U.S. Department of State Daily Press Briefing #29, 99-03-09
From: The Department of State Foreign Affairs Network (DOSFAN) at <http://www.state.gov>
754
U.S. Department of State
Daily Press Briefing
I N D E X
Tuesday, March 9, 1999
Briefer: James P. Rubin
GUATEMALA
1 Secretary Albright's Travel to Antigua, Guatemala for
Central American Summit
EL SALVADOR
1 Presidential elections in El Salvador
SERBIA (Kosovo)
1-3 Status of KLA Action on Rambouillet Accords/KLA Delegation
1-2,4 Ambassador Holbrooke's Travel to Belgrade/Scheduled
Meetings/Mission
2,4,5 NATO's Intentions/Position on Use of Force
3-4 Prospects of Kosovar Delegation Visit to Washington
GREECE
4 Greek Opposition Leader Karamanlis' Visit/Meeting with
Secretary Albright
CHINA
5-6 Detention of Chinese Dissident Wang Lixiong
6-8 Investigation of Espionage at Department of Energy Labs
RUSSIA
8-9 Update on Situation in Chechnya
ANTIGUA AND BARBUDA
9 Elections For New Parliament
IRAN/ITALY
9-10 Iranian President Khatemi's visit to Italy
CAMBODIA
10-11 Cambodian Authorities Proceeding to File Charges Against Ta
Mok
11 Prospects for an International Tribunal
NORTH KOREA
11 Update on Ambassador Kartman's Discussions
12 Request for More Food Aid
IRAQ
12 Reports of Executions of Military Personnel
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE
DAILY PRESS BRIEFING
DPB #29
TUESDAY, MARCH 9, 1999, 1:10 P.M.
(ON THE RECORD UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED)
MR. RUBIN: Welcome to the State Department briefing. Let me first say
that I did not cut myself shaving on my forehead.
(Laughter.)
And I didn't slam the coffee cup into my forehead upon reading the
newspapers this morning.
I have a statement for you on Secretary Albright will travel to Guatemala
on March 10 and 11 to join the President for the Central American Summit,
and also on the presidential elections in El Salvador. Those will be posted
after the briefing. With that, let me go to your questions.
QUESTION: Are the Kosovar Albanians inching toward a signature?
MR. RUBIN: Getting to yes is a process that we will not say is completed
until we have a signature. Senator Dole spoke to one of the KLA leaders,
Mr. Krasniqi, this morning, and we expect the Kosovar Albanians to follow
through on the commitment that they made through Ambassador Hill to the
Secretary yesterday. But we will, again, not have a signature until we have
one.
Clearly, the pressure is now focused on the Serbs. Ambassador Holbrooke is
in Belgrade. He and Ambassador Hill are there. Ambassador Holbrooke is
scheduled to meet with President Milutinovic today and President Milosevic
tomorrow. He will be urging in the strongest possible terms Serb compliance
with the agreements negotiated in October; Serb restraint in the period
leading up to the scheduled talks on March 15; and Serb acceptance of the
Rambouillet accords when the conference reconvenes. That is what he will be
doing.
In the meanwhile, Ambassador Hill and others will be in touch with the
Kosovar Albanians to arrange for the expected approval by them through a
signature.
QUESTION: How much running room does Ambassador Holbrooke have to fine
tune the Rambouillet accord?
MR. RUBIN: That is not his mission. His mission is to urge restraint by
the Serb side prior to the accords; to demand compliance with the October
agreements; and to explain to the Serbs why they must accept this
agreement. Once the signature is attached by the Kosovar Albanians, we've
been quite clear that they would have to agree to any changes. We expect
that signature, and there is no discussion of material changes.
QUESTION: Are you saying, though, that, if the Kosovars have not yet
signed the agreement that there may be -
MR. RUBIN: No, I'm not saying that.
QUESTION: Will he reiterate the NATO bombing threat to President
Milosevic?
MR. RUBIN: I'm not going to describe publicly his talking points. I think
the message is as I described it - demanding compliance; urging restraint;
and explaining why they should sign the agreement.
Secretary General Solana has spoken to NATO's intentions, and that would be
appropriate for him to do so. I think that President Milosevic knows what
NATO's intentions are. As far as what Ambassador Holbrooke would specifically
say on that subject, I don't think it's appropriate for me to state in
advance before such a meeting. But I think the basic situation is pretty
well-known.
QUESTION: Jamie, is one of the problems in getting to yes with the
Kosovar Albanians, the question of exactly who will sign the document? It
does seem to be several parties within that grouping. Is there some
controversy over who would sign?
MR. RUBIN: The best way I can explain this is to make clear to you that
what we're trying to do here is a rather unique thing. The Kosovar
Albanians, for ten long years, engaged in essentially a passive, peaceful,
non-cooperation with the Serb authorities who were oppressing them. After
ten years of peaceful resistance, they went to a violent resistance through
the operations of the KLA. This is a new organization; it is only a certain
number of months old. It is not a fully unified organization.
Therefore, when we got together this delegation, which in and of itself was
a difficult challenge, to get the delegation to Rambouillet to negotiate on
behalf of both the KLA and the political leadership that it engaged in this
peaceful resistance for ten long years, that it wasn't an easy proposition.
They'd never operated as a unified entity before. This is new. They chose a
chairman, Mr. Thaci, and at the end of the process they sent a letter
by Mr. Surrai to the Secretary declaring their consensus position.
As far as who signs the document, so long as we believe it reflects the
authoritative position of the political side of the house and the KLA side
of the house, we will be satisfied. That doesn't mean we would expect any
signature in any situation like this to involve the guaranteed approval of
every single person involved. Clearly, there are going to be people who
want a statement of independence immediately. Those people are going to
exist. That's the reality of what happens when you let oppression turn
into a civil conflict like this.
But we will have to make a judgment whether we think it does reflect the
political and the KLA side of the delegation. We don't expect there to be a
problem with that. They have to make the decision as to who signs it. They
elected Mr. Thaci as their chairman for the purposes of Rambouillet, and if
they want him to sign it and he signs it that's fine with us. If they want
someone else from the KLA to sign it or if they want some other process,
obviously we'd look at it to make sure we think it reflects both sides
of the delegation - or both elements of the delegation.
QUESTION: Could several people sign for them so that you make sure --
MR. RUBIN: Sure. Well, there was a four-person presidency, sort of co-
chairmanship, as well. Mr. Thaci was the chairman for the purposes of
meetings, because somebody has to conduct the meetings; and then there was
a four-person team of Mr. Thaci, Mr. Surrai, Dr. Rugova and Mr. Qosja, I
believe; they represented the whole groups. So that would be plausible as
well.
All I'm telling you is that getting a delegation together was a challenge,
a difficult challenge. Getting an agreement negotiated that they would
accept was an even more difficult challenge. We staved off that inability
to do so most recently with the good work of Senator Dole and, obviously,
the work of the Secretary in France. They've now indicated, through
Ambassador Hill, that the KLA, which has been perceived to be the ones that
really weren't sure yet, that they have voted to approve it. Now we need to
get it authenticated through a signature. We'll be waiting, but we
expect that to happen.
QUESTION: Since that statement to Ambassador Hill, there has been new
statements coming from the KLA, one of them saying that their acceptance is
contingent on there being no Serb attacks. Was that made clear to
Ambassador Hill?
MR. RUBIN: I don't accept your premise to your question. Look, any
reporter can go out there and find some member of the KLA to say something.
I would expect some members of the KLA to say many different things.
Clearly, the Kosovar Albanians have a right to be concerned about Serb
crackdowns. I do not believe that there has been an authoritative statement
on behalf of the KLA saying they will not sign unless x, y and z. I believe
there were reports attributed to certain members of the KLA expressing
concern about continuing violence. We share that concern, but we do not
believe that the decision of the KLA was contingent upon a condition as you
described it.
QUESTION: Has there been any date set for the Kosovar delegation to come
here?
MR. RUBIN: No.
QUESTION: Do you still expect them to come here?
MR. RUBIN: Yes.
QUESTION: You said before that Milosevic knows what NATO's intentions are
and that the basic situation is pretty well-known. In diplomacy, words
spoken and not spoken are often chosen very carefully with a purpose. I
just wondered, is it still NATO's intention to subject Yugoslavia to air
strikes if Milosevic doesn't sign - if Yugoslavia doesn't sign?
MR. RUBIN: Our position hasn't changed. Nothing has changed, and I
wouldn't read more into it than that.
QUESTION: Could you give us a read-out if you have something from the
meeting between the Secretary and the Greek opposition leader?
MR. RUBIN: Yes, it was a good meeting. They discussed Cyprus; they
discussed Kosovo. They had a good meeting. It went pretty much as
expected.
QUESTION: Can you give us the time of the meeting? Half an hour?
MR. RUBIN: 45 minutes.
QUESTION: Did they talk about the Ocalan matter at all?
MR. RUBIN: Our position on Ocalan is pretty well-known. I do believe it
came up. But I will leave it to Mr. Karamanlis to describe his position.
Our position on Ocalan is pretty well known, and we want to see him - and
wanted always to see him - brought to justice. They did not discuss any
internal Greek matters.
QUESTION: Who was present from your side?
MR. RUBIN: I'll have to get a list for you.
QUESTION: Do you know if Mr. Holbrooke, after Belgrade, will travel to
Ankara or to Athens?
MR. RUBIN: I have not heard any suggestion of that.
QUESTION: Do you have any comments on the remarks of Mr. Simitis -- his
last week's statements about condemning terrorism?
MR. RUBIN: I think I described that yesterday.
QUESTION: You didn't read the text, you said, of the -
MR. RUBIN: I'll have to get it afterwards for you.
QUESTION: I'm sorry, I just want to go back to this question about air
strikes on Serbia.
MR. RUBIN: A little tag team?
QUESTION: Well, I mean, you're not saying it.
MR. RUBIN: There's no need to it. I'll give you a copy of every statement
we've made on it. It still stands.
QUESTION: Okay, is NATO --
MR. RUBIN: I just don't want to say it a little differently right now and
have you write a big story that something's changed.
QUESTION: Okay, well, there has been a lot of heat out of, I suppose,
mostly European columnists and cartoonists about --
MR. RUBIN: I haven't seen those, but I'm sure you'll send me a collection.
QUESTION: About how bellicose the US is on this, and particularly the
Secretary, to the point, it seems, of being out of sync with the rest of
NATO. I'm just wondering whether NATO's position is still --
MR. RUBIN: Yes, NATO's position is still the same. I think - look, we are
- for those of you who were there, and I know you were - in the run up to
the meeting, at a time when it appeared, based on representations made by
the Kosovar Albanian delegation that they were about to sign, there are
severe consequences that flow from their signing and the Serbs not signing.
We spoke to those, and all we're doing now is waiting for the Kosovar
Albanians to sign and then the pressure will clearly turn on the Serbs
in the same way as before.
We do not believe there's been any change in NATO's position or any of the
key European allies. The fact that anonymous European officials criticize
the United States during the course of a very difficult negotiation about a
matter in Europe is pretty much standard fare in this business. Those
anonymous officials often complain if we're not involved and then complain
bitterly if we are involved. That's just the nature of being the United
States, and we're kind of used to that.
QUESTION: On China, there's been an arrest. Do you have any comment on
that situation?
MR. RUBIN: On the arrest, we have seen press reports of the detention of
Wang Lixiong. We do not have independent confirmation of these reports.
Wang is a well-known writer, who has written a popular book that the
authorities have reportedly attempted to suppress. The book remains popular
in pirated editions.
Mr. Wang, who appears to have been detained because his book offended the
authorities -- should this be the case we would urge his immediate release.
China has signed international covenants which guarantee freedom of
individual expression. We call upon China to live up to its commitments.
QUESTION: Actually, I misspoke; I was talking about the scientist. I'll
take the other one, though.
(Laughter.)
If you've got something on the scientist, I'll take that as well.
MR. RUBIN: Oh, on that. On the particular firing of Wen Ho Lee, I can
only say that it's an ongoing investigation and it would be difficult for
me to comment on it. Your questions need to be directed to the Department
of Energy or the appropriate law enforcement authorities. But let me say
that preventing the flow of weapons or other sensitive information to
foreign nationals is a high priority for the Departments of State and
Energy; that Presidential Decision Directive 61 directed the Department
of Energy to create an office of counter-proliferation precisely
to ensure that all necessary steps are taken to prevent inappropriate
access to sensitive information and facilities.
More generally on this whole subject, we obviously take seriously these
charges, which arose out of events that allegedly took place at nuclear
weapons laboratories during the 1980s. CIA and Justice investigations are
ongoing. Congress has been fully informed through the appropriate
committees as information has become available. After briefings in July
1997, the Administration took quick steps to evaluate the information and
develop new procedures to strengthen security in the nuclear weapons labs.
A new Presidential Decision Directive, as I said, governing counter-
intelligence issued in February 1998 is being implemented vigorously.
We impose strict measures to guard against inappropriate technology
transfers to China's military and nuclear weapons programs. These include
no sales to the PLA or nuclear weapons programs; strict review of dual-use
technology, as to sophistication of technology as well as end user. We have
also taken strong steps to halt China's proliferation of sensitive
technology to other countries. We continue to review whether other steps
are needed. That's where that situation stands.
QUESTION: Do you have any comment about the red carpet visit of Iranian
President Khatemi in Italy?
MR. RUBIN: China first, then we'll go to Italy.
QUESTION: I know you don't want to comment on the ongoing investigation,
but is it possible that foreign policy considerations could have muted
protests to the Chinese on this matter?
MR. RUBIN: Could you please repeat the question?
QUESTION: Is it possible that the US Administration's desire for good
relations with the Chinese could have muted its protest to the Chinese on
this matter?
MR. RUBIN: Again, the question of protest -- we have no illusions about
China's desire to acquire sensitive information and technology for military
uses by many different means. It is absolutely not true that we downplayed
any evidence of this. We took the issue seriously, as our actions
demonstrate. Let's bear in mind that this espionage took place in the
1980s. Our first step was to evaluate the extent of Chinese espionage at US
nuclear labs and its implications for Chinese nuclear weapons capabilities.
Even though it is difficult to resolve these issues, we determined that the
threat was serious enough to warrant immediate action. In response, the
Administration intensified investigation of possible espionage cases and
strengthened security at the labs.
So we have been operating, as every Administration has been operating,
under no illusions as to China, like other countries, desire to obtain
sensitive information, and we've acted on it based on the evidence and not
on any other - I mean, it's inconceivable that we would downplay concerns
about espionage in a case that took place in the '80s. What I said to you
yesterday is that we believe we need to engage with China and talk to China
precisely to advance our national security, in cases like India and
Pakistan, in cases like North Korea going nuclear. But it's absolutely not
true that we downplayed any evidence.
QUESTION: Has this case been raised with the Chinese since it appeared in
the media a couple days ago?
MR. RUBIN: I don't know the answer to that. The Secretary didn't - again,
they've said they wouldn't do it, just the way every country that is trying
to obtain sensitive information through such means says that. So it's not
really a question of raising it with them; it's a question of finding out
what happened and taking steps to remedy the situation and act on
them.
It's difficult to go into all the detail in this forum, but in this area
that is pretty standard fair for espionage.
QUESTION: It would seem pretty pro forma that the Secretary would speak
to her Chinese counterpart.
MR. RUBIN: Not necessarily, when they've said it's not true. So they're
not going to say anything different in private.
QUESTION: They also say that - on the trip, which I didn't go on - they
say that they think there are some elements in the United States that are
trying to --
MR. RUBIN: Yes, I spoke to that on the trip. I think the Secretary made
clear to China that the fact that the United States is concerned about
human rights, the fact that the United States is concerned about charges
such as these, the fact that the United States is worried about proliferation
problems is not the result of some hidden conspiracy; it's the result of a
bipartisan concern in this country about Chinese policies and practices in
cracking down on human rights and Chinese policies and practices in
the area of proliferation.
We work on those problems. We think in the proliferation area we've made
substantial progress. In the human rights area, there's obviously been
major steps in the wrong direction. That is not the view of some small
element; that is the view of a bipartisan consensus in this country.
QUESTION: Have you decided what you're going to do about the Geneva
resolution?
MR. RUBIN: I have nothing new for you on that.
QUESTION: Jamie, do you have any information on reports that one of the
three Americans who was killed in Colombia had received death threats from
right wing paramilitary groups?
MR. RUBIN: I was asked about this yesterday. Did we get any new
information? We have nothing new, but we will try to work on that for
you.
QUESTION: What can you say about the situation in Chechnya?
MR. RUBIN: We understand that on March 5, the Russian official in charge
of law enforcement liaison between Moscow and Groznyy was taken hostage.
According to Russian press reports, the remaining members of the Russian
representation in Chechnya were evacuated from Groznyy.
Speaking to reporters in Moscow, the Russian Interior Minister deplored the
kidnapping and vowed to take action to free the general. Kidnappings in
Chechnya and the surrounding republics are a serious deterrent to
organizations interested in providing aid to the many needy in the region.
It is our hope that central authorities, working with local law enforcement,
will bring about an end to these crimes.
We remind all Americans of the State Department's Consular Information
Sheet on Russia, which recommends Americans defer travel to Chechnya, North
Ossetia, Ingushetia, Dagestan and surrounding areas due to continued
political strife and frequent kidnappings. That's all I have for you on
Chechnya.
QUESTION: Oh, okay, I was wondering if you knew the Russian Security
Council is having a meeting on the matter today.
MR. RUBIN: We'll try to get you some information on that.
QUESTION: I was wondering if you might have something to say about the
possibility of renewed Russian attacks on Chechnya.
MR. RUBIN: I haven't heard that, but we'll try to get you something on
that.
QUESTION: Were you able to get anything about warnings in the Antigua
elections today?
MR. RUBIN: As a matter of fact, I was. Antigua and Barbuda are having a
general election today to elect a new 17-member parliament. The incumbent
Prime Minister, Lester Bird, is seeking a second consecutive term. Today's
election is occurring five years since the last general election. The
current government has invited a three-person team from the Commonwealth's
secretariat to monitor the voting process.
The question of a threat to the Antiguan Government apparently refers to
language in a 1998 International Narcotics Control Strategy Report on
Antigua and Barbuda, which says "Antigua's democratic institutions of
government remain under threat from individuals who have infiltrated
government bodies to weaken the fledgling money laundering and off-shore
business controls. Using their considerable financial influence on the
government, they secured some changes that weakened anti-money laundering
legislation and we do not believe the government has adequately addressed
this threat."
In short, there is a corruption problem that we want to see them deal with,
and that must be the threat question that you had asked me about yesterday.
We don't have any plans to issue a Public Announcement on today's elections
in Antigua and Barbuda. With respect to our Consular Information Sheet, if
we receive information that warrants such an announcement of some increased
danger or any other use of our consular program, we will take appropriate
action.
On June 9, we indicated that American citizens should be aware that there's
a caution about incidents of crime against tourists.
QUESTION: Do you have anything on whether the bodies of the Americans who
were killed by the FARC in Venezuela are on their way home?
MR. RUBIN: They're expected shortly. I don't have a time for you, but
I'll try to get it for you after the briefing.
QUESTION: Somebody had started to ask a question about Khatemi's visit to
Italy.
MR. RUBIN: That's true; I forgot to come back to you. Please formulate
your question again.
QUESTION: Do you have any comment about the red carpet visit of Iranian
President Khatemi in Italy?
MR. RUBIN: We, as a goal, have stated that we support the reintegration
of Iran into the international community. But we have said that needs to be
done in conjunction with changes in Iranian policies and practices with
respect to support for terrorism and pursuit of weapons of mass destruction.
We expect and trust that the Italian Government will convey these same
concerns to their Iranian guest. We and our European allies all believe
that we would like to see improvements in that area. There have been
some, but we believe there is still a long way to go.
We obviously considered the elections in Iran to be a positive development,
by which the people of Iran were able to express themselves freely. We have
no reason to doubt the election was free and fair. But we still have
concerns about the issues I mentioned, and we know that our allies in
Europe share those same concerns and we would expect those to be raised.
QUESTION: What about Khatemi's visit to the Vatican? I believe he's
showing up there today.
MR. RUBIN: I believe my understanding is he's expected to see the Pope
later in the week.
QUESTION: Do you have any observation on that visit?
MR. RUBIN: Let me withhold comment on that until it happens.
QUESTION: You declared this election free and fair.
MR. RUBIN: I didn't declare, I said we have no reason to doubt it.
QUESTION: That's a term that carries a lot of weight.
MR. RUBIN: Well, free and fair may have been going too far. We have no
evidence of any particular manipulation of the elections. If you were to
have asked me that question - I was trying to step ahead of a question. I
don't think we had international monitoring by which we could declare them
free and fair, but we have no reason to dispute the turnout and the
results.
QUESTION: Cambodia - the Prime Minister seems less and less interested in
an international war crimes tribunal. Any comment?
MR. RUBIN: Yes, we are pleased that Cambodian authorities are proceeding
now to file charges against Ta Mok. It is entirely appropriate for Cambodia
to implement its domestic criminal law against Ta Mok. As we understand it,
he has been formally charged with violations of a 1994 law outlawing the
"Group of Democratic Kampuchea." We do not yet know the full scope of
charges that may be brought against him in the Cambodian legal system.
None of this, however, precludes an eventual trial before an international
criminal tribunal established to prosecute Ta Mok and other senior KR
leaders, which is our long-standing preference and the reported recommendation
of the UN group of experts.
We don't think this rules out the domestic proceedings -- consent by the
Cambodians to an international trial. We look forward to further cooperation
with the Cambodian Government on this point.
With respect to that, let me just point out that the Foreign Minister will
travel to New York to meet with UN officials later this week. I would
expect someone from our government in New York to be in touch with them.
What we will be trying to do is to convince them of the importance of a
real internationally sanctioned trial to ensure lasting reconciliation and
justice for this brutal killer.
QUESTION: Is there a double-jeopardy, by chance?
MR. RUBIN: No, the lawyers don't regard that as double jeopardy.
QUESTION: The State Department lawyers have rendered an opinion on that
now.
MR. RUBIN: Well, I don't know about an opinion - a formal opinion. I know
that we don't not regard the one as precluding the other; and, therefore,
by logical implication, we don't regard it as double jeopardy. That is my
logical implication from our position -- that as far as we're concerned he
can go through a domestic, legal process and still stand before a
tribunal.
Let me just give you an example. If the only law he ends up being charged
with is participation in an outlawed group, as opposed to the genocide or
mass murder that he has been widely alleged to have led in Cambodia, that
would not be double jeopardy. If you want me to take the question to our
lawyers, if there was some proceeding that involved mass murder, I'm sure
that the charges and the list of charges and the reasons for the charges
would be different in the international forum than the domestic forum.
I've heard nobody suggest any question of double jeopardy.
The question is whether -- Hun Sen has expressed some concern about the
destabilizing effect of a trial by an international tribunal. We have said
we disagree with that. We think that reconciliation, stability and justice
would be better served in Cambodia by an international criminal proceeding.
That is what we are going to be arguing to the Cambodians.
QUESTION: Do you have anything on that talks with the North Koreans?
MR. RUBIN: Other than to say our able Ambassador Kartman continues his
marathon discussions with the North Koreans. They began on February 27 The
number of meetings since then has been eight. They're continuing today. We
are seeking steps by the North Koreans to remove fully our suspicions about
the Kumchang-ni site, including by providing access to it. We have
repeatedly stated that we are not prepared to pay North Korea to ensure
compliance with its obligations.
We have suspicions about the nature of certain underground construction at
Kumchang-ni, but we have no basis to conclude at this point that the North
Koreans have violated the agreed framework. We are seeking access to the
site to be able to confirm that North Korea remains in compliance with the
agreed framework and that it will continue to meet its obligations. That is
where we stand. If we have any developments, we will get them to you. But
given the history of North Korean negotiations, I wouldn't assume
that this need go quickly.
QUESTION: Jamie, on a different subject with the North Koreans, has
decision been made on the WTO request for more aid for North Korea? They
made a few -
MR. RUBIN: WHO. WFP. WTO. WHO. WFP. I have nothing for you on that. It
has been our long-standing policy to provide food aid based on humanitarian
need. We determine our response based on assessments by the WFP and other
international humanitarian organizations -- maybe even the WTO -- and the
resources available to us. I have nothing new for you on that.
QUESTION: As I understand it, the North Koreans are saying the whole
argument in New York is about how much food aid would be required to enable
the North Koreans to be flexible on the question of access to this
underground site.
MR. RUBIN: Well, we have a long-standing policy and we will pursue that
policy; and that is to provide food aid based on certain assessments,
certain needs and certain resources. The North Koreans always try to tie
these things together in ways that would suggest that it's different than
our long-standing policy. We continue to explain to them and to you that we
have a long-standing policy of providing food aid based on needs and
assessments and resources. We will continue to pursue that.
QUESTION: On Iraq, there were reports about a number of executions of
military personnel in the beginning of February. Do you have any information
on that?
MR. RUBIN: I don't have anything new on that for you.
QUESTION: Is there anything old on that? We haven't even heard anything
old on that.
(Laughter.)
MR. RUBIN: Some two weeks ago, there's some old stuff.
QUESTION: No, it was on the wires today, specifically -
MR. RUBIN: Right, but it may be -- I just don't have any new response to
what was on the wires. But I will certainly urge our able staff at the NEA
Bureau to give me information about responding to information that is on
the wires.
QUESTION: Also, any response to the clashes over what Palestinians are
calling a settlement expansion in Israel?
MR. RUBIN: I didn't know that was on the wires.
QUESTION: Well, the clashes were a couple of days ago, and they're sort
of bickering about it now. I thought you all might have some words.
MR. RUBIN: Nope.
QUESTION: Thank you.
(The briefing concluded at 1:45 P.M.)
|
