 |
Compact version |
|
 |
        |
|
 |
||
|
Sunday, 22 December 2024
|
||
 |
 |
|
|
|
U.S. Department of State Daily Press Briefing, 01-03-12U.S. State Department: Daily Press Briefings Directory - Previous Article - Next ArticleFrom: The Department of State Foreign Affairs Network (DOSFAN) at <http://www.state.gov>DAILY BRIEFING Richard Boucher, Spokesman Washington, DC March 12, 2001 INDEX: RUSSIA TRANSCRIPT: MR. BOUCHER: Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen. Welcome to the Monday briefing. I don't have any statements or announcements, so I would be glad to take your questions. Mr. Gedda. Q: Could you tell us what former President Carter is going to be doing here in the building this afternoon? MR. BOUCHER: I am sure you can ask former President Carter a little more about what he intends to raise. For the Secretary, who has known President Carter for a long time, it is a chance to discuss with him a whole variety of issues that President Carter has been involved in. But it's really up to President Carter to raise whatever issues he wants to discuss. Q: Did President Carter ask for it? MR. BOUCHER: I think so, yes. I would have to double-check that. Q: Do you have any comment on President Putin's offer to supply Iran with defensive weapons? MR. BOUCHER: Let me say a couple things about that. I think, first and foremost, you know that the issue of proliferation and the issue of Russian proliferation activities is a top priority issue for this Administration. It's one that the United States has raised frequently with the Russians in the past, and one that we will continue to raise into the future. With regard to Iran, we are particularly concerned about sales of advanced conventional weapons or sensitive technologies, things like nuclear missile technology, and that will be an area of particular concern to the United States, and one which we would be most energetic about. As far as what constitutes defensive systems, I guess the Russians haven't been quite clear on that, but we would be looking particularly closely at anything that was advanced conventional weapons or sensitive technologies. We think it is particularly counter-productive for the Russians to sell things in their neighborhood in areas that affect us as well that might threaten us all. Q: Are you talking about that in general terms, or are you specifically talking about this -- what was coming out of Moscow today? MR. BOUCHER: Well, what's coming out of Moscow today is not well defined in terms of what they would intend to sell. There are, I think -- you know, I've seen wire stories, examples and things like that. What I am saying is that the areas that I identified -- advanced conventional weapons and sensitive technologies -- are in fact of great concern to the United States, and we would expect to raise them quite energetically and repeatedly if that was the area that they started going into. Q: Right, but you said that -- that's been said in the past, frequently. But you don't have anything specific on today's developments? MR. BOUCHER: It's up to the Russians and the Iranians to specify in more detail what they may or may not be doing. But this is an issue of great concern to us, and particularly to this Administration. Q: Can you comment on whether this might violate the Vassener Agreement? MR. BOUCHER: No. Q: There is evidently a high-level Russian official who is coming here on Wednesday who will meet with Secretary Powell, and I think Condoleezza Rice. MR. BOUCHER: I think that's their equivalent to our National Security Advisor. Sergei Ivanov is coming. Q: Do you know if this is -- did we ask him to come? Is this involvement - - MR. BOUCHER: My understanding is that this is not specifically -- he is not coming to talk to us about this, that he is coming because he is Dr. Rice's counterpart, but he -- no, I'll finish the sentence -- but obviously we may end up talking about this with him. Q: Any other subjects? MR. BOUCHER: Oh, it will be up to Dr. Rice, first and foremost, since it is her counterpart, but I would expect the whole gamut of US-Russian relations to be discussed. Q: On a related theme, there are persistent reports in the Arab press about this Administration making secret contacts with the Iranians through Iraqi dissidents, presumably people related -- connected to SCIRI. Do you have any comment on these reports? MR. BOUCHER: No, I don't. Q: And in that -- in connection with that, does the Administration plan to take any steps against the Mujahedin-e-Khalq, the People's Mujahedin of Iran, who continue to have that office a few hundred yards from the White House. MR. BOUCHER: Do you mean other than arresting a bunch of people that were fundraising for them in Los Angeles? Q: Well, have you done that? (Laughter.) MR. BOUCHER: I would expect the Administration to continue to take the appropriate steps. I'll leave it at that. Q: Might you close down their offices? MR. BOUCHER: I'll expect the Administration to continue to take the appropriate steps. Q: They have to destroy a bunch of ancient statues, though, before they -- before you actually move into the closing down of -- MR. BOUCHER: I would expect the Administration to continue to take the appropriate steps. Q: Another subject? Q: No, no. Q: Wait, can we stay on Iran? Q: Just one about Iran. Are you picking up where the Clinton Administration left off -- pardon the phrase -- (laughter) -- MR. BOUCHER: Please. Q: -- vis-à-vis Iran policy? It was the previous administration's goal, you know, to establish a dialogue with the Iranians. Is there any difference from what they were doing? MR. BOUCHER: The Secretary has talked to some extent about Iran. I don't think we have tried to enunciate any particularly new policy. Obviously the areas of concern that were of concern before have not been dealt with: the issues of opposition to the peace process and support for groups that violently oppose the peace process, questions of weapons of mass destruction. You have seen the Secretary and others in this Administration express their concerns about Iran's intentions with regard to nuclear capabilities and things like that. So I think the Secretary has been fairly clear. We haven't tried to enunciate an entirely new Iran policy, but obviously we would want to see those issues addressed as we go forward. Q: On that same subject, this week the sanctions against Iran have to be renewed, or they are suspended. What is the plan for those? MR. BOUCHER: The sanctions are done under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act by executive order. The authority expires March 15th unless it's renewed before that date. The President has the authority, but I am not aware that there is any decision at this moment. Q: (Inaudible)? MR. BOUCHER: No. I won't pronounce it because it doesn't sound nice. Q: And it's the International Emergency -- MR. BOUCHER: The International Emergency Economic Powers Act. It's been around for a while. That's the legal basis for the sanctions. Q: There's a story in USA Today saying that they're going to be renewed. Q: Can we move on to the Middle East? MR. BOUCHER: Please, Jonathan. Q: The Secretary has taken quite a few attacks in the Gulf on his remark that Jerusalem is the capital of Israel. I wondered if you would like to clarify your policy on that. MR. BOUCHER: I think we have clarified. We've made quite clear there is no change in US policy. The Secretary was describing the practical situation on the ground. Q: Sorry, but what is policy? MR. BOUCHER: What is policy? Q: Yes. MR. BOUCHER: The policy has always been and remains that this is an issue to be resolved by the parties in negotiation. Q: So you don't take a position on the status of Jerusalem? I just want to get it straight. MR. BOUCHER: The position that we've taken is that the status of Jerusalem is a matter to be resolved between the parties. Q: And on a related theme, what is your position on the Arab foreign ministers' demand that the international community should provide protection for the Palestinian population? MR. BOUCHER: I don't know if they have specified in any more detail. I've just heard the initial press reports. The issue for us has always been one where any sort of protection or observers, whatever, should be done between the parties by agreement of the parties, would be done in a way that's acceptable to the parties. At the same time, we've been quite clear in calling on the sides to do everything they can to end the violence, calling on the sides to end incitement and take steps to reduce the violence, as well as looking to the Israeli side to ease the economic pressure, including turning over the tax revenues and easing some of the restrictions on movement. So I think we have been quite clear that we thought there were things that both sides could do, and we'll continue to specify that, that we are concerned about the violence. The Secretary, over the weekend, talked to Prime Minister Sharon, to I guess now former Prime Minister Barak, to Foreign Minister Peres, about the situation. And we'll continue to be concerned about the situation as we look to steps that they can take to, as I said, end the violence, break out of the cycle of violence, as well as ease some of the economic plight of the Palestinians, who are in dire straits these days. Q: He didn't talk to anyone on the Palestinian side? MR. BOUCHER: Not this weekend, no. Q: Richard, one question related to that. Is there anything that the US is planning to do to help ease that economic situation? Are we considering direct food shipments or direct, you know, job assistance, or something? MR. BOUCHER: We and a number of other countries have tried to be of assistance, to provide emergency assistance to the Palestinians. First of all, I think on a policy level we have been clearly against any measures that make it impossible for ordinary Palestinians to survive economically. We think some of these security steps and restrictions of movement, in fact, do that. We have said all along that there needs to be an end to the violence, but there also needs to be an end to the economic pressure. Second of all, in terms of money, in January 2001 we redirected nearly $57 million in program funding to address emergency needs. This included 10 million to assist with municipal services, 4 million for health-related activities, nearly 9 million from the State Department's emergency refugee migration account. We have been involved in this issue with other governments, with governments of the Arab world, with Europeans in terms of our discussions with the European Union, on this economic situation there. Our assistance doesn't go to the Palestinian Authority; it's provided through nongovernmental organizations and programmatic funding to international organizations. Q: Is the US trying to be sort of an organizer and a collector, or has the EU -- or has anybody? MR. BOUCHER: I'm not sure who exactly is in the lead, whether there is somebody who has called a donors conference at this point or not, but there are a number of organizations that are very much involved. The European Union has certainly done a lot and continues to work very actively. Then some of the Arab governments have been quite helpful. And as I said, the United States, in its own way, has tried to be helpful as well. Q: Richard, the Sharon Government has eased some of the closures to some extent. Would you say that the steps they have taken so far are inadequate? Or you want to see more, presumably? MR. BOUCHER: I think we have seen steps that both ease and make more difficult the plight of the Palestinians, and steps that don't necessarily always respond to security needs. So we are very concerned about the economic situation. We certainly acknowledge Israel's security needs. We think that the economic pressure, the restrictions on movement in particular, contribute to a deterioration in the situation in the territories. They place hardship on families, undermine relations between Israel and the Palestinians, and they don't really quiet the security situation in the region. So that's why we have been quite clear that some of these steps need to be eased. Q: Can you be more specific on those steps which don't always respond to security needs? MR. BOUCHER: I think at this point I'll just leave it at what we have said. We have said there are things that both sides need to do -- clearly stopping the shootings, ending incitement, ending the violence is a very important issue -- and so that we can see some easing of the overall situation. Q: Well, in that, what do you make of Chairman Arafat's remarks over the weekend at the Palestinian National Council? MR. BOUCHER: Yes, again I am trying to avoid sort of direct commentary on specific steps or specific statements. I think we have been quite clear on what we think people need to do, and the fact that we are here today saying that they need to do those things maybe means they still need to be done. Q: Exactly. So you are -- but you don't want to say anything about Arafat's lack of comment on the -- and the possible end to the Intifada? MR. BOUCHER: I don't want to try to get into an ongoing commentary on a daily basis on what others might say. I want to make quite clear, though, that the policy of the United States has been to say -- to ask on the Palestinian side, an end to the shootings, an end to the incitement, and take steps to end the violence. On the Israeli side, we have also been looking as the violence goes down for steps that would ease the economic pressure, particularly by providing the tax revenues and by easing restrictions of movement. Q: Is it fair to say, Richard, that the Secretary discussed these steps with Mr. Sharon, Prime Minister Sharon, in his call? MR. BOUCHER: I don't know exactly to what level of detail he got in those phone calls. The general issue of the violence and the way forward was discussed. Q: But in terms of easing the economic pressures? MR. BOUCHER: I will have to double-check with him and see whether they raised these specific steps or not, if they discussed them. Q: He made these calls from home, I presume? MR. BOUCHER: Yes, I think so. Q: Are there any consequences in the US-Israeli relationship if they continue to restrict movement and continue to withhold the tax revenues? MR. BOUCHER: The US-Israeli relationship is fundamentally vital to both of us. Our support for Israel's security is ongoing, constant, continuous. But we also will provide our views, as we do, on the steps that we think they should be taking, as well as our views to others, like the Palestinians, on steps we think they should take. Leave it at that. Q: Can we talk about the meeting on Sudan on Friday, and what, if any, action plan or any kind of new steps that are going to be taken? MR. BOUCHER: As we previewed the meeting and said it was an informational discussion with the Secretary, a chance for the Secretary to gather his experts, primarily within the building. I think we had in the end one person from the NSC and one person from the Agency for International Development there. But it was a chance -- it was an informational meeting, a chance to discuss the situation, the various activities, options and issues. It was not a decision-making meeting. So since we talked about the meeting in those terms before the meeting, and since it turned out just the way we had predicted, I don't have anything more to say now about decisions because it wasn't meant to make any decisions. Q: Another subject? Iraq. Did the Secretary misspeak last week when he said additional funds had been released for the Iraqi opposition? It was my impression that there was simply an extension of money that would have expired on March 1st? MR. BOUCHER: No, he didn't misspeak. He spoke very precisely. Q: Could you give us more information about that? MR. BOUCHER: Do I have the numbers with me today? Basically, what he has been doing is releasing tranches of that 4 million. The grant authority was extended. His decision-making is to release pieces of that money for individual projects and activities, and he has been doing that. He has been releasing money the way he said he did. I don't have the numbers in my head right now, but I'll try to get them for you. Q: Just one follow-up. Can you tell me what the money was for? MR. BOUCHER: The basic humanitarian and public activities that have been described in the past that that $4 million was for. Q: The Secretary has spoken several times about a review of the no-fly zone policy, that being one of the three baskets of policy. What exactly is being reviewed? Is there something about the no-fly zones that is considered inadequate and that needs to be changed? What ideas are being kicked around? I realize he has also said that it's Rumsfeld's issue, but I wonder if he has got any input since he is just back from the region and has a military expertise, is weighing in at all on this. MR. BOUCHER: He is Secretary of State. Secretary Rumsfeld is the Secretary of Defense. This is a Defense Department issue. It's within Secretary Rumsfeld's jurisdiction to look at it and determine how best to carry out the mission of the no-fly zones. Obviously the overall Iraq policy and all its elements is a matter of discussion between senior people in this Administration, and to that extent the Secretary participates. But when the Secretary has talked to you about this, he has been quite clear that it was the Defense Department's job to look at this. Q: On Turkey, they are looking for is there some kind of commercial tie with the Iraq without violating the sanction regime. Do you have any reaction on this subject? They already announce it. MR. BOUCHER: I'm sorry, I don't quite understand what you are describing. Q: The Government of Turkey, they said that they are looking for a commercial tie with the Baghdad without violating to the sanction regime. MR. BOUCHER: Well, we have discussed with the Government of Turkey, as we discuss with many people in the region, especially the frontline states, an Iraqi policy that would tighten up, as we know, on controls of weapons, money and smuggling while, at the same time, allowing an easier flow of civilian goods for the civilian population. So to that extent, yeah, they could have economic ties with Baghdad and not violate the sanctions. Q: Yesterday's Washington Post exposes connections in Cyrpus and Greece for -- which help President Milosevic, former President Milosevic, to export illegally money from Yugoslavia, and gold. Do you have any reaction on that? MR. BOUCHER: Somewhere. Yugoslav riches. That's what I'm looking for. It's quite clear that Milosevic and his close associates channeled Yugoslav assets through Cyprus and other countries to a whole variety of locations. Our concern about these issues has been well known and longstanding. Recently, the Cypriot authorities have taken some steps to stop such flows, including closing Beogradska Bank's offshore banking unit and freezing accounts held by suspect Yugoslav nationals. Cyprus is also working directly with the International Tribunal. The Government of Cyprus has indicated publicly that it is prepared to work with Yugoslavia to identify and trace the Milosevic money trail. We would like to see the fullest possible cooperation between Nicosia and the new authorities in Belgrade. And obviously we welcome the cooperation that exists. Q: The same article included some anti-American statements from Cypriot officials, high-level officials, along the lines that we don't want Americans to say to us what to do with this thing. And do you have any reaction? Are you satisfied with the cooperation of Cypriot officials on this issue? MR. BOUCHER: As I said, there is some cooperation, which is obviously welcome, but we would look for the fullest possible cooperation between Cypriot officials, the Tribunal, and cooperation with Belgrade. As far as statements that may have been made here and there about the United States, it's not a matter between the United States and Cyprus so much as it is a matter between Cyprus and the new government of Belgrade, between Cyprus and the International Tribunal, and between Cyprus and its international obligations under the United Nations. Q: Along those lines to Yugoslavia, what do you make of this ceasefire that was signed today between the ethnic Albanians and the Serbs, which apparently was brokered by NATO? MR. BOUCHER: Are we sure it was signed? My people weren't sure it was signed. We know that the Yugoslavs have said that they're they're willing to have a ceasefire. We have seen press reports that the ethnic Albanians have said that they're willing to have a ceasefire. But I don't have anything yet that confirms those reports or says that it was actually signed. Obviously that would be a welcome step. We have made quite clear, I think, through NATO, that NATO will carry out these phased and conditioned reductions in the size of the security zone. Last week, NATO said that they would conduct the controlled return of Yugoslav forces into the narrow sector of the ground safety zone that's next to the border between Serbia and Macedonia. The timing of that will be determined by the NATO-led peacekeeping forces, the KFOR commander. And NATO forces, Yugoslav forces, are still, are currently discussing the technical operating conditions for that to happen. Q: And one more thing. Has the United States presented Kostunica and the new government with a kind of to-do list of things that they have to -- that they should work on or actually accomplish by the 31st in order for the President to authorize this aid money to continue? MR. BOUCHER: We and other governments have had discussions with the new government in Belgrade about their cooperation with the International Tribunal. That remains an important issue for us and for many others. We have urged Yugoslavia to fully cooperate with the Tribunal, as all members of the United Nations are obligated to do. The voluntary surrender today of an indicted accused war crimes, an individual accused of war crimes in Bosnia we see as a positive step. At this point, we have not made any particular decisions on certification. We have talked to the authorities in Belgrade about the type of steps that could contribute to a positive certification decision. In making this decision, we will look at all aspects of their cooperation with the Tribunal and the other issues that are specified by Congress, including respect for the Dayton Agreement and promoting democracy, human rights, and the rule of law. Q: Well, as I recall, these reports from Belgrade said that one of the things on this list was the -- well, you know, the surrender of someone who had been indicted by the ICTY. Does this surrender today fulfill that -- I don't want to say "condition", but does that fulfill the -- MR. BOUCHER: What I described was a comprehensive look at the issue of cooperation. It is not conditioned on a single turnover one way or the other. Q: Right, but are they now -- are they able to check that one off the list because of this, or -- MR. BOUCHER: We have talked to them about a whole series of steps of the kind that they could take, and certainly turning over indictees is one of the steps. But I would not say that it is conditioned upon any particular step, that one step is not determinant in one way or the other. Q: One other issue. I don't know if you would have this, but of the approximate $100 million that is conditioned to these steps, can you say how much the Yugoslav -- how much has actually been doled out, how much they have spent? MR. BOUCHER: I will have to check on that. Q: Do you know if Secretary Powell will be joining the meeting between President Bush and Japanese Prime Minister Mori next week? And if so, do you know what they would be discussing during that meeting? MR. BOUCHER: It's a little early to specify. Normally, he would. I'm not sure I've seen the Secretary's exact schedule for next week to know if he is going to be able to make that meeting. And what they will discuss will be, I am sure, the full range of issues in the US-Japan relations. Q: (Inaudible) Radio. Secretary Powell called on Saturday Czech President Havel to express US concerns with the Czech diplomatic efforts to include in the resolution condemning violation of human rights in Cuba, also criticism of US embargo -- Cuban embargo-- embargo against Cuba. Do you have any comments on that, on actually the American sort of contact with the Czech over the Czech diplomatic efforts to include the criticism of embargo in the resolution? MR. BOUCHER: I would, first of all, confirm the Secretary did talk to President Havel over the weekend. I think it was Saturday, but I'm not sure. They discussed the issue of the Cuba resolution at the UN Human Rights Commission this year. The United States’ view in working with the Czechs and with a variety of others who are involved in this resolution has been that it should be quite clear about the human rights situation in Cuba, and it should not mix in other factors such as economic issues. Q: Can you give us some idea of the State Department's involvement at this point in the spy investigation? Is it all the FBI? What is the State Department doing in terms of damage control, how the coordination works? MR. BOUCHER: It is an FBI investigation, and we are cooperating and working closely with the FBI as they go forward. But I can't get any more specific than that without getting into how the mechanisms work and how the investigation is proceeding, and it's really not for us to talk about an investigation that is under way. Q: Has his office reopened? Hanssen's old office? Is that -- MR. BOUCHER: I don't know. But again, that would be a decision for the investigators. Q: Can I go back to Cuba for one second? In the conversation between President Havel and the Secretary, did the Secretary talk about how -- talk about the fact that the Czechs, given their own very recent experience with -- a bad experience in Havana with their two former officials there -- should -- did that come up in the conversation at all? MR. BOUCHER: I don't know if that specific situation regarding their two former officials, who were I think private visitors at the time, whether that actually came up or not. I think we do look to working with the Czech Government because we do think that their views on the Cuban human rights situation are quite clear and that they understand quite well the problems and difficulties presented on the human rights front by the Government in Cuba. Q: Also on the Human Rights Commission meeting, which starts in a week or so, you have mentioned China and Cuba as being priority issues for the US. Are there other countries on the list of priorities as well that you are aware of? MR. BOUCHER: Yes. I don't have a complete list for you at this point of what resolutions we will introduce and support, but there are obviously other countries that will be discussed at that meeting besides these two. Q: Well, could you take the question? MR. BOUCHER: I'll see if we can give you any more detail at this stage. Q: Back to the subject of locating embassies. Could you give us any more insight into the decision that came out in Berlin today about the Embassy there, and waiving the requirement for the setback? MR. BOUCHER: Certainly. The Secretary has made a decision in principle to move ahead with the construction of our new Embassy on the US Government- owned site at Pariser Platz in Berlin. His basic decision was that America needs to be at the heart of Berlin, in the heart of Europe. We are working with German authorities to finalize plans and requirements. It is probably too soon to talk about start-up dates. It is important to remember that this project is a priority for the Department. Security is always a high priority for us when we build new embassies, and has indeed been a major factor as we have looked at this project on Pariser Platz. We believe, and the Secretary's decision was, that we can meet our security needs by working with German officials at the site, and therefore he has waived one or two of the technical requirements with a view that these security -- the security that we need can be achieved by other means. So he has issued waivers for specific requirements in this case because he believed that we could fulfill our security needs through a variety of other means. Q: Can you give any details of those technical aspects on which he has issued waivers? MR. BOUCHER: I think it was particularly the 100-foot setback requirement, where he decided that we could meet our security needs with a slightly smaller setback than that. Q: Any others? MR. BOUCHER: I would have to double-check and make sure. Q: Do you know how large the setback…? MR. BOUCHER: No, I will have to double-check on that, too. Q: Richard, can we move to the position, which is the Caspian-based energy sources as a special envoy, which I believe is the, Elizabeth Jones was there. Does that mean -- is the US changing the policy against Caspian- based energy sources or the Baku-Ceyhan pipeline? MR. BOUCHER: No, the Secretary made a whole series of decisions about a week ago on special envoys, special titles, special advisors. And these decisions were made, by and large, in order to keep -- in order to work these issues in a regional context within the regional bureaus and not have them as separate offices and separate functions; rather, to integrate them in our overall approaches to these regions, wherever they might be. I don't have with me today the exact list. I think you're right on the specific title, but I would have to double-check to make sure. But I think, in any case, our policy on the Baku-Ceyhan pipeline was stated about a week ago. We talked about it here. And we have still been supportive of projects that can lead to multiple pipelines in this area. A multiple-route strategy remains our goal, and that we have continued to work with our companies and with other governments to see this project come about. Q: Richard, on the whole special envoy thing, would it be possible to get a list or at the least, the very least, a number, the number of these position that have been -- were not renewed? MR. BOUCHER: Twenty-three. Q: Oh, it's already been -- Q: Twenty-three and 25. MR. BOUCHER: Twenty-three, nineteen and six is the way it breaks down. There were 23 titles that were abolished; there were 19 that were retained; and there were six that retained with a view to reviewing them in six months. And then, actually, there is seven more that were established by law and so they weren't subject to the Secretary's review. In terms of the specific details of which ones are on which list, we can get you that from the Press Office. Q: Here's a really obscure one for you. What is the Department's position on the provision in the bankruptcy bill which transfers jurisdiction for certain Lloyds of London debt suits from British to US courts? MR. BOUCHER: That is something that I'll have to check on. I was aware of that, but I haven't found out if we have a position on it yet, frankly. Q: Because you've been widely reported as saying -- not you personally but -- MR. BOUCHER: Not me personally, because I don't know enough about it to say anything. Q: -- said to oppose this position. MR. BOUCHER: I'll have to check and see if we've taken a position on that. Q: Back to the special envoys. Among those that you know of that are no -- that have been eliminated, does that include the Special Middle East Coordinator and the Coordinator for dealing with the Iraqi opposition? MR. BOUCHER: On the Special Middle East Coordinator, the Secretary's decision was to move that function back into the regional bureau, the Bureau of Near Eastern Affairs, so that the pursuit of peace, as he has talked about, can be done in a regional context. That's the way he has discussed it, and that's the way it will be handled in the future. As far as the -- Q: (Inaudible)? MR. BOUCHER: Yeah, in the separate office. But, I mean, you should be quite aware, that other than Dennis Ross, the people who have been working on this issue for many years who have toiled away in the vineyards and devoted time and energy to this will be working on the issue in the regional bureau, so that the expertise is not being abolished or lost in any way. And obviously the people in the regional bureau have considerable expertise on the matter as well. As far as the Iraqi opposition -- it is called Special Coordinator for the Iraqi -- for Transition in Iraq. That position is being retained, but it will be looked at in six months as far as its continued function. Q: Is the same occupant still in that position -- Frank Ricciardone? MR. BOUCHER: Yes. Q: Okay, then. It sounds like as though you didn't -- that people don't know this. I mean, I was gone, but did you go through all the -- MR. BOUCHER: I haven't actually gone through the complete list. We have had it available for people who might have asked about this, that or the other, and we can put out the entire list if that's what people want. This is the first time I guess we've stood up and done specific questions about any of the details. Q: Could you say something now on -- what about the North Korea position? MR. BOUCHER: I have to check on that. Q: It was kept? Okay. MR. BOUCHER: No, let me double-check on North Korea because there were a couple North Korea positions, and I have to check on exactly which one we're talking about. Q: Can you add to the list the annotation of which congressmen or senators have asked for these programs, as discussed in the hearings last week? MR. BOUCHER: Well, I think you guys can go over the transcripts of the hearings and see the congressmen or senators who had particular interest, and you'll be able to see the hearings on Wednesday and Thursday to see if there are additional positions in which they have particular interest. Q: On the meeting with the Indonesian Foreign Minister this afternoon, can you go over briefly what you think the agenda will cover? MR. BOUCHER: In general terms, yes. It's the first chance for the Secretary to talk to the Indonesian Foreign Minister. They'll cover bilateral relations, issues in the region, I'm sure. Obviously there are many events in the news these days with regard to events in Jakarta and elsewhere in Indonesia that we follow very closely that are of particular concern to us. We have always supported the territorial integrity of Indonesia and continue to do so. Q: Can you go over what the Secretary talked about with the Secretary of Energy, and also with the UN High Commissioner for Refugees this morning? MR. BOUCHER: The Secretary of Energy -- they are meeting as we speak so I can't put it in the past tense yet. They were obviously going to have a chance to discuss issues where they are both involved on the international stage, particularly, I suppose, the issue of oil pricing and oil diplomacy. On the meeting this morning with the High Commissioner for Refugees, the Secretary and he had a chance to meet -- they have met before, but first time for each of them in their current jobs -- and to discuss the urgent needs and the work that is going ahead in regard to refugees around the world. The Secretary commented at the outset of the meeting as to how much of his time and how much of his job he finds coming into this has been to deal with some of the humanitarian tragedies, and particularly the issues of refugees around the world. High Commissioner Lubbers filled him in on his general approach to these matters, issues of funding and management of the organization, and then they discussed some of the specific situations in Guinea, in Afghanistan, and one more that I can't quite think of right now - - anyway, and other specific situations around the world. Oh, Sierra Leone and the Presevo Valley as well. Q: Did they talk about budgetary allocations requested by the Administration for this issue for the coming fiscal year? MR. BOUCHER: They didn't talk about the specific allocations by the United States at this point. The High Commissioner commented on the fact that he has always received good support, positive support, from the United States, and that he was looking in the future to try to broaden their donor base to make sure that there were others in addition to the United States, the Scandinavians, who were particularly prominent in supporting the work of the High Commissioner for Refugees. Q: Is there any thought to giving that agency responsibility for internally-displaced persons, as opposed to refugees? MR. BOUCHER: That subject wasn't really discussed this morning. I'll have to check on where we stand on that. Q: To go back to oil pricing and oil defenses, do you know whether US Ambassadors to OPEC countries are conveying any kind of concerted message this week in advance of the OPEC meeting? MR. BOUCHER: No, I don't, and I will have to check on that. Q: On Afghanistan, the Taliban is destroying standing Buddhas statue. Do you -- or do we have any international law, regulation, to protect the historical artifact in all of the countries, all of the world, and can we stop them? MR. BOUCHER: The reports now are that the moveable statues have been destroyed, and that the giant Buddhas have been 80 percent destroyed. We have no confirmation, but we don't have any reason to doubt these reports. We, along with many other countries, private institutions, international organizations, have made efforts over recent weeks to try to persuade the Taliban not to destroy this irreplaceable part of Afghanistan's cultural heritage. The efforts were apparently not successful. Along with many other countries, we would strongly condemn this destruction of the irreplaceable world heritage. Secretary Powell called it horrible, described it as a tragedy, a crime against humankind. He deplores it and we deplore it. I want to say that we shouldn't let our dismay with the actions of the regime or the Taliban authorities distract us from helping the Afghan people. As I mentioned, this was a discussion this morning with the High Commissioner for Refugees. The Afghan people are not responsible for the Taliban decision, and indeed most Afghans disagree with what has been done. The Afghan people are suffering from an unprecedented humanitarian crisis which is the result of continued warfare, draught, harsh winter, and misrule by the Taliban. So we are continuing our emergency humanitarian aid. We would urge other countries to do the same. So there we kind of have it. It appears to have gone forward. We and others who have tried to stop it have been not successful in getting it stopped. At the same time, we do differentiate between the actions of the Taliban and the need to support the Afghan people, who are in dire straits these days. Q: Did you say -- I may have missed it. Did you say that this had come up in the Secretary's meeting this morning with the High Commissioner? MR. BOUCHER: The plight of the refugees from Afghanistan had come up. Q: Right, but this destruction of the statues wouldn't affect US assistance to Afghan refugees? MR. BOUCHER: Yes. I mean, I'm trying to remember. The destruction of the statues came up in passing, but it was quite clear that it was not going to affect our assistance for the refugees, and that we would continue to work with the UN High Commissioner for Refugees and others to make sure that those people were taken care of. Q: But, do you know, was that a concern of the High Commissioner, that somehow the US would seek -- MR. BOUCHER: No, it may have come up in passing. I can't even remember exactly how it came up. But it was not a major concern of his. And they talked about the plight of refugees. They discussed the other issues involved in handling and taking care of them. Q: Thank you. [end] Released on March 12, 2001
U.S. State Department: Daily Press Briefings Directory - Previous Article - Next Article |
|
 |
|
 |
 |
|
All Rights Reserved.