U.S. Department of State Daily Press Briefing #47, 98-04-16
From: The Department of State Foreign Affairs Network (DOSFAN) at <http://www.state.gov>
617
U.S. Department of State
Daily Press Briefing
I N D E X
THURSDAY, APRIL 16, 1998
Briefer: JAMES P. RUBIN
STATEMENTS
1 UN Report on Promoting Peace and Development in Africa
1 Integration of National Minorities in Latvia
CAMBODIA
1-4 Update on the Reported Death of Pol Pot
1 Contact between the US and Foreign Governments Concerning
Pol Pot's Death
2-3 US Policy Regarding other Khmer Rouge Leaders Responsible
for Atrocities
3 Agenda for the ASEAN Meetings; Upcoming Cambodian Elections
3-4 Travel by US Officials to the Region
4 Contact between the USG and the Government of Hun Sen
4-5 Information Provided by the US Embassy in Phnom Pen
Regarding Pol Pot
ARMS CONTROL
5-6 Eligibility of Entities in Russia to Receive US Aid
6 Status of Commitments Made During the Gore-Chernomyrdin Era
7-8 US Policy of Review for Russian Entities to Receive US Aid
8 Travel by Bob Gallucci to the Region
TURKEY
9 Desecration in Greek Orthodox Graveyard
GREECE
9 Harassment of Private Turkish Yachts by Greek Naval Boats
PANAMA
9-10 Status of Multinational Counter-Narcotics Center (MCC)
LATVIA
10 Contact between the Secretary and the Russian Foreign
Minister Concerning Latvia
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE
DAILY PRESS BRIEFING
DPB #47
THURSDAY, APRIL 16, 1998, 12:45 P.M.
(ON THE RECORD UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED)
MR. RUBIN: Welcome to the State Department briefing. Your numbers are
shrinking here on a Thursday. Let me start with the Associated Press.
By the way, before we give the floor to the Associated Press, we will be
issuing two statements: one on the Secretary General's report on Africa
that was submitted to the Security Council today, as well as a statement on
the Latvian government's legislation to facilitate integration of national
minorities.
At this point, there will not be a briefing tomorrow.
QUESTION: If I could ask you if the US can finally confirm whether Pol
Pot is dead and then get on to other matters?
MR. RUBIN: At this point, we have no reason to doubt what all of us have
seen on television. We have no basis for suggesting that Pol Pot is alive.
At the same time, we can't confirm that he is dead other than to say that
we have all seen rather compelling images on television and rather
compelling statements to that effect, and we have no reason to doubt
them.
QUESTION: In one image he suddenly has jet-black hair having been white-
haired just a few months ago, but indeed, the State Department has no
information of its own from other governments or from the Cambodian
government?
MR. RUBIN: Let me say that we note reports that the Thai government has
obtained photos of Pol Pot's remains and that the Cambodian Government has
called for an autopsy. We are in touch with both governments to learn the
results of their inquiries and, if the death of Pol Pot is confirmed, we
support the Cambodian government's call for an autopsy. We believe this
should be done by a reputable organization with the results open to
international review. It is not clear at this time who has custody of Pol
Pot's remains, if they are indeed his remains. But again, let me emphasize,
we have no reason to dispute the rather compelling reports of his
death.
QUESTION: What would an autopsy help establish?
MR. RUBIN: Well, it would be a way to confirm who he was, perhaps, among
other factors.
QUESTION: Well, what about our concerns about the cause of death?
MR. RUBIN: It might also provide information in that regard, as
well.
QUESTION: Are there any concerns right now that he may not (inaudible) -
MR. RUBIN: Again, as you can see from my carefully guarded comments, we
don't have a lot of information about this and the majority of our
information about his death comes from news accounts and accounts provided
to government officials. We don't have any local American officials on the
scene. So, we are telling you what we know best, and what we know best is
that we have no reason to dispute or reason to believe that what we see is
not true, but we can not independently confirm it.
QUESTION: But Jamie, don't you think it's a little coincidental that just
a few days ago we were asking you questions about whether or not Pol Pot
was going to be extradited out of - whether there was a plan to get Pol Pot
out of Cambodia, to Thailand perhaps, and put him on trial. And then
suddenly, he turns up dead.
MR. RUBIN: Well, there are some who think that it's convenient but, at
this point, our view is that we have no reason to dispute his death. We
wanted to see him brought to justice, and that is our position. Other than
that, what people are doing is speculating.
QUESTION: But you don't see that there is any connection in the -
MR. RUBIN: No, I can see that a lot of people can speculate, but people
can't speculate with hard information who don't have it, and we don't have
it.
QUESTION: In the mind of the administration, if he is, in fact, dead,
does that end the effort to bring possible Khmer Rouge war criminals to
justice?
MR. RUBIN: That is a question I can answer. Our long-standing policy is
that all the senior Khmer Rouge leaders responsible for the atrocities
committed in Cambodia during the Khmer Rouge rule from 1975 to 1979 should
be brought to justice. Although Pol Pot was the most notorious leader, the
Khmer Rouge regime had a collective leadership. These senior leaders fully
share responsibility for what occurred, and those responsible for
crimes of that kind should be prosecuted.
QUESTION: Is the United States going to actually pursue efforts to bring
these other leaders to justice and, if so, how?
MR. RUBIN: Well, we made clear that we thought it was important to bring
Pol Pot to justice. If he is indeed dead, we also think it's important to
bring other members of the collective leadership to justice. What we were
prepared to do with Pol Pot, as you know, I was not prepared to comment on
publicly, so all I can tell you is that we believe that the need for
justice to respond to the crimes against humanity committed in the '70s
doesn't end with Pol Pot's apparent death.
QUESTION: Jamie, several of these people are now - either have been
pardoned by the Hun Sen government or are working in the government. What
chances do you think there are of these people actually being brought to
justice?
MR. RUBIN: Well, it depends. There are different characters and different
figures who have done - made different decisions about renouncing the Khmer
Rouge. But let me say this: The United States supports the right of the
Cambodian people to choose their own leadership through free and fair
elections. We have consistently supported the Paris Peace Accords. The
Khmer Rouge leadership at that time was not willing to disarm or take part
in the elections. Many Cambodians who supported the Khmer Rouge as a
nationalist alternative while Vietnamese troops were stationed in the
country no longer supported it after a democratically elected government
was installed.
The United States has supported the reintegration into Cambodian society of
Khmer Rouge defectors by providing daily rations and other humanitarian
assistance. Many former members of the Khmer Rouge, including some in
Cambodia's current leadership, have renounced that organization's murderous
policies and indeed have become some of its most committed opponents.
The United States continues to oppose any political role for the Khmer
Rouge itself. We are monitoring the issue of Khmer Rouge political
influence very closely. The US is strongly opposed to having senior Khmer
Rouge leaders play any role whatsoever in the Cambodian government and we
obviously attach great importance to bringing to justice the Khmer Rouge
leaders responsible for the atrocities.
In short, it depends on who you are and what you did, and some of them who
may or may not have had a direct responsibility have either renounced the
Khmer Rouge and found a way to work with the new government and others may
still be hiding out. But, clearly, the collective leadership included more
than just Pol Pot and, depending on who the person is and what they've done
and said since that time, it would be appropriate to pursue justice.
QUESTION: Jamie, there's going to be an ASEAN meeting in a couple of days
on the organization of the upcoming elections in May, I believe, in
Cambodia. Do we plan on bringing this up at that meeting? Would this be
something that we would push the other countries -
MR. RUBIN: When we are closer to the meeting I'll be in a better position
to describe our agenda for you other than to say that internal affairs in
Cambodia are relevant to the possibility of having successful elections,
and I would be surprised if one could talk about Cambodia without talking
about recent events.
QUESTION: Jamie, let's go back to whether it is Pol Pot or not. Are any
American officials attempting to go up to view the body from Phnom Pen -
the Ambassador, perhaps?
MR. RUBIN: I haven't heard of his plans. I've read some of the reporting
from the embassy, and that isn't part of the plan at this point. That
doesn't mean that at some point we can't get information that leads us to
conclude, based on what we know, that it is indeed Pol Pot. But I'm not
aware of any particular trip by him.
QUESTION: And can you characterize at all the exchange on this with the
government of Hun Sen today?
MR. RUBIN: Between us and the Government of Hun Sen, other than to say
that they are calling for an autopsy and we share that view; and they have,
in their contacts with us, not obviously been able to provide us with
enough information to conclude that he is definitely dead for us to say
independently that we learned it. On the other hand, we haven't received
information from them, and we have been in contact with them, that suggests
there is any reason to doubt what is apparent.
QUESTION: Can you just rule out this wacky sort of conspiracy theory? The
United States is not, at this moment, spiriting Pol Pot out of Cambodia? In
all seriousness, can you at least say that?
MR. RUBIN: Well you called it "wacky", so I'm allowed to laugh if you
called it "wacky." I have no information to that effect.
QUESTION: Can we go to another subject?
MR. RUBIN: Yes.
QUESTION: One more question. They've said he's going to be cremated in
the next day or so.
MR. RUBIN: That would certainly make it impossible to conduct an
autopsy.
QUESTION: Have you taken any measures to try to prevent that from
happening?
MR. RUBIN: I'm not sure we can take measures to prevent the cremation of
a person we don't know who he is and whether, indeed, it is Pol Pot, and we
have no independent information about that.
QUESTION: Can you confirm or deny if the embassy in Phnom Pen was
informed in the last few days that there might be something afoot with Pol
Pot, either in terms of an attempt or and attempted -
MR. RUBIN: Our embassy in Phnom Pen receives regular reports of different
speculation about what will or won't happen with Pol Pot. He's been a
person who's been the subject of enormous speculation almost every day of
this year. I'm sure they've received indications, but we didn't receive, to
my knowledge, information that anyone was planning to kill him, if that's
what you're suggesting.
That doesn't mean that someone didn't suggest that someone was planning to
kill him. I think I've read that almost every day in the newspapers. What
I'm saying to you is that we have very little hard information on this
subject, and all sorts of speculation occurs every day, and the best we can
tell you today that we know is that we have no information to dispute what
is apparent; that is, that he died.
QUESTION: USA Today has a story that the United States has declared - the
administration has declared 20 companies ineligible for assistance,
companies believed to be assisting - involved with Russia proliferation to
Iran, that specific countries - the funds have been cut off to specific
companies. They named the companies.
Has there been a finding that so many agencies or research facilities in
Russia are ineligible to receive millions of dollars in US aid?
MR. RUBIN: I think what is a little misleading about that is this sort of
blacklist idea. Rather, what I think is accurate is to say that we evaluate
very carefully proposals to use US government funds in cooperative projects
with foreign entities. This is standard procedure that we follow in such
cases and, of course, we would want to scrutinize and look very skeptically
at proposals involving entities that might be engaged in activities in the
area of nonproliferation that concern us.
US efforts include working with entities and scientists in Russia and the
NIS to redirect their expertise to the civilian economic sector so that
they are provided with legitimate alternatives to working on programs of
proliferation concern.
For over a year now, we have been extremely concerned and quite troubled
about reports that Iran's missile program has been able to obtain
technology from some Russian entities. During this period, we have worked
on this subject very actively at high levels in this administration and we
have incorporated our concerns in this regard into our review of proposals
for US government funded cooperative projects. Such reviews assist us in
ensuring that assistance is not provided to entities that may be engaged in
activities of proliferation concern.
I am not in a position to discuss a specific list, other than to say that
we do closely scrutinize many companies, and I can say that the list, as
reported, is neither definitive nor error-free.
QUESTION: All right. Having heard all that, what does - which is helpful -
but the article is beyond that. We all know you are against proliferation.
We all know about Russia's promises.
MR. RUBIN: I did all that work, Barry.
QUESTION: No, that's good stuff, but their performance, evidently, falls
short of US expectations and of their promises. The disappearance of
Chernomyrdin probably doesn't help because he made a specific promise to
Vice President Gore.
MR. RUBIN: The Russian government has confirmed that the commitments made
during the Gore-Chernomyrdin era stand.
QUESTION: What about implementation? This article suggests that they have
not implemented this promise and that the US has come to a conclusion that
there are a lot of agencies in Russia assisted by American companies that
are ineligible. If you don't want to give the number and you want to deal
with the names and you won't even suggest that some of these names may not
be correct, has there been a finding, apart from the watch list that
exists for a year now?
MR. RUBIN: No, the impression -
QUESTION: Have you found enough fall to crack down yet?
MR. RUBIN: The impression given by this article that there is a blacklist
based on a finding is incorrect; rather, there are companies that, with our
increased concern about proliferation, we pay more attention to. An example
of an erroneous entity is the Russian Space Agency that is on that list,
and so there are flaws in that list.
What I am saying to you is that these are companies and entities that,
because of our concern over the last year about proliferation, now receive
extra scrutiny. But there is no ban. There is no finding that these
companies have violated a sanctions law and, therefore, are going to be
subject to sanctions and not being allowed to receive US assistance.
QUESTION: Well, I'm going to take your answer in good faith because the
administration doesn't think there has to be a law.
MR. RUBIN: Sorry?
QUESTION: I'm going to take your reply on good faith.
MR. RUBIN: It's always in made in good faith.
QUESTION: When you spoke of law. And, of course, that's irrelevant as far
as the administration is concerned. They don't need law.
MR. RUBIN: No, no, I -
QUESTION: You don't think you need enabling legislation. No, it's all
right. I'm just asking, law aside, has the administration concluded that
Company A, B and - Project A, B and C are ineligible because of misbehavior?
MR. RUBIN: I can not get into specific -
QUESTION: Without naming the companies.
MR. RUBIN: -- companies or specific entities. What I can tell you is that
the impression given that the administration has concluded that Entity A,
Company B or Organization C is banned because of proliferation activity is
incorrect. What is correct is that there are a large number of entities
that we scrutinize especially carefully because of our concern about
proliferation. What I can say is that one of those entities that's on that
list is not receiving that level of presumption against a project,
and that is the Russian Space Agency.
So, rather, this is a rather informal list that has received increased
prominence as a result of one of our nation's newspapers.
QUESTION: Are there actually more entities, companies, organizations on
this watch list
than -
MR. RUBIN: What I can say is that it is neither exhaustive, definitive,
nor error-free.
QUESTION: While we're talking about -- this is USA Today.
MR. RUBIN: Do you have something to say there, in the back?
QUESTION: Yes, I do, Mr. Rubin.
MR. RUBIN: I noticed that.
QUESTION: In your recitation of the flaws in the story, would you dispute
the basic thrust of the story that it's possible that these companies could
be penalized for their work?
MR. RUBIN: No.
QUESTION: You don't dispute that?
MR. RUBIN: No, no, let me try to - if you think that I only spent time on
what was wrong with it, let me spend time on what was right with it. It is
correct that the United States government has deep concerns about
proliferation and that it has informal lists of entities where we have
concerns that they might be involved in proliferation activities and,
therefore, merit extra scrutiny before allowing us to engage in joint
projects with them or provide assistance to them.
Many of the companies and entities in that very interesting story prepared
by one of our nation's newspapers are accurate; that they are receiving
extra scrutiny because of this concern.
MR. RUBIN: How is that for a balanced view, Lee?
QUESTION: I like that view better than the earlier one.
QUESTION: Would it be fair to say that these companies and entities and
agencies that are on this rather informal list, as you call it, have not
received any aid, whether or not they are banned from receiving it?
MR. RUBIN: Well, I think I tried to signal that certainly one of the
objectives of our foreign policy is to redirect experts in the area of
weaponry, missiles, and nuclear capabilities that existed in Russia away
from that expertise. And so our efforts include working with entities and
scientists in Russia to redirect their expertise towards the civilian
economic sector so that they are provided with legitimate alternatives to
working on programs of proliferation concern.
So I wouldn't rule out that there are projects affiliated with some of
those entities that are designed to wean them away from work in areas where
there may be a residual concern of proliferation.
QUESTION: (Inaudible) funding has been - I think -
MR. RUBIN: Right, but then I would have to talk about a specific company
and a specific project. What I can say is that, overall, our objectives of
our policy include working with those entities where there may be people
who are able to be moved away from proliferation-prone activities towards
civilian economic activities. To the extent that they are, to the extent
that a program does that purpose, and to the extent that it can do
that without providing residual capability to the proliferation-prone
activity, we would be prepared to do that in principle. But I have been
specifically prohibited from describing any particular company, any
particular entity, or any particular project associated with that.
QUESTION: Just if you could deal with one - if we could get one fact here,
is Bob Gallucci going over there later this week?
MR. RUBIN: To my understanding, he will be going there shortly. I don't
know the exact date.
QUESTION: For what, purpose?
MR. RUBIN: To continue the work that was done through the Winser-Koptev
channel to try to nail down, as much as possible, implementation of the
January executive action that will hopefully make it harder and harder for
Russian entities to provide assistance, wittingly or unwittingly, to the
Iranian missile program.
QUESTION: New subject, Turkey. The Greek Orthodox Church has its
headquarters in Istanbul and they've complained of graves being desecrated
and bombs going off in their church compound. And, evidently, the Church
sent a letter to the President earlier this month asking the President if
he would take this - bring it up to Turkey in some fashion. I'm wondering
if the Secretary has heard about this, if she's involved in it, and where
we stand.
MR. RUBIN: I'm unaware of what any communication may have been with the
President, but I can certainly tell you what our position is on this issue.
We deplore this grotesque and repulsive crime. The Turkish government has
joined in the widespread condemnation of this crime and we understand from
the Turks that an investigation is underway. We hope that the investigation
will be conducted with the utmost vigor.
So we're familiar with the crime. That is our view on it. With respect to
what may have been communicated to the President, I have no information.
QUESTION: The Church has complained that Turkey has been lagging in
investigating what's going on. You're not aware of and contacts --
MR. RUBIN: I have no information on the to's and fro's of the investigation
other than to say that the Turkish government has joined in the widespread
condemnation of this crime, and we understand from the Turks that an
investigation is underway and we hope it's carried forward.
QUESTION: Yesterday in the Aegean, some Greek boats, naval boats,
harassing private Turkish yacht and the families and civilians, and they
were very close to fighting because the Turkish Navy tried to stop them or
something like that. Do you have anything on the subject?
MR. RUBIN: I have no information on that.
QUESTION: The US has been trying to arrange with Panama to set up an anti-
drug operation in what is soon to be a former US base in that area. I
understand there may be some snags in this project?
MR. RUBIN: We reached and announced an essential agreement with Panama in
January to locate a multinational counter-narcotics center in Panama. Since
then, for internal reasons, the government of Panama has demanded extensive
textual changes. We have agreed to some restructuring and clarifications.
We must, however, conclude the negotiations soon or we will be forced to
implement plans to locate the center elsewhere. We would prefer to have it
in Panama but, if we can't nail this down soon, we may have to locate
it elsewhere.
QUESTION: What sort of things are they asking for that you find
unacceptable, or are they frivolous?
MR. RUBIN: I don't have a detailed list of the negotiating difficulties,
but it would be probably unwise to discuss them even if I did if we're
still trying to work them out. But what I can say is if we don't work them
out soon, we're going to have to look elsewhere.
QUESTION: Could you define "soon"?
MR. RUBIN: "Soon" is one of those words that doesn't mean a long time, it
doesn't mean years, it doesn't mean many months. But short of that, we try
not to define "soon".
QUESTION: A couple of months, six months?
MR. RUBIN: I didn't say that. Soon means soon.
QUESTION: Could you share what the Secretary expressed to the Russian
Foreign Minister in her letter concerning Latvia?
MR. RUBIN: Well, I just put out, and will make available to you, a
statement on Latvia. We don't normally make public communications between
the Secretary and the Foreign Minister other than to tell you that she
obviously is concerned that the problems in the relationship may not be
handled through the appropriate dialogue that we'd like to see. Clearly the
government in Latvia has taken a step today to move forward towards
alleviating some of the concerns and we don't want to see these relations
spin out of control, and we'd like to see the difficulties between the two
countries resolved through dialogue rather than threats of sanctions,
which we regard as counterproductive.
QUESTION: Did she write the letter, without going into the details of
what she said in it?
MR. RUBIN: I wouldn't dispute that account, that there was such a
letter.
(The briefing concluded at 1:15 P.M.)
|
