U.S. Department of State Daily Press Briefing #15, 00-02-28
From: The Department of State Foreign Affairs Network (DOSFAN) at <http://www.state.gov>
744
U.S. Department of State
Daily Press Briefing
I N D E X
Monday, February 28, 2000
Briefer: James P. Rubin
KYRGYZSTAN
1 Statement on Concern Over Pre-Election Irregularities
MIDDLE EAST PEACE PROCESS
1-2 Ambassador Ross' Travel in the Region
1 Status of the Israeli-Palestinian Track
1-2 Status of the Israeli-Syrian Track
LEBANON/FRANCE
2-3 Israeli-Lebanon Monitoring Group
2-3 French Prime Minister Jospin's Comments
ISRAEL
3 Reported US-Israeli Draft Strategic Agreement
CUBA
3-6 Update on Expelled Cuban Diplomat / Return to Cuba Via Canada
LIBYA
6 Reported Easing of Passport Restrictions / Sanctions
NORTH KOREA
7 Preparations for High-Level Visit to Washington
RUSSIA
7-8 Welfare and Whereabouts of Journalist Andrei Babitskiy
AUSTRIA
8 Secretary's Meeting with US Ambassador Hall
CZECH REPUBLIC
8 Reports Secretary Albright Considering Running for Presidency of
Czech Republic
MOZAMBIQUE
8-9 US Assistance with Flood Relief Efforts
SUDAN
9 Update on Situation/Status of NGOs
CHINA
9-10 US Ambassador to China in Washington / Congressional Meetings
10 Admiral Blair's Travel to China / Discussion of "White Paper"
10-11 China's Human Rights Record
IRAQ
11-12 Acting Head of UNSCOM Charles Duelfer Resigns
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE
DAILY PRESS BRIEFING
DPB #15
MONDAY, FEBRUARY 28, 2000, 12:40 P.M.
(ON THE RECORD UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED)
MR. RUBIN: Greetings. Welcome to the State Department briefing on this
Monday, towards the end of February heading towards March, which lies
before April.
QUESTION: Which is a very important month.
MR. RUBIN: Which is a very important month, both March and April in their
own special ways.
We do have a statement on the pre-election irregularities in Kyrgyzstan
that we will release after the briefing, and some advisories about upcoming
events. And provided that Price doesn't knock over all the chairs in the
back of the room, we'll go right to your questions.
QUESTION: I see Dennis Ross is heading back from the Middle East after a
week of shuttle diplomacy. Any impressions you'd like to share with
us?
MR. RUBIN: Yes. Ambassador Ross is heading back to consult with Secretary
Albright and the President about his work over the past week. Obviously, he
has had a number of meetings, some of them more difficult than others.
Clearly, he is working very, very hard on the effort to restart the
Palestinian track. Clearly, we are seeking to overcome the differences that
exist between the Israelis and the Palestinians both on the remaining
issues in the Sharm el Sheik accord as well as the prospect of getting
agreement on the permanent status, the permanent peace, by September. This
was an intensive effort by Ambassador Ross.
His preliminary conclusions he offered me to use were that he believes both
sides are committed to the process but there are a number of ideas that
have been discussed and that are being examined, that we intend to stick
with this effort and that he will report, obviously, in more detail to the
Secretary and the President.
QUESTION: On the Syrian track, after the cabinet meeting in Israel a
couple of days ago, reports resurfaced that the Israeli Government did, in
fact - the previous Israeli Government did, in fact, give Syria guarantees
of complete withdrawal from the Golan Heights and that this was deposited
with the United States. Are you now in a position to tell us - to enlighten
us about what happened back in - when was it - in '95, '96, in the days of
Prime Minister Rubin (sic) (Rabin).
MR. RUBIN: On the Syria track -- what did you call him? I like the sound
of that.
Let me say this. On the Syria track, obviously, this is an issue that the
President and the Secretary and Ambassador Ross have all been working
intensively on for some weeks now. We have made it a practice of not
describing the details of the negotiations because we believe that will
make it that much harder for the negotiations to both restart formally and
to resume successfully. That view, I think, was made true by the result of
the leak of some of the working documents in the Israeli press, which
clearly harmed our efforts. And I think our judgment about what one
can and can't say in public was demonstrated through the aftermath
of that publication.
So that is not a practice we intend to change. I can say this: There has
been a continuity in Israeli policy, and Prime Minister Barak has made that
clear to us. From our standpoint, what we have seen as the guiding
principle is that both sides' needs must be met, and our effort has been
rooted in that principle in trying to help both sides achieve that
principle.
There is still an enormous amount of work to be done. We've had a problem
where each side wants its needs to be met first, and that has made it not
possible as yet to restart talks formally. We have stayed in very close
contact with both sides in order to prepare the ground so that, if and when
we get the formal discussions resumed, that they can be successful. And
that is about as much as I can say on your question.
QUESTION: Can I just have a quick follow-up? Does this hint that the
Israelis may be moving towards a recognition of full withdrawal make it
easier or more likely that you will be able to get these talks restarted?
MR. RUBIN: Well, I'm not going to begin to play pundit for you on this
subject. Maybe that will come in the future but, from our standpoint, I
don't think it's wise to speculate as to what the chances of the effort
occurring and then them being successful are. From our standpoint, what I
can say is that we're working to achieve the principle I've described of
both sides having their needs met and, at this point, that's all I have to
say.
QUESTION: Well, on that, is the United States - there seems to be
indications that the US and France are trying to put something together on
this. I'm just wondering, did Ambassador Ross meet with Prime Minister
Jospin when he was there, and do you have anything to say about the rather
ugly turn of events that happened with the Prime Minister?
MR. RUBIN: Let me take those in separate pieces. We have been working
with France to try to create as much calm as possible in southern Lebanon,
to work in capitals to lay the groundwork for the meeting of Israeli-
Lebanon Monitoring Group. There were further incidents of violence in south
Lebanon over the weekend. We continue, along with France, to urge maximum
restraint, to avoid an escalation of violence.
The April Understanding and the Monitoring Group process are important
undertakings which all parties need to adhere to. We are working to bring
about a meeting in the future. That said, however, only a comprehensive
peace can resolve these issues and resolve the underlying tensions that
cause this problem. That is why we are doing everything we can to restart
the Lebanon track as well as the Syria track. And violence in Lebanon only
makes this effort more difficult.
With respect to what the Prime Minister in France said, I think I will
leave that for him to respond to.
QUESTION: Was there a meeting between him and --
MR. RUBIN: I am not aware of that. We've certainly been in touch with the
French to talk about how to promote as much calm as possible in southern
Lebanon.
QUESTION: Are you trying to get a meeting of the Monitoring Group?
MR. RUBIN: As I said to you last week, I think we do want to ultimately
have such a meeting. In the meantime, we are working through capitals to
try to create the groundwork for such a meeting. But we are working to
bring about a meeting of the group in the near future.
QUESTION: It's not an immediate objective?
MR. RUBIN: What we are trying to do is work in capitals at this stage.
And we would like to see a group meeting in the near future but, obviously,
not immediately or I would have said so.
QUESTION: The Israeli Deputy Defense Minister was in Baltimore yesterday
and he said that the United States and Israel have begun to draft a
strategic agreement that isn't quite a treaty but contains lots of details
about cooperation and so on. Can you tell us anything about it?
MR. RUBIN: Yes, I think I've said for some time I don't think there is
anything new about that. I don't know about "drafting." I mean, there may
be somebody's draft; I don't know about joint drafting. But we have been
talking to the Israelis about what kind of adjustments might be appropriate
in our strategic relationship in the context of a comprehensive peace. And
we have been consulting with them on that for weeks now and we continue to
do so, but there is nothing really new to report on that end.
QUESTION: You don't have any documents floating around?
MR. RUBIN: As I alluded to, I am sure there are some documents on one
side. I don't know about "joint drafting." That strikes me as a little bit
of wishful thinking.
QUESTION: On Cuba?
MR. RUBIN: Yes.
QUESTION: We were told that Mr. Imperatori --
MR. RUBIN: Well, let me add that that doesn't mean that we aren't
consulting closely and intensively with the Israelis on this matter.
QUESTION: We were told that Mr. Imperatori would be back in Cuba by now
and, apparently, he's still in Canada and the Cuban Government is saying
that he is seeking permission to stay in Canada for the time needed to find
an honorable solution to the problem. And that implies a solution to the
problem regarding the fellow who was arrested on spy charges in Canada. Is
something being worked out that would involve testimony from him in
some US venue?
MR. RUBIN: Let me say this: In a meeting in the Department of State on
the 26th, representatives of the Cuban Interests Section said they
preferred that Mr. Imperatori return to Cuba via a third country and
concurred with the travel arrangements for returning him back to Cuba via
Canada when so advised.
This expulsion from the United States via Canada was arranged on the
understanding he would simply transit on his way to Cuba. This was closely
coordinated by US, Canadian and Cuban officials in Washington in advance.
From our standpoint, the Cuban Government has acted in an unprecedented way
and, in unprecedented manner, they have violated their international
obligations by not voluntarily recalling their diplomat after we declared
him persona non grata. PNG does not mean, "Please Now Go." It means person
non grata. It means, "Go." And he either went voluntarily or, as you saw,
he went involuntarily.
We presume that the Canadian Government will resolve this matter directly
with Mr. Imperatori and/or the Cuban Government. The solution is for him to
return to Cuba in accordance with the government of Cuba's international
obligations.
The Canadians have kept us updated on this matter and we understand that
the Canadians expect him to depart Canada before his visa expires. We have
said for some time we would be willing to allow a number of officials,
including Mr. Imperatori, to return to the United States after having been
PNGed under specified conditions if and when law enforcement authorities
feel it may be necessary. Under international practice, when a diplomat is
declared persona non grata, his government must remove him. They have
violated that diplomatic practice. When and if a time comes where law
enforcement officials believe it appropriate for him to be here and
those specified conditions for him and others are arranged, I'm not
going to rule out that possibility. But in the meantime, PNG means
PNG.
QUESTION: I'm a little confused as to why he was forcibly expelled and
not arrested, as had been threatened. I mean, it leaves a kind of
indication to me --
MR. RUBIN: I never threatened his arrest. I said there were a number of
possibilities. There was the law enforcement possibility. On Friday, we
indicated - on Thursday, we indicated the visa possibility, that it would
be expired. So we - persona non grata means that he is no longer welcome in
the United States. He was involuntarily removed from the United States
because his government refused to voluntarily remove him.
Arrest would be the subject of a law enforcement matter, which was one of
many possibilities which was not threatened but was mentioned as a
possibility.
QUESTION: I'm sorry I used the word "threatened," but it was a possibility.
MR. RUBIN: Right.
QUESTION: He wasn't arrested, which would lead me - and maybe I'm just
way off base here - but it would lead me to the conclusion that you don't
really have the goods on this guy. He wanted to stay and to fight these
charges in court and you didn't give him that opportunity.
MR. RUBIN: Right. I don't think you should draw conclusions about "having
the goods" from this episode. As you all well know, preparing a prosecutorial
case is not something that can be done in seven days. We made the judgment
that because of activities inconsistent with his status, that he was PNG.
That is a rather firm action by the United States and, obviously,
we took the necessary steps to enforce that action.
Just as peace is not made in seven days in the Middle East or in Northern
Ireland or in Ethiopia and Eritrea, a prosecutorial case is not made
necessarily in seven days. If and when the time comes that law enforcement
officials seek his presence in court or in other law enforcement proceedings
and he chooses to come, that will be fine. But none of this should be read
any other way other than that we made the decision to PNG him pursuant to
the time frame and you shouldn't draw dramatic conclusions by the
fact that an indictment was not put forward in a matter of a few days.
QUESTION: Is the United States contemplating loosening the passport
restriction to Libya?
MR. RUBIN: I think some of your colleagues are a little focused on Cuba
here.
QUESTION: Perhaps I missed something here, but you seemed to be saying at
the beginning that the Interests Section here had agreed on the arrangements
for his departure in advance and that they agreed that he would only go to
Canada in transit.
Are you saying that they have reneged on this agreement?
MR. RUBIN: Well, I think I said what they told us and you saw the events
as they unfold. We arranged for his transit through Canada based on the
understanding he would simply transit on his way to Cuba. Obviously, that
did not happen and that was not our understanding at the time.
QUESTION: That meeting took place on Saturday morning?
MR. RUBIN: The 26th, yes.
QUESTION: Do you have any comment about Philip Agee's new business in
Cuba?
MR. RUBIN: I know nothing about it.
QUESTION: It's a travel - an Internet travel agency promoting tours to --
MR. RUBIN: I would think that all Americans would want to make sure that
any business they were running through Cuba did not run afoul of the
Treasury Department's rather stringent restrictions.
QUESTION: Are you loosening the passport policy for Libya for Americans
traveling to Libya?
MR. RUBIN: We have made no such decision. The Secretary extended the
passport restriction, I believe about three months ago, for another year.
With respect to Libya in general, we continue to expect full Libyan
compliance with the requirements of UN Security Council resolutions before
we can support the lifting of UN sanctions. The travel restriction is based
on a judgment about security. It's not a sanction; it's based on a judgment
about security, and that judgment was renewed by the Secretary some months
ago. I can get you the exact date for that. And I have nothing new
for you on any new judgment.
With respect to the suggestion that the fact that Libyan diplomats are
restricted to the five boroughs of New York City, we did approve Ambassador
Doorda's travel to Washington, D.C., because the purpose of his travel was
to attend a meeting of the International Fund for Agricultural Development,
which is consistent with his UN duties. We did not have any bilateral
contact with him in Washington and the Libyan mission did not request that
we do so.
With respect to the related issue of Libyan participation in Congo
peacekeeping, the mission was put together by the UN Department of
Peacekeeping Operations. This isn't a positive sign towards Libya or a
negative sign towards Libya; it's no signal whatsoever.
QUESTION: So the Ambassador's comment, he's also engaging in a bit of
wishful thinking?
MR. RUBIN: I haven't seen what he said. I'm just telling you what our
policy is.
QUESTION: There is nothing that you might categorize as even a modest
gesture toward Libya, that you're aware of?
MR. RUBIN: Well, he did travel here for the meeting, which hadn't
happened before but it was consistent with his UN duties.
QUESTION: On North Korea?
MR. RUBIN: Sure.
QUESTION: On the meeting in New York later this week, can you give us
some idea about what they're going to be discussing, any dates yet for the
senior official coming? And, also, there was a report in the South Korean
press that they're going to talk about opening liaison offices finally.
MR. RUBIN: Right. All of those things are possibilities. What I can tell
you is that we do expect there to be a meeting to finalize preparation for
the high-level visit to Washington, which is still on track as far as we
know for next month. Consistent with that visit, we do intend to have
discussions with North Korea on a number of issues that have been
outstanding. We have always demonstrated a willingness to continue work on
the liaison office effort. We have expressed a willingness to work on
counter-terrorism issues, by explaining in some detail to the North Koreans
what steps they need to take to remove North Korea from the terrorism
list. And those efforts continue.
I can't give you a date for the New York meeting but we do expect to have
something on that very, very shortly.
QUESTION: The press report said Wednesday but --
MR. RUBIN: It just hasn't been finalized with North Korea in particular.
Until it's final, it's not final.
QUESTION: Is it possible it will be announced today?
MR. RUBIN: I am told "very, very shortly," which is more than I'm usually
allowed to say but I don't think today is necessarily that shortly. Someday,
by the way, I intend to define what "shortly" means.
QUESTION: For some days, this Department has said it is waiting for
Moscow's response on Babitskiy. It would seem they have responded by now
arresting him again and filing criminal charges. At the same time,
President Putin today said that the case appears to have gotten "completely
mixed up" were his words. I wonder if you could comment more fully on this
today, especially with regard to specifics as to how Moscow will be
held responsible?
MR. RUBIN: Well, first of all, let me say that we are relieved, as I am
sure all involved are, that Mr. Babitskiy is alive and well in Dagestan;
that Mrs. Babitskiy and her daughter and a lawyer traveled to Dagestan on
Sunday, and that Russian authorities granted his attorney access to
Babitskiy. There are wire reports indicating that Acting President Putin
has said that Babitskiy should be released. If that were to happen, we
would certainly welcome such a development.
There have been a number of conflicting reports about this. What happened
in the trade, from our standpoint, the important thing is that Mr.
Babitskiy is okay. And we hope the facts of the case become increasingly
clear. From our standpoint in general, the Babitskiy case was extremely
disturbing and it has been a top priority for the State Department and for
this administration in dealing with Russia. And let me say the suggestion
by some, including Tom Dine at Radio Liberty, about what we have and
haven't done is extremely off base and doesn't bode well for the credibility
and accuracy of Mr. Dine's statements.
From the moment that this case has come up, we have acted with dispatch at
the appropriate level, worked closely with Radio Liberty officials who
actually were informed about the case, unlike Mr. Dine. And we worked very,
very closely in making very clear to the Russians our concern about it. I
recall personally being in Moscow when it developed, and Mr. Trimble, who
we worked very closely and successfully with, was very pleased in the way
that we constantly kept it on the agenda, that we sought to get Russian
clarifications, and that we did whatever was appropriate in trying to get
information about where he was.
So at this point, it's clearly an extremely disturbing case of trying to
crack down on independent media. We're pleased that he's alive. We
certainly hope that Mr. Putin's statements about the imminent release of
Mr. Babitskiy prove true. If so, we would certainly welcome that.
QUESTION: There is some speculation in Austria that Mr. Haider may resign
as the head of the Freedom Party. And I'm just wondering, if he does do
that, if that would make any difference to the United States in terms of
its policy toward --
MR. RUBIN: Well, it couldn't hurt. But Ambassador Hall met with Secretary
Albright earlier today as part of her regular review of this matter. She
received an update. I was not at the meeting but I think if there was an
imminent expected resignation of Haider, that somehow that would have been
brought to my attention. But I'll check that for you.
QUESTION: It's Austrian press reports.
QUESTION: I have a couple of questions. One, is the Secretary considering
running for the presidency of the Czech Republic?
MR. RUBIN: The short answer to that question is no. The long answer is
also no. From time to time, the Secretary of State has been approached by
Czech officials who have indicated their interest in her succeeding Vaclav
Havel as president. She has always been flattered by their interest in
this. Obviously, if one is being considered for such a high post by serious
people in the land of your birth, that's very flattering. She has
never seriously considered this. She has always dismissed these entreaties,
and there is no truth to the idea that she has been seriously campaigning,
considering trying to succeed Havel.
QUESTION: And, also, do you have anything more on the US response to
events in Mozambique, the flooding, the AIDS issue?
MR. RUBIN: Yes, I probably can get you something after the briefing.
There is some efforts that we've certainly been making in that regard.
Today, the US Agency for International Development has announced it will
provide $132,000 to Save the Children for emergency cholera prevention
activities. This brings our total assistance to just over $600,000. In
addition, we've sent disaster assistance specialists to Mozambique. They
are currently conducting assessments and we're working with the Department
of Defense to send an emergency flight containing relief supplies,
including shelter materials, blankets and water containers.
QUESTION: Do you have any update on the situation in Sudan where,
apparently, Operation Lifeline in Sudan is in peril?
MR. RUBIN: It is our understanding that some of the non-governmental
organizations who have been doing truly heroic work there have begun
pulling out their expatriate staff and project assets. Some 26 international
organizations have signed an MOU that has been demanded from the SPLM but
another 13 have not yet signed, including some of the larger US-based
organizations. We have repeatedly urged Dr. Garang and the SPLM to suspend
its March 1st deadline, to reopen negotiations with these non-governmental
organizations.
Our special envoy, Harry Johnston, along with our special - the UN Special
Ambassador Vraalsen, met with the SPLM leadership in Kenya on February 17,
last week, to offer direct US and other donor assistance to negotiate the
outstanding points of the disagreement, to request a suspension of the
deadline while negotiations are ongoing and to request that no NGOs be
expelled.
The current situation remains unchanged with the SPLM continuing to hold
that the organizations who do not sign the memorandum of agreement must
leave.
QUESTION: Jamie, on this statement that was put out on Thursday or Friday
which was very - quite harsh, the consideration that the - at the White
House, of providing direct food aid to the SPLM, would that - if they go
ahead with this in keeping the demands in the MOU, would that automatically
mean that --
MR. RUBIN: At this point, we have made no decision as to whether to use
the authority provided by Congress. Obviously, this is a matter of deep
concern to us and we have deplored and continue to deplore the decision of
Dr. Garang's Sudan Peoples Liberation Movement to expel relief workers from
southern Sudan that don't sign an MOU by March the 1st. I am not going to
predict for the end of time what we will do with that authority, but
I can state rather comfortably that this can't help their case.
QUESTION: Can you state comfortably that the administration is still
confident that --
MR. RUBIN: I'm so comfortable these days, it's easy to say things
comfortably.
QUESTION: -- that the administration is still confident that permanent
normal trade relations will be passed on the Hill? And if you could also
speak to the US Ambassador to China, Admiral Prueher, is in town, what he's
doing while he's here?
MR. RUBIN: Yes, the US Ambassador is here. We believe he is a very
effective advocate for the wisdom of maintaining relations, good relations,
with China even while we disagree on important issues including Taiwan,
including certain nonproliferation issues and including profound differences
on human rights.
Ambassador Prueher is here as part of our effort to convince the Congress
that we should not cut off our nose to spite our face, that we should keep
our eye on the ball. And the ball here is what will be in the interest of
the United States with respect to the World Trade Organization. And what
will be in the interest of the United States is for us to get the benefits
of lowered trade barriers and non-tariff trade barriers, to improve the
involvement of American companies, American businesses and American
workers in getting trade with China, even while holding open the possibility
that the World Trade Organization's admission of China will increase the
prospect for China living under the rule of law.
And so these two benefits were negotiated, considered and planned,
irrespective of disagreements with China about subjects like Taiwan, about
subjects like human rights. So we hope that Ambassador Prueher's presence
here and the efforts that Secretary Albright and Secretary Daley and
ultimately the President have been making to try to convince members of
Congress are successful in having them keep their eye on the ball. What's
in the US national interest? If that's your standard, this agreement is
clearly in the American national interest because it improves our trade
position, it improves the chances that China will live under the rule of
law domestically and internationally and, thus, improves the chances for
the benefits of US-China relations being felt.
Whether the Congress decides to heed that sage advice is obviously
unknowable. But we remain confident that, at the end of the day when all
the arguments have been heard, that Congress will see the wisdom of the
case that I just summarized for you.
QUESTION: In the week since the White Paper was issued or the days since
it was issued, after your initial communications with Beijing and here in
Washington with the Chinese Embassy, has the administration asked China,
encouraged China to step back or make any kind of gestures or anything to
try to calm things down?
MR. RUBIN: We have been in touch with China a number of times, a number
of places over the last week. The most recent contact is by Admiral Blair
who is in China and has expressed his concern on behalf of the United
States about the release of this White Paper and the unhelpful and counter-
productive remarks and positions stated in that paper.
We continue to urge China to look for ways to reduce tensions and we
continue to strongly urge China not to take any additional steps that could
increase tensions. We regarded that paper as counter-productive and not
helpful to the situation in the cross-strait dialogue, nor was it obviously
helpful in our internal efforts here.
QUESTION: Jamie, I asked this question to Mr. Koh on Friday and I would
just like to ask it to you. Do you see that the repression internally in
China of human rights being extended internationally to a threat or
repression of human rights in Taiwan? Is there an international human
rights violation going on here by China?
MR. RUBIN: Human rights, to the extent that Assistant Secretary Koh is
the expert in defining them - from my standpoint, they refer to the
international human rights instruments. And the Chinese record in the last
year has been one of deterioration in a number of fronts, both with respect
to organized groups like the Falun Gong, with respect to religious
persecution and with respect to a number of activities, their record has
deteriorated.
With respect to Taiwan, we have a One China policy. We have three
communiques with China but we don't always agree on their threats to
Taiwan. And in the most recent case, we regarded their threat as counter-
productive. We continue to regard it as counter-productive and we continue
to oppose it very strongly.
QUESTION: Just to follow up on Andrea's question, you said that you would
urge China to look for steps to decrease tensions.
MR. RUBIN: Right.
QUESTION: What sort of steps are you looking for?
MR. RUBIN: There are a number of different possibilities. I am not going
to specify them but, obviously, we want the tension in the straits to be
reduced.
QUESTION: I have a question about Iraq. Charles Duelfer, the acting head
of UNSCOM, has now resigned. Do we have any reaction to that? Are we
following Hans Blix in his efforts to create a new organization, and are we
satisfied with what he is doing, that it will satisfy our needs vis-a-vis --
MR. RUBIN: Let me say this. I know Charlie Duelfer. Charlie Duelfer is a
friend of mine and Charlie Duelfer is a very good arms controller. We
believe that Mr. Duelfer has provided outstanding service to the United
Nations in helping carry out the Security Council's mandate with reference
to disarmament and monitoring. He has served two Executive Chairmen with
great distinction and his service reflects great credit upon the United
Nations.
We note that Mr. Duelfer has offered to make himself available as a
resource to Dr. Blix and, from our standpoint, the new inspection
organization, UNMOVIK, has the same mandate and the same rights, privileges
and immunities as UNSCOM. We believe that Dr. Blix should be able to
benefit from the experience of the current UNSCOM staff and have the option
to retain them if he wishes. We've obviously been in touch with Dr. Blix
but I don't want to prejudge what steps he may or may not take.
QUESTION: Do you have any idea if he will retain any of the current
UNSCOM people?
MR. RUBIN: Certainly from our standpoint, we believe he should be able to
have the benefit of the experience of the current UNSCOM staff and have the
option to retain them, but I'm not Dr. Blix's spokesman and I don't want to
prejudge what he would or wouldn't do.
QUESTION: I was wondering if you have anything more on Tony Lake's
mission?
MR. RUBIN: I have nothing new on that but we can check after the
briefing.
QUESTION: Is there any formal reaction to the formal nomination of Koch-
Weser for the IMF by the EU this morning?
MR. RUBIN: I think the White House Spokesman will have something
definitive to say about that and so I think, rather than muddy that message
with a word here or a word there that's slightly off kilter, I would refer
you on that very sensitive issue to the White House.
(The briefing was concluded at 1:20 p.m.)
|
