless, this is a very important
issue. We expect the Chinese Government will look into this as closely as
we are.
QUESTION: Well, in this one case, though, the Chinese have misled you
from several different stages with the Sun Microsystems, which was sold to
a company in Hong Kong, been diverted to a civilian user in China, and then
on to a military use also in China. So it's four steps where you would
have had the opportunity to verify it. The American contractor is throwing
up its hands, apparently saying it didn't know anything. And the Chinese
are refusing to let you verify it. What's the story --
MR. BURNS: Sid, I can't accept all the assumptions that are injected in
your question. I can just tell you that we have some concerns about
alleged diversions. I have told you that. We are looking into them. We
expect the Chinese Government to meet all of its commitments and to treat
this as a priority issue with us.
The Department of Commerce is also talking to American firms about improved
methods where the firms can report to us on any indication that there may
have been diversions. Any sale of supercomputers to China is done with one
motive in mind by the American companies and by the American Government
that issues export licenses, and that is to make sure that these sales are
for civilian use, not for military end-use.
QUESTION: But in this one case, the one that is written about in _The New
York Times_ today, which I just described, that you seem to be unable to
verify --
MR. BURNS: Not unable, unwilling. Unwilling to get into the details of
conversations that are best left private.
QUESTION: Would you like to go to the site, the military site in China,
and verify the use of that computer?
MR. BURNS: I don't have plane reservations. You want me to go to the
site of the - no, really, I'm trying to answer your questions.
QUESTION: Not you. The Administration --
MR. BURNS: The Administration is going to do everything it can to uphold
- everything it must to uphold American law and to make sure that, because
we have such profound proliferation concerns with China, that China
understands this is serious business; that if we allow the exportation from
the United States of supercomputers - even low-level supercomputers, not
high-level -- that we expect that the Chinese Government will make every
effort with its own companies to prevent any illicit, illegal diversion of
that technology to military end-use. That is a very serious issue.
Secretary Albright identified that as a serious issue at the end of her
meeting with Minister Qian. We will continue our discussions and we will
uphold our laws.
QUESTION: What about --
QUESTION: Can you --
MR. BURNS: I'm sorry, excuse me, Sid still has the floor.
QUESTION: Just this issue of the Chinese allowing you to inspect the use
of that particular computer from Sun Microsystems -- is that something you
all would like to do?
MR. BURNS: I can assure you we are going to make every effort to get to
the bottom of all of these alleged diversions and the ones of concern to
us. We would expect full cooperation from the Chinese Government, full
cooperation. I hope that answers your question.
QUESTION: Can you really trust the Chinese?
(Laughter.)
MR. BURNS: I'm going to give you a Reaganesque response.
Governments always verify. Governments can't afford to trust in
relationships like this. We expect that commitments will be upheld,
commitments that are seriously undertaken. But we always have independent
means to verify that commitments are being upheld.
That is how governments operate in relationships like this. Judd.
QUESTION: A couple of questions in Cuba, Nick.
MR. BURNS: Yes.
QUESTION: Revisiting a somewhat old story, about a couple months old.
MR. BURNS: That is usually what we do with the Cubans.
(Laughter.)
QUESTION: Well, the Cubans have revisited their charge that a
U.S. cropdusting plane passing over Cuba emitted biological - sprayed a
biological substance over Cuba that resulted in an insect infestation.
They are taking this claim, they announced yesterday, to a meeting of
signatories of the ban on biological weapons. I know the State Department
has denied and labeled the charge outrageous, but do you have a further
comment, given the new development?
MR. BURNS: I think this is blatant dis-information by an authoritarian
Communist government of the type we saw in the Cold War about an incident
that was very straightforward. The motives of the Cuban Government are
quite transparent here. The Cuban Government has to live with the
international conviction against it that it violated international civil
aviation regulations when it shot down two unarmed Cessnas on February 24,
1996. The ICAO, the I-C-A-O, found against Cuba in that case.
Now, in part to divert your attention, the attention of Western
journalists, from this international crime carried out by the Cuban
Government where four Americans were killed - four Americans were killed
and we haven't forgotten that -- they tried to give us these trumped-up
charges. Here are the facts. October 21, 1996, an airplane en route from
Bogota via the Grand Cayman Islands had clearance from the Cuban
authorities to fly over Cuba. The aircraft pilot observing a Cuban
commercial aircraft flying below him, marked his spot by using the
aircraft's smoke generator.
The pilot followed prudent and safe aviation procedures by marking his
aircraft's location to avoid any kind of international collision or mishap
with the smoke.
At no time did the aircraft engage in conduct which would violate United
States law, international law. The allegation that somehow this aircraft
dumped some toxic substances on Cuba is a farce.
It's dis-information by the Cuban Government. We don't believe it, and I
would encourage you not to believe it because the Cuban Government normally
lies to you and to us about matters like this.
QUESTION: Another Cuban question.
MR. BURNS: Sure.
QUESTION: A really old story.
MR. BURNS: Okay.
QUESTION: This one is 35 years old. A report is coming out on the
alleged connection - I guess it's alleged, I don't know if I have to say
alleged - connection between the CIA and the Mafia -- the State Department
is issuing a report dating back to the early 1960s -- and attempts to kill
Castro. Do you have a comment on that?
MR. BURNS: Well, this is an old story. All I can tell you is that our
very fine historians in the State Department, led by our Chief Historian,
Bill Slany, are on the verge of releasing, in our foreign relations series
volume, some documents that do pertain to the alleged CIA involvement in
assassination plots against Fidel Castro. I know that these documents are
currently at the printer. When they return from the printer, whether it's
tomorrow or next week, we will release these documents. If you are
interested, you can contact David Patterson, our deputy chief of the
historians over at Columbia Plaza. He will give you an advanced look at
these documents. The revelations in these documents are not going to
strike any of you who have followed this matter as new.
The Church Committee -- Senator Church's committee of the 1970s -- revealed
that the Central Intelligence Agency did try to assassinate - was involved
in plans, excuse me, involved in plans to assassinate Fidel Castro. Those
plans, obviously, were never carried out.
The Church Committee was open about it. These documents will reveal,
again, that these activities were planned and there is nothing new about
that. We felt an obligation to history and to those who write history to
release these documents 35 years after these events took place. Yes?
QUESTION: On these documents?
MR. BURNS: Yes.
QUESTION: How is it that these new documents to be released in the next
day or so were not released in the full volume which was released about two
weeks ago?
MR. BURNS: Why were they not released?
QUESTION: Yeah.
MR. BURNS: This is not, as I understand it -- I had a quick conversation
with David Patterson before I came out here -- this is not one of the
volumes that we're releasing. It's documents supplement to that.
QUESTION: Right, but it comes from --
MR. BURNS: Why wasn't it released two months ago?
QUESTION: Yes.
MR. BURNS: I don't know exactly why, but we're releasing them now. I
think that shows our good faith in allowing historians to judge on the
wisdom of some of the activities that were undertaken more than 35 years
ago. Any more on Cuba? Yes?
QUESTION: North Korea.
MR. BURNS: Yes.
QUESTION: Can you shed any light on the talks going on in New York today?
MR. BURNS: The talks began at 11:00 a.m. this morning -- the talks in New
York between the United States and North Korea.
When those talks are completed, we will have something to tell you here in
the press office. I'm not sure it will be a full substantive readout, but
we will certainly be able to tell you who was there and where we think
we're going.
I should also tell you that - I think you know that KEDO and North Korea
signed today 19 implementing documents which clear the way for site
preparation work to begin on a light water reactor project in Sinpo, North
Korea. These agreements are the result of intensive negotiations by KEDO
and the North Koreans. We think that they are important agreements and we
look for them to be carried out faithfully by the North Koreans because
KEDO will be faithful in carrying them out on our side. It is another
milestone in this project and it allows us to proceed with confidence in
our project to continue to freeze North Korea's nuclear program.
QUESTION: They still are adhering entirely to the agreement?
MR. BURNS: We monitor on a daily basis North Korea's implementation of
the agreed framework and we believe that North Korea is implementing the
agreed framework faithfully.
Did you have a question, sir?
QUESTION: Afghanistan.
MR. BURNS: Afghanistan, okay.
QUESTION: The continuing saga at the embassy here with the two people
both claiming to be charge. Given the new successes of the Taliban, what
would it take to get a new Taliban person recognized as charge? And is
this sort of situation with the two people and their conflicting claims
unprecedented in diplomacy, or is that normal with transition governments?
MR. BURNS: I don't think it is an unprecedented situation.
You see this sometimes in coup d'etats where the older, the previous
ambassador or charge'd'affaires holds on when the new people appointed by
the new government come in, so it is not unprecedented to see this happen
in Washington.
I would just make two quick points. First, I have read press reports of
some alleged Taliban advances in the northern part of Afghanistan. You
know there has been an episodic back and forth ebb-and- flow quality to the
fighting there. It is very difficult for us to know, because we are not in
Afghanistan, what the true state of the military positions are among the
relative forces there.
Second, the United States has not recognized any of the various factions in
Afghanistan, any one of them as the Afghan government.
We, I think, need to see further that if one faction does emerge as the
dominant faction and is able to establish a truly nationwide government, we
need to see that happen before we can even consider the question of
recognition. We continue to have contacts with all the various factions,
including the Taliban. But we've not recognized any of them as
representative. As for the standoff in the embassy, I'm not aware of any
change in our own position; right, John?
MR. DINGER: No news.
MR. BURNS: No news, John says, on that at the moment.
Yes.
QUESTION: Anything about the joint demarche of the United States with
France about the cease-fire in Congo?
MR. BURNS: In Congo? I can tell you that we're working very closely --
as the French foreign ministry indicated this morning in Paris - we're
working closely with the French on our joint belief that the people who
took over - that the fighting in Congo, Brazzaville, excuse me, should
stop. Ambassador Aubrey Hooks, the American ambassador to Congo,
Brazzaville was in Paris today for important discussions with his French
counterparts.
We see eye to eye with the French. We're working cooperatively with the
French. We're very pleased about that, and we hope that we can together
help stimulate movement forward to stop the fighting in Congo. Yes, sir.
QUESTION: What about the joint demarche?
MR. BURNS: A joint demarche? I'm not aware of a joint public statement,
but there have been joint demarches by France and the United States to the
various political actors in Brazzaville, yes.
QUESTION: It looks like the Kabila government is continuing to snub the
UN in its investigation of slaughters in the east.
Has there been any reaction to that? And apparently they want to determine
who leads the UN investigation as well now.
MR. BURNS: Well, I think our bottom line is fairly clear.
We Americans believe that a United Nations investigation of the alleged
atrocities in and around Kisangani ought to proceed and proceed rather
quickly. I know there are some procedural discussions underway about who
should lead it and who shouldn't. Our bottom line position is that a way
must be found to get a UN team into the Kisangani area, into Kinshasa to
talk to the government about these atrocities.
Mr. Kabila owes the international community an explanation for what
happened. If in fact forces under his own control - or forces at least
under his nominal control - undertook these atrocities, then there has to
be some accountability for that, an explanation for that. There has to be
steps taken by the government of the Congo to make sure that it does have
control of its rebel fighters throughout the country - or its fighters,
now, throughout the country; and that forces of the government don't have
the ability to do what they want in terms of trying to carry out reprisals
for ethnic slights or ethnic differences.
What happened in Kisangani is a horror. There were mass atrocities that
were carried out; we know that. Now someone has to be held responsible.
We very much support the United Nations in its efforts to get a team in as
quickly as possible.
QUESTION: Are you still confident, though, that President Kabila is going
to fulfill this pledge to allow the UN to go in and not obstruct evidence?
MR. BURNS: He must fulfill his pledge. That's his obligation.
He assured Secretary General Kofi Annan, as well as Ambassador Bill
Richardson that the United Nations would have access to Congo.
He must do that; he must work cooperatively with the United Nations.
Our bottom line position - I want to go back to this - is that some way
must be found, in the discussions between the UN and the Kabila government
to get the UN investigative unit in there.
QUESTION: Nick?
MR. BURNS: On the same topic? Yes.
QUESTION: Two more. According to Kabila, it was a renegade element of
Kabila's forces that carried out these atrocities without his knowledge,
are you?
MR. BURNS: Well, I think we have to be fair about this.
Mr. Kabila has said many times in public that the atrocities were wrong;
that he wishes they had not been committed; and that it could be that
forces who were not responding to his control carried them out. Our view
is that there has to be accountability; that someone directed these forces
and we need to find out who those people were, who the ringleaders were and
they ought to be brought to justice, they ought to be prosecuted for the
murder of Rwandan Hutu refugees in and around Kisangani over the last
couple of months.
But I'm not a prosecutor and I'm not also an expert on the situation up
there. So the proper thing is to allow a UN investigation, put the facts
on the table and proceed with prosecutions, if that's possible.
QUESTION: So, as far as the United States is concerned, you don't know
whether it was under Kabila's orders or whether it was a renegade element.
But an investigation --
MR. BURNS: No, that has not been established, but I think it is very
important that objective observers from the United Nations are allowed in
to establish the facts.
QUESTION: (Inaudible.)
MR. BURNS: On this issue?
QUESTION: No, another issue.
MR. BURNS: Okay. Let's give some other people a chance and we'll go to
Mr. - yes?
QUESTION: Do you have any comment about the Saudi position announced by
the Crown Prince Abdallah bin Abd al-Aziz Saud that they will boycott the
Doha summit, economic summit?
MR. BURNS: Well, we encourage all Arab countries to participate in the
Doha Economic Summit. These economic summits in Casablanca and Amman and
Cairo have been extraordinarily important. I was at the Cairo summit last
year. I saw the effect when Israelis and Arabs get together to talk about
business. It has an effect on politics, a very beneficial effect. If the
peace process is to be carried out in all of its dimensions, people have to
be willing to go to economic conferences, so we are not pleased.
We are disappointed that a government would choose not to go.
We encourage all Arab governments to attend the Doha summit which will be,
after all, in an Arab country.
QUESTION: They're citing their boycott because of the lack of progress in
the peace process and the stagnation. And they are asking other Arab
countries to boycott it as well.
MR. BURNS: We don't agree with that. If that was allowed to prevail in
the Middle East -- that because there are problems you shouldn't move
forward in any way with any other aspect of the peace negotiations -- we
wouldn't have a prayer of moving forward. Forty-nine years of this is too
much. Some countries have to stand up and be leaders and have to be
willing to take some risks for peace. We have seen that His Majesty King
Hussein is willing to do that. We have seen that President Mubarak is
willing to do that. The Israeli Government is willing to do that.
Chairman Arafat is. We need leadership from other Arab leaders.
QUESTION: Taking into consideration this conference is in November, do
you see any chances of this peace moving process --
MR. BURNS: We hope that all Arab governments will consider attending -
will attend. Those Arab governments who have said they won't attend, we
hope they will reconsider their positions. Mr. Lambros?
QUESTION: The Department of Defense with unusual (inaudible) supports and
welcomes the Turkish unilateral action imposing the so-called confidence
measures in the Aegean Sea in areas under Greek (inaudible) jurisdictional
responsibility. May we have the State Department's position since the
Greek Government already expressed its great concern with an extensive
announcement criticizing Turkey.
MR. BURNS: Mr. Lambros, did you suggest there was a Department of Defense
statement on this?
QUESTION: Yesterday. That's exactly --
MR. BURNS: By my colleague, Ken Bacon?
QUESTION: That's correct.
MR. BURNS: Okay. I was on an airplane yesterday for 21 hours.
QUESTION: But I can read it for you.
MR. BURNS: I did not have the pleasure of reading Mr. Bacon's transcript.
It is always a pleasure to read his transcripts, but I have not had that
pleasure yet. So let me obtain the pleasure of reading his transcript and
then I'll be glad to give you an answer tomorrow.
QUESTION: One more question. According to reports, Cyrus Vance submitted
to the UN Secretary General the new name of "FYROM, " under the title,
Republic of Macedonia-Skopje. Do you have anything on that? My question
also is why not the "Republic of Skopje-Macedonia?
It's an American proposal suggesting whatever it is.
MR. BURNS: You're trying to trick me, Mr. Lambros, aren't you, into
saying - into making some faux pas that will embarrass the United States.
QUESTION: According to reliable sources from the UN.
MR. BURNS: That's not my job. My job is not to embarrass the United
States Government. So, I will take the question, meaning I will look into
this for you and give you a considered response when I have had the
opportunity to consult some of our experts who work on the Eastern
Mediterranean --
QUESTION: Any comment on the Italian Government --
MR. BURNS: -- and on the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia.
Now, Mr. Lambros, I can say that we're looking forward very much to the
talks outside of New York in Amenia, New York. Amenia, New York close by
Trout Beck, New York, where the UN Secretary General will convene a meeting
between the parties to the Cyprus conflict. We are very, very interested
in that.
Of course, the United States Government will not be participating in those
talks. Ambassador Holbrooke, who is the special emissary of the President
and Secretary of State, will not be participating.
I believe we may be represented at a lower level, fairly low level. I
think Carey Cavanaugh, who is a low level official, probably will be not
participating. He may be involved - excuse me, he may be present
physically in the town and available for conversations along the margin,
but that's a low level. We're not being represented at a high level, which
would be Ambassador Holbrooke.
QUESTION: Mr. Holbrooke is going to meet Denktash and Clerides July 8th,
and also the Cypriot foreign minister separately.
MR. BURNS: Has Mr. Holbrooke announced that?
QUESTION: Yes.
MR. BURNS: I'll have to consult with his press department.
I haven't consulted with Mr. Holbrooke's publicity advisors on this
recently, but I will do that.
QUESTION: One more question. Mr. Holbrooke --
MR. BURNS: I will do that. I will inform myself of Ambassador
Holbrooke's activities and I will get back to you.
QUESTION: One more. Mr. Holbrooke, in two cases, has received thousands
of dollars in order to provide exclusive interviews in Athens and Ankara.
It is --
MR. BURNS: Mr. Lambros, that is objectionable. I object.
I object to any allegation of improper behavior by a great American --
QUESTION: It's information. It's not allegation.
MR. BURNS: -- like Dick Holbrooke.
QUESTION: It's not an allegation.
MR. BURNS: Thank you. So I can't answer those questions.
Yes.
QUESTION: The Turkish Cypriot leader, Denktash, indicated yesterday that
he might not go to New York because of the document to be presented to both
sides next week. First of all, do you have any reactions to that? And
secondly, has the U.S. has any input in that document? Is that a plan? Is
this a sheet of talking points? Do you have any information on that?
MR. BURNS: My response to your question would be, we very much support
and applaud the efforts of Kofi Annan to convene talks on Cyprus in Amenia,
New York, and we encourage both of the parties to be represented at the
highest possible level. That would be President Clerides and Mr. Denktash.
We think that is very important that they be there. Peace is not going to
be made of you stay away from the conference table. Peace will not be made
if you are not there.
QUESTION: Is there a UN package prepared to be presented to the parties
in question?
MR. BURNS: I do not wish to speak for the United Nations, but we, the
United States, support the United Nations and the role the United Nations
is playing. We give every support possible to it. We wish it success.
QUESTION: Did the U.S. contribute to the preparation of such a document
by UN high commission --
MR. BURNS: We have consulted quite intensively with the United Nations.
But this is a United Nations conference, set of discussions that is being
undertaken. We hope it is very much successful. We have our own special
negotiator in the person of Dick Holbrooke. We will be carrying on
separate discussions, but always in conjunction with the efforts of the
United Nations and the United Kingdom with Sir David Hannay and in the
spirit of cooperation that all of us together might make a small
contribution to move the process forward knowing that the people who really
need to make the basic effort here are the parties themselves, President
Clerides and Mr. Denktash.
QUESTION: Nick, how much would you say the New York talks be part of the
so-called U.S. initiative?
MR. BURNS: Well, I can tell you, we support the role of the United
Nations. We will work cooperatively with it. Ambassador Holbrooke is not
going to be undertaking any kind of trip to the region until after the UN
talks are concluded.
QUESTION: Nick, in Ankara the new Turkish Government appointed from
President Demirel, mostly the secularist parties, they established a new
coalition. Do you have any reaction on this subject?
MR. BURNS: Well, we look forward to working with Mr. Yilmaz.
We know him well. He has been, as you know, prime minister before.
He has been a senior official in many governments. We are looking forward
to working with the government that emerges from the current round of
consultations - that is emerging, I would say.
QUESTION: Almost 12 months, you don't have any high- level contact with
the Turkish Government. Are you planning to --
MR. BURNS: I don't understand that. We have high- level contact with the
Turkish Government every day.
QUESTION: Every day?
MR. BURNS: Yes.
QUESTION: Is that ambassador-level?
MR. BURNS: Yes, which is a very high level.
QUESTION: Okay.
MR. BURNS: The ambassador, Marc Grossman, who has been our ambassador --
he is now departed -- was the President's personal representative. We have
had high-level contact. Strobe Talbott visited Ankara just a couple of
weeks ago. He is a high-level official; he is our deputy secretary of
state. Letters, phone calls, meetings by Secretary Albright, NATO meetings
with Mrs. Ciller and others - we have had the highest possible contacts
with President Demirel, with Deputy Prime Minister Ciller. We will have
contacts with Prime Minister Yilmaz. We respect him.
We look forward to working with him and his government as it is formed. We
have an excellent relationship with Turkey, and that is going to be carried
on.
QUESTION: I believe so. But in the last 12 months, did you ever invite
any Turkish officials from Ankara at the minister level?
MR. BURNS: Excuse me?
QUESTION: Any ministers, did you invite to Washington?
MR. BURNS: Well, I have to go back and I'd have to check the record as to
whether invitations have been issued.
QUESTION: Please.
MR. BURNS: But then-Ambassador Madeleine Albright in July 1996, when she
was Ambassador to the UN, visited Ankara. Under Secretary of State Peter
Tarnoff was in Ankara. Deputy Secretary of State Strobe Talbott. We have
had Defense Department officials.
Jan Lodal has been there. There has been no lack of contact between the
United States and Turkey.
Yes, Mr. Eicher. Yes, sir.
QUESTION: Welcome back, Nick.
MR. BURNS: Thank you very much. It's a pleasure to be back with you.
QUESTION: Thank you, Nick. Can you comment on the - I believe it's a
first in world history - certainly in the justice system of the United
States, two Latvian agents of the Russian Mafia have been arrested in a
customs sting -- customs agents posing as Colombian drug dealers - to sell,
to purvey a Bulgarian-made tactical nuclear weapon to these alleged
terrorists, drug dealers.
Can you comment, first, on what may be happening in Bulgaria, Russia -- the
United States cooperating with those governments to get to the bottom of
this matter?
MR. BURNS: Bill, that's a law enforcement matter. I am going to have to
leave it to the law enforcement agencies to discuss.
I don't know if it's the first in world history. Unfortunately, there have
been many attempts to sell illicit material and technology here in the
United States or to transship it through the United States, but it is a law
enforcement matter. This is a case that will be brought in our own courts
and I can't interfere with that. I can assure you it's in good hands with
our legal authorities.
QUESTION: In a Washington Post story today, CIA reports Russia and
China are the major suppliers of arms.
MR. BURNS: Well, I understand the CIA has released that report. It is
giving it out to reporters. It is a report mandated by Congress. I think
I would encourage you to read the report and make your own assessment of
it.
QUESTION: On Albania. Any comment on Italy's Government decision to
abandon Albania? They have decided yesterday to --
MR. BURNS: Mr. Lambros, you ask provocative questions.
(Laughter.)
QUESTION: It's not provocative.
MR. BURNS: Now, you're talking about our NATO ally, Italy, one of our
great allies. Italy and the United States have had such good relations.
Why would you want to cast aspersions on Italy --
QUESTION: I'm asking you a question about the decision to abandon
Albania.
MR. BURNS: -- by saying that they have abandoned Albania.
Italy and Greece have played a major role, a major positive role in trying
to help the Albanian people through their current difficulties.
So, we congratulate Prime Minister Prodi and Foreign Minister Dini on their
leadership of the Western Alliance in Albania. Italy has been the leader.
We appreciate that. We have tried to follow Italy's leadership by being
helpful to the country, the European countries that have been involved
there. We congratulate Dr. Vranitzsky for his efforts in Albania, as well.
QUESTION: He decided to leave.
MR. BURNS: I reject the words that you're using to describe our NATO
ally, Italy. I really do. I don't think that's appropriate.
QUESTION: Do you have any update on Mir Kansi and today in Fairfax Court
a judge denied the request from CBS News and the Washington Post and
other news organization to allow cameras in the courtroom? Do you --
MR. BURNS: I have nothing to say about Mr. Kansi. He is facing the
American justice system and we'll let the justice system do the speaking
here.
QUESTION: Do you support cameras in the courtroom?
MR. BURNS: That is a decision for the judge to make, not for the federal
government in our system.
Thank you.
(The briefing concluded at 2:06 P.M.)
(###)
|
