U.S. Department of State Daily Press Briefing #150, 97-10-16
From: The Department of State Foreign Affairs Network (DOSFAN) at <http://www.state.gov>
839
U.S. Department of State
Daily Press Briefing
I N D E X
Thursday, October 16, 1997
Briefer: James B. Foley
EUROPEAN UNION
1-4 US-EU Negotiations on Implementation of the Libertad Act to
Continue
3 Congressional Concern re: Title IV of Libertad Act
3 US Effort to Achieve International Disciplines re:
Trafficking in Confiscated Property
COLOMBIA
4 Testimony by Colombian National/Allegation of Visa Fraud at
US Embassy
UNITED ARAB EMIRATES
5-8 UAE C-130 Aircraft Emergency Landing in New York/Report of
Weapons Cache
HAITI
8-9 Secretary's Visit Scheduled October 17
GREECE
9 Press Report of Deployment of US Forces to Rhodes
IRAN/FRANCE/MALAYSIA/RUSSIA
9-13 Investigation into South Pars Project Contract
Continuing/Possible Application of ILSA Sanctions/Report
of Goldman,Sachs Bond Offering to Gazprom
11 Status of Investigation into Applicability of Sanctions to
British-Canadian Investment Project
GREECE/TURKEY
13-14 Alleged Harassment of Greek Defense Minister's Plane by
Turkish Aircraft
LIBYA
14 Nelson Mandela Visit
PANAMA
14 Negotiations on Multinational Counternarcotics Center
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE
OFF-CAMERA PRESS BRIEFING
DPB #150
THURSDAY, OCTOBER 16, 1997, 1:00 P.M.
MR. FOLEY: No announcements. George.
QUESTION: I don't have any questions.
MR. FOLEY: Okay, thank you for coming to the State Department.
(Laughter)
Patrick.
QUESTION: I'm sure Henry wants to ask about pacific salmon.
QUESTION: No, no, no, no, no. I'm here on a social visit.
QUESTION: Okay.
MR. FOLEY: Yes, Jim.
QUESTION: The EU-US talks. Can you tell us where things now stand? There
appears to be a time-out, to use a government phrase.
MR. FOLEY: Time out?
QUESTION: Yes.
MR. FOLEY: Are you sure about your region, here? You're talking about the
Helms-Burton talks that took place.
QUESTION: That's right.
MR. FOLEY: Yes, well, a US delegation, led by Assistant Secretary of
State Al Larson, held two days of useful discussions with the European
Commission, the EU member states and the Luxembourg presidency on
disciplines and principles relating to investment and confiscated
property.
We agreed to pursue these discussions, as you recall, in the April 11 US-EU
Understanding on the Libertad Act. While significant differences do remain,
they have been narrowed in the course of this week's negotiations.
During the course of the discussions, the US delegation saw promising areas
for future work, and has recommended to Washington that the process
continue to be pursued. We also understand that today the EU Council - the
Committee of Permanent Representatives - has agreed, on their side, for the
talks to continue. They have not apparently issued a new deadline, either.
So we expect, therefore, that the talks will resume with the EC and its
member states later this month, around the margins of the next OECD meeting
in Paris - a meeting on the multilateral agreement on investment. So
this is the week of October 27.
So, no conclusion, if you will, to the negotiations, but some narrowing of
differences. I can't tell you exactly what they are because the negotiations
are ongoing. But progress was enough for both sides to agree to continue
the talks, and to continue them at the end of this month.
QUESTION: The first part of your statement, was that a US statement or
was that a joint declaration?
MR. FOLEY: No, it's US.
QUESTION: Because that points to one of the differences. The Europeans
don't accept the word - what is the word for the properties?
MR. FOLEY: Disciplines?
QUESTION: No --
QUESTION: Confiscated.
QUESTION: Confiscated. They don't accept that word, do they? Is that a --
MR. FOLEY: I'm not aware specifically as to whether there's a dispute
over that word. But certainly in terms of the Libertad Act and its
application in Cuba, we feel very strongly that what is indeed involved is
confiscated property owned by American citizens. So I think, on that, there
is no doubt about US views; but I'm not aware specifically as to whether
the semantics are at issue in our talks with the Europeans.
QUESTION: So you can't say where progress was made?
MR. FOLEY: No, I can't. No.
QUESTION: And what --
MR. FOLEY: Differences have been narrowed to some degree. Differences
remain significant, though, and so we're just going to let the negotiators
negotiate in private between now and the end of the month. And we are
somewhat hopeful that we can achieve further progress in Paris.
QUESTION: Do you have to play this off to the US Congress, to see if a
proposed solution would be possible?
MR. FOLEY: Well, I suspect that at the conclusion of the negotiations, if
we have successful negotiations which protect our interests and which lead
to, for example, the kind of international disciplines against trafficking
in confiscated property that we have sought since the April 11 understanding,
that we will be discussing the results of those negotiations with the
Congress.
After all, there were significant consultations with interested members of
Congress leading up to the April 11 understanding, and there was support
for our efforts to attempt to universalize, if you will, prohibitions
against trafficking in confiscated property.
QUESTION: Is there a possibility that new legislation would be required?
MR. FOLEY: I don't know. I think that's something that perhaps our
experts would be able to get for you. I'd be happy to look into it. But
since we're still negotiating, I think the question is hypothetical at this
point, but I'd be glad to look into it.
QUESTION: The European Union wants to suspend Chapter IV of the Helms-
Burton. There is opposition from Senator Helms and also Congresswoman
Ileana Ros. They sent a letter to Secretary Albright telling her that they
don't want to suspend Chapter IV. Also, at the same time, Ileana Ros, in
her letter to Secretary Albright stated that there is an Italian firm in
Cuba that is trying to abort the sanctions of Chapter IV. My question is,
how do you respond to these letters by Ileana Ros? And also, to suspend
Chapter IV requires legislation.
MR. FOLEY: Well, I think that leads, in part, to the answer to Jim's
question previously. If that's where we ended up -- that we had an
agreement that we believed was satisfactory, that met our concerns and the
concerns in Congress behind the original Libertad legislation -- then - and
this, again, at this point, is still hypothetical -- we might indeed be
looking with Congress at the possibility of new legislation.
So, in answer to your question, Jim, I'm reminded that that is correct.
That's, again, assuming that we have what we think are successful
negotiations.
QUESTION: Same subject. Narrowing, to some degree, the differences and
the warmer feeling between the two negotiating bodies, does that extend to
Canada? Is there any sense that there is a warmer feeling in the relationship
over Helms-Burton between Canada and the United States, or do they remain
outside the wicket?
QUESTION: Well, you can include Mexico also.
QUESTION: Yes.
MR. FOLEY: Well, we have - anybody else?
(Laughter)
MR. FOLEY: We have historically warm relations with Canada. There are
occasional ups and downs, Henry, as you know, related to various matters
from time to time, but the relationship is excellent. Even on the fisheries
issue, of course, we have a mechanism in place, and on both sides we're
working towards what we hope will be progress on the matter.
But on this, Canada is not involved in these negotiations. We wish that
Canada would participate, because we think that it is important. This goes
beyond Cuba; it transcends Cuba. The effort to achieve international
disciplines that prohibit trafficking property, we think that's something
that Canada ought to be a party to.
QUESTION: So there is no thawing at the moment on the differences between
the two countries on Helms-Burton?
MR. FOLEY: I'm not aware that there's been any change.
QUESTION: Jim, I'm just going to take a stab at this question; it has to
do with Colombia and some testimony on the Hill this morning, before the
House Judiciary Committee. Apparently a Colombian national, whose identity
was not disclosed because he fears for his life, testified that the cartels
have an intermediary that they use to get US visas illegally, and that they
have a contact in the US Embassy in Colombia who provides these visas for a
fee. Can you respond to this charge, or are you aware of this?
MR. FOLEY: Well, yes, I'm aware of it just coming in. I heard about the
testimony. There are allegations of this nature that occur from time to
time around the world. We certainly are not aware of any such scheme, but
we would welcome hearing any details about the alleged malfeasance that was
described at the hearing today on the Hill.
We very vigorously investigate all reports of alleged visa fraud. So we're
lacking details at this point; but if we get them, the more details we get,
the more thorough our investigation could be.
We have a telephone number where people can call who have any information
of this kind concerning consular fraud. I'd be happy to give it to you.
It's the State Department's Inspector General Hotline; it's 202-647-3320.
But again, Laura, it's too early. This just occurred this morning, and we
don't see supporting detail at this point. It was just someone's testimony.
But we certainly take the allegation seriously.
QUESTION: He has been jailed three years ago in the United States, and he
says he made these allegations to the American officials who arrested him.
He said it was three years ago when the visa official in the embassy was
charging $5,000 for a visa. I don't think this is the first time you've
heard this. He said he gave the report to the American officials two years
ago.
MR. FOLEY: Well, if that's what he alleges, then that's what he has
alleged. However, it's the first I've heard about it. But I'd be happy to
take the question and look into whether we've had any previous indication
of an allegation in that regard.
QUESTION: A rather unusual situation in New York, apparently, last night.
And I guess queries have been put to the people at the Pentagon, who
referred them here. It involves - and this is second-hand, so I beg your
pardon if I'm incorrect on any of it -- a C-130 airplane belonging to the
UAE that was flying from the United States, apparently back to the UAE. A
prop fell off the plane and it had to make an emergency landing someplace
in New York. And in the plane were apparently two Pakistanis and
eight or ten UAE citizens who were heavily armed, saying they were on some
sort of US training mission when they left. Have you heard anything about
this?
MR. FOLEY: I've heard a little bit about it. I won't be able to say much
for two reasons. First, I don't have detailed information, apart from what
I'm going to give you; and secondly, because it is a matter under
investigation at this point. So I would refer you to law enforcement
authorities.
But what I can tell you is that a UAE C-130 made an emergency landing last
night at Saranac Lake Airport in New York State. Now, the Department of
State had issued diplomatic aircraft clearance for this aircraft on
September 23. The Department of State was informed that the purpose of the
flight was a training mission. The C-130 had 12 known passengers on board,
and there were no reported injuries during the emergency landing.
As to the reports or allegations concerning the presence of weapons, it is
not known at this time when or where such weapons were purchased and what
the circumstances may have been. So I can't comment further, because I
don't have the information.
As I mentioned, the FBI, New York State Police and other law enforcement
officials are on the scene, and an investigation is underway. If we're in a
position to say more about the incident tomorrow, then I'd be happy to do
so, but that's all we have for now.
QUESTION: Why was the plane given diplomatic clearance, do you know?
MR. FOLEY: Well, I believe that's routinely necessary for flights of this
nature. I'd have to --
QUESTION: Was it on its way from Washington when it had trouble?
MR. FOLEY: I believe it departed from Washington, yes.
QUESTION: Dulles?
MR. FOLEY: Yes.
QUESTION: What kind of a training mission?
MR. FOLEY: I'm not aware of that.
QUESTION: Could you try to find out?
MR. FOLEY: Yes.
QUESTION: And you say it is not known where the weapons were purchased,
but you're acknowledging there were weapons on the plane?
MR. FOLEY: Well, we have reports that there were weapons on the plane. I
believe the reports are true.
QUESTION: Can you say what kind of weapons?
MR. FOLEY: No, I don't have that.
QUESTION: Was there anything else on the plane?
MR. FOLEY: Not to my knowledge.
QUESTION: Were these soldiers or what?
MR. FOLEY: I don't have that. Again, I have very little detail at this
point. This is something that apparently occurred last night, and
investigators are on the scene compiling that information. Obviously, we're
going to have to go back and check our records, check the nature of the
clearance that we gave, what we were informed about when we gave the
clearance, and do a post mortem, if you will, on the incident. But --
QUESTION: Were there any Americans on the plane?
MR. FOLEY: Not to my knowledge.
QUESTION: What flavor of investigators are looking into this, what
agency?
MR. FOLEY: As I mentioned, FBI and New York State law enforcement.
QUESTION: FBI and New York State?
MR. FOLEY: Yes.
QUESTION: I've been asked to ask, did any have Canadian passports?
MR. FOLEY: Not to my knowledge.
(Laughter)
And Mexican passports?
(Laughter)
QUESTION: Jim, you said clearance was given on the 23rd?
MR. FOLEY: Yes.
QUESTION: Do you have any idea how long these individuals were in the
United States, or are these kind of training missions fairly regular?
MR. FOLEY: I'd have to look into that for you, Laura. I don't have
that.
QUESTION: (Inaudible) - now, or it's impounded, or --
MR. FOLEY: I believe that it landed beyond the end of the runway and may
be somewhat in a position where it's unable to depart. But --
QUESTION: Any individuals injured?
MR. FOLEY: No.
QUESTION: The individuals are under arrest or being questioned or --
MR. FOLEY: Well, you'd have to talk to law enforcement authorities on the
scene. I don't have any information that anyone is under arrest or that
this is a criminal matter. I think that's really getting ahead of the game.
That's not my information at this point, but it is being investigated.
QUESTION: Where are these 12 people?
MR. FOLEY: There was some kind of an accident that occurred, so it would
normally be investigated. Obviously, we need to look further into the
question of arms on the plane and how this is connected to the diplomatic
clearance that we gave the aircraft. But, again, I can't give you any more
right now, because I don't have that, and it is being investigated. When
I'm in a position to say more, I will be glad to do so.
QUESTION: And where are the people, the 12 people, did you say?
MR. FOLEY: They may still be on the scene. I just don't know, though.
QUESTION: Can you tell us whether the UAE has requested and the
Department of State has granted previous requests before?
MR. FOLEY: I believe it's a fairly routine matter.
QUESTION: One more question that's very hypothetical, admittedly, but if
this plane came to this country with these people aboard who were armed at
the time, would that be something that is allowed by US law or not; do you
know?
MR. FOLEY: I'd have to refer you to Federal Aviation authorities on that.
In terms of diplomatic personnel, there are procedures - and I'm not sure
they apply in this case -- for notification and registering that are a part
of normal diplomatic business. But again, not knowing the details, not
having them, I'd like to be more helpful to you, but this is all I have at
this time.
QUESTION: -- a lot of loose ends on it. When you say, fairly routine
matter, you mean for the UAE or for State to give these things out to any --
MR. FOLEY: I don't have that information specifically as to how often in
the past such clearance has been given to the UAE, indeed to other nations
that are flying in and out of our airports. But my understanding, though,
is that the procedure is fairly routine.
QUESTION: Procedure, generally speaking, is fairly routine?
MR. FOLEY: Yes, yes.
QUESTION: And also, as a follow-up to --
MR. FOLEY: But I will look into that question, though, in terms of the
rhythm or magnitude of previous such clearances.
QUESTION: And what's the state of your knowledge as to whether the DOD
and/or the FAA are part of the investigating teams?
MR. FOLEY: Well, I would assume that FAA is involved, insofar as some
kind of an accident took place - fortunately not one that caused any
injuries or fatalities. But I don't have anything more for you on that,
Charlie.
QUESTION: Can you tell us about what the Secretary plans to do in Haiti
tomorrow, and if there is alarm in the United States because of the
situation in Haiti - the assassinations and these attacks by former
President Aristide over the United States policy?
MR. FOLEY: Well, I really have nothing to add to what Mr. Rubin had to
say yesterday. The Secretary's schedule is still being put together, still
being finalized. Mr. Rubin is en route right now there. I think I would
follow our normal practice of not commenting while the team is in the
field.
If we have any details to report that have been finalized about her visit,
we'd be happy to make them available in the press office later today.
QUESTION: Some newspaper in Greece, which they are very close to the
Greek Defense Ministry, they reported that some 900 US soldiers will be
deployed to Rhodos Island. Do you have anything on this formation?
MR. FOLEY: No, I don't have any information on that. That's the first
I've heard of it.
QUESTION: Back on sanctions, have you heard or have you been in
communication with the Russians or the Malaysians on this pipeline
deal?
MR. FOLEY: Well, we are in the investigatory stage still, as you know,
because we've said that a number of times from this podium. There was a
report I saw that we'd sent a team out to the three countries involved in
the South Pars project. My information is that no such team has departed
yet. But as I said, we're looking at the contract, and we're in the
investigatory phase. We must first examine the whole issue of the contract
and sanctionability before we get to look at the options.
QUESTION: Well, as part of the investigation, are you talking to the
French, the Russians and the Malaysians?
MR. FOLEY: We have discussed with them the whole issue, even before the
announcement of the contract. I believe we have had discussions with the
Europeans, certainly with the EU and with the French. I'm not aware that
we've had direct contacts with the Russians and Malaysians yet. We will be
having that, but I don't have a timetable for you on that.
QUESTION: Do you have anything on this report about the bond offering out
of New York for Gazprom, I believe it is, and whether the sanctions might
affect that? Is that still part of the investigatory process?
MR. FOLEY: Yes, we're aware of the reports. We saw the press article, of
course, today, that Gazprom might be looking to the US market to raise
money. We are lacking details about such an effort. In any case, though the
article raises questions about a particular element of sanctionability that
we haven't determined yet. So we're not prepared to discuss, at this time,
the specific aspects of the law, including the possible application of ILSA
sanctions to prevent particular types of activity.
These issues are being reviewed as we address specific cases. Again, right
now we're looking at the issue; we're investigating the contract. We must
determine whether the activity is sanctionable. Then --
QUESTION: The activity being --
MR. FOLEY: The contract.
QUESTION: Rating?
MR. FOLEY: First of all, I'm talking about the South Pars project.
QUESTION: What about the issuance of debt, is that --
MR. FOLEY: You're talking about the issuance of debt, and I'll get to it
in a second. So first, we're looking at the contract itself to determine
sanctionability. And then the next step we would take if we determine that
it is sanctionable, would be for us to decide which sanctions are
applicable and what menu we would need to choose from.
On the question, though, of underwriting, which is what was raised, our
lawyers right now are looking at the issue of whether, under the rubric of
sanctions governing financial operations, that would apply to underwriting
itself. It's not mentioned specifically in the ILSA legislation, but we
have not made a determination, though, as to whether that would be covered
among the menu of sanctions.
Let me say, though, because the question keeps coming up, in the briefings
here and a lot in the press, about our policy on ILSA, let me just
reiterate that Iran's behavior has long been of great concern to the United
States. Our goal is to deny Iran the capacity to develop weapons of mass
destruction and to have them cease their support for terrorism and other
acts that undermine regional peace and stability. We seek to advance these
goals in cooperation with our allies. Unless and until Iran changes its
behavior, which is of such concern to us, we are simply not prepared to
carry on business as usual with the Iranian regime. We feel very strongly
that our allies and friends should not do so, either. That is why we also
believe that we should do all possible to deny to the Iranian regime the
capability to carry on its unacceptable behavior.
It is for that reason that we will fully and completely implement ILSA. We
intend to implement the law, and the law makes clear that sanctions are a
real option if sanctionable activity has occurred.
Again, we have not yet made a decision on whether there is sanctionable
activity in this case under ILSA. We are investigating these cases
thoroughly and expeditiously. Under Secretary Eizenstat will coordinate a
National Security Council - National Economic Council review of ILSA, and
we will pursue this through consultations directly with the countries and
the companies involved.
QUESTION: Same subject. Six months ago, Nick was asked about a British-
Canadian investment in I believe it was Iran. Nick used basically the same
language you just used in terms of "we will pursue a thorough investigation,
this is a very serious issue and so forth." I raised this about two
weeks ago in this briefing, and there's been no answer. If you could
bring us up to date on the status of that --
MR. FOLEY: I'd be glad to get it for you.
QUESTION: Please.
MR. FOLEY: In fact, we had an answer ready for you, and it wasn't raised
again. I don't have it with me, but perhaps after the briefing we can get
it for you.
QUESTION: How many times do we have to raise it before --
MR. FOLEY: That's a good question.
QUESTION: Okay.
MR. FOLEY: There's a lot of questions every day.
QUESTION: When you say you're looking into the contract, does that mean
you have access to the exact terms of the contract? And my second question
is why the delay in assigning teams to the three countries?
MR. FOLEY: Well, I'm not sure it's a delay; I wouldn't describe it as
such. But I'd be happy to look into the question for you, as to when we are
sending experts out.
As to your first question, I am not aware that we have in our possession
the actual contract. But we're able to discuss the issue with our friends
and partners. I'm sure we'll be able to get the information we need to be
able to make our determination.
Carol.
QUESTION: Are you advising Goldman-Sachs not to go forward with this bond
offering because you are looking at it and it may in fact fall under
sanctionable activity?
MR. FOLEY: I'm not aware that we're issuing any warnings of that
kind.
QUESTION: If they go forward with this bond offering -- I don't know how
long it's going to take you to make your decision on the Total project. But
what if it's six months?
MR. FOLEY: Well, we're looking at it expeditiously - the overall
question. We're not intending to delay the investigation and the Secretary's
ultimate determination. But businesses face risks of all kind every day in
making their decisions. I couldn't judge for you the magnitude of risk that
would be involved for this company to proceed on this issue, absent a
determination on our part that underwriting was included in the menu of
sanctions that we'll have available under ILSA. It certainly is a risk
of some kind, but I couldn't handicap it for you because we haven't
made that determination yet.
QUESTION: Jim, did the company, Goldman-Sachs, come to the State
Department before this, asking for advice or opinion about this whole
issue?
MR. FOLEY: I'm not aware that there has been - or at least that there was
a direct contact between --
QUESTION: Indirect? Any kind of contact?
MR. FOLEY: I'm not aware of a direct contact. I stand to be corrected.
I'd be happy to look into it for you. But I did ask this question recently,
and I was told that, in fact, there had not been a direct contact.
QUESTION: Would you have expected - your asking the question of others
suggests that normally a company would do such a thing.
MR. FOLEY: Well, we received an indication that this issue was being
investigated. We were asked to comment on it, and that's what triggered our
awareness of the issue. But, again, my understanding is that we were not
directly approached by the company. Now, whether we have been in the last
hours or not, I'd be happy to look into for you.
QUESTION: Do you have any feel for how soon they expect to go forward
with this bond offering?
MR. FOLEY: No, I don't. I don't have that information.
QUESTION: So it becomes --
MR. FOLEY: You'd have to ask the company.
QUESTION: The way financial markets are, probably your statement there is
enough to cause a few ripples. Would your advice be for everyone involved
to hold off until you make a determination?
MR. FOLEY: I'm not giving any advice of that nature. In fact, I'm serving
as the spokesman here from the podium, and I'm able to describe to you the
state of our information on the issue at this moment. But really, the
primary official responsible for our overall ILSA policy is Under Secretary
Eizenstat. I would hesitate to get out in front of him and speak hypothetically
about this issue. But I think certainly from this podium, at this moment,
though, I'm not in a position to issue any kind of advice to the company in
question.
As I stated, this is something that our lawyers are looking at now. And
there are several stages we have to go through that include, first of all,
the determination on the South Pars project, the sanctionability; and then
next, the menu of options. So it's not something that I can speak to
authoritatively at this moment.
QUESTION: But you say bond offerings are not specifically mentioned in
the ILSA legislation.
MR. FOLEY: That's my understanding.
QUESTION: Okay. But you might find a way to sanction it, even though it's
not --
MR. FOLEY: I wouldn't want to predict the outcome of our legal examination.
QUESTION: If it's not mentioned, why would you even look at it, if it's
not in the law?
MR. FOLEY: Well, it's possible that legal experts could determine that
such authority was implied under the law. I wouldn't want to predict that
is what's going to happen, but it is a possibility, and our legal experts
are looking at the issue.
QUESTION: On Greece and Turkey, one more question. Turkish airplanes went
beyond the recent repeated violations of Greek air space. And for the
second time in the last two days they harassed the airplane carrying the
Greek Defense Minister from Cyprus to Greece. The same plane was full of
reporters, also. I was wondering, do you condone behavior like that, and
aren't you worried that it might increase even more tensions and lead to
something more than just harassing a plane?
MR. FOLEY: Well, first of all, I can't confirm that it's true. So I would
hesitate to make a pronouncement on the specific incident you raise because
we are aware of the press reports of the incident, but cannot confirm them.
However, as we have stated before, I don't want to get into the details of
every allegation of this nature - what might have occurred or might have
not occurred.
We continue to engage Greece, Turkey and both communities on Cyprus to
avoid actions that complicate or distract from efforts to promote a Cyprus
settlement. In this context, we remain closely engaged with the parties to
encourage steps such as an over-flight ban to create an atmosphere
conducive to serious negotiations.
As Mr. Rubin stated earlier this week, we would hope that all sides would
appreciate the benefits of reinstituting a complete and open-ended
moratorium on over-flights of Cyprus by Greek and Turkish military aircraft
at the earliest possible moment.
QUESTION: Is there any way you can check if the incident did take place?
It's twice and it's all the Greek reporters that say that. Reuters, AP from
Athens and Ankara have a lot of reports on that. So I was wondering --
MR. FOLEY: Well, I'm not sure that we have the technical capability to
confirm such an incident ourselves. I suppose if all sides agreed that it
happened, then it would be possible to be pretty definitive about it. But
that's not something that I think we can verify.
Yes, Patrick.
QUESTION: Nelson Mandela is going to visit Libya as part of a North
African tour. Is that a good thing for him to do?
MR. FOLEY: Well, we would reiterate the fact that according to UN
Security Council Resolution 748 and 883 that flights into Tripoli are a
violation of sanctions. So I think that would be a very specific concern.
But we also believe that diplomatic contacts ought to be maintained at a
low level. We would be disappointed with a visit of any head of state.
QUESTION: On Panama, can you tell us what's really going on in these
negotiations, instead of "you expect to make progress"? Has there been any
contact by other countries to participate in this multilateral center
against narco-traffic? What is the timeframe for these talks?
MR. FOLEY: Well, because these are ongoing negotiations, it is our normal
practice not to comment on such negotiations as they are proceeding. I
think you won't be surprised at that. I do believe that there has been
multilateral interest in participating in the Multilateral Counternarcotics
Center. I think that I'm not in a position to go into the details of the
negotiations, but the answer to your question is yes.
QUESTION: Which countries have been --
MR. FOLEY: I'd rather not go into that.
QUESTION: Are we going to get a read-out of the talks which began
yesterday with the Panamanians on this subject?
MR. FOLEY: Well, there have been several rounds of talks, and they're
headed on our side by Ambassador McNamara. We believe they've made progress,
and we're hopeful that we can get an agreement soon. I think we're hoping
that we'll get one before the end of the year. When we have something
specific to report, we will, George. I'm not in a position to predict
whether this round this week will produce agreement. But when we have
something that's concrete and positive, we'll definitely report it.
Any other questions? Thank you.
(The briefing concluded at 1:35 P.M.)
|
