U.S. Department of State Daily Press Briefing, 01-05-17

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 17, 2001

INDEX:

ANNOUNCMENTS
1         Secretary’s Address to Washington Scholarship Fund
1-2       Appointment of Special Coordinator for Tibetan Issues
2,3       Trilateral Coordination and Oversight Group Meeting
VIETNAM
2-3       Assistant Secretary Kelly in Hanoi for ASEAN Meeting
7         Arrest of Priest, Father Tadeus Nguyen Van Ly
CHINA
3-4,4-5   Indictment of Li Shaomin
4         Recently Issued Public Announcement
6         Assistant Secretary Kelly’s Meetings
6         EP-3 Return
6-7       Olympic Venues
UKRAINE
7         Death of Gongadze
ISRAEL – PALESTINIAN AUTHORITY
8         Reported Remarks of Powell regarding Arafat
9         Possible Meeting with Powell and Arafat
14        Secretary Powell Phone Calls
14        Mitchell Commission Report
15        Settlements
IRAQ
9-10,12   UNSC Resolution on Iraqi Sanctions
10        Inspection of Sites
11-13     Consultations Regarding Sanctions
RUSSIA
13-14     Secretary Powell Meeting with Foreign Minister Ivanov
LEBANON
14-15     Amendment to Suspend Aid
CUBA
15        Helms-Lieberman Legislation
INDIA
15-16     Under Secretary Grossman and Foreign Secretary Iyer Meeting
SAUDI ARABIA
16        Reported Invitation to Crown Prince Abdallah
MOROCCO
16        Arrests of 36 Rights Activists

MR. BOUCHER: Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen. If I can do a couple things off the top, including a statement or two. First of all, just to tell you that on Friday, tomorrow, the Secretary will be addressing the Washington Scholarship Fund Graduating Class at 10:15 at the Nannie Helen Burroughs School in Northeast, Washington. He will be making remarks, but there won't be a question-and-answer period. So we have information on how to cover that for you there. We'll be putting that out after the briefing.

Let me tell you about two things involving Asia. One is the appointment of a Special Coordinator for Tibetan Issues, and the second is an upcoming trilateral meeting with the Japanese and the Koreans.

First of all, the Tibetan Coordinator. Secretary of State Powell has designated Paula Dobriansky as Special Coordinator for Tibetan Issues. This responsibility will be in addition to her continuing role as Under Secretary for Global Affairs. As the Department's Coordinator for Tibetan Issues, Ms. Dobriansky will work to promote a substantive dialogue between the Chinese Government and the Dalai Lama and his representatives. She will maintain close ties with the Congress and with nongovernmental organizations.

The Special Coordinator's role is to assist in preserving the unique cultural, religious and linguistic heritage of Tibetans, objectives that are consistent with our support for human rights in China.

Question about that?

Q: When we were hearing the Secretary on the Hill several times recently saying with some pride that he had cut back on special coordinators. But then again, some are required by Congress, and he asked please, in effect, don't -- you know, don't interfere, what I'm trying to do is to cut back.

Is this somehow in contradiction of that scaling down of special coordinators?

MR. BOUCHER: No. You remember when he made the initial decisions on special coordinators, special envoys -- got rid of about half of them -- but there were some that were established by law. I'd have to double-check. I believe this was one established by law and they were out of consideration from the beginning because they are established by law.

But this is obviously a policy that we support. We support the preservation of the unique heritage of Tibet.

Q: Is Senate confirmation required for that, or is that a strict appointment?

MR. BOUCHER: No, it's an appointment. She has confirmation for the job that she's in now, the Under Secretary for Global Affairs.

Q: Any response from China yet?

MR. BOUCHER: Not that I have heard of, but you guys may hear it first. As we know, we have had this position in the past. We think it is important. We have a very consistent policy on Tibet, which the Chinese are familiar with.

All right. The upcoming meeting, the Trilateral Coordination and Oversight Group will meet in Honolulu, Hawaii, on May 26th. Delegations representing the United States, the Republic of Korea and Japan will discuss a wide range of issues in our ongoing coordination of policy towards North Korea. Our delegation will be led by James Kelly, the Assistant Secretary for East Asian and Pacific Affairs.

This May 26th meeting is part of a continuing process of close and cooperative consultations among the three countries. It was formalized in April 1999 as the Trilateral Coordination Oversight Group. The last trilateral meeting was held March 26th in Seoul.

So I would be glad to take questions on that.

Q: Who got to choose the venue for this one?

MR. BOUCHER: As you know, the last one was Seoul. I expect this one we are hosting, and we do it in a place that is convenient for people traveling all the way across the Pacific, or halfway across the Pacific, as the case may be.

Q: So Guam wasn't considered?

(Laughter.)

Q: On a related -- a question on a related subject. Can you tell us what the North Korean delegates said at the meeting in Vietnam which was so tantalizing?

MR. BOUCHER: Is this like a board game or something that -- with the North Korean -- oh, the -- okay, I got it. Assistant Secretary Kelly is in Hanoi at the ASEAN meetings. It is an ASEAN Regional Forum senior officials meeting. The gathering is a prelude to the meetings at the ministerial level in July.

He doesn't have any bilateral meetings scheduled with the North Koreans, but they did encounter each other. A senior North Korean representative and Assistant Secretary Kelly encountered each other on the margins of an official function. I am told they just exchanged greetings.

Q: Okay, but the North Korean made a speech in a closed session in which he discussed relations with the United States. Are you prepared to say anything about what he said?

MR. BOUCHER: No. I am not in the habit of taking North Korean speeches and repeating them here, particularly if they are given in closed session.

Q: Richard, at this meeting, the trilateral meeting, is the US prepared to say what its position on resuming the negotiations with North Korea is?

MR. BOUCHER: Well, the President has said that we look forward to resuming it, contacts with the North Koreans, at an appropriate time after the review is completed. But the review is nearing completion. I don't think we have a particular date yet for its conclusion, but the meeting, I would say, is not an announcement but an opportunity for substantive discussions with our allies as we come to the end of our review.

Q: If I can get to another subject, the Chinese indictment of Mr. Li? Kind of ominous, isn't it?

MR. BOUCHER: As you know, we have been following this, all the twists and turns in this situation, including -- I'm not quite sure what I'm…. Phil, nobody just handed me any news, did they?

MR. REEKER: No, I just --

Q: This isn't the place for (inaudible) -- (laughter) --

MR. BOUCHER: All right. This is a case that we have been following closely. We have been working on it. As you know, we said before he was arrested in Shenzhen. He is now in Beijing. We were notified by China's Ministry of State Security on May 15th that the Chinese Government had formally arrested and charged Mr. Li Shaomin, an American citizen. The charges are spying against China on behalf of Taiwan. We are very concerned about this development. We will continue to express our concerns about Mr. Li's case to the Chinese Government. Obviously we are going to press very strongly for him to be accorded due process and for this case to be brought to a fair and a speedy conclusion.

Q: They seem impervious to these appeals and these pitches, and I'm hearing -- at least one office in the Senate has registered concern that this is ominous for others, other Americans, US citizens who are also of Chinese background.

MR. BOUCHER: Maybe he's read our travel advisory, travel warnings. I mean, we've put out a statement not very long ago --

Q: Well, that's right. There's limited (inaudible) --

MR. BOUCHER: No, we put out a statement, a Public Announcement, the other day for people, particularly Chinese Americans, to say that there was a risk in being caught up in these things. Sometimes even people who traveled before safely without any problem. So I think we've made our concerns quite clear about a number of these cases, we've given our best advice to American travelers, and we've continued to raise these cases with the Chinese.

Q: Anything to tell on that, Richard? Any progress on us raising the issues?

MR. BOUCHER: We've continued to raise the cases. I think progress is measured in individual circumstances. I'm not aware that any of these individuals are out yet.

Q: But certainly this, Richard, is backwards; it's not progress at all.

MR. BOUCHER: No, and I said that. We're very concerned. We'll continue to press.

Q: Richard, firstly, might you adjust the language of that Travel Advisory to reflect the gravity of this case? And secondly, do you have any reason to believe that these charges are unfounded?

MR. BOUCHER: I don't think I'm in a position to start passing judgment on individual cases, particularly ones where the allegations don't -- well, the allegations in this case don't involve the United States, first of all, so I don't think I have any reason to believe one way or the other.

As far as the advisory to Americans goes, certainly we would stand by the advisory, and this case makes clear again why it's important to have that information out to our traveling public. Whether the language needs to be reviewed or not will depend on, I think, further developments. I don't know. I'm not aware of any review at this moment. We just put it out. And it is, as we noted, pretty strong and pretty clear.

Q: Did you say that when -- or if you didn't, could you say when the last time you had consular access to Mr. Li was?

MR. BOUCHER: We last had access on April 30th. We expect to see him again within the next two weeks. And we've delivered clothing, books, letters, to Chinese state security officials for transmittal to Mr. Li. An Embassy Beijing consular officer did that on May 16th.

Q: But didn't see him?

MR. BOUCHER: Didn't see him. So we saw him April 30th, we’ll see him again within two weeks. Let's do this chronologically. Saw him April 30th, May 16th we delivered materials to the Chinese to turn over to him, and we expect to see him again within two weeks.

Q: Is that okay?

MR. BOUCHER: That's consistent with our consular agreement.

Q: Okay, so you don't have a problem with having to wait?

MR. BOUCHER: We'd like to see people as often as possible, but this kind of schedule is consistent with our consular agreement.

Q: Have you gotten confirmation that he has gotten these books and --

MR. BOUCHER: It was yesterday, so I don't know that we have it yet. We'll probably get that when we see him, which will be sometime in the next couple weeks.

Q: Are you satisfied that he is getting legal representation, and have you been in touch with his lawyer?

MR. BOUCHER: I don't particularly know if he has a lawyer, frankly. I think the charges were May 15th, so we'll have to see what the legal situation is. Obviously that's our main concern in these cases is that they be handled fairly, that they be handled speedily, and that there be due process.

Q: Why in the next couple of weeks, and not sooner?

MR. BOUCHER: The consular agreement, I think, provides for access at least once a month, and sometimes that's what we get.

Q: Have you been requesting more frequent access?

MR. BOUCHER: I believe we've been looking for access whenever we can get it. We don't postpone our requests, but we understand that sometimes we only get it in accordance with the terms of the consular agreement.

Q: Does the State Department relate this in any way to the various disagreements with China? Is this a vengeful move on their part?

MR. BOUCHER: I wouldn't relate it that way. We have disagreements with China about policy matters, we have serious disagreements about human rights, we have serious disagreements about the handling of some of these cases involving Americans and Americans citizens. I think overall there is an approach to China that says we look to cooperate with China as China becomes more and more a part of the world and as China adopts more and more international standards, whether it's human rights or trade or nonproliferation or activities in the United Nations. So within that regard, we look in all these situations to try to see China adopt international standards of fairness, of process, and of human rights.

Q: Can I ask about the plane quickly? Just a quick follow-up.

Q: I was just going to ask if this was -- if Mr. Kelly raised this case when -- in his meetings about the plane -- leading to your question, Barry. And if he did, don't you kind of -- are you going to see this as kind of a slap in the face, the Chinese charging him the same day, I think, that Kelly had his meeting?

MR. BOUCHER: I don't know to what extent specific cases were raised in Kelly's meetings. Obviously, in his discussions with the Chinese, they talked about a number of things in addition to missile defense, including human rights situations. And we have continued to talk to the Chinese, both in Washington and in Beijing, about the various detainees at this point.

Q: On the plane, there was a statement -- and it's a somewhat ambiguous statement by a Chinese official -- that is getting some interpretation that they are about to let the plane go, something to the effect that we never intended to keep the plane forever or something like that.

Is there any sign of a break in that situation?

MR. BOUCHER: At this point, we have continued our discussions with the Chinese. We had a meeting today in Beijing to talk to them about arrangements for the return of the airplane, but I don't have any new announcements on it for you.

Q: Richard, on the same general subject, the Chinese suggested a willingness to share some Olympic events with Taiwan if Beijing gets named the host, so long as Taiwan agrees to reassert allegiance to a One China policy. Do you have any comment on that?

MR. BOUCHER: I don't have anything particular to say about that. We have obviously always encouraged a dialogue across the Taiwan Straits. We have always encouraged steps to reduce the tensions. But we have always said that what kind of steps, what kind of setting the dialogue and having the discussions is up to the parties themselves.

And then on the broader question of any venues for the Olympic Games, including the choice of continent, city, or cities, we haven't taken a position on that. So, no, I don't have anything particular on that.

Q: Richard, can I follow up the Olympics? You said that you -- last week, Secretary Powell said that he hasn't decided whether he is going to take a position. Do these continued detentions and charging of American citizens have any bearing on whether you might make a decision to oppose the Olympics?

MR. BOUCHER: We have not taken a position on the location of the Olympic Games. That has been the position we have taken in the past, not take a position.

Q: Except for 1980.

MR. BOUCHER: Except for 1980. So I think that remains our policy.

Obviously the detentions of Americans are of great concern to us. They are a concern in our overall relationship, and we would like to see these cases handled in accordance with fairness and law, the way other nations in the world do that. So that continues to be an issue. And these things sort of fit together in that respect in the overall relationship and how we view human rights, but I don't think that we can link those two pieces quite in that way.

Q: New subject? The Ukrainians are saying they found the people who killed Gongadze, and they are dead, and he was killed by hooligans, and it wasn't politically motivated. Is this what you had in mind when you called for a fuller and transparent investigation?

MR. BOUCHER: We would reiterate our view that there needs to be a prompt, thorough and transparent investigation. We have expressed our concern about the handling and the pace of this case. We will study the information, the details of the latest developments, before trying to offer an analysis. But I think we maintain the view that there needs to be openness and transparency.

Q: What, does that mean that you don't consider the investigation that was done -- I mean, obviously you are putting in the present or future tense. "There needs to be." So can you be a little bit more explicit about what you think the merits are of the existing investigation?

MR. BOUCHER: I think we will look at this information. We will look at how it is developed, how it is presented, how it is explained, before we comment further on that. But the overall picture remains one where we are looking for openness, we are looking for transparency.

Q: But you are not saying that you -- you are not dismissing yet, at least, until you -- you haven't looked at it yet, so you are not dismissing the results of their investigation?

MR. BOUCHER: I am not trying to give it a thumbs-up or a thumbs-down to this particular information. But as it's looked at, as it's explained, as we go forward, we still see a need for transparency and openness in explaining this.

Q: In Vietnam, a priest named Nguyen Van Ly was apparently arrested shortly after sending testimony in the form of a letter to the US Congress. Do you have anything on his case or his situation?

MR. BOUCHER: I haven't checked on that. I'll have to check on that for you and see.

Q: News reports in Germany are quoting the Secretary as telling Chancellor Schroeder in March that Chairman Arafat has lost touch with reality. Can you shed any light on that -- as quoted by the German Ambassador to the Foreign Ministry?

MR. BOUCHER: I don't remember the Secretary saying that. I don't know what to --

Q: Has the Secretary --

MR. BOUCHER: Where were we in March? We were in Ramallah, is that it, or was that February?

Q: This is the Schroeder meeting.

MR. BOUCHER: This is the Schroeder meeting. No, I wasn't in the Schroeder meeting. But, you know, we've had conversations with the Secretary on this subject and haven't heard that.

These are, you know, fourth-hand press reports relating to reported leaks of other people's information, I think, and so frankly I haven't asked the Secretary if he ever said that about Chairman Arafat. I know he said many things, and I have never heard him say that.

Q: Could you ask him for us?

MR. BOUCHER: I'll check to see if it's something we want to jump into. But every time somebody reports that somebody may have said something to somebody about somebody else, I don't want to have to jump up here and go run and ask the Secretary.

Q: If I could follow, though, this was reported by the German Ambassador, who was reportedly in the meeting.

MR. BOUCHER: And the German Ambassador even said that he heard it?

Q: Well, he --

MR. BOUCHER: He reportedly reported that he reported that the Secretary reported it, right?

(Laughter.)

Q: Well, have you made any representations to the German Government that perhaps the Secretary was misquoted in the cable?

MR. BOUCHER: Have I read the cable? Have you read the cable?

Q: Is there any update on the plans or the steps to arrange a meeting between the Secretary and Mr. Arafat?

MR. BOUCHER: No, it's still under consideration.

Q: Could I ask you -- I just want to know. Let's get into Iraq a little deeper than we did yesterday, please, because the British have made their move, and I guess you wanted to let some time pass. But, you know, this has been described as a joint US-British move, but what the British are suggesting, doesn't it indeed coincide with US policy?

MR. BOUCHER: Yes.

Q: All right. So why were they up front instead of the US or instead of the two together?

MR. BOUCHER: We're working with others on this. We're working closely with the international community. We're working with the frontline states, working with the Permanent 5, with other members of the Security Council. We're discussing a similar approach. We're exchanging ideas. As I said yesterday, those ideas are getting more and more concrete; some of them are being put on paper.

The point is to work together to help the Iraqi people at the same time as we control the ability of the regime in Baghdad to develop weapons of mass destruction. We do expect a draft resolution will be circulated in the Security Council next week. We are working closely with the British in that regard and with other members of the Council on the resolution. We are working towards what will be a significant change in our approach to Iraq in the United Nations. As you've heard from us before, the focus is on strengthening controls to prevent Iraq from rebuilding military capability and weapons of mass destruction while facilitating a broader flow of goods to the civilian population of Iraq.

Q: But I thought the Secretary's position -- February -- it's a few years -- few months later now. Have you any update on whether the sanctions -- I mean, you know, the Swiss cheese sanctions against weapons is being plugged?

MR. BOUCHER: As we have said, we are working on the implementation of that. We talked about it yesterday, we talked about it today. We are going to have a resolution next week. Has it been done yet? No, it's not done yet. We are doing it.

Q: No, you do need a new resolution to appeal and urge, as he did, some of your best friends in the region to work a little harder to deny transit of weapons material to Iraq. I was just asking if that has borne any fruit so far.

MR. BOUCHER: I don't think we expected to see immediate results during the period we are now. We expect to see a coming together of the countries involved to implement a new system of controls on weapons to Iraq; to implement a more open flow of goods for the Iraqi people; to implement, strengthen controls on smuggling to and from Iraq; to implement ways to protect economies of neighbors, should Iraq try to retaliate for this.

So there's a lot of pieces to this, as we have discussed. And all those pieces are being put together, some of them in the resolution, some of them through unilateral actions, some of them through action by frontline states. And so all those pieces are coming together now, is where I put it.

Q: Well, what about the inspection piece? Is that a prerequisite for removing the civilian sanctions?

MR. BOUCHER: Part of the puzzle is better controls on smuggling in and out of Iraq.

Q: How about these weapons inspectors, return of weapons inspectors?

MR. BOUCHER: Support for the UN resolutions is still strong. We continue to believe that Iraq must comply with Resolution 1284. But right from the beginning, the Secretary has said that we will do what we think is appropriate in terms of controlling Iraq's access to weapons of mass destruction. We will do what we think is appropriate in terms of allowing the Iraqi people to get what they need, even though they suffer under the regime.

The Iraqis, if they want to show that they are not building weapons of mass destruction, if they want to substantiate the mostly incredible, non- credible claims that they keep making, if they want to do that by inviting inspectors in, then good. They still have the need and the obligation. But we are going to do what we think is necessary to make sure they don't have the ability to develop weapons of mass destruction.

Q: Let me just go one step further. Obviously, it's always said there are other means, and you have other means besides on-site inspection, and I think you are saying that again. But the question is, do they have to permit on-site inspection to get out from under these civilian sanctions, and I think you are saying no.

MR. BOUCHER: We never have said that that was part of the picture. It is not a trade with Iraq. It is a statement that we are going to do what we think is appropriate vis-à-vis the regime and vis-à-vis the Iraqi people. And what we think is appropriate for the Iraqi people is that they be allowed to get civilian goods. What we think is appropriate with regard to the regime is that they not be allowed to get the materials that they could use, that they would use, to threaten their neighbors in the region.

Q: Well, Richard, all this is still contingent on allowing inspectors back in, correct?

MR. BOUCHER: He just asked that question four times, and I just said no four times. So you get number five, and I will say no to you, too.

Q: Sorry.

Q: Russia said today -- the Deputy Foreign Minister says -- that at this point, Russia does not support this proposal. Do you chalk that up to just the consultations not being finished yet, or could you explain to us some of the problems Iraq is having with it?

And let me just say, Jordan is saying that the neighboring states will be hurt by what this proposal looks like at this point, and I know that is something the Secretary said they were going to try very hard not to let happen.

MR. BOUCHER: As far as Russia goes, we are continuing our consultations with Russia, and when the Russian Foreign Minister comes here tomorrow this will obviously be a subject that the Secretary discusses with him.

In terms of the frontline states and the steps that they need to take, we are aware that Iraq is making threats against them, Iraq is making threats to have some sort of economic retaliation, and we have been talking to them and talking to others about ways to protect their economies should Iraq try to carry out those threats.

Q: So you think they will be satisfied when it comes to the final approval?

MR. BOUCHER: As I said, that is one of the pieces that has to come together to get everybody working on this.

Q: So could you say at this point that you have a commitment from the frontline states to stop any weapons flow going in and stop any smuggling from coming out?

MR. BOUCHER: I think we have had a commitment, a general commitment, all along; a general consensus from people all along to move in that direction, to do the things that were necessary to make this new system work. And certainly the people in the neighborhood are the most careful, need to be the most careful, about making sure that Iraq doesn't rebuild its capabilities.

So I think we have a desire to move in this direction from all the people involved, and now we are in the point of moving the kind of steps and specific actions that all of us have to take to make it work.

Q: Yes, I wondered if you could explain something on this. Is it correct to think that the United Nations would have to approve, continue to have to approveevery contract of imports into Iraq, including civilian goods, if only to say that this is a civilian good contract and therefore can go through without any problems?

And then I have a follow-up.

MR. BOUCHER: I think we will come out with some of these details as we put all the pieces in place. There will obviously be goods that none of us want Iraq to acquire. There will obviously be goods which we all think are fine. There will obviously be some dual-use things in the middle. There's different ways of handling those reviews. So who decides that this is one of these and not one of those is one of the questions we have to discuss with the different partners and members up at the UN. They won't necessarily all come, all get reviewed, in the Sanctions Committee, for example. They may get reviewed through some other mechanism.

Q: Do you think you have time to finish that off in time for the -- by June the 4th? I mean, you seem pretty vague about lots of the details. Are you going to have time to do this?

MR. BOUCHER: We are working on many, many details with people, and we hope they can all be brought together by an early date, but we will see. I don't have a particular timing, other than to say we hope to move on the resolution next week.

Q: And my follow-up is this. I mean, the whole point to this was to overcome -- to win the propaganda battle against the Iraqis, who say that the United Nations is responsible for the hardship and sufferings of the Iraqi people. But as long as the United Nations continues to hold all the money, how are you going to win this propaganda battle, and as long as the UN is reviewing every contract, as they do now?

MR. BOUCHER: Well, obviously I can start by convincing you. (Laughter.) Try, just try it.

The effect of this on the Iraqi people is that they will see goods showing up. They will be able to acquire things. The flow will be smoother. The ability to get a hold of things they need will be easier, except for whatever restrictions and problems that are caused by the regime. It will --

Q: It's the same now.

MR. BOUCHER: Let's stop arguing and let me finish the answer, and then you can argue with me.

The fact is, if there is a smoother flow, a better flow, and people get what they want, I think people will realize there has been a change. If they realize it is available, if they realize there are no impediments to getting it, but that things don't show up, I think they'll realize much more quickly who is at fault. So I don't think there is any particular problem in a system which allows a very, very smooth and almost unimpeded flow where somebody is watching what's going and knowing what's going.

The money is certainly there. There's billions of dollars -- $16 - $20 billion available this year for the Iraqi regime to spend. The fact that they're not spending it and the goods aren't showing up is quite clearly the fault of the regime.

Q: You've been saying for months that the only problem with the flow is that they're not ordering the goods. Why would they suddenly start ordering goods and allowing a free flow just because you've changed the system -- to undermine their confidence?

MR. BOUCHER: It will be clear that there are no impediments from our side to the flow of civilian goods.

Q: But you've been saying there are no impediments anyway. Why will people suddenly believe you just because you've tinkered with the system?

MR. BOUCHER: Well, obviously I ought to give up on you and try somebody else. (Laughter.) There will be a clear definition, a clearer definition of the goods which are allowed to go. It will be quite clear from reporting what's prohibited and what's permitted, and a smaller class of goods in between.

So if the Iraqi regime wants to say you didn't get a refrigerator because of the bad Sanctions Committee, it will be clear to all that refrigerators or whatever are on the Sanctions Committee list of permitted items, so you can't maintain that it's a Sanction Committee problem when it's quite clear that the Sanctions Committee, or whoever, says no problem with refrigerators. So I think that will help things out. I think refrigerator trucks is one of the examples cited all the time.

So whatever these things are, it will be quite clear there is a broader and bigger and clearer list of things that are no problem.

Q: Can we change the subject?

MR. BOUCHER: In the end, if it works, things will be available and people will know they're available. If that happens, then I would expect the Iraqi population to understand the source of their troubles.

Q: I have kind of a logistical question about tomorrow. Has the Secretary's schedule with Foreign Minister Ivanov been firmed up yet, or is he arriving with still no idea when it is he's supposed to show up?

MR. BOUCHER: He doesn't arrive until this evening, and they'll start out by having breakfast together tomorrow morning. Exactly the pattern of meetings after that I don't know. We'll get that to you as soon as we have it.

Q: The Russians are saying there will be a couple meetings with the Secretary.

MR. BOUCHER: I'm sure there will be.

Q: (Inaudible) the meeting with Bush and the meeting with Ivanov, the times of those. Bush and the meeting with Dr. Rice, is what I'm saying.

MR. BOUCHER: So there are not too many pieces left to fall into place, but I'm not here to lay it out until it all falls into place.

Q: So we're trying to get --

MR. BOUCHER: I'll get you a schedule as soon as we have the schedule firmed up.

Q: And breakfast is obviously the first, so where is that?

MR. BOUCHER: Here.

Q: Here? Okay.

MR. BOUCHER: Let's get it lined up, and we'll tell you.

Q: In a slightly less contentious area, can we go back to the Middle East for a second?

MR. BOUCHER: What's contentious about Ivanov?

Q: Than Iraq. First of all, has the Secretary spoken to any leader by phone in the last few days? We haven't had an update on that. And also, is there any more movement or anything you can tell us on the Mitchell Commission report and when you plan to --

MR. BOUCHER: There's nothing new on the Mitchell Commission report. As we've said, Senator Mitchell has received the comments of the parties and passed those on to us, so we have the comments of -- we have the report from Senator Mitchell, we have the comments of the parties, the comments of Kofi Annan, on that.

As far as phone calls go, well, the last few days -- where are we? No, I don't have any -- on Saturday he talked to Foreign Minister Peres. Yesterday -- no, Monday, he talked to Foreign Minister Ivanov a couple times, Foreign Minister Manley, the Czech Foreign Minister. I don't have any since then. That may be because I forgot to ask on one or two days.

But we've been in touch with the Israelis. You know he had the meeting with the Palestinians, with Abu Mazen, the other day. And we've kept in touch with the Israelis through our Ambassador. So we've continued to work on these issues in cooperation and consultation with them.

Q: The Secretary said he opposed the amendment which suspends aid to Lebanon when he spoke in the House committee last week, I think, or the week before. They've now voted in favor of that. Do you have any comment on that? And what does the Secretary do to prevent this from going any further?

MR. BOUCHER: The Secretary's view is quite clearly stated. We've maintained that view. I've just heard about the vote this morning, but I'm sure we'll continue to make that view known on the Hill and see if we can make it prevail.

Q: Richard, you've got 24 hours to consider the legislation that Senator Helms and others introduced to support Cuban dissidents. Do you have a position on that proposal?

MR. BOUCHER: No. I'll have to see what happens after 48 hours.

Q: On the Middle East, the spokesman for Ariel Sharon, Raanan Gissin, told AFP this morning that there will be no extension of the area of the settlements and no new construction of new colonies.

Do you have any comments on this? Is it encouraging?

MR. BOUCHER: I'm not sure we've seen the statement or had a chance to analyze it. I'm not clear right off whether that's evolution or the same statement as they made when they entered into the coalition.

We are still considering the various aspects of the Mitchell Commission and the comments of the parties on it. We'll obviously take into account explanations that the parties give of their policies in different areas. But I don't really have a commentary at this point from us.

Q: Can you tell us what the Indian Foreign Secretary is discussing with Under Secretary Grossman, or what they did discuss this morning?

And also, do you have a date now for the Pakistan -- just related -- the Pakistani Foreign Minister meeting?

MR. BOUCHER: I don't think we did, did we? We checked yesterday and we didn't have a day.

On the meetings today, we're having meetings today with the Indian Ministry of External Affairs. They are bilateral talks that are part of an institutional dialogue with India that we established in March of 2000. It's now being vigorously pursued by the new Administration. The dialogue includes summits, ministerials, regular meetings like this one at the senior official level. As you know, we had meetings with Minister Jaswant Singh in April, and the Deputy Secretary had meetings in New Delhi last week.

The Indian delegation here is led by Indian Foreign Secretary Chokila Iyer, the most senior career official in the Ministry. The US side is led by the Under Secretary for Political Affairs Marc Grossman. The two delegations are discussing a wide variety of regional and bilateral issues, including regional security, next steps to implement the institutional dialogue, and a preview of the June 2001 working group meetings on counter-terrorism and peacekeeping.

Q: Do you understand that they're the equivalent -- that this guy is Grossman's --

MR. BOUCHER: Yes, Marc Grossman, the Under Secretary of Political Affairs, is our most senior career person, like his Indian counterpart here.

Q: Any comments on Bill Clinton being egged in Warsaw?

MR. BOUCHER: I hadn't heard about it, no.

Q: Is there any truth in the report that Crown Prince Abdallah has been invited to Washington, and he said, no, thank you?

MR. BOUCHER: You would have to ask them about that. We don't go into details on visits.

Q: Okay, one more. Thirty-six Moroccan rights activists have been arrested. Do you have anything to say on that?

MR. BOUCHER: No, I hadn't seen that. I will have to check on it. [End]

Released on May 17, 2001

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