U.S. Department of State Daily Press Briefing, 01-05-09

U.S. State Department: Daily Press Briefings Directory - Previous Article - Next Article

From: The Department of State Foreign Affairs Network (DOSFAN) at <http://www.state.gov>

Richard Boucher, Spokesman

Washington, DC

May 9, 2001

INDEX:

YUGOSLAVIA
1-2       Secretary Powell's Meeting with President Kostunica
1-2, 4-5  Donors Conference/ US Aid/ US Support for World Bank Assistance Programs
2-3, 5    Setting Date for Transfer of Milosevic/ Cooperation with The Hague
3         Legal Framework for Kosovo
UN
5-6       Discussion of Withholding Payments to UN
6         Disappointment About Loss of UN Commission on Human Rights Seat
6         Payment of Back Dues
CHINA
7         Interest in Fastest Possible Return of Airplane
7         Resumption of Surveillance Flights
TAIWAN
7         Alleged Stop in United States of Taiwanese President
IRAN/LIBYA
7-8       Iran-Libya Sanctions
IRAQ
8         Implementation of No Fly Zones/ Reducing Frequency of Patrols
8-9       Contact with Kurdish Groups and Shiites
ARMS CONTROL
9         Arms Control Agreements
SOUTH KOREA
9-10      Deputy Secretary Armitage's Comments on Re-engagement
SUDAN
10        Attack on Red Cross Aircraft/ Danish Pilot Killed
ISRAEL/PA
10-11     Brutal Killing of Two Youths/Israeli Incursions into Gaza/Investigation
13        Whether There is Consideration of Offering Reward
SYRIA
11-12     President Asad's Statements About Jews/ Our Ambassador's Meeting with Syrian Government
RUSSIA
12        US Government Efforts to Assist John Tobin
NIGERIA
13        President Obasanjo's Visit/ Meeting Plans
UKRAINE
13        Identification of Journalist Heorhiy Gongadze's Remains

MR. BOUCHER: Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen. I have no statements or announcements, so I would be glad to take your questions.

Q: Do you have any news?

(Laughter.)

Q: No?

MR. BOUCHER: The Secretary meets with President Kostunica this afternoon, and we look forward to a good meeting. This is really a historic occasion. It's the first meeting of a democratically elected leader of Yugoslavia, first visit to Washington, first meeting with the Secretary of State.

There is a large number of issues to discuss, including cooperation with Yugoslavia, developments in the region, obviously interested in southern Serbia, the situation along southern Serbia and in Kosovo. It is really a very important occasion. A lot of things, as I said, to discuss. Obviously cooperation with the international tribunal on Yugoslavia will be an important part of our discussions, and the Secretary will stress the importance of cooperation.

We welcome the statements that President Kostunica has made about passing a law on cooperation. That's important. And we also want to talk about the status of Mr. Milosevic. So there is a lot to talk about. It happens at 2 o'clock.

Q: On a logistical note, is there someone from his delegation that's here now in the building?

MR. BOUCHER: I don't particularly know. I wouldn't be surprised if there were, but I don't particularly know one way or the other if there is.

Q: I was wondering, as I was yesterday, but maybe with 24 hours you know a little more, about how the other countries feel about a donors conference. Is the US alone in thinking there has to be more cooperation to support a donors conference? The US is alone quite a bit lately. I just wondered on this issue, if there's a secret ballot and, you know, if others have concurred with you that they have to --

MR. BOUCHER: We are in touch with others obviously, and there is probably differing views on this. I think what is clear is that we don't, as the Secretary said in his decision April 2nd, that we don't intend to support and participate in a donors conference without the kind of continued progress that we see.

Yes, there are others involved. Obviously the European Union is involved. Obviously the World Bank and others. And so part of the decision making is theirs. But it's all the better for all of us, I think, to be there together. It's all the better for all of us to coordinate our assistance and to do it through a donors conference. And frankly, it's all the better for all of us for Yugoslavia to be cooperating with international justice, and that has to be a goal we all share.

Q: Well, the way you phrased it, this may be hypothetical or premature. Is it possible there would be one and the US would not attend, or is it too early?

MR. BOUCHER: I suppose it's theoretically -- it's theoretically theoretical and premature, but not inconceivable. But it's way too early to talk about that. We need to talk to others. There's no date scheduled at this point for a conference.

We are all interested in helping Yugoslavia. The President made that clear in the meeting this morning at the White House with President Kostunica. We are all interested in supporting Yugoslavia's democratic development. And we are all appreciative -- the Secretary will express our appreciation -- for the path that they've chosen of democracy and further reforms that they have instituted in a whole variety of areas of Yugoslav life. So it's not like we want to stay away, but we are also interested in seeing the kind of progress that we need to see in terms of their cooperation with the tribunal.

Q: Yesterday, Carla del Ponte told us that the Secretary had agreed with her that today it was time to press Kostunica on setting a date for the transfer of Milosevic. Is that taking too big a leap when Kostunica hasn't even said, has he, that he would transfer him?

MR. BOUCHER: I'm not quite sure how far down in the details we should be getting at this point. I tried to answer that yesterday within the context of yesterday's meeting, and I don't think I have anything particularly new to say on it.

Q: (Inaudible.)

MR. BOUCHER: I'm sorry?

Q: Well, could you ask -- can you ask him again, please? Does he plan -- why does he feel now is the time to ask for a date?

MR. BOUCHER: What is important is that we establish a process of cooperation between Yugoslavia and the tribunal. There are a whole number of areas involved. One is passing the law and having a framework for that cooperation, which President Kostunica has said that he wants to do and he wants to do at an early date. So that is a good thing; that is a positive development.

Within that framework, there are a whole number of actions that are going to need to take place for cooperation, one of which is turning Milosevic over. We think that Yugoslavia has an international obligation, that they need to meet that obligation, and therefore that the question should be asked as to how and when they are going to meet that cooperation.

Q: But Kostunica hasn't said that even once this law is passed that he is committed to turning him over.

MR. BOUCHER: No, as I said, I think we agree that the question that needs to be asked is -- they have an obligation -- it's not whether or not they have an obligation. The question that needs to be asked is how and when they are going to meet that obligation.

But it is part of a larger process, and passing the law is one of the first steps in that process. What we are looking for now is the overall cooperation with the tribunal, the overall engagement in that process of meeting Yugoslavia's international legal obligations.

Q: Richard, today's meeting between Kostunica and President Bush was the first time a Yugoslav President has met with an American President since Dayton -- the Dayton peace accords?

MR. BOUCHER: I really haven't looked at it that way. I have said it is the first time we have ever met with a democratically elected leader of Yugoslavia, and the prospects, the context in which we are meeting is not a context of negotiating over some horrible things that have happened, but it is of discussing cooperation over some wonderful things that have happened.

Q: Richard, as you know, the UN mission in Yugoslavia is trying to set up and prepare a legal framework for Kosovo, and I'm wondering what the Secretary might ask President Kostunica to do with respect to this framework and Yugoslav support for it.

MR. BOUCHER: I think in terms of Kosovo, obviously we are going to want to compare notes on where things stand, particularly along the border between Kosovo and Serbia. And as you know, we have been turning over the Ground Safety Zone to Yugoslav control in order to stabilize the area.

But in terms of actually the developments in Kosovo according to the UN resolutions, where we want to cooperate with Yugoslavia is in terms of encouraging Serbs in Kosovo to go back to set up and to participate in this process. It is very much in all our interests that the future of Kosovo include all the ethnic groups. And it is very much in all our interest and their interest to encourage that to happen.

So we want to work on a framework that provides for multiethnic participation, and we want all the parties, the people in the region with influence, to encourage Serbs to participate.

Q: Richard, on the US aid question, has all the 50 million that the Secretary certified on April 2nd -- has that all been disbursed yet?

MR. BOUCHER: It wasn't 50/50. I forget the exact total at the time. Because aid money goes through these various stages of being decided, allocated, spent, et cetera, it is hard to describe.

My understanding at this point is that we have notified Congress of about 70 million of the 100 million, so we have told them what we intend to do with about 70 million of the 100 million. That doesn't mean that all the checks have been written and payments have been made, but we have decided on 70 million. So there is 30 million left for this year that we have not decided yet.

Q: At this point, is that 30 million untouchable from April 2nd; they're going to get that? That is not -- cooperation with the -- further cooperation with the ICTY does not -- is not a requirement for that 30 million, the remaining 30 million, correct? Or is that --

MR. BOUCHER: It's sort of hard to define exactly because we have not decided what to do with that money yet, and obviously the relationship and the progress of the relationship enters into that, as well as finding appropriate and good uses for it.

The other thing that enters into that is the donors conference and the coordination of aid. So that money might be used at the donors conference. That money might be part of a pledge. We haven't decided what the pledge would be at a donors conference. So it's not easy to define in terms of our bureaucracy, the donors conference, and the needs in Yugoslavia, to give you a precise amount that's being held up for this, that or the other. But the overall process of delivering aid, supporting a donors conference, moving forward, would certainly be facilitated and is somewhat contingent upon the need to continue cooperation.

Q: Then I must have been under the wrong impression on April 2nd, because I thought that when the Secretary certified them on April 2nd with that one condition, that the 100 million of that original package was then safe; they were going to be able to get all of that and not have to worry about it because of that certification, and that the only thing that was conditioned on their cooperation with the ICTY was assistance in addition to that.

Was I incorrect?

MR. BOUCHER: No, that's not totally incorrect. That's somewhat correct. What he decided on April 2nd is we could continue spending money. So we could continue spending money, and we can continue spending money, up to the amount of money we have in our wallet for this year, which is $100 million. And so what he decided is we could continue spending that money, but that our support for a donors conference, which is an attempt to coordinate, an attempt to allocate, an attempt to pledge, would be contingent upon cooperation with the tribunal. Obviously the spending of money, donors conferences -- these things are all tied together.

Q: And does that also apply -- that same thinking also apply to -- yesterday they became a member of the World Bank. Would that apply to US support for World Bank assistance programs as well?

MR. BOUCHER: I'll go back and double-check on that one. That I'm not quite sure.

Q: Is the 70 untouchable, the 70 that's been allocated? I mean, it's somewhat the same question, but if we've already said that we're giving them this as of April 2nd, that can't be reneged even if --

MR. BOUCHER: What the Secretary said on April 2nd was that we would continue to spend the money, and we have continued to spend the money up to the 70 million. We could continue to spend -- I guess we could spend 30 million this afternoon if we had an appropriate use to it. So there is no withholding of funds at this point. But support for the donors conference, continuation of this overall process -- there is not a specific amount that is linked to the donors conference. I think that's where we need to clarify.

Q: Yesterday, Ms. Del Ponte had some rather harsh criticism of President Kostunica's government in terms of its level of cooperation with The Hague. Does the Bush Administration share that? And would you say that Secretary Powell is disappointed that in the -- you know, more than a month since he conditionally certified Yugoslavia that there has been no further action taken by Kostunica?

MR. BOUCHER: As I think we made clear yesterday, we will continue to press the Yugoslav Government to cooperate with the tribunal. We do feel that we have not seen in the last month or so the kind of cooperation with the tribunal that we would expect and the kind of cooperation from the tribunal that would lead us to want to support and participate in an early donors conference.

So we'll keep pushing in that direction, but we haven't had our meeting yet and we'll hopefully hear in somewhat clear terms from President Kostunica how they intend to establish and continue that cooperation. Maybe we'll hear more today than we have seen in the last month. Certainly we welcome his statements that he supports early passage of a law on cooperation. That is an essential piece, and we look forward to that happening.

Q: Speaking of money, withholding and giving, is there any consideration being given -- punitive action -- because of those two actions on human rights and narcotics control, to withhold or some way penalize the UN so far as assessments and payments go?

MR. BOUCHER: There is -- I think as you have all seen reported or reported yourselves, there is some discussion on the Hill of withholding some of our payments to the UN, either the second tranche or the third tranche. No. We think that -- first of all, it is clear we are disappointed with the vote in the UN Commission on Human Rights. We will work very hard to make sure that we get on the commission next year.

But at the same time, we don't think that linking our obligations and payments to the United Nations to the outcome of that particular vote is a good idea. We think that that would be extremely damaging to our ability to cooperate in multilateral organizations, and with a sense that we are a reliable participant in these organizations and that we will pay our way.

Q: Richard, to follow up, there has been a contention among other Republican administrations that the UN should not be a place where people can take free shots at the US, that if the UN is to be taken seriously, that its actions and its statements should be taken seriously. Is there any regard, any thought in the Administration that this action should merit some response, if not necessarily dues by the US?

MR. BOUCHER: I think there is a feeling within the Administration, first of all, that what we had was a vote of 54 countries, 54 members of the Economic and Social Committee, and certainly we do think that the consequences of that vote, of the United States not going on the Commission on Human Rights are disappointing not only to us but to many others, and therefore we need to talk to the members, we need to work with the members. And above all, we need to ensure we get on next year.

But it was a decision by the members of this committee, not a UN decision. Secretary General Kofi Annan has expressed quite publicly his disappointment, and I think that of the UN system, that the US won't be a seated member of this committee for the future.

So I think our focus is primarily on the members and the people who voted or didn't vote in our favor, rather than on the United Nations as a whole.

Q: Well, does that mean then that you are actually going out and trying to find out who it was that --

MR. BOUCHER: I think, as we have said before, this was a secret ballot. I am not sure we will find out and know those things. I think -- as I said, as the Secretary has said -- the important thing is to work hard and make sure that this is not repeated and to make sure that we get on the committee next year.

Q: Richard, how hard has the Secretary been working to try and persuade members on the Hill to not pass legislation that would hinder the payment of those back dues?

MR. BOUCHER: I would have to check. I know that our legislative affairs people are active on the Hill, with the Secretary's direction. I will have to check and see if he has made phone calls or written letters himself.

Q: Will it come up tomorrow on budget concerns?

MR. BOUCHER: Maybe.

Q: He won't say --

Q: (Inaudible.)

MR. BOUCHER: I don't know. I haven't seen the testimony yet.

Q: The Secretary favors the current bill as is, without amendments; is that right?

MR. BOUCHER: I am not quite sure I have seen the current bill. The Secretary favors paying our dues to the UN under the agreement that we negotiated with the Hill and with the United Nations, without linking it to the outcome of this particular vote.

Q: China. Anything further on the plane? Rumsfeld said yesterday the Secretary will be pursuing it through diplomatic channels. Y ou had a statement yesterday. Any word on the plane?

MR. BOUCHER: No, I don't think there is any word on how and when the airplane will be returned. We continue our discussions with the Chinese in Beijing through our embassy. We do have an interest in the fastest and smoothest possible return of this airplane, and we believe the Chinese have the same interest. And therefore that is what we are talking to them about, how to effectuate the fast and safe return of the aircraft.

Q: Were there any meetings today with the Foreign Minister?

MR. BOUCHER: There was a meeting yesterday. I haven't seen anything on a meeting today, but I'm not really sure.

Q: That meeting yesterday was the one where the Chinese protested the resumption of the surveillance flights?

MR. BOUCHER: Yes, they made clear they were against the flights, and we made clear we thought they were quite legitimate and necessary.

Q: On a related topic, is there anything new on the alleged stop in the United States of the Taiwanese President?

MR. BOUCHER: I don't think I have anything new. I would have to check. I don't have to check; there is nothing new.

Q: There was a hearing this morning on the Iran-Libya sanctions, which I believe expire next month?

MR. BOUCHER: August.

Q: August? Okay. Anyway, there were a lot of witnesses who thought that the sanctions should be extended, and I wondered if the Administration has taken a position.

MR. BOUCHER: No, we haven't.

Q: Can we go to the Middle East?

Q: Asia?

MR. BOUCHER: Go to the Middle East, Asia, Africa? Okay, let's go to Jonathan.

Q: Yes, the no-fly zones. You've seen reports, no doubt, that there are recommendations that the frequency of patrols should be reduced. I wonder, does the State Department have a view on that? And have you had any contact with the people directly affected, i.e., the Kurdish groups and the Shiites in the south, to consult with them on the repercussions for such a decision?

MR. BOUCHER: I'm not quite sure what reports you are referring to. Maybe it's something you wrote that I haven't read yet. (Laughter.)

Q: This morning's paper.

MR. BOUCHER: I'm sorry, but I'm trying to figure out what the news is. All along, we have made clear that we are reviewing all aspects of the Iraq policy, first the international aspect, the sanctions regime, the need to control weapons going into Iraq, the need to make sure that we're not impeding the flow of civilian goods to the civilians in Iraq, the Iraqi people, and the need to make sure that Iraq can't threaten its neighbors.

That is an aspect that the State Department has spearheaded. You have seen the Secretary work on that, and we continue to work on that to make those changes a reality.

But we also have said all along that we were looking at the implementation of the no-fly zones, that the Pentagon was looking at that aspect. We are looking also at the issue of support for alternatives in Iraq, support for regime change in Iraq. So all those aspects of policy are being looked at. The question of how to implement the no-fly zones is something that is being looked at the Pentagon, and that's where you would ask questions about how that is going.

Q: The senior general commanders have recommended reducing the frequency of patrols in the no-fly zones.

MR. BOUCHER: Again, that's a military question that you can ask them and what they've recommended.

Q: Well, not it's not because it has policy implications; it has implications for your relations with the Kurds and the Shiites. And have you been consulted on that, and do you have -- what's your input into any decision that might be taken with this?

MR. BOUCHER: Our input is private between agencies. We don't talk about policies until they are formulated, and the people in charge of this are over at the Pentagon. We don't talk about our input into different policy reviews as they are ongoing. I won't do that on Korea, I won't do that on Iraq, I won't do that on Sudan or any other area. You want to ask me what our input is? Our input is private between agencies. When we've worked with our colleagues announcement come up with policy, we'll explain what US policy is.

Q: I'm interested -- is there any State Department input, even if you wouldn't say what it would be, even if you felt you could -- (laughter) --

MR. BOUCHER: Okay, I'm condemned. Everybody is going to use the word "input" in their question.

Q: No, Mr. Rumsfeld yesterday ambitiously reached to all -- new frontiers. It's not quite clear what he's reaching. It's not clear what he intends to do in space, in the upper atmosphere. But, you know, there's been a whole history of gradually closing down weapons activities for the good of the planet in certain areas.

Is there any diplomacy here? I know it's early in the process, but there are arms controls agreements besides the ABM Treaty, which I guess the whole Administration is in favor of throwing overboard, but there are other agreements that may go by the wayside.

Is State part of this process, as the keeper of arms control agreements? They were negotiated by diplomats. Is this purely a military decision or is it a State Department decision, too, what to retain for the sake of capping the arms race?

MR. BOUCHER: I would invite you to read the press conference that Secretary Rumsfeld did yesterday. I think he was --

Q: (Inaudible) -- the text?

MR. BOUCHER: Well, maybe you ought to read the text, then, because I think he was quite clear that he is not chucking any arms controls agreements; he's not installing new weapons in space. He's making an organizational decision within the Pentagon about how they do things. I don't think the way the Pentagon is organized has diplomatic implications. If they decide to do something with diplomatic implications, then obviously we'll be involved.

Q: On policy review, I'll try now. Deputy Secretary Armitage apparently delivered a letter today, I think, to the South Korean president and said that the US is ready to start -- will soon be ready to start re-engaging.

MR. BOUCHER: I think Deputy Secretary Armitage gave a press conference where he was asked where we stood on the policy review, and he said we were close to the end; and was asked how long, he said probably a matter of weeks. And I agree with him.

Q: That's good. Great.

MR. BOUCHER: Lest he be reading the transcript, make sure it's recorded that I agree with him.

Q: And you don't have anything else to --

MR. BOUCHER: I don't think we have anything else to say at this point.

Q: So he gave a whole press conference?

MR. BOUCHER: I'm not sure if it was a press conference or a stakeout or what, but he made some comments to the press.

Q: New subject? The Sudanese apparently shot at a Red Cross plane today, and I believe there was damage and injury, maybe a death or two. Do you have anything?

MR. BOUCHER: We don't, at this point, know who was responsible for the attack on the Red Cross aircraft, but we understand that the International Committee of the Red Cross will be conducting an investigation of it.

Obviously any attack on humanitarian relief operations is an outrage. We condemn it most strongly. These operations are very important for the welfare of countless Sudanese civilians.

Let me tell you what we do know from reports in the region. An International Committee of the Red Cross aircraft came under fire today in southern Sudan. Unfortunately and very sadly, the Danish pilot was killed. The co- pilot took control of the aircraft and brought it to its destination in Kenya.

This plane is a routine weekly flight that does four stops to Khartoum, Juba and Wau in southern Sudan, and Kenya. The flight operates with the knowledge and the clearance of the Sudanese Government. So we will remain in touch with the International Committee of the Red Cross and see what we can find out about it. At this point, like I say, we don't know who might have shot at it.

Q: Can we go to the Middle East now? I guess Ambassador Indyk has already spoken about the killing of the two Israeli children, but I'm wondering if you had anything to add to that and if you have anything to say about the latest Israeli incursions into Gaza.

MR. BOUCHER: I think there is -- the reports on incursions are just coming out. We've said our piece on those kind of activities before. I'll just leave it at that.

On the killing, it's a horrible, brutal killing of two youths. One was an American citizen, Yaakov Nathan Mandell. Our consular section chief in Jerusalem has spoken with both of Yaakov's parents. He has offered the US Government's condolences. Our Consulate General in Jerusalem is prepared to assist the Mandells however we possibly can at this very difficult time. It is very much a horrible tragedy, a terrible tragedy. The Palestinian Authority, we understand, has expressed regret, and we welcome that. But I don't think we know much more at this point.

Q: How are we going to find out more, or are we going to leave it to the Palestinian Authority to decide who did it? Or since one of the young people is an American citizen, is there going to be kind of an aggressive American involvement in getting to the bottom of this?

MR. BOUCHER: I will have to see who is conducting the investigation. I will find out.

Q: Do you know who did it?

MR. BOUCHER: No.

Q: It's too early.

MR. BOUCHER: I said that three times.

Q: Do you know if Ambassador Indyk or other of your people in Israel have raised this with the Palestinians -- this specific incident -- because one was an American citizen?

MR. BOUCHER: No, I don't know. I am sure we are in touch with a lot of local authorities. I expect our Consulate General in Jerusalem has been in touch with the Palestinians. But as I said, at this point, this happened overnight. The chief concern at this point is to be in touch with the families and try to help take care of the families.

Q: And moving further north, are you still standing by your comments you made on Monday, when I was not here, about President Asad's statements about Israelis -- or Jews in general after -- well, the Syrians at least say they have called in your Ambassador to tell him that your comments on Monday were inappropriate because they were based no a misinterpretation and misunderstanding of what President Asad said.

MR. BOUCHER: I don't think I have anything different to say at this point, other than to note that, yes, our Ambassador did meet with the Syrian Government. He raised the issue as well, conveyed our view that such language is regrettable and unacceptable, that it fuels religious hatred and does not serve the cause of peace. So he had a meeting -- that was Tuesday in Damascus. They said their piece, but we said ours as well.

Q: Which means that you don't buy this explanation that President Asad had been misunderstood?

MR. BOUCHER: Our understanding of the remarks I think is quite clear, and we have expressed our reaction to them.

Q: How do you feel about Mr. Asad, who I believe the Administration found, when he came in -- in fact when the Secretary was in the region -- as a forward-looking -- I forget the exact words -- but the notion was this may be a turning point in Syria's approach to things -- a more reforming, a more modern leadership. But this doesn't represent a modern thinking, does it?

MR. BOUCHER: No, it doesn't, and we criticized the remarks because we don't think it does represent --

Q: You don't have any reassessment of the fellow in charge in Syria, do you?

MR. BOUCHER: I'm not going to reassess everybody every time they say something, not at this point. No, I know. It is very unacceptable remarks, and we think those views are out of line.

Q: The family or the father of Tobin -- I think is the young man who has been sentenced in Russia -- says that he is hoping the US Government will still help get his son out. Do we have any role to play in that? Are we making any efforts on his behalf after he has already been sentenced?

MR. BOUCHER: We have continued to be in touch with him, first of all, to help him out. We have continued to be in touch with the Russian Government about the case. And I think his lawyers are considering what their next options are at this point. So we continue to assist in any way we can.

Q: But that's really all we can do, isn't it, provide consular access and --

MR. BOUCHER: In the end, he and his lawyers have to decide what their legal options are, and obviously we can continue to express our interest in his welfare and our interest in the case.

Q: Is the State Department -- I'm sorry, if I could just follow on that -- does the State Department feel that Tobin got a fair trial?

MR. BOUCHER: I'm not sure we have an assessment at this point, but I will check. I think generally, you know, we know that the judicial system in Russia is quite a bit transformed from the way it used to be.

Q: Going back to Israel for a second, as you noted, the US usually doesn't offer rewards for information about US citizens killed by Palestinians. And I'm wondering whether that is still the case in this case, whether there is a consideration of offering a reward, and why or why not?

MR. BOUCHER: I don't know. We will have to see about that. As I said, at this stage, it has happened overnight. It is a terrible tragedy. Our chief concern is to be in touch with the families, to help the families. I am sure the matter will be investigated. Whether we have a role in that or need to offer some reward we will have to see.

Q: Later this week, President Obasanjo of Nigeria is coming. I am just wondering if there are any plans for separate meetings between him and the Secretary other than -- I guess the Secretary will sit in with the White House meeting, but do you know of any one-on-one encounter that's planned?

MR. BOUCHER: I will have to check. Frankly, the answer is I don't remember. I will have to double-check. I'm not sure if there is anything on the schedule at this point.

Q: The torso, which the FBI was looking at for Ukraine, has been identified as that of Gongadze. Is there going to be any response by this government to that finding?

MR. BOUCHER: I think, first of all, all along we have made quite clear our interest in an open and transparent investigation and our willingness to help with that. Part of the involvement of the FBI and the involvement of -- I think it was FBI and Department of Defense experts who conducted various analyses in regard to the work of the Ukrainian Procurator General's office was due to the fact that all along we have been pushing for an open and transparent investigation.

So the fact that we were able to provide the expertise and help them reach this conclusion is an important manifestation of the interest of the United States in seeing that justice is served and seeing that there is an open and transparent process of investigation.

Q: Well, on that, are you all convinced that President Kuchma is interested -- holds the same feeling?

MR. BOUCHER: I don't want to comment on this individual or that individual in Ukrainian politics. But the fact that we were able to do this represents our interest, and we think the interest of the prosecutors in Ukraine. We got excellent support and cooperation from the Ukrainian side during the entire proceeding, and we would hope that that kind of openness and transparency would continue to prevail.

Q: In terms of what, the prosecution of whoever for the murder?

MR. BOUCHER: The investigation and the prosecution, yes.

Q: Thank you. [End]

Released on May 9, 2001

U.S. State Department: Daily Press Briefings Directory - Previous Article - Next Article