 |
Compact version |
|
 |
        |
|
 |
||
|
Sunday, 17 November 2024
|
||
 |
 |
|
|
|
U.S. Department of State Daily Press Briefing, 01-03-30U.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 30, 2001 INDEX: STATEMENTS TRANSCRIPT_: MR. BOUCHER: Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen. A couple things off the top. I think you've seen our statement on Colombian transit visas. We had a statement this morning on Belarus. And to add to my remarks yesterday, I sighted Tom Weston in the cafeteria and saw him again today, so our Special Cyprus Coordinator is on the job, lest there be any doubts. With that, I'll be glad to take your questions. Q: Could you talk about what the Secretary and the Turkish Foreign Minister may have said about Iraq and how his ideas, the Secretary's ideas, might help the Turkish economy? MR. BOUCHER: I think there was a general discussion of the Iraq policy and how we would move forward. The Secretary explained our ideas and how we wanted to move forward now to put them into effect, working with the Europeans, working with the Perm Five, working with the frontline states. The Turks expressed general support for the direction and appreciation for the way we were working with them and they look forward to working out the final details with us. Q: (Inaudible.) MR. BOUCHER: Sure. I think the Secretary covered most everything else, but I’ll take your question. Q: Can you be more specific on the context of the discussion on Cyprus between the Secretary and -- MR. BOUCHER: The context of the discussion was the UN process and the UN talks and the importance that the United States attaches to continuing that process and moving it forward. I think I'll leave it at that. Q: Did they discuss the Aegean Sea issue, and specifically the rocky islands? MR. BOUCHER: They discussed in general the state of Greek-Turkish relations as well as broader issues with Turkey and the European Union, but not specifics like you mentioned. Q: Nothing on the Aegean? MR. BOUCHER: As I said, the Aegean being a component of Greek-Turkish relations, the general topic came up. Q: Can you elaborate a little more -- MR. BOUCHER: No, I can't because there was nothing specific on islands or a particular body of water. Q: How about economic matters that were mentioned? What exactly did the Secretary say with respect to the IMF and other multilaterals and the state of Turkey's economy? MR. BOUCHER: He asked Foreign Minister Cem sort of for a briefing on the state of play and the state of reform in Turkey. The Foreign Minister ran through some of the issues and the state of affairs in Turkey, the commitment to reform. I think he cited in doing so some of the remarks he had made during the course of the week in public, in Washington. So you will find him on the record, I think, on those kind of subjects. The Secretary appreciated the explanation, expressed our support for the continuation of that process, the process of reform, and working with the IMF as it goes forward. I think there's also -- I didn't have time to get it, but there is a Presidential letter to, what is it, the American Turkish Business Council that was meeting that expresses our support in those terms as well. Q: Expresses support for reform, or expresses support for the IMF, an IMF package? MR. BOUCHER: Well, it is all worked up together in working with the IMF on the reform process, and then that is where we are. Q: So the program is good. You guys think that what they have got -- what they are planning to do is okay? MR. BOUCHER: We think that the way they are working on reform, in conjunction with the IMF, is okay. And we want them to continue doing that. Q: So that they haven't done it? They haven't done enough yet? You want them to keep doing more? MR. BOUCHER: I'm not -- that's as far as I'm going to go, I'm sorry. Q: Can you go a little further than you did about how the revised sanctions program the Secretary has been talking about would benefit Turkey? MR. BOUCHER: Clearly, there are opportunities in the process of targeting the sanctions and focusing the sanctions for neighboring states to benefit from trade in civilian goods. At the same time, the important thing about the cross-border trade, about the smuggling of oil and diesel fuel, for us is our concern about the revenue, the Baghdad regime's access to uncontrolled revenue, or perhaps the smuggling of items that could rebuild its military capacity or weapons of mass destruction programs. So that's why we are working with Turkey on the development, the implementation of this approach to sanctions, the strengthening of controls over weapons of mass destruction, while protecting the economic interests of those regional economies like Turkey that do have economic relations with the civilian population of Iraq. Turkey has a long history, I think, of working with the international community relating to Iraq. They have implemented the sanctions after the Gulf War, despite a considerable economic cost at some points, and obviously we expressed appreciation again today for the way we worked together on the northern no-fly zones. So we think that this export of Iraqi oil can take place and should take place under the Oil-for-Food program, and as you say, that will then, as we revise the process, that may open up some opportunities for normal trade with the civilian population. Q: The Foreign Minister said the other day -- the Foreign Minister of Turkey, that is -- that it is unrealistic of the US and Israel to assume that negotiations or further talks with the Palestinians couldn't take place unless the violence stops. He said that there is no way the violence is going to stop unless they start coming to the table. Did he share that view with Secretary Powell today and try to urge the United States to get more involved? MR. BOUCHER: They didn't talk extensively about the Middle East in the parts of the meeting that I was in. I think our views on these subjects are well known. The Secretary did talk this morning also for about one hour with Foreign Minister Amre Moussa of Egypt, and that was essentially the subject of their discussion as well. The Secretary made clear, as the President did yesterday, that we felt it was very, very important for the violence to stop and very, very important for Mr. Arafat, for Chairman Arafat to speak out publicly, to call for an end for the violence, so that we could see the kind of actions, the rebuilding of trust, the direct dialogue, the easing of the economic restrictions that would, in fact, provide a basis or a foundation for renewed talks. As the President said yesterday, we don't see meaningful progress in peace talks being able to occur unless the violence is ended. Q: -- move on to a new subject? MR. BOUCHER: It depends what subject we're on now. I'm not quite sure if we're on Turkey or the Middle East. Q: I was going to move on to the Balkans, but -- Q: Egypt, well, just what else did -- was that the extent of the conversation between the Secretary and Foreign Minister Moussa? MR. BOUCHER: No, there was a very considerable conversation on the situation in the Middle East. I think the basic approach that the President outlined yesterday and that we have outlined today is the one that we discussed with the Egyptians, which the Egyptians I would say in general terms supported, that there does need to be an end to the violence, there does need to be an end to terrorism, there needs to be restraint on the other side. We have made clear as well the Israelis need to avoid actions that can be seen as provocative. They need to avoid over-reaction and we encourage the Israelis to continue to move on things like easing the closures, restoring normalcy, removing checkpoints. But, first and foremost, we all agree the violence needs to stop, and we made quite clear we think there needs to be, by Chairman Arafat, very clear and public call against violence and terrorism, and there are other actions we think the Palestinian Authority needs to take. Q: But all that was -- MR. BOUCHER: So that was the general sort of approach that was being discussed. Q: Did the Secretary not bring up the US disappointment or objection to what the final communiqué -- MR. BOUCHER: Let me get back to your question now, having said that was the -- there was a longer discussion of Middle East peace than I described before. I'll try to describe that for you now. There were a number of other subjects that they discussed, which since my brain may not have them all, let me find my notes. They did talk about the Arab League meeting. They talked about the Iraq policy questions and how we intend to go forward, again, same kind of discussion as with the Turkish Government, working with the Perm Five, working with the frontline states. Obviously, the specific factors are different for different governments. They also talked about Sudan and the problems there. A couple regional issues, the bilateral relationship and some of the trade issues with Egypt and also kind of the strategic picture of the region. Q: Did the issue of the Egyptian Ambassador come up, in Israel? MR. BOUCHER: I don't think that came up specifically -- no, that didn't come up specifically during the meeting I was at. It is an issue we continue to discuss with the Egyptian Government, the need to return their ambassador to Israel. Q: As a follow-up, did anything come up on concerns raised in Washington and in Congress about state-sponsored Egyptian media broadcasting or writing a number of anti-Semitic or increasing their rhetoric against Israel? MR. BOUCHER: Again, that didn't come up today, but that is an issue that we do raise with the Egyptian Government. Q: On the discussions on the Sudan, is there anything that the United States is looking for Egypt to do that might improve the situation over there? MR. BOUCHER: I think the way I would put it is the issues of the Sudan are important to both of us, clearly very important to Egypt, very important to us as well. The Secretary has noted repeatedly, including today, the complexity, the number of different issues, of humanitarian tragedy, human rights violations, religious violations, war, factional fighting, government problems and other things like that that intersect in the Sudan that make it one of the most difficult situations and one of the most difficult tragedies in Africa and in the world today. Egyptians obviously share a very strong view, so what they basically did was to compare notes. As the Secretary noted, we are going through a review process with regard to the Sudan, and what we might be able to do, what might be the way to do it, and so they discussed, heard from the Egyptians, some ideas and discussed ways of going about that. Q: On the Arab League Summit communiqué, what exactly did Secretary Powell tell the Foreign Minister? MR. BOUCHER: I think he expressed in private the same kind of concerns that we have expressed in public about some of the language in the communiqué. He asked and they discussed for a while how the Iraqi issue had played through at the summit, and I think the Secretary made clear that we felt that at this stage, particularly the Israeli in the Middle East and the Israeli-Palestinian issues, that this was one of a number of factors that we didn't think were helping to quell the violence. Q: That would be the disagreements that you have in the summit communiqué? The boycott, and that kind of thing? MR. BOUCHER: Yes, some of the things that were mentioned in the Arab League Summit communiqué. Q: Richard, do you have any assessment as to the response in the region among the Israelis and the Palestinians to the appeals we heard yesterday from the President? MR. BOUCHER: I don't have any broader assessment, other than to say that in our discussions with the Egyptians, they understood the need for steps to stop the violence, and to be coupled with steps on the other side to exercise restraint and to start easing the restrictions. Q: Can we stay on Israel? Q: Can we get your comment on a map produced and published today by The Washington Post against the territorial integrity of western Greece in the name of the Albanian nationalism? MR. BOUCHER: I don't really know what you're talking about. Q: It's a full-page story, Mr. Boucher, and it is very important, and I would like to hear your comment. MR. BOUCHER: Okay. I will be glad to look into it. That might -- Q: So far you did not read the article, you didn't see the map? MR. BOUCHER: That's my personal comment, that I did not see it, and I will be glad to look into it and get our experts to look at it. Q: But what is the US policy vis-à-vis then for (inaudible) Albanians in (inaudible)? MR. BOUCHER: I'm not quite sure. We have said consistently that we believe that the ethnic Albanian community needs to be accommodated within the Macedonian political process, that we see Macedonia as an example of a successful multi-ethnic state, and we have strongly encouraged the Macedonian Government to take advantage of the situation these days in this difficult situation that they face militarily, as they deal with that, to also move forward on the issues of respecting the ethnic community of Albanians that lives in Macedonia and providing them with political options, with political outlets. So we have supported the ethnic Albanian communities within Macedonia in terms of our aid programs and other things that help them participate in Macedonian democratic life, and that remains our -- Q: Could you please clarify about the autonomy? I'm not talking about change in borders, cultural activities, language school, et cetera. We are talking about the autonomy. Do you support Albanian autonomy…. MR. BOUCHER: I'm sorry, I don't really know what you're talking about then. I'm not going to start specifying from Washington something we've -- what we have stressed is that they work these things out within the coalition, within the government, within the democratic process. I'm not going to specify a particular outcome from Washington that I don't even know if it's under discussion out there. Could we -- I'm at the end of my brief on this one. Q: (Inaudible.) MR. BOUCHER: We have consistently encouraged governments in the region to be democratic, to respect minority rights, to provide opportunities for minorities to participate in the political system. That remains our view in this region as well as elsewhere. Q: On the Balkans, the Interfax News Agency is reporting that Foreign Minister Ivanov is going to a contact group meeting in Paris on April 11. Is Secretary Powell planning to attend any such meeting next month? MR. BOUCHER: He is considering it. Q: He is considering what? MR. BOUCHER: Attending any such meeting next month. Q: On what date? MR. BOUCHER: On April 11, he is considering attending a contact group meeting in Paris, but it's not decided yet. Q: And let me follow up also on the Balkans, the Macedonians are denying responsibility for a mortar attack that killed an EPTN journalist and a civilian yesterday. And they are also saying, I think, that the offensive against the ethnic Albanian rebels is over. Are you satisfied that they have used appropriate force? And are you satisfied with their denial of the mortar attack? MR. BOUCHER: I hadn't seen any particular statement or denial by the Macedonian Government. I do know that the matter remains under investigation and that the Government of Macedonia is working with the Kosovo forces, the NATO-led Kosovo forces, on that investigation. So we're very obviously concerned and have expressed our sympathies to the families of the deceased. But as far as exactly what happened, we will await the results of that investigation. Q: Also, Richard, further north, what is your understanding of what's happening in Belgrade right now? MR. BOUCHER: Don't know. I don't have any more information than you do, I think. We're reading the news reports. Q: With respect to certification, can you shed some light on timing? MR. BOUCHER: I think the Secretary told you that he, over the next days, he will be examining the information, the results, the activity, what has happened in recent weeks and months with regard to the criteria in the law for certification. He will be looking at it over the next couple of days. I don't expect to have any decision to announce for you until Monday, frankly. Sunday is not a day -- that's part of it, too. I was thinking more of the fact that we are not going to obligate any money on Sunday, anyway. We are not going to notify the Congress on Sunday, anyway. And therefore we don't expect to have a decision to announce for you until Monday. Q: Yesterday, you said that it was basically he was going to do it by the deadline. He had every intention to do it by the deadline. MR. BOUCHER: And I talked to him today and this is where we are. Q: So there has been a change, then. MR. BOUCHER: No, there hasn't been a change. If you look back at what I said -- Q: Can I ask -- can I ask -- MR. BOUCHER: -- it was till approximate and using words like "weekend." Q: Technically then at midnight on Saturday if the Secretary has not made a decision, is the money suspended? MR. BOUCHER: Technically, we wouldn't be able to obligate any aid money to Yugoslavia at 12:01 Sunday morning until such time as he were to make the certification. Now, we are not about to obligate any money on a Sunday or notify Congress anyway. So -- Q: I'm not suggesting that you were. But it's technically -- if no decision has been made by the deadline, it's considered suspended, until such time as they are -- MR. BOUCHER: I guess my answer to that is, yeah, but big deal. Q: Well, because -- MR. BOUCHER: Well, if you're going to write a big story saying, grand excitement, the United States is not going to spend any money in Yugoslavia today, we weren't going to spend any money in Yugoslavia that day either, so big deal. (Laughter.) Q: Well, that's very witty, Richard, but I mean, you're blowing off a congressional deadline. I'm sorry, that's the way it is. MR. BOUCHER: No, we're not blowing off a congressional deadline. I'm sorry, Matt. We're not. We're absolutely not. If you read that law, you will see the requirement is that we not obligate any money after March 31 until and unless we have certified to Congress, okay? If Congress hears from us the next day or the day after or three months after or six months after, we have met our requirement to Congress. Q: Right. But -- so -- MR. BOUCHER: As long as we don't obligate any money. So don't make this into something between us and Congress. Q: -- but technically -- but technically it is going to be suspended. Q: Could I just confirm that you are saying that this -- the United States has not been told by Belgrade authorities that an arrest of Milosevic is imminent? MR. BOUCHER: We don't have any information of our own on that, or any information other than what we are seeing in the press at this moment. Q: Is there some kind of law that says that we can't obligate money on Sunday? I'm just confused. Or is -- like we can't sell liquor in Washington on Sundays or something? (Laughter.) I mean, what -- MR. BOUCHER: I don't think there are any blue laws about obligating money on Sundays. But there is no particular intention to do so. It's not normally done. We don't come in on Sundays to obligate money. We generally find a way to get our work done on the work days. Q: Yeah, but you know you did send David Sheffer up to the UN to sign that criminal court treaty on a Saturday. So this whole weekend thing, I'm not sure -- MR. BOUCHER: Matt, some things happen on weekends. We work on weekends. You know the phone calls the Secretary has made on weekends. You know the number of Security Council meetings we've had on weekends, you know the number of trips and events that we have been on on weekends. Obligating money in part of our aid program is not something that, of necessity, has to be done on weekends and therefore is not something that is normally done on weekends. Q: Can I move on to China? Do you have anything to say about this Hong Kong-based American professor who is in detention? MR. BOUCHER: There is not much I can say because of privacy considerations, but I can give you a general statement that there is a case of an American in custody in China that we have been working on since late February. I would note that in this case, in accordance with our bilateral consular convention, the Chinese Government notified us of the detention within four days, as required. We are working with the family, we are in close touch with the family in this case. We have had a consular visit, and we would expect another consular visit to occur within the next week. Our consular agreement with China provides for such visits to occur at least once a month. Q: Is there anything more you can do for us? MR. BOUCHER: Her? Are you changing the name? Q: I might have been changing -- I'm talking about -- MR. BOUCHER: I think you're changing the case. Q: Okay. MR. BOUCHER: But there is nothing more I can say about the first case that I was asked about that I can't even confirm the identity of the individual because of Privacy Act considerations, but the case that I was just describing in general terms, we have been working closely with the family, we will be seeing the person again soon. Q: Okay. But I wanted to ask about Ms. Gao then, now that she -- Q: Well, can we stay on this one and then go to -- MR. BOUCHER: Okay, let's stay on this one. Q: Have you asked for more consular visits and have been denied more than the one per month? MR. BOUCHER: As I said, we expect a second visit to occur within the next week. That is what we are looking at. Q: -- during the visit of (inaudible)? MR. BOUCHER: I have to double-check on that. We talked about some specific cases during the course of those visits and discussions, and I frankly don't know if this might have been one of them. Q: Do you know where he is being held? MR. BOUCHER: I'm not able to say. We do, because we visited him, but I can't say. Q: When you've been talking -- when we've been asking questions about this woman over the last few days, and you've been talking about how the general issue of consular access has been raised with the Chinese, were you including this case as well? And is there a reason why you decided not to mention the fact that, look, there are actually two cases now, not just -- I mean, I know the woman is not an American citizen, but -- MR. BOUCHER: There are a number of Americans in jail in China on various places, various charges, some of them criminal, et cetera. There are something like 20 Americans now in prison for various crimes in China, and obviously every time an American gets arrested, we expect the Chinese to meet the obligations of the consular convention. There is no particular connection between these cases, not that we are aware of, and what I would say is in the case of Ms. Gao, the issue was a minor, an American citizen, the child, who was held in what we view as detention for a long period without consular notification. In this case that I just described to you but didn't talk about specifics of, we did get consular notice within the required time period. Q: Since you told me that you are not in a position to explain about the autonomy, the legal terminology or the diplomatic one, how do you explain that your Government, in the same token, is supporting an autonomous Kurdish entity in northern Iraq? MR. BOUCHER: No, I'm sorry, I'm not here to argue with your ideas of a situation. I will explain the United States' views on matters that are real and that are occurring, and that is where I will stay. I'm sorry, I'm just not going to entertain hypothetical questions and comparisons. Q: I have two questions. The first one is, do you have anything about the North Korean Foreign Minister's health? MR. BOUCHER: No, and I don't expect that we would. Q: And the other one, Colombia. Can you tell us what actions exactly the United States plans to take against Colombia for working against you in the UN this week? Q: And on top of that, when was the decision on the visas that I asked about yesterday, that you released the statement on today -- when was that decision actually made? I realize it was published in the Federal Register today, but when was that decided? MR. BOUCHER: Let's do one question at a time, okay? On the issue of Colombia and the statements by Assistant Secretary Walker yesterday, to amplify what he said, the US at the highest levels is disappointed by Colombia's decision to sponsor and subsequently vote in favor with the UN resolution on the observer force. We will be discussing our views with the Government of Colombia and reviewing that action in the context of our relations with Colombia, both bilateral and multilateral. I would like to emphasize, however, that we continue to support the Government of Colombia's efforts to combat narcotics trafficking, and specifically, we remain committed to the full implementation and US assistance to Plan Colombia. Q: Richard, will there be consequences? MR. BOUCHER: As I said, we are disappointed with the decision and we will be raising it with the Government of Colombia. Q: Yes, but Mr. Walker yesterday spoke about consequences. What kind of consequences are -- MR. BOUCHER: As I said, we are disappointed in the situation and we will be raising it with the Government of Colombia. Q: Maybe commercial sanctions, or -- MR. BOUCHER: I'm not going to speculate at this point. We are disappointed with the action, and we will be raising it with the Government of Colombia. That is the immediate consequence; any subsequent consequences we will tell you about later. Q: Why are you disappointed, since this is a free decision from a free country that belongs to the UN? And also, why -- consequences means that something bad is going to happen, that's what they feel. MR. BOUCHER: As I said, we're disappointed by the decision. Q: Why? MR. BOUCHER: Because we don't think it is the right decision. Q: Why? MR. BOUCHER: We don't think it is a helpful decision. We don't think it helps the situation, we don't think it responds to Colombia's interests, and we certainly don't think it responds to our interests or the interests of peace in the region. And we will be making that clear to the Government of Colombia. Q: So what does it change, the fact that they made the decision and you don't like it? MR. BOUCHER: We are going to go talk to them about it. Q: When? Q: Well, does it -- is it going to change? Something is going to change? MR. BOUCHER: When we decide to -- I'm sorry, you guys are getting way ahead of me now. I'm going to tell you what I can say right now, and when we have more to tell you, we will. Q: Yes, but I mean, certainly it is a free decision from a free member state to make. I mean, there are plenty of decisions that the United States makes that a lot of other countries in the -- MR. BOUCHER: And we usually hear from them, and they can expect to hear from us. Q: But they don't say that there are going to be serious -- MR. BOUCHER: That's the way it works. Q: But they don't say that there are going to be consequences to the relationship. I mean, don't you think that's a little harsh? MR. BOUCHER: Well, you can judge that if you want. But we are going to raise it with them. Q: Were you expecting a different way to do the things from Colombia, or something like that? MR. BOUCHER: Well, I think we would hope that they would take a broader view of their interests and a broader view of some of these questions, and that is why we want to raise it with them. Q: Is one of the reasons why there may be consequences to this vote is because we are financing so much of the rebuilding of the country through Plan Colombia, and we have been so generous with them? MR. BOUCHER: I don't want to try to provide that linkage. I think I just explicitly said that we definitely support Plan Colombia and we will continue our support for Plan Colombia. But in terms of the broader relationship that we have with Colombia, in terms of the issues that we try to discuss and work on together, this is one where we are disappointed and disagree with the position the Government of Colombia has taken, and we will raise it with them, and we will talk to you about it more if there are other consequences. Q: But don't you think that it might end up being intimidation for a country next time it is going to vote on something that you might not like? MR. BOUCHER: Well, we would hope they would vote differently next time. Q: That is not good. MR. BOUCHER: We would hope that they would vote differently next time. That's the whole point of this. All right, you can talk to him about Albanian autonomy, and we'll go on to something else. (Laughter.) Q: -- visa. And just to clarify, that the visa was not a consequence that Mr. Walker was -- MR. BOUCHER: No, the visa decision was not a consequence. The visa decision was made before -- Q: When was this? Do you know when it was actually? MR. BOUCHER: The exact time, I don't know. I think the explanation itself talks about sort of the history of what happened during the month of March, so it was made recently. I think it was announced down in Colombia in terms of implementation yesterday. It is going in the Federal Register; that's why we are doing it here today. Q: But you don't know exactly when they -- MR. BOUCHER: The exact moment of decision, I don't know. But -- Q: Does it say they haven't been able to read the whole thing? Yes, but does it say who actually made it -- was it the State Department or the INS? MR. BOUCHER: I suppose it is a joint decision, and in the end, we have responsibility for visa reciprocity, but obviously the Immigration Service are the ones who tell us what is going on in terms of the people that we have been issuing visas to, who might have been transiting and trying to stay. Q: Do you know, have you heard any complaint from the Colombian Government about this -- MR. BOUCHER: Not that I know of. I will have to check on that. Q: Can I go back to China? Gao Zhan's husband was granted his citizenship this morning. Does it help the US Government in any way, to negotiate with China? MR. BOUCHER: I mean, first of all, on his gaining citizenship, we are always pleased, we are always happy to see new US citizens, and we congratulate him on his swearing-in, if you want to start with that, point number one. At the same time, we will continue to press for the release of his wife. His wife is in custody in China and, as you know, we have called for her immediate release, and we will continue to press that. That was raised during the high-level visits and discussions last week. We have raised it through our Embassy, and we raised it once again on the 29th, which was yesterday, in Washington with the Chinese Embassy here. So her detention continues to be a human rights concern of the United States. We don't see any reason for her to be detained, and we look for her to be immediately released. Q: Going back to Assistant Secretary Walker for a moment. Does the Secretary share his views about Chairman Arafat's contribution to the current violence in the region? He made some extremely harsh comments yesterday, and I wondered if you could reflect on that. MR. BOUCHER: I'm not quite sure what I'm referring to, or what you're referring to, in terms of the comments. I don't remember seeing any particular quotes. Q: -- specifically along the lines that Arafat's recent actions were not the actions of somebody who was interested in peace, that they forced the United States into the veto -- he forced the United States into a veto at the last minute at the UN? MR. BOUCHER: I think that is quite consistent with what we have said, with what the Secretary has said. In terms of the way the UN action went, we were looking to work on something that would be acceptable to the parties, that would indicate that we expected to see the consent and agreement between the parties, for the UN to be helping out, and instead, we saw a resolution forced, pushed forward that is, as you know, we described as unwise, unhelpful, unbalanced. There are a number of things that the Secretary has cited in his conversations. I mentioned the Arab League Summit, the way the resolution went, some of the statements about continuation of violence, that go in the other direction, that do not contribute to calming the situation, that don't constitute what we are looking for, which is a clear and public statement against violence and concrete actions like arresting people, bringing people to justice and preempting attacks. Q: Another thing that Assistant Secretary Walker said was that there had been absolutely no response from Arafat to US appeals -- now, he said it -- for taking steps to ease the violence. Now, since he testified, the Secretary spoke on the phone with Chairman Arafat. Can you tell us what was his -- what was Chairman Arafat's response to Secretary Powell's delivery of President Bush's message of "stop the violence"? MR. BOUCHER: I don't think we have seen a particular response at this point, or any actions that would go in the direction that we are looking for. Q: So Arafat gave the Secretary no indication that he might or that he was considering coming out -- MR. BOUCHER: I mean, I don't think I can go that far into the phone call. I don't have that much detail on the actual phone call itself. But I would say in terms of the kind of actions we are looking to see, we have not seen those actions, and as I just noted, the Secretary has noted, that there have been a number of things in recent days that go in the opposite direction. Q: In following up on that, I mean, at this point, is the State Department -- is the United States -- are we reconsidering the US relationship with the Palestinian Authority, as some on Capitol Hill have suggested the State Department should? Is that a process going on at this point? MR. BOUCHER: We have continued to work with people in the region, we have continued to work with the Palestinian Authority. Ultimately the decisions that need to be made are in the hands of the Israelis and the Palestinians, and they need to make the decisions. Our point here is that the leaders of these people need to make the tough decisions, and that is what we are looking for. Okay, thank you. [end] Released on March 30, 2001
|
|
 |
|
 |
 |
|
All Rights Reserved.