U.S. Department of State Daily Press Briefing #147, 97-10-10
From: The Department of State Foreign Affairs Network (DOSFAN) at <http://www.state.gov>
846
U.S. Department of State
Daily Press Briefing
I N D E X
Friday, October 10, 1997
Briefer: James P. Rubin
STATEMENT:
1-2 Southeast Asia: US assistance to Indonesia and Malaysia re
air pollution; dollar figure; relation to President's
climate control initiative; possible reasons for problem:
agribusiness, El Nino, etc.
MEXICO
2-3 Possible request for US disaster assistance
ARMS CONTROL
3-4 Landmines: Attempts to modify treaty by others to encourage
US to become a signatory; China as a topic at this
month's summit; US position; date to sign
TURKEY
5-6 Purpose of Holbrooke/Miller's trip; itinerary
6 Holbrooke conference for Greeks/Turks/Cypriots in Brussels
SWITZERLAND
6-7 Decision by New York City to exclude Swiss Union Bank from
a bond offering
7 State's contact with New York; legal implications
ISRAEL
7-8 State's view on Weizman's supposed remarks about
Secretary/Netanyahu contact; Secretary's message on
Sheinbein case; recent contact between Secretary/
Netanyahu
13-14 Peace Process: Doha economic summit; representation
RUSSIA
8 State's comment re Yeltsin's remarks at European summit;
State's view of a regular tripartite summit: Germany,
France, Russia
8-9 Details of Talbott's trip in Moscow
9-10 Commitment from Russians not to sell long-range missiles,
etc. to Iran; MTCR
10 Russian action to prevent sales; possible US sanctions; Total issue
NAGORNO-KARABAKH
10 Ghukasyan press conference in Armenia; Minsk Group
TRADE
10-12 Helms-Burton: State's response to Helms' letter requesting
documents as proof of Article IV implementation;
potential effect on negotiations with Europeans;
extension of October 15 deadline; possible suspension of
Title IV
LATIN AMERICA
12 Cuba/Regional: Celebrations re the 30th anniversary of Che
Guevera's death
CHINA
12 Secretary's meeting with Liu Huaqiu
13 Proliferation
IRAQ
13 Sanctions; continued US pressure at the UN; date of
Secretary's decision
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE
DAILY PRESS BRIEFING
DPB #147
FRIDAY, OCTOBER 10, 1997, 12:45 P.M.
(ON THE RECORD UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED)
MR. RUBIN: Greetings. Welcome to the State Department briefing room,
Friday, mid-Indian Summer.
I'm here to take your questions. I do have one statement on the question of
Southeast Asia. Today the Department of State is announcing a package of
immediate technical assistance to the most seriously affected countries in
Southeast Asia - Indonesia and Malaysia. These countries have suffered from
unprecedented levels of air pollution, caused by forest fires and
exacerbated by the low rainfall and unusual wind patterns associated with
El Nino.
The United States also has under consideration other forms of cooperation
which it intends to explore with all affected countries in the region,
including Brunei, Singapore, the Philippines and Thailand. Earlier today,
Under Secretary of State for Global Affairs Timothy Wirth met with the
ambassadors of these countries to review the situation and discuss possible
areas of cooperation where U.S. expertise could complement ongoing
activities in these countries.
Our technical assistance package will support ongoing efforts by Indonesia
and Malaysia in five areas - humanitarian relief, fighting the fires,
monitoring air quality, analyzing the health effects of the smoke and haze
and weather forecasting. It will involve efforts and expertise from nine
U.S. government agencies - the Agency for International Development; the
Centers for Disease Control; the Department of Defense; the Department of
the Interior; EPA; National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration; NASA;
the US Forest Service; and the State Department.
We are also looking at how we can help over the longer term to predict
future El Nino drought events and to prepare for their associated negative
impacts. Ideally, this would allow nations in the region to prevent the
recurrence of major fires and their damaging consequences. We do have a
statement on this matter, and the specific assistance will be provided in a
fact sheet. I can tell you, for example, that Secretary Cohen has
approved the use of three C-130s in this effort. The Pentagon would
be in a position to discuss further what it can do. But we do have
a fact sheet describing all the work that we're doing in this area.
QUESTION: Do you have a dollar figure?
MR. RUBIN: I do not have a dollar figure. This is mostly in the area of
technical assistance; it's not in the area of financial assistance. So
mostly what this involves is American experts going over there and trying
to offer assistance in monitoring air quality, weather forecasting, and
health assessment programs within the participating agencies' current
mission activities. So we can't give you an exact cost estimate at this
time.
DOD will provide three C-130s equipped with aerial fire-fighting equipment.
They're also working with the government of Indonesia to identify future
needs for humanitarian assistance. The Forest Service and the Interior
Department are expected to continue to provide expertise and training and
firefighting. NASA and NOAA are making available satellite imagery and
technical advice on its interpretation. EPA will provide monitoring
equipment and personnel to take air samples. And NASA will take samples of
smoke plumes in the area. The CDC will lead a research study on health
impacts from the haze, and recommend preventative measures. AID's Office of
Foreign Disaster Assistance has had an expert in Jakarta for the past ten
days, evaluating the severity of the drought and determining an appropriate
humanitarian relief response. The USAID mission to Indonesia will support,
providing state-of-the-art wildlife remote sensing maps, wild-park
strategist to serve in Indonesia and technical assistance in fire risk
reduction.
Each of these agencies will be able to give you more detail. I think the
point of this - and the Secretary commented about this to me - is that it
demonstrates the kind of new problem we're having in the world. It
demonstrates that the United States Government, under the leadership of
President Clinton and with Secretary Albright's efforts here, want to be in
a position to focus on the dangers that these kind of new phenomena place.
And all these agencies are working together under the State Department to
try to deal with it.
QUESTION: How does this relate to the President's $1 billion climate
control initiative?
MR. RUBIN: This is not related to that. This is a response based on an
existing problem. The State Department gathered together the various
agencies in the ways that I suggested to you to try to deliver some
emergency assistance for this problem.
QUESTION: Jamie, El Nino has exacerbated the problem. But part of the
root cause, at least, is apparently the slash and burn approach used by
agri-businesses and even small farmers in clearing forest land. Is the U.S.
going to seek to try to convince Indonesia in particular, to do something
to change that approach?
MR. RUBIN: Well, I don't know that the precise reason is what you
described. I'm sure that after being there for a while and working with
them on this problem and being better able to analyze what the causes are,
in addition to El Nino, we will continue to work with governments there, as
we do through the work of Under Secretary Wirth and AID Director Atwood, to
try to explain what the dangers are.
But until we're there and we can assess it a little more completely, it
would be hard to pin blame in that way.
QUESTION: Jamie, speaking of disasters caused by El Nino, is the U.S.
going to help Mexico in any way with the aftermath of the hurricane? Have
they asked for any assistance?
MR. RUBIN: At this point, we are unaware of any request for disaster
assistance from the Mexican Government. We do stand ready to respond should
Mexico make such a request.
QUESTION: On land mines, stipulating the statement that was made from the
White House already today, has the United States given any thought to
trying to modify this treaty now, before - I don't even know if, practically
speaking, you could do it. But are there any conversations going on with
principals to the land mine treaty negotiations that might provide some
kind of modification before signing in Ottawa, so that the United
States could be a signatory?
MR. RUBIN: I'm not aware that anybody seriously believes that the planned
signatories intend to make any changes that would permit us to sign. It is
noteworthy that President Yeltsin made an announcement today about his
intentions to consider signing the agreement, and his desire to be part of
the international regime that is seeking to control that.
That is precisely what the United States has been looking for. I think most
of the experts in this area recognize that it's not American land mines
that are causing these problems. But people believe that without American
involvement and American leadership, the problem countries would not
participate. But as a result of our bringing this issue to the fore a
couple of years ago, and now a result of the work in Ottawa that we're
pleased to see happen, it looks like one of the problem countries may be
willing to do more to help solve this problem.
So again, the logic behind the American position has always been that it's
not our land mines that are causing the problem. And as President Clinton
has said, we are going to have alternatives to anti-personnel land mines in
Korea by the year 2006; and by the year 2003, the U.S. will no longer use
anti-personnel land mines outside Korea.
So based on our unilateral policies, by the year 2006 we will have
eliminated our anti-personnel land mines. We have done an enormous amount
of work that I'm sure you've seen in the statements by Secretary Cohen and
the President in demining. But the logic of our position has always been
that the key and the reason why we were focusing on the CD in the first
place is that with all the good intentions in the world, without the
countries that are the problem participating, the people who are dying and
the kids who are losing their legs and the people who are being maimed
aren't going to stop dying and being maimed.
Now we see an important development in that one of the problem countries
that produces and exports land mines or has their land mines exported
surreptitiously is considering taking a very forward-leaning step. So we
welcome this statement by President Yeltsin, and it could signal a growing
number of problem countries joining in an effort to make sure that either
their policies or their international legal obligations are all steered to
preventing the problem.
QUESTION: Well, another problem country is China. And the summit is going
to take place at the end of this month. Will this likely be a topic at the
summit?
MR. RUBIN: Well, when someone wins the Nobel Peace Prize, it's an
international event. And I have every reason to believe that some attention
has been already paid to this event, and will continue to be paid to this
event.
In all of our discussions with countries around the world, we have made
land mines a priority issue. I wouldn't be surprised if this came up. This
is not part of the planned discussion on nonproliferation, human rights,
energy, environment and trade that we had, but I suspect that with the
statement by President Yeltsin and the recognition that China is a problem
country as well in its refusal to take unilateral steps to prevent the
problem, that perhaps the Chinese Government will have to address
this issue more completely.
QUESTION: But is that enough to change the US position?
MR. RUBIN: Again, the US position is based on a unique set of responsibilities
that we have on the Korean Peninsula and our unique role in the world. On
the Korean Peninsula, we are pursuing and defending a country -- helping to
defend a country - in a sense pursuant to a United Nations mandate. The
world has asked us to play a role in Korea to prevent conflict there.
It is the judgment of our generals and our military experts that
until the year 2006, we need to have anti-personnel land mines to do that
job.
That shouldn't mean that other countries whose land mines are falling into
the wrong hands and are causing deaths and maiming little children
shouldn't realize that they don't have unique responsibilities pursuant to
UN resolutions, and that their land mines are actually killing and maiming
people while ours are not.
QUESTION: Jamie, are you saying that the US couldn't sign the treaty
before 2006?
MR. RUBIN: Well, we've gone through an elaborate justification of our
decision-making and what will come next. I can get you one of our experts
to speak to this. But the bottom line is, we want to work within the CD to
develop a treaty that we can sign. And we cannot sign the Ottawa agreement
for several reasons that we've explained rather carefully, including the
Korea exception, including the definition of an anti-personnel land mine
and an anti-tank mine.
So what we're going to do is focus in the CD on trying to get the other
countries in the world to live up to a regime that would prevent their
export and their production. But I think that for anyone who understands
the danger of land mines, they have to understand that it's not American
land mines that are blowing up little children. And the more we make people
understand that, the more the pressure will go where it belongs - on the
countries whose land mines are produced and exported in such a way
that little children have their legs blown off or die as a result
of other countries' production and export of land mines.
Same subject?
QUESTION: According to press information, Ambassador Holbrooke will be in
Ankara, Turkey --
MR. RUBIN: Now, how did that become the same subject?
QUESTION: Oh , no --
MR. RUBIN: A different subject? Okay, please.
QUESTION: Sorry. Ambassador Holbrooke will be in Ankara, Turkey,
according to press information, this upcoming Sunday. Can you explain to us
the purpose of his trip and if he will go to Nicosia or Athens?
MR. RUBIN: Ambassador Holbrooke and Mr. Miller, our Cyprus coordinator,
will visit Turkey October 12 and 13 to continue discussions with Turkish
leaders. They began in New York on the margins of the UN General Assembly.
They will discuss the full range of issues relating to our efforts to
promote a settlement of the Cyprus dispute. They hope to meet with the
Turkish leadership. Meetings are still being arranged.
Let me emphasize, this is not a negotiation. This is a continuation of
discussions. The trip is a natural follow-up to discussions which the
Secretary, Assistant Secretary Grossman and Ambassador Holbrooke and Mr.
Miller had with Turkish officials in New York.
We are engaged in an active process of discussions to see what assistance
we can provide the parties in coming to a conclusion. We believe now is the
right time to continue the process in Ankara. They are needed in Ankara to
follow up those held in New York.
Ambassador Holbrooke and Mr. Miller have had several opportunities in
recent weeks to talk with key officials from around the region. They held
extensive talks with Cyprus President Clerides during the latter's recent
visit to New York. They look forward to meeting Turkish Cypriot leader
Denktash when he visits the U.S. later this month.
So as far as the question of Athens is concerned, Mr. Miller will travel on
from Turkey to Athens. But let me emphasize, as the subject of Turkey and
Greece come up - and I know there's at least a minor interest in this room
in that subject - that it is not necessary for an American official of
whatever prominence to go to Greece and Turkey every time they go to the
region. We will not adopt a view that failure to go to both countries is
intended to send any signal or means anything other than it is the
judgment of the officials involved that the best way to advance the
process is to take such a trip.
Obviously, I'm not in a position to discuss much in detail as to what they
will discuss, because we want to keep that confidential - at least during
the course of the discussions, and certainly beforehand.
QUESTION: Holbrooke won't go on to Greece?
MR. RUBIN: Correct.
QUESTION: But Miller will
QUESTION: Follow up?
MR. RUBIN: Follow up, yes.
QUESTION: Ambassador Holbrooke, I think, is planning a conference in
Brussels in November to bring the businessmen of both sides - both from
Turkey and Greece, as well as Turkish Cypriot and Greek Cypriot sides.
Could you comment on that conference?
MR. RUBIN: I'm not aware of him pursuing that effort in his role as
special envoy. That doesn't mean it won't happen. He just hasn't told me
about it.
QUESTION: Same subject?
MR. RUBIN: Yes, one more on this subject.
QUESTION: Two days ago, Mr. Holbrooke stated here in Washington that he
didn't have any immediate plans to go either to Ankara or to Nicosia or
Athens. What changed from Wednesday in that he's going to Ankara?
MR. RUBIN: Well, today - when did he say this?
QUESTION: Wednesday.
MR. RUBIN: Today's Friday, and the word "immediate" must have only been
24-hour operative word.
QUESTION: The State Department's relations with New York City, which are
never good - the controller of New York is cutting Union Bank of Switzerland
out of a billion dollar bond issue. I know Under Secretary Eizenstat has
responded, according to The New York Times, but could you give us something
on it?
MR. RUBIN: Well, you must have a special relationship with one news
organization. We certainly understand that the concern about what happened
during World War II generates very strong emotions. But we also believe
that the banks in Switzerland are taking significant steps that we've asked
them to take. They have published the names of dormant accounts. They have
begun handling claims against those accounts by heirs. Swiss banks have
also established a $180 million fund for Holocaust survivors that
has already begun operation. The government of Switzerland has established
an historical commission. And we would like to commend the Swiss Government
for these steps, and we hope that more countries will emulate their
approach.
That is what we have been urging. And it is our view, as those responsible
for diplomacy and those responsible for getting results from the banks and
from the various governments, that rather than confrontation, cooperation
is the best means to achieve the results we want. So we do not regard these
kind of steps as productive; in fact, we regard them as counterproductive.
If someone wants to promote progress in this area, they should assist and
support the United States Government in trying to promote that cooperation
through the channels that we've been able to promote all the steps that
I've described. So our view is that this particular step is counterproductive.
QUESTION: And has the State Department communicated that to New York
City?
MR. RUBIN: I think that those who live in New York City usually read
their newspapers, and I'm sure that they got the message. But I will check
to see whether it was done through some official channel.
QUESTION: Jamie, is what they have done legal?
MR. RUBIN: I'm not aware that there is any law that requires a foreign
bank to have an opportunity to bid on every contract, and I'll have to
check that for you, and their decision not to allow such a bid from a
foreign company. I don't know whether that is affected by a trade law of
some kind, but we can check that. Let's take that question.
QUESTION: Another subject. President Weizman of Israel is quoted as
saying that Prime Minister Netanyahu wanted to come to Washington to talk
to officials here, including Secretary Albright. But she sent word back
that she - according to him, according to the reports -- that she has
nothing to say to him at this point. Does that --
MR. RUBIN: That doesn't sound like Secretary Albright.
QUESTION: Well, assume a certain amount of distortion, was there such an
approach?
(Laughter)
Was there such an approach, and was it turned down?
MR. RUBIN: I'm not aware of a specific request for a specific meeting
that was turned down with the answer that we have nothing to talk about. On
the contrary, Secretary Albright and Prime Minister Netanyahu have been in
regular and constant contact for many weeks now. They have a good working
relationship, and they are both determined to see what they can do to try
to promote the Middle East peace process.
QUESTION: You said the other day that she had sent him a message on the
Sheinbein case.
MR. RUBIN: And we received a letter in return that I believe the Israeli
Embassy has released.
QUESTION: But in addition to that, do they still talk on the telephone?
MR. RUBIN: Yes, they talk on the telephone. I'm not aware of the last
call. But let me state very clearly, if there's any doubt on this, there is
no problem in their relationship that would make her not want to take his
calls or him not want to take her calls or her not want to meet with him or,
I hope, him not want to meet with her.
QUESTION: On European Summit in Strasbourg, President Yeltsin seems to
have made a number of pronouncements in and before that, not only on land
mines. He seems to suggest that kind of Europeans should look after their
own affairs without any outside interference. Now they've announced a
tripartite summit to be held regularly between Germany, France and Russia -
with the first one to be held in Russia. Do you have anything to say on
that?
MR. RUBIN: Yes, we think the more that President Yeltsin and the Russian
Government and the Russian people work closer and closer with European
governments and European people, the more chances there are for Russia to
integrate itself with the international system, which is something that we
very much want to see happen.
As you know, we've had a policy from this Department for some time to try
to promote Russia's integration with the West through a variety of fora --
and you know them, so I won't list them all. So when Russian leaders agree
to meet regularly with European leaders, we think that's a good thing.
Let's remember we're the United States, and we're not uncomfortable with
other countries meeting.
QUESTION: Another one on a slightly different technical issue - I
understand that Mr. Talbott has just returned back from Moscow. Can you
tell us whom he met, what he discussed, what was achieved?
MR. RUBIN: I believe he met with a variety of Russian officials,
including Foreign Minister Primakov. They discussed the important subjects
of arms control, and focused on the prospects for ratification of START II.
They were encouraged by what they heard. We remain hopeful, and we expect
to see action by the Duma this Fall. And we are hoping that they will see
the wisdom of ratifying a treaty that's very much in the interest of the
Russian people, because of all the reasons that we have stated many
times.
They also discussed at an expert level the prospects for further negotiation
under the rubric of START III to reduce further the sides' strategic
nuclear forces to the realm of 2,000 to 2,500 warheads.
Finally, they discussed a matter that is of extreme importance to the
United States, and that is the cooperation that we believe we need from
Russia in trying to prevent the acquisition of long-range missiles by Iran.
We take very seriously the problem of transfers of missile technology that
could contribute to Iran's missile program. We have raised our concerns
repeatedly at the highest levels of the Russian Government.
Russia has made clear that its policy is not to assist Iran's missile
program. We have now established a mechanism to pursue this with the
Russians, and are working hard to resolve the problem. We take very
seriously reports about transfers in this area. We follow up on them. If
the facts warrant, we take the steps necessary to deal with them.
Deputy Secretary Talbott followed up on the work that Foreign Minister
Primakov and Secretary Albright had done, and that Vice President Gore and
Prime Minister Chernomyrdin had done to intensify and accelerate our
mechanism on Iran. It was a very serious discussion; a lot of work took
place. I'm not in a position to discuss specific cases, but we hope to have
an early date for Ambassador Wisner, our special envoy on this subject, to
be able to go to Moscow and discuss this further.
QUESTION: Have you gotten a commitment from the Russians not to sell long-
range missiles of any kind or their component parts to Iran?
MR. RUBIN: Yes, absolutely. That's part of the MTCR commitment that the
Russians have already made. They have made clear that if there are such
components or technology going, it's not as a result of Russian Government
policy.
What we've been doing is not focusing on Russian Government policy, but
focusing on ensuring that there are no entities in Russia that are acting
inconsistently with that policy.
QUESTION: And how did the Russians tell you that they would get a handle
on this?
MR. RUBIN: Well, this is a problem that occurs in many parts of the world
where companies or entities occasionally are in a position to do things
that their governments don't want them to do. We've seen that in other
European countries. We've obviously seen that in China, where the Chinese
Government has said that things haven't gone on and we've believed that
certain entities have done things.
So the way you get a handle on it is, you get down to specific cases; you
have the promulgation of regulations; you have enforcement of those
regulations; and you have penalties for those who violate those regulations.
That is the system that we use in the United States; that's the system that
our European partners in the MTCR use. But that doesn't mean that things
don't slip through the cracks.
The Russian Government has been responsive to our efforts when we've
provided specific cases to try to solve them. In fact, they publicly stated,
I believe, last week that there was a specific case that they had been made
aware of, and they stopped it. So that's what this whole mechanism is about
- is making sure that we and they are working from the same information
base, and making sure that both we and they take that information with the
same level of seriousness and that regulations are promulgated, regulations
are enforced and penalties ensue.
QUESTION: Have you told them about plans to impose penalties on any
specific entities? I mean, have you --
MR. RUBIN: I'm not aware at this point that we have any determinations
that would yield sanctions at this time.
QUESTION: Did he raise the Total-GasProm --
MR. RUBIN: Given the sensitivity of this case, I think most discussions
with the government of France and the government of Russia included
discussion of this case, yes.
QUESTION: (Inaudible)
MR. RUBIN: Yes, I have something for you, so I hope you ask the right
question.
QUESTION: Do you have an answer to the question I asked yesterday?
(Laughter)
Regarding the American position on --
MR. RUBIN: Let me see whether I can answer your questions. On October 7,
Nagorno-Karabakh leader Arkadiy Ghukasyan -- thank you - gave a press
conference in Armenia. While he discussed his views on the Nagorno-Karabakh
conflict, he did not give an answer - official or unofficial - to OSCE
peace proposals.
The Nagorno-Karabakh leadership has promised an answer in the near future,
and we will not characterize it in advance.
The U.S. is co-chair of the Minsk Group, along with France and Russia, and
we will continue working to resolve this conflict.
QUESTION: Helms-Burton?
MR. RUBIN: Helms-Burton, yes.
QUESTION: Senator Helms, in a letter to Secretary Albright, asked her for
all the documents that prove that Chapter IV of Helms-Burton had been
applied properly with the law. My question is, has the Department already
sent an answer to Senator Helms? And in the letter, he has stated that the
United States plans to continue applying Chapter IV properly with the law.
So how could this statement affect the ongoing negotiations with the
European Union, regarding the promise the United States is going to suspend
--
MR. RUBIN: We are aware of Senator Helms' views regarding enforcement of
Title IV provisions of the Libertad Act. The Department has kept the
Congress closely informed regarding implementation of that Title. We have
informed Senator Helms that we will process his document request as
expeditiously as possible.
In response to a similar request by the Senator in May 1996, the Department
made available 106 documents pertaining to Title IV enforcement. Additional
documents were provided in September '96. We will be equally responsive to
this latest request.
Under Title IV, the State Department, pursuant to its published guidelines,
investigates the cases of persons or companies who may be trafficking in
confiscated properties in Cuba, and determines whether the evidence
warrants a determination of trafficking and exclusion of certain individuals
from entry into the United States.
We have made determinations in two cases, involving the Canadian company
Sherritt International and the Mexican company Grupo Domos. We are actively
investigating other possible instances of trafficking.
We believe this law has had an impact. We believe dozens of companies have
either pulled out of Cuba or refrained from investment they were planning
to make. We suspect that the number of companies may be even higher than we
know.
As far as working on existing cases, we're doing it as quickly as possible,
but we have to bear in mind that in this case, like a lot of the other
cases that are asked about, if we are to impose a sanction, it has to be
able to withstand court challenges. We don't impose sanctions haphazardly
or lightly as a government. When we do impose them, it is the result of
very careful review, careful investigation of the facts and confidence that
the determinations will stand scrutiny. So we don't have additional
companies right now, but we're working the problem
As far as how that will affect the negotiations, I don't see why Senator
Helms' letter would affect the negotiations, because we - with or without
Senator Helms' letter - are determined to enforce this law. And if
companies are determined to be sanctionable, we will enforce the law. As
you know, the European governments are not fond of this law, and that is
why we were working out ways to ensure that they step up their pressure
against the government of Fidel Castro.
QUESTION: There was a deadline of next Wednesday agreed to last April
when this agreement was worked out. Is it possible that there will be an
extension, given the fact that the two sides still seem to be far
apart?
MR. RUBIN: Well, again, this is not our deadline. This is a deadline
where the European governments saw this as a time where, if there were not
agreement, they may need to go back to pursue the case in the WTO.
We are prepared to continue to work with them. We have made clear that
we've waived Title III sanctions - or the application of them - in the past,
based on a stepped-up determination by the European governments to put
pressure on Castro to promote democracy. And it is our intention, and we
are operating under the presumption that we would do that again if
the
European governments continue to work with us in stepping up the pressure.
Meanwhile, there is a negotiation on the so-called disciplines that relate
to ex-appropriated property. We want that negotiation to go forward, and we
want it to succeed. We are still some number of days away from October 15,
and our goal is to get to success. If it means going to October 16, I can't
imagine we would throw in the towel.
QUESTION: But the Europeans want to - from the United States to suspend
Title IV. That's what they want.
MR. RUBIN: Right, and I'm not aware that we're considering that at this
time, because we have no reason to conclude that there are additional steps
by other governments that would warrant that kind of decision.
QUESTION: Something on Che Guevara?
MR. RUBIN: And the question is?
QUESTION: Do you have any comments on the big celebrations taking place
not only in Cuba, but in all Latin American countries?
MR. RUBIN: Well, when Ambassador Albright was first US Ambassador to New
York - to the UN in New York, she sat through a speech by the North Korean
delegate in which he gave a speech that she said made her feel 40 years
younger, because it sounded like the Cold War.
Looking at Cuba today, with the kind of resurrection of Che Guevara and the
kind of lengthy speeches that were seen from Mr. Castro, we do sense a
certain time warp in Cuba. The world has changed. Democracy is on the rise.
His people clearly want democracy; they want to participate in the world
economy. And no matter how many times you play the same old movie, it's not
going to change the desires and the needs of the people of the modern
world.
QUESTION: Did the Secretary see Liu Huaqiu, and was there anything - did
she make any progress in the --
MR. RUBIN: She will be meeting with him, I believe, it's at 2:30 p.m.
this afternoon. If there is something to report, we will be in touch with
you.
(Laughter)
QUESTION: Can we call you? Is that a problem?
QUESTION: Another sanctions question - yesterday you said that the U.S.
will take the hardest line at the UN regarding the latest report on Iraq,
and that we're weighing our options there. Are you any closer to making a
decision on that?
MR. RUBIN: I do actually have some experience of negotiating resolutions
with Secretary Albright in New York, and they take many days. We are still
of the view that we want to see the Council take the strongest possible
action in ensuring that Iraq's government is pressured to live up to its
commitments under Security Council resolutions.
So we want to see that happen. We are consulting with our colleagues on the
Security Council. And we have not yet reached closure.
QUESTION: A follow-up, please - can a decision be made before Albright
leaves the country? I know she and Richardson are leaving the country on
Sunday.
MR. RUBIN: The Council works without the President or the Secretary of
State in Washington or the - I believe Council decisions have occurred even
without the UN Ambassador being there.
QUESTION: Has the Secretary heard from Bob Einhorn? And if she did, is
she happy about - with Chinese explanation?
MR. RUBIN: Well, that is an artful way of asking the question. We are
working very hard on the problem of Chinese proliferation. We believe
substantial progress has been made, and we think that additional steps are
necessary if we're going to be in a position to pursue the peaceful nuclear
agreement.
QUESTION: Are you confident that the Doha Summit is going to happen now?
Are you in any position to --
MR. RUBIN: I think what we have said - and I would reiterate here - is
that the Secretary intends to go. We are realists; we recognize the success
of the conference, unfortunately, will be partially dependent on the
climate in the peace process.
We don't think it ought to be that way. We think that governments in the
region ought to see this as benefiting them, regardless of how successful
the peace negotiations are. But the success of the conference will be
greater if the peace process is in better shape.
We saw a step last week that was important - the first face-to-face meeting
between Prime Minister Netanyahu and Chairman Arafat since March. One hopes
that this will be followed up by additional steps in the peace process; and
then that will increase the chances of the most successful summit.
QUESTION: But are you saying that this is - I mean, I understand she's
committed to going, but is this the sort of thing where you'll only know at
the last minute how many people are going to be there and whether it will
actually take place?
MR. RUBIN: Well, the success of the summit is not simply a function of
what governments are represented; it's also a function of their level of
representation.
QUESTION: What commitments do you have?
MR. RUBIN: And we would like the highest possible representation, and we
would like the most possible number of governments, and we are still
working to encourage governments to participate.
QUESTION: Thank you.
(The briefing concluded at 1:25 P.M.)
|
