Visit our Document Archive Read the Convention Relating to the Regime of the Straits (24 July 1923) Read the Convention Relating to the Regime of the Straits (24 July 1923)
HR-Net - Hellenic Resources Network Compact version
Today's Suggestion
Read The "Macedonian Question" (by Maria Nystazopoulou-Pelekidou)
HomeAbout HR-NetNewsWeb SitesDocumentsOnline HelpUsage InformationContact us
Thursday, 28 March 2024
 
News
  Latest News (All)
     From Greece
     From Cyprus
     From Europe
     From Balkans
     From Turkey
     From USA
  Announcements
  World Press
  News Archives
Web Sites
  Hosted
  Mirrored
  Interesting Nodes
Documents
  Special Topics
  Treaties, Conventions
  Constitutions
  U.S. Agencies
  Cyprus Problem
  Other
Services
  Personal NewsPaper
  Greek Fonts
  Tools
  F.A.Q.
 

U.S. Department of State Daily Press Briefing #23, 97-02-13

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>


1041

U.S. Department of State
Daily Press Briefing

I N D E X

February 13, 1997

Briefer: Nicholas Burns

DEPARTMENT
1	Secretary Albright's Activities
1,5-6,16  --Working Breakfast w/PM Netanyahu
16	  --Discussion of Mideast Bank
1	  --Memorial Service for Ambassador Harriman
1 	  -- Remarks--Conference on Religious Freedom Abroad
1	Ambassador Bill Richardson Sworn In
1-2	Traveling with the Secretary on the Internet
1-2	Creation of Secretary of State E-Mail
2	Jovian Waltrick Family/ Director of Caucasus Affairs Mtg.
3	A/S Kornblum Upcoming Trip to Rome, Sarajevo, Pale
3-5	  --Mtg. w/Contact Group re: Brcko Arbitration
10-11,14    Secretary Albright's Upcoming Trip
11-14	Secretary Albright's Family History

CHINA 6 Washington Post report re: Alleged Campaign Contributions

CUBA Helms-Burton 6-7 -EU Postponment of WTO Challenge 14 ---Latin American Focus on Human Rights in Cuba 7-8 Sentences for Boat Hijackers Returned by U.S.

NORTH KOREA 8,10 World Food Program Appeal 8-9 Status of U.S-North Korea Mtgs. in New York 9-10,15 Hwang Jang Yop Request for Asylum @ S. Korean Embassy in Beijing

UNITED NATIONS 14 U.S. Arrears

FORMER YUGOSLAVIA 15 Serbia-Report of Denials of Visas to U.S. Congress 15 A/S Shattuck Considering Trip to Region 16 Passage of Special Election Law

VIETNAM 17 Intention to Jam Radio Free Asia


U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE
DAILY PRESS BRIEFING

DPB #23

THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 13, 1997, 1:59 P.M.

(ON THE RECORD UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED)

MR. BURNS: Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen.

Welcome to the State Department. As you know, Secretary Albright had a working breakfast this morning with Prime Minister Netanyahu.

She's now over at the White House with President Clinton and the Prime Minister and others, and I believe there will be a White House press conference in about an hour, or hour and a half on the Prime Minister's visit to Washington today.

She had a very good meeting with him, and she pledged that she would be personally quite involved in the Middle East peace negotiations and in relations with all the Middle East countries but most especially Israel, Palestinians, Egypt, Jordan, the other primary countries with which we have contacts there.

She also attended the memorial service today for Ambassador Pamela Harriman. As you know, she spoke to the Conference on Religious Freedom Abroad. You all heard those remarks, and she is now at the White House. So she's had a busy day.

On a separate note, I just want to congratulate Ambassador Bill Richardson who was sworn in today as the United States Ambassador to the United Nations. We think he's going to be an outstanding Ambassador. He had a resounding 100-to-nothing vote of confidence by the U.S. Senate. He is very well prepared given his vast diplomatic experience over the last couple of years as a troubleshooter for the Clinton Administration, and we all want to welcome him on board here to the Department of State.

I also want to let you know about a feature of the Secretary's trip that you might find interesting and also some new things that we're doing with our Internet. We are launching today a new program called "Traveling with the Secretary."

This coincides with Secretary Albright's trip to Europe and Asia.

It allows people, average citizens who don't get a chance - Sid - who don't get a chance - I see you smirking here, Sid. Give this a fair shot. Think of it this way. You have 240 million Americans; about 15 of them get to come here to the State Department everyday and ask questions.

If anybody out there wants to ask the Secretary of State a question, they now can do it through the State Department Web Site, www.state.gov. We are creating today a new designation, which is a Secretary of State e-mail - secretary@state.gov. People around the country or around the world can e-mail the Secretary of State. I cannot guarantee she's going to personally sit at home every night and answer every e-mail message, but I can guarantee people who do send messages to her that they will get a response from the State Department.

She will be given on a weekly basis a compilation of all the messages that come in, with a breakdown of what subjects people are sending messages about. In some cases, I think she will be responding.

I also want to let you know - to go back to my main point - that we're setting up this home page on the Web Site that will effectively let people chart the course of this trip or any other trip and to get information on what is being done by the Secretary on a daily basis, whether it's in Italy or Germany or China or Japan. It's meant to help educate, especially for students, for young people.

You know, the Administration has set up a GLOBE network.

This is an education, environment and science program that ties together, I believe, 4,000 schools around the world. Secretary Christopher visited one of these schools in Stuttgart. All these schools are linked by the Internet; they're linked by a common concern by environmental problems and technological problems.

Secretary Albright intends to have, when she's in Russia on Thursday, February 20th, an interactive Town Hall Meeting with the GLOBE students around the world. She'll be on-line. They can send in their messages or questions on-line and she'll be responding to them.

So I am issuing a press statement today which details all of this. I really do commend it to you. It's mainly for kids.

It's for all the people who don't get to come down to the State Department everyday, and it's another way that we're trying to communicate with the American public about what the State Department is doing and what American foreign policy is all about.

Two more things. First, I want to let you know that, yesterday, the family of Joviane Waltrick came into the State Department.

Joviane Waltrick, of course, is the young woman who was killed in the automobile crash in which the Georgian diplomat, Mr. Makharadze, was involved on January 3rd.

I understand that Mrs. Viviani Wagner, who is the mother of Joviane Waltrick, her husband and a family friend, came in yesterday. They met with Steve Young who is our Director for Caucasus Affairs, the person who is in charge here at the Department of State for Georgia and Armenia and Azerbaijan.

Mr. Young expressed his condolences on behalf of the Department of State. He indicated our shared interest in seeing that justice is served in this case. He described the responsibilities that the State Department has and our action to try to convince the Georgian Government to lift the diplomatic immunity of Mr. Makharadze so that he might face trial, now that the U.S. Attorney has indicated quite clearly that he intends to bring formal charges should diplomatic immunity be lifted.

We were very pleased that she took the time to come in to see us. We have a lot of sympathy for her and for her family members.

I just wanted to let you know that this happened and that we stand ready to work with the family in whatever way they wish to work with us. I think it was a quite constructive meeting that we had yesterday.

Finally, I want you to know that our Assistant Secretary for European and Canadian Affairs, John Kornblum, is leaving this afternoon for Rome with his Interagency Team. In Rome, they will meet with Contact Group members to discuss the decision on the Brcko arbitration. They will then travel to Sarajevo to meet with the leaders of the Federation. They'll travel to Pale, the Republic of Srpska, to meet with Bosnian Serb leaders. Then I think that John intends to return to Rome on Saturday evening where he'll be met by the Secretary of State. He'll be flying into Rome on the first leg of her trip around the world.

I know that a lot of you are interested in the Brcko decision.

As you know, just as a reminder, under the terms of the Dayton Accords, this was one very last issues settled in the last two days of the Dayton negotiations. The parties agreed to binding arbitration of the disputed portion of the inter-entity boundary line in the Brcko area.

Roberts Owen, the American attorney, is the presiding arbitrator.

He has been meeting with the Serb and the Bosniak members of the panel, and he is making final preparations for a decision.

I understand that Roberts Owen intends to announce this decision tomorrow in Rome.

I want to be clear about the role of the United States here.

This is a matter for the Arbitral Tribunal to decide, not for the United States Government. The arbitration process is conducted in confidence. It would be therefore be inappropriate for the United States to comment on the arguments that have been presented, in some cases, in public and to reporters by the various sides.

But since we believe the international community must move quickly to provide support for the implementation of the Brcko solution, once it's announced, the United States High Representative Carl Bildt and the Contact Group member states have agreed to meet tomorrow in Rome. They will be dedicated to helping to implement this decision by the Tribunal - this very important decision on Brcko.

I can't announce the decision today. It's not for the United States to announce it, but it will be announced tomorrow and I'll have a further comment tomorrow morning after it's announced in Rome.

QUESTION: Can you say if a final decision has been reached yet?

MR. BURNS: I can say that I think the final touches - the final preparations are being made for this decision. By and large, I think that Mr. Owen understands what decision he's going to be announcing tomorrow, yes.

QUESTION: You're aware of reports that the Bosnian Serbs are supposed to get administrative control over Brcko for a year?

MR. BURNS: I am just not going to comment on any aspect of the decision that's going to be announced tomorrow.

That's up to Mr. Owen to announce.

QUESTION: Nick, how concerned is the United States that, regardless of whatever decision comes out, this situation in Brcko could erupt into fighting?

MR. BURNS: At Dayton, Brcko was one of the most difficult issues. As I said, I believe - as I remember, it was the last issue that was decided with President Izetbegovic and Mr. Milosevic and others. It was the suggestion put forward by Secretary Christopher for this tribunal - the Arbitral Tribunal. It's a very emotional issue. It also is an issue that has a lot to do with the geo-politics of the area, given the geography of Brcko and its access to other parts of the region that are quite important for all the groups.

We think it's one that has to be handled quite sensitively.

That's why the Arbitration panel has been meeting. The two sides have committed under the Dayton Accords to abide by the decision of the tribunal itself, which will be announced tomorrow.

QUESTION: How many troops do you think may be needed to reinforce the area?

MR. BURNS: The decision hasn't been announced yet.

I just don't want to get into it, and I really can't extrapolate from a decision that hasn't been announced to anticipate what security requirements will be needed. But I can say this, I know that the United States and the other Contact Group members are fundamentally dedicated to making sure that once the Brcko decision is announced, it is implemented, because the parties have an obligation to do so under the accords. They pledged to do so.

QUESTION: What's the likely repercussions of the Brcko decision on the Greater Bosnia peace deal?

MR. BURNS: Our sense is that the momentum that is clearly there to continue peace - and there has been a peace for well over a year - to continue efforts to reconstruct the country and to follow the Dayton Accords. That momentum will continue.

QUESTION: But are you not fearful at all that Brcko, being the powder keg that it is, if fighting were to erupt, that it could unravel the whole Bosnia peace -

MR. BURNS: I don't want to assume that the worse is going to happen. I understand why you ask a question like that, but I don't want to assume the worse is going to happen.

We assume that with the proper care here by SFOR, by the international community, and by the parties, this decision will be another peace in the puzzle to put together a continuation of the momentum from the Dayton Accords.

The Dayton Accords have turned the situation around for the better, and we expect that that trend will continue.

QUESTION: Nick, is the United States willing to contribute additional troops necessary or police - let's call them security forces - if that's required to monitor the Brcko corridor?

MR. BURNS: We have no plans to contribute any additional forces beyond the forces that have been committed by President Clinton to the SFOR effort. Those force levels will stay the same. This decision will not require us to deploy additional troops to Bosnia.

QUESTION: You don't have use the word "troops" and you don't have to talk about exclusively SFOR. You know, security forces, police monitors, the whole -

MR. BURNS: I can't comment - since the decision hasn't been announced, I can't comment on the decision and I can't comment on what provisions SFOR is going to make for implementation of the decision. That has to be done tomorrow in Rome.

QUESTION: You just can't say, "Basically, our policy on committing more forces to police is . . ."

MR. BURNS: Sid, you understand why I can't answer this question. It's not because I don't have answers. It's because the decision hasn't been announced. It's not for me to announce it. It's for the Tribunal to announce it; it's for Mr. Owen to announce it. Once it's announced, I'm sure he'll lay out his rationale for the decision and you'll have a chance to ask SFOR and me tomorrow about any of these other questions. We're about 24 hours ahead of that question.

QUESTION: Nick, in your description of the meeting this morning with Prime Minister Netanyahu, you said that the Secretary pledged to personal involvement. Does that imply that she intends to do a lot of traveling to that region?

MR. BURNS: She's made no decisions on travel to the region. She's got a big trip coming up, to Europe and the Middle East. When she comes back, she has an important Congressional testimony.

In terms of the Middle East, here is what's happening. Prime Minister Netanyahu is the first in a series of four visitors to Washington over the next couple of weeks. So, therefore, the focus of Middle East diplomacy concerning the peace negotiations is really Washington, D.C., until the springtime.

Prime Minister Netanyahu, Chairman Arafat, President Mubarak, and King Hussein will all be the guests of President Clinton and Secretary Albright. I think that's where the locus of our own diplomacy will be here in Washington. I'm sure at some point the Secretary will entertain the possibility of a trip to the region, but she's just not there yet.

QUESTION: Could you translate the phrase, then, for us? What does her "personal involvement" mean? How will it be different?

MR. BURNS: She had a very good breakfast, by the way. They got along quite well. They had a substantive discussion on a variety of the issues concerning the various peace discussions.

She was simply indicating that the Middle East is a region of great concern to us and she, as Secretary of State, will be directly involved in our own diplomacy, paying a lot of personal attention to it, as all of her predecessors have done for several decades.

QUESTION: Will Ambassador Ross' functions change with his new title?

MR. BURNS: I don't expect so. I think he'll continue to be the point man -- person for the United States on our Middle East diplomacy.

Yes, Lee.

QUESTION: Nick, there were charges in the Washington Post today that the Chinese Government was involved in funneling campaign money to the Clinton Administration. Is that correct?

MR. BURNS: I simply have no comment to make on that story.

QUESTION: If I can return to Prime Minister Netanyahu for a second and the discussion yesterday of the discussions on the sale of jets to Saudi Arabia. Is the Administration willing to give Israel military equipment, perhaps access to some sort of intelligence that would help alleviate the concerns they have about losing their strategic edge?

MR. BURNS: I think on these questions, since the President and the Prime Minister are going to give a press conference in about an hour's time, I think on specific questions pertaining to our relationship with Israel, what is being discussed by the President and the Prime Minister, I'm going to leave that to the President and the Prime Minister. I did answer this question yesterday and certainly stand by everything I said yesterday.

Tom, welcome back.

QUESTION: Thanks. On Helms-Burton? Does the United States view the Helms-Burton law as a matter of national security and, therefore, outside the jurisdiction of the WTO, and (inaudible) on what grounds?

MR. BURNS: First, let me just make, if I could, a larger comment and then try to get to your question. You know that the European Union has decided to postpone, at least for a week, its proposal that the WTO look into this question. It's helpful that they've decided to postpone the question, but we're a little bit disappointed they've only postponed and not dropped or suspended entirely this request for the WTO Director General to select panelists to adjudicate the differences of opinion between the EU and the United States on this issue.

We said many times that the Liberated Act, Helms-Burton, is first and foremost the law of the land. It's also a foreign policy matter. We don't consider it to be a trade issue. We consider it to be a foreign policy issue. The WTO has jurisdiction over trade issues but not foreign policy issues or national security issues, and that, I think, is a distinction that we will continue to press home.

We, therefore, believe it's inappropriate for the WTO to consider this issue at all - this dispute between the United States and the European Union. It's a highly political matter, and we think it will just have adverse implications for the way that the WTO does business.

QUESTION: Are you not concerned, though, that other governments could use the same argument to get the WTO - to remove the WTO from jurisdictional over trade issues that they might consider to be highly political?

MR. BURNS: No, we're not, because we think that there is a fairly clear agreement internationally on what are trade issues and what are political issues. This is an exception, but there are not a lot of other issues out there in which we're involved centrally where we think either our economic competitors or other countries around the world are going to claim politics, when it's clearly a trade issue at hand.

I think there is a distinction there that most people in the international community will accept.

George.

QUESTION: Did you see the story about Cuba prosecuting six rafters or folks - I guess they hijacked a tugboat and were intercepted by the Coast Guard; repatriated back to Cuba and were prosecuted by Cuban authorities, and some people might say that this runs counter to the agreement which was reached a year and a half ago.

MR. BURNS: What I can do, George, is take you through what we know about this issue. These people - the six Cubans - were returned to Cuba by the U.S. Coast Guard under the terms of the May 2, 1995, Migration Agreement between the U.S. and Cuba.

As you know, under that agreement, the Government of Cuba has pledged not to prosecute or otherwise take reprisals against returnees as a consequence of their attempt to immigrate illegally.

For example, these people should not be prosecuted for the act of departing Cuba without an exit permit, which is a requirement of Cuban law. The May 2, 1995, agreement does not, however, provide immunity against prosecution for criminal offenses, such as hijacking, which are committed before or during or after the departure attempts.

I wanted to make that legal distinction for you.

As we understand it, since the repatriation of these six Cubans on May 6, 1996, officers from the United States Interest Section in Havana have made regular visits to the family members of the accused hijackers to monitor the progress of the case and insure that no reprisals were taken against the family members.

Yesterday, our Interests Section delivered a Diplomatic Note to the Cuban Government, asking for confirmation of the disposition of this case. In this case, we understand just purely, not on a normative basis but on a factual basis, that 8- to 20- year sentences would be consistent with the normal length of sentences in Cuban hijacking cases. I don't say that we approve that. It's just a factual representation of what is normal in the Cuban system.

QUESTION: Can you tell us whether these people were sentenced?

MR. BURNS: Yes. That appears to be what happened.

QUESTION: So it's not an issue, as far as you're concerned, between the United States and Cuba?

MR. BURNS: I wanted to take you through the history of this, to say that we think the May 2, 1995, agreement needs to be respected. In this case, our officers had access to these people, and there is this distinction in the law between criminal offenses and then violations of, for instance, emigration law.

There's a broad distinction, I think, that I wanted to point out to you in this particular case.

QUESTION: So the Cubans have not violated the agreement is what you're saying?

MR. BURNS: We've not accused them of violating the agreement, that's right, in this particular case. But I'm not saying that we support the actions either. I'm just saying we're not accusing them of violation, that's right.

QUESTION: Do you view this as a loophole, as something that they could continue to use and something that this government might try and close?

MR. BURNS: I think it's something that we were aware of - this distinction about hijacking is something that we were aware of when the May 2, 1995 - before the May 2, 1995, agreement was consummated with the Cubans.

QUESTION: Nick, do you agree with their explanation that this is a hijacking instead of a migration issue?

MR. BURNS: That's what they were tried under, and we've not, I believe, raised our voice publicly to counter that.

QUESTION: Do you have anything on food aid to North Korea?

MR. BURNS: There's been no progress on that issue.

We continue to consider the World Food Program's appeal. We think that we'll make a decision shortly. Secretary Albright was quite forthright in speaking about this yesterday on Capitol Hill, and, when we have something to announce officially, we'll certainly let you know that.

QUESTION: Can you tell me when your last official meeting was in New York with the North Koreans?

MR. BURNS: Let me check on that. I'm not quite sure when it was.

QUESTION: (Inaudible) defector who - in fact who the South Koreans say he is?

MR. BURNS: Let me just say on that, all we have, of course, are the reports from Beijing that this gentleman apparently has defected to South Korea. As you know, he remains, as far as we know, in the South Korean Embassy in Beijing. You've heard what the North Koreans have said, and we hope that this case can be worked out under the normal procedures.

We've not had any contact with Mr. Hwang. I'm not aware of any plans to have contact with him, and it's something that the South Korean Government needs to work out with the Government of China.

QUESTION: Nick, did you express that sentiment to the Chinese, that you'd like them not to send him back to Pyongyang, as they have in some cases like this?

MR. BURNS: I don't know that we've been involved in any way in this episode. I don't know that we've had any direct contact with the Foreign Ministry in Beijing. I can check and see if our Embassy has. I don't know for sure. This is a matter, we think, for the South Koreans, obviously, to deal with, since the gentleman is in their Embassy, which is on their sovereign territory in Beijing, and also an issue for the Government of China to work out.

But I can't speculate either about the reasons why he apparently has defected. I'm sure at some point if he does make his way to South Korea or some other country, he may have an opportunity to speak publicly, but not yet. We haven't heard anything from him.

QUESTION: Does the U.S. see this matter could influence Joint Briefing and the Four-Way talks, something like that?

MR. BURNS: We don't believe that this incident should affect the willingness of any party to participate in the Four-Party talks or before that in the Joint Briefing that the United States and South Korea have offered to North Korea. We remain hopeful that North Korea will proceed with the briefing and get on with the Four-Party talks. We will consider all those issues, obviously, as separate from this particular incident.

QUESTION: (Inaudible) and, if so, could you answer whether you have any opinion as to whether this really is Mr. Hwang or not?

MR. BURNS: I believe that was Jim's question. We have no reason to doubt what the South Koreans have said publicly, and that is that Hwang Jang-Yop has asked for asylum at their Embassy in Beijing. We know that he was Chairman of the North Korean Foreign Affairs Committee of the Supreme People's Assembly, and he's also a Party Secretary of the Central Committee. He is a senior figure in North Korea's leadership and has been for some time. We have no reason to doubt what the South Koreans have told us at this point. But again, we haven't had access to him. We're reading the same reports that you are and, of course, are receiving some general information from the South Korean Government.

QUESTION: How do you characterize the impact on the North Korean Government of losing someone at such a high rank?

MR. BURNS: It's obviously a quite extraordinary event to have a person of this level in the North Korean Government - a person of this kind of influence - to defect from North Korea to South Korea. I think it's very clear what the significance of this is. It's the first time a senior person like this has defected.

QUESTION: Going back to Cuba -

QUESTION: No, can we stay on this.

MR. BURNS: Yes, Judd.

QUESTION: Nick, earlier you said you haven't had any access to him, and you didn't know of any request, but would not the United States like to talk to him?

MR. BURNS: I think at this point we're quite content to let the South Koreans and the Chinese resolve this incident.

I don't think it's the business of the United States to get involved.

I don't believe we've been asked to get involved, as far as I know. So, I think we'll leave it there. If at some point, he does reach South Korea or another country and wishes to talk, well, that's another matter. But I know that we haven't made an attempt to get involved in any way.

QUESTION: How do you think - is there any implication between his defection and the food crisis which is taking place in North Korea?

MR. BURNS: We just cannot speculate on the reasons for this gentleman's defection. Who knows? We haven't had a chance to speak to him. We do know separate from that, that there is a severe food crisis in North Korea. That's why we're seriously considering this food appeal from the World Food Program.

Yes, Lee.

QUESTION: Nick, I'd like to get back to the trip for a minute. Two questions. First, has Secretary Albright considered or is she considering any stops to any Holocaust-related places or memorials during her visit, given the recent revelations about her background? And, secondly, could you just go over a little bit about the whole media frenzy about the trip; about how many people wanted to go on the trip; the overwhelming interest, etc.?

MR. BURNS: The second question is particularly interesting to me. I'm not sure there's a media frenzy to go on the trip.

There is a great demand of people -- more than 40 members of the press signed up to go on the trip; and, unfortunately, because we still fly in Circa 1960 707s - President Kennedy's Air Force One, we have space for 12 journalists to travel with us. So we regret very much that we weren't able to take everybody who wanted to come, and we are appreciative of the interest that the press shows in our foreign policy. It's a good thing, and we're looking forward to traveling with the 12 who will be going with us.

On the first question, I know that Secretary Albright's schedule in each of these stops is going to be jam-packed with meetings.

Let me tell you about the trip itself. This is not a trip where Secretary Albright feels she needs to get acquainted with world leaders in these capitals in Europe and in Asia. She knows almost all of them. She's had extensive contact with almost all of them, with one or two exceptions.

This is a trip where she's going to roll up her sleeves and get down to work on the agenda that we have with these countries, which is in all cases - with all of them, in Europe and Asia - a very important, vital agenda for the United States. In most cases, she's only going to have enough time because of the compressed nature of the schedule to meet with the governmental leaders.

In a few cases, she'll be doing things outside of the meetings, but they'll be very brief, and I'm not aware of any plans by her on this particular trip to visit Holocaust-related spots.

Having said that, she is a lifelong student of the Holocaust.

She is a Europeanist. She is someone throughout here entire life - teenage and adult life, professionally - has been primarily interested in the history of Europe in the second half of this century. She knows quite a lot about what happened in the Holocaust during the second World War.

You can imagine then how these revelations of the past several weeks have affected her. It's a very emotional issue for her.

She lost three grandparents in the death camps. She lost an aunt. She lost a cousin and many other family members, and she is very interested in looking further into her family's past to uncover what else she may not know about her family's past. She's very proud of her family. She's very proud of her parents. And, as she has said many times, that she owes a lot to her parents for having rescued her from both Adolph Hitler and Stalin.

Having said all that, Lee, I think you should agree with me - and I hope the press would agree - that this is an intensely personal issue for her and her family. I think the press needs to respect that a little bit. It is certainly reasonable for the press to write articles, to ask questions, as you've been doing - and she's been talking to members of the press. Some of the people in this room have talked to her. But I think it's also true that at some point this has to become a personal issue for her family, and she has to be allowed to do her job as Secretary of State.

QUESTION: Nick, when you just said, without any qualification, that she lost three grandparents, an aunt and a cousin, you didn't, you know, say there's been some information, or she's looking into, or she has heard, or she's been told. When last we visited this subject, it was in the latter category. She had heard this.

It was all new to her. It was a major surprise, and she was going - and her family were going to look into it. Maybe you were speaking a little quickly just now to Lee, but if it is now established fact, could you tell us how it moved from the "may" to the "sure"?

MR. BURNS: Barry, even, beyond the Michael Dobbs -

QUESTION: Is this the weight of all the information?

MR. BURNS: Beyond the Michael Dobbs' information - the research that Michael Dobbs did - we now have further reports from journalists, even one who has been to Prague, who visited the Holocaust Memorial Site, the Jewish Memorial Sites in Prague, and the names of her grandparents are on that list. This is fairly compelling information. She's had a chance to think about it.

She's had a chance to sift through it. So I'm representing what I understand to be the truth here as she understands it and as we understand it. But there's been a rush of information available to her, and even since the Michael Dobbs' article came out and more information, more press reports - you've seen them all - have come in.

So the weight of the evidence seems to be quite clear here.

She and her family intend to look into it, as I said, much more deeply, because they're proud of their parents, and they're proud of their family; and they want to know more about their family's origin, as you would, I think, or I would, if we were in this situation.

QUESTION: Wait a minute. All the names of all the Holocaust victims are listed, aren't they, in Prague? The Synagogue is the Holocaust Memorial, I believe.

MR. BURNS: I haven't been to -

QUESTION: But she's never -

MR. BURNS: I haven't been to the Synagogue there -

QUESTION: Alright.

MR. BURNS: -- so I just know that, as reported by The New York Times and The Washington Post, there is a list of the victims - the Czech victims of the Holocaust, and the list is quite specific.

QUESTION: Right, but while we're into this subject, I've been there, and I haven't seen the list, nor did I look for the list, but I have no Czech background. She, in all her visits there, had never looked at that list, right? She has never had occasion to look at the inscriptions?

MR. BURNS: You know, Barry -

QUESTION: Or do you know?

MR. BURNS: I'll be very glad to just briefly summarize again what Secretary Albright has said in public - that's important to do that, and that is that her earliest memory as a very young child in London during the second World War was of being a Christian -

QUESTION: Right. No, no, I just meant -

MR. BURNS: It's important for me to answer it, because you've asked a very important question. Throughout her entire life until several weeks ago, her parents had given her and her sister and her brother information that was quite consistent in their own minds - the minds of the kids - that they were Catholics; that they came from a Catholic family in Czechoslovakia. There was never a reason -

QUESTION: Right.

MR. BURNS: -- for the Secretary to think any otherwise, nor would there be for me or for any of you out there, and I think she said this in public, but it's a very important point. She and her brother and sister had no inkling of this until these letters started to arrive from Central Europe, as she has said, during the time - during the transition, after she was named, and before she was sworn in.

QUESTION: One last thing, please. If she were here, she's really the person to ask. But the incredible - it's not just articles and columns and letters, leading newspapers and all, and the buzzing around. Is any of this distracting or unsettling to her?

MR. BURNS: I can tell you this. She understands that the press has a job to do, and the press is -

QUESTION: Letters, too. People who write and say she's running away from her past or we understand why she would do this.

MR. BURNS: She understands. Secretary Albright understands why the press is interested in the story. It's a fascinating story. It's also a very tragic story. She welcomes all the letters that she's received, and she hopes that those letters will help she and her sister and brother and others to look into this matter further, so that they can uncover the full story of their family.

She understands that the press needs to report on this. All of us understand that, because that's the way our society runs. I'm just saying - and there's been a lot of commentary in the press. I'm just saying that I think at some point - and I say this just personally as someone observing this - at some point this has to be treated as a personal issue for her. She has a busy job as Secretary of State, and she's doing it. She's off to a great start. She's worked 20 hours a day. She's not going to allow anything to distract her from doing the job that President Clinton swore her in to do, and that is to be the best Secretary of State that she can be.

But she's obviously going to take some time over the next couple of years to continue to look into this, and that is a personal issue for her and her family. I think in our society, it's important to respect privacy. It's importance to have a sense of tolerance, especially when judging people who are deceased. It's very important to be tolerant about people who are deceased, not to try to read things into the minds of people who are deceased. This is my own personal view here. I think that's a very important factor in this whole equation that's being debated now.

QUESTION: Nick, what did she think about the Post story today, suggesting that the Israeli Government knew about this -

MR. BURNS: I have not talked to her about that particular story.

QUESTION: So she hasn't considered - you said she has no current plans to visit any Holocaust-related site. Has she considered at all any plans to visit any Holocaust -

MR. BURNS: No, as I said, on this particular trip - this ten-day trip to eight countries - I'm not aware in the planning - I don't believe there's going to be any Holocaust-related site on this particular trip.

But I know, given the person that Madeleine Albright is, given her history and now the new history that's being uncovered about her, that she will find an appropriate way at some point in the future, as a senior member of this government - as Warren Christopher did, as James Baker did, as Henry Kissinger did, as George Shultz did - on a trip to Europe to talk about the fact that we can't forget the Holocaust and that Americans have as much responsibility as everyone else to remember the Holocaust and to memorialize people who died during the Holocaust. That's something that she feels very deeply as a European and as a human being; and, of course, she'll take the time to do that.

But on this particular trip, she has a schedule. It's a very compressed schedule, and she's going to keep to that schedule.

QUESTION: Going back to Cuba, do you have anything on the Helms-Burton law in getting cooperation from the Europeans to put pressure on Castro?

MR. BURNS: Yes.

QUESTION: Now that you are preparing trips to Latin America, and the Secretary has said she is going to intensify the relationship with Latin America, do you expect a similar situation with Latin America parallel to what Europe has been doing?

MR. BURNS: We already find that's the case. At the Ibero-Latin Summit in November, which I believe was held in Chile, there was a decision taken by the countries to increase their focus - expand their focus - on the human rights situation in Cuba. It is commensurate with the decision taken by the European Union. We believe that Latin countries are increasingly now interested in this question of human rights and democracy in Cuba. That's a very good thing.

QUESTION: Nick, Kofi Annan held a news conference today. He said that it's illegal for nations to refuse to pay their dues. Now, granted, the Administration does want to pay the money and the ball is in Congress' court, as it were. Do you accept that -

MR. BURNS: I don't want to quibble with the words at all. We have great respect for Secretary General Annan. We agree that the United States ought to pay its dues. We're the founding member. We're a member of the Security Council. We ought to pay our dues. The President and the Secretary of State have both pledged to do that, and they have a way to do that in the budget presented to the Congress last week. We hope the Senate and House will agree with us, that we ought to pay our dues.

QUESTION: Can I come back to the North Korean issue?

MR. BURNS: Yes.

QUESTION: You said that this defector should be worked out in normal procedures. May I clarify that? By that, do you mean that he should be dealt with -- recognized in international customs and norms? By that, may I translate that.

As a general principle, apart from the politics, if Mr. Hwang's independent desire to request asylum is established, as a general principle, the United States will support his asylum?

MR. BURNS: What I mean by that is that this is an issue to be worked out by the Government of South Korea and the Government of China - because of course, this took place in China, but the individual is now residing in the Embassy of the Republic of Korea. There are agreed-upon international norms as to how to adjudicate these situations. They should obviously be followed.

We have every reason to think they are being followed.

QUESTION: Serbia. The Serbs say they want to deny visas to U.S. Congresspeople because some of them took part in the demos last November and December. Have you protested this to Serbia?

MR. BURNS: That would be a very bad idea. If Serbia wants a relationship with United States, it must respect the people who are elected by the American people. If Congressmen want to travel to Serbia, they do so with the support of the Administration and they ought to be given visas. If the Serbian Government denies visas to members of Congress, they will have a very rough time of it with Secretary Albright.

QUESTION: What about Mr. Shattuck - have you made a decision whether he should go next week?

MR. BURNS: I know that John Shattuck is considering a trip to the Balkans, but no final dates or, I think, even itinerary have been established. I believe that some more work needs to be done to prepare that trip, so we are not in a position to announce it even though I know it was outted slightly in the press the other day.

We haven't decided on the itinerary or the dates, or even in some parts of the mission. So that has to happen. When we do put that together, I'll let you know.

Let me just say, we welcome passage of the Special Election Law. We now want to see it implemented. I want to repeat something we said yesterday, and that is, these people who are taking their seats now as victors in the November 17th election ought not to have the assets of power stripped away from them.

If the Serbian Government has any intention to allow them to occupy city council seats but then not respect the power of city councils and the decision-making power of city council members, if they try to exert an undue amount of central control over the cities, that won't be fair and it won't be in the spirit of the wish of the international community that people elected should serve in the positions that they sought.

QUESTION: A couple of - Netanyahu, I guess, attached questions, sort of what we call "B Matter" -

QUESTION: Or "C Matter."

QUESTION: Or "C Matter." He's apparently trying to stir up interest again in this Mideast Bank. About every six months, we ask you how it's doing, and you say "Just fine." I don't think you can go in there and open an account.

Where is the Mideast Bank now? Are you and the Europeans on the same track, and will there be a Mideast Bank? Or can you tell -

MR. BURNS: I know that Secretary Albright mentioned the Mideast Bank to Prime Minister Netanyahu this morning. He does support it. The United States fully supports it. We have had trouble in raising money for the bank, as you know. We'd like to get a greater consensus both here in our own country and the Congress and international, for funds for that bank.

QUESTION: Having troubles with Europe?

MR. BURNS: We continue to talk to the Europeans about the central importance that we think a Middle East bank could play in the economic development of relations among states and in raising income levels all across the Middle East in the next century.

QUESTION: I didn't see them come in, or hang around Blair House. Did the Ambassador come - is Martin Indyk here for these talks?

MR. BURNS: Ambassador Indyk is here. He was at breakfast this morning with Dennis Ross and with Mark Parris and Toni Verstandig and Aaron Miller, and others.

QUESTION: Will he going back? Will there be an announcement on his future while Netanyahu -

MR. BURNS: I just can't help you out on an announcement on Martin's future.

QUESTION: That's alright. We'll just makes calls.

MR. BURNS: If it's appropriate to make an announcement on Martin's future, I'm sure the White House will do so.

QUESTION: We'll give you an opportunity, if you'd like to.

MR. BURNS: The President is going to speak in 15 minutes. I don't want to really get too deeply into Middle East Affairs.

I have one thing before we go. We understand that the Government of Vietnam has announced that it intends to jam Radio Free Asia.

This is a most unfortunate decision.

The United States Government opposes jamming of international radio broadcasts as an infringement on freedom of the press and the free flow of information. We also reject the criticism by Vietnam of Radio Free Asia. The criticism is that Radio Free Asia is interfering in Vietnam's internal affairs.

The free flow of information to the Vietnamese people is an internationally guaranteed right under United Nations covenants and governments can't interfere with that. So we firmly reject any attempt to stifle Radio Free Asia, and we'll give it all the support we can to make it a vibrant and clear station so that people in Vietnam and southeast Asia can have objective facts put before them.

Thank you.

(Press briefing concluded at 2:43 p.m.)

(###)


U.S. State Department: Daily Press Briefings Directory - Previous Article - Next Article
Back to Top
Copyright © 1995-2023 HR-Net (Hellenic Resources Network). An HRI Project.
All Rights Reserved.

HTML by the HR-Net Group / Hellenic Resources Institute, Inc.
std2html v1.01 run on Friday, 14 February 1997 - 0:26:02 UTC