Browse through our Interesting Nodes on the Eastern European States 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
Friday, 29 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 #40, 97-03-18

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>


988

U.S. Department of State
Daily Press Briefing

Tuesday, March 18, 1997

Briefer: Nicholas Burns

DEPARTMENT
1  Welcome to German Radio & Television Journalists
1  Retirement of Court Reporter Ferdinand Kuyatt
2  Public Announcement on Papua New Guinea
2  Secretary Albright's Activities
2  --White House Press Briefing
2  --Attendance at Briefing on Helsinki Summit
2  --Telecon wRussian Foreign Minister Primakov
2  --Helsinki Departure-March 19
2  --Mtg. w/Brazilian Foreign Minister Lampreia

NATO 2 NATO Expansion 2-3 --Central/Eastern Europe 4,10-11 --Proposed Russia-NATO Charter

MEXICO 4-5 Arrest of Brigadier General Alfredo Navarro Lara 5-6 Drug Certification Decision/Process

COLOMBIA

6,-7,15 Effects of Drug Decertification/Consideration of U.S. Military Aid?/Extradition

ALBANIA 7 Speculation on President Berisha's Resignation 7 U.S. Support for EU Delegation 7 Situation in Tirana 7-8 Evacuation/Refugee Update

RUSSIA 8-10 New Government Appointments/Economic Reforms

MIDDLE EAST PEACE PROCESS 11-12 Building at Har Homa/Resumption of Negotiations 12 Yassir Arafat's Assurances on Violence

NORTH KOREA 13 Four Party Talks 13 Departure of Hwang Jong Yop from Beijing

CYPRUS 13 Carey Cavanaugh Consultations in Europe

ZAIRE 14-15 Situation Update/Mtg. in Nairobi on 3/19/Call for Ceasefire

WESTERN SAHARA 15 Former Secretary James Baker Appointment as Special Representative


U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE
DAILY PRESS BRIEFING

DPB #40

TUESDAY, MARCH 18, 1997, 1:31 P. M.

(ON THE RECORD UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED)

MR. BURNS: Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen. Welcome to the State Department. I want to welcome to the briefing today 12 German radio and television journalists -- I believe they're seated on both sides of the room today - who are visiting the United States, and they're here on a journalistic exchange program between the United States and Germany. I want to welcome you.

Thanks for coming. I don't know what lessons you're going to learn about the relationship between the American Government and the media, but let's see what happens during the briefing.

I do want to take one minute to honor someone who has been an unsung hero here at the Press Briefing. It's Ferd Kuyatt who is retiring from the State Department on March 31. All of you benefit, as do I, from the fact that we have Court Reporters here who transcribe everything you say and everything I say. Ferd has been doing that since 1980 with the State Department; and before that for 23 years with the Air Force as a civilian.

His first position with the U.S. Government was back in 1950 in Sidney, Nebraska, if I'm not mistaken. His total years of service with the Federal Government, as I said, are 42.

He's retiring. He has received many Performance Awards from the United States Government. One of my predecessors, Chuck Redman, once wrote of him: "He's always cheerful and helpful, consistently excellent work standards. By general acclaim, Mr. Kuyatt is the best conference reporter the State Department has ever had." And former Secretary of State George Shultz was so amazed to see Mr. Kuyatt show up at an interview site despite blizzard-like conditions that he wrote a letter to Mr. Kuyatt that said: "I was astonished and reassured to see you show up this morning." Ferd accompanied Secretary Shultz on many interviews inside and outside of this city.

Ferd, you've been terrific. You've been one of the unsung heroes along with Marilyn (Plevin) behind the scenes. Thank you very much. I think it's appropriate that at least the State Department camera focuses on you today. Thank you.

(Applause)

MR. SCHWEID: Will Ferd be transcribing this briefing?

MR. BURNS: Yes, he will.

MR. SCHWEID: (Mumble, mumble, mumble)!

MR. BURNS: Barry, thank you. Your usually entertaining self.

Before Barry goes to his unintelligible questions.

QUESTION: (Errrrrrrr).

MR. BURNS: Yes, exactly --- errrrrrrr. I just wanted to let you know that we are posting today a public announcement on Papua New Guinea. The Department of State recommends that American citizens defer all non-essential travel to Papua New Guinea due to the recent threats against foreigners by insurgents in Bougainville Province and the related civil disturbances that have been underway in Papua New Guinea over the last week.

Just a word on the Secretary of State. I know that Barry, among others, was at the White House this morning for the Press Briefing that she gave with Sandy Berger. She is going to be attending a briefing with President Clinton in just about half an hour over at the White House - a briefing on the summit in Helsinki. She's been doing a lot work, as you know. She took a call this morning from Foreign Minister Primakov who called in to discuss some of the specific arms issues that they had been talking about over the last three days here and that will be an issue at Helsinki.

She's really devoting most of her time today to this meeting. She's going to be leaving tomorrow night at around 6:00 with the President on Air Force I. She'll be accompanied by Deputy Secretary Talbott, Ambassador Jim Collins, and a few others from the State Department. She'll be returning with the President on Friday evening. I just wanted to give you a little account of what she's been up to.

The Secretary had an excellent meeting last evening with Minister Lampreia, the Foreign Minister of Brazil. They had a meeting - I guess it lasted about an hour - that covered the full range of issues between the United States and Brazil, including the Peru-Ecuador border dispute which, of course, that Brazil, the United States, and two others have been the guarantors of since, I think, the early 1940s. A lot of talk about economic trade between the United States and Brazil - economic issues; specifically, also environmental issues, and discussions of the President's upcoming visit to Brazil in May. A very good meeting, I wanted to note for you. I'll be glad to take any questions on that.

Barry.

QUESTION: Why does the Secretary find it necessary to very vigorously and repetitively say that the United States will not sacrifice the interests of central and eastern Europe in its negotiations with Russia over NATO? What sacrifices are being demanded?

MR. BURNS: The reason that she said that this morning and has said it before is because it's a charge that doesn't hold water. It's a charge that we've seen in the press just in the last couple of days from some former American officials and also some other commentators from the region.

Barry, let's face it. As the Secretary said this morning, what's really going to be happening at Helsinki and beyond in all the meetings that President Clinton and Chancellor Kohl and President Chirac and Prime Minister Major have, and the other NATO leaders have with the Russians is, we're trying to design a new Europe for the new century, a Europe that's truly different than the Cold War. That means that we have to take into account the sensitivities and the sensibilities and the geo-strategic position of the countries of central Europe.

Clearly, we want to bring some of those countries into NATO. We want to enhance their security. There have been some ridiculous and silly charges that the meeting in Helsinki is going to be a sellout. There's not going to be any sellout, as she said this morning. They're not going to be any concessions made. The security of those countries is fundamentally important to the United States.

QUESTION: So it's not a response to any demands by the Russians. It's a response to criticism here, in the West, suggesting -

MR. BURNS: It's in response to a lot of idle talk; that's right.

QUESTION: I don't know. That's a judgment call. But hasn't NATO already taken steps to give some assurances to Russia on the forces that will be in eastern and central - hasn't the U.S., by saying there won't be nuclear weapons there?

MR. BURNS: NATO has made those decisions. They pertain to nuclear forces. No reason and no intention and no plan to station nuclear forces in new countries.

QUESTION: I thought there were assurances about saying that for the time being, at least, there's no intention to put massive forces in central and eastern Europe, non-nuclear as well.

MR. BURNS: That is true, but NATO has also said very clearly that it cannot give any kind of assurance that would say that there will be no NATO forces, troops, personnel stationed, on whatever basis, on the territory of new members. We've not given that assurance.

We have to go back to the general principle that we're talking about here. There is no second-class membership in NATO.

If we're going to bring new countries into NATO, all those countries have to be full members of NATO. They have to have all the rights of NATO members but they also have to fulfill the obligations that NATO countries have to each other.

We have said that it may be necessary to have some people, at least, stationed in those countries.

QUESTION: Do the eastern European countries have actually any influence over the character of the charter, or is it just going to be decided without their participation? Do they have a word on this process?

MR. BURNS: The proposed charter between Russia and NATO has been developed by the 16 NATO countries. The other countries need to make these decisions as to what kind of military relationship to have with Russia. We have briefed the central European countries on what, in general, we would like to see result in a charter between the United States and Russia.

But the only countries that have the right to agree to any kind of arrangement between NATO and Russia are the 16 NATO countries themselves. But I don't think there's anything in that charter that would surprise, frankly, central European countries.

We're simply trying to take prudent steps to establish a working relationship with Russia that will serve everybody in Europe well.

Another point, just related to that. A lot of people have been asking today, "Well, do you think it's going to be possible to have an agreement on the charter by Friday night in Helsinki?" As Secretary Albright said this morning, no.

The reason is, the United States cannot agree on its own to a new charter between NATO and Russia. We have to consult with Germany and France and Britain and Italy and Canada, and the other NATO allies. All of us need to make that decision together. So we can guarantee you there will be no charter agreed to by Friday evening, because this is a multilateral exercise where 16 countries are negotiating with one country.

QUESTION: Yes, but could the U.S., at the end of this summit, find itself satisfied with the main terms of the charter and then take that result to the other countries?

MR. BURNS: Our expectation is that a substantial amount of work needs to be done to complete the negotiations in the charter; that it will not be possible to complete all of that work by Friday evening. Helsinki is a step towards Madrid. It's part of the process of leading to Madrid.

Chancellor Kohl went to Moscow in early January. President Chirac went to Moscow in early February. President Clinton goes to Helsinki in mid-March. Following the Helsinki meetings, we're going to see a lot of diplomatic activity between Helsinki and Madrid on July 7-8, and a lot of work. There's still no assurance that NATO and Russia will agree on a charter. If that happens, if by the end of June or very early in July, that there's no charter worked out, NATO will simply go ahead with its plans to expand and make that decision at Madrid.

Now, we far prefer to have a charter; obviously, we prefer to have a charter, but it takes two to tango and we'll have to continue to negotiate very seriously along the way.

Yes, Bill.

QUESTION: Thank you, Nick. Bad news. The bad news is for Mexico. I believe Lieutenant General Navarro has been arrested for attempting to bribe another General to cover up to protect the Tijuana mob - the Arellano Felix mob. The good news, of course, is that he was caught; and the bad news is that the army now, who have two high-ranking Generals have been arrested in the last month for drug corruption. Do you have any comments on this, Nick?

MR. BURNS: The facts, as we know them, are the following.

That General Alfredo Navarro Lara, a Brigadier General in the Mexican Army, was arrested yesterday by the Mexican Government for allegedly offering a bribe to another senior military officer, General Jose Luis Chavez Garcia, and that this bribe was offered on behalf of a major narcotics syndicate in Mexico.

General Chavez is the newly assigned person in charge of the anti-narcotics effort in Baja, California.

General Navarro apparently threatened General Chavez and his family if he declined the bribe. General Chavez, fortunately, reported the incident and launched the investigation that led to the arrest of General Navarro.

The arrest certainly confirms that there continues to be a serious corruption problem within the Mexican Government.

Bill, I would end on a more positive note. It also confirms that President Zedillo is fundamentally committed to the war on drugs. He is arresting senior people in his own government and making sure that when there are problems, they're being rooted out.

In President Zedillo we do have the senior most Mexican official who is absolutely and fundamentally dedicated to working with the United States to keep drugs off the streets of Mexico as well as the streets of American cities.

QUESTION: Nick, is this Department and this government confident that the anti-cartel Generals have the upper hand in Mexico?

MR. BURNS: We're confident that the President of Mexico is determined to win this. He said it's the highest priority that he has, as well it should be, and we'll continue working with him.

QUESTION: Same subject. There was a meeting last night involving State, NSC, Treasury, with Senators Coverdell, Feinstein, and Hutchison on Mexico decertification. Do you have any details of that meeting?

MR. BURNS: I don't. We are consulting with the Congress now on the way forward. Obviously, the President stands by his decision to certify Mexico. The Administration believes that was the right step. We would like to receive support in the Congress that would reflect this fundamental point. In order to work with Mexico, you've got to show some faith and trust in the Mexican authorities, and you've got to agree to a detailed program of work together.

I can't give all the details of the meeting last night, George, except to say, we'd like to work with supportive members of the Senate and House to see if we can all go forward together with a positive program and a positive message for Mexico. A negative message --the ultimate negative message would be, you've got problems; we're going to give you the back of our hand and we're going to sanction you.

We are convinced of one thing. If that's the route that the Congress wants to take, then we won't win the war on drugs with Mexico because we won't be able to cooperate with Mexico.

The only way to cooperate with Mexico is to truly work hand-in-hand, side by side. That's why we believe the certification decision is the right one. Because from the top on down in Mexico, President Zedillo is setting a positive example for all of us.

QUESTION: Can it be, Nick, that this whole certification process is working against good relations and cooperation between Mexico and the U.S.? That was stated in the hearing last week.

MR. BURNS: One thing about the separation of powers in the Constitution of the United States is that the Executive Branch doesn't make the laws; Congress does. The Executive Branch implements the laws. Certification is part of our legal system.

Therefore, we have an obligation to implement it.

QUESTION: I guess I should ask if the Congress came to the State Department, to the Executive, with what they think is a better idea than certification, would this Department be open?

MR. BURNS: Purely hypothetical at this point. If it did, I'm sure we'd look at it, but I don't see anyone coming up with new ideas.

QUESTION: Nick, on decertification of Colombia, is it true that the Administration proposal for Colombia includes OPIC aid and also foreign trade aid, as well as the anti-drug material?

MR. BURNS: Is it true that the active program included those two elements?

QUESTION: Yes.

MR. BURNS: I'd have to check. I don't quite remember everything that we've offered to the Colombians.

QUESTION: What I'm wondering is whether decertification has any practical effect on Colombia at all.

MR. BURNS: It certainly does. I think if you listen to the protests from Bogota, you understand how concerned the Colombian Government is about the fact that it is branded now as a country that cannot effectively deal with narcotics problems. That has implications for not only the pride of the Colombians but also for the reputation in international circles - even in international financial circles.

I think that there is a penalty that's very substantial that countries feel when they're decertified, and the Colombians certainly feel that way. A more positive message for the Colombians would be there is nothing that stands in the way of having the grade raised during the 12-month review period. If, for instance, six months from now the Colombian Government can show demonstrably that it is making a very good-faith effort to make a difference in the war on drugs to cooperate with the United States to make sure that drug cartel leaders who are arrested are actually convicted and don't serve their terms in hotel-like prisons.

If all those good things happened, then, of course, there's always the possibility of more positive action by the United States.

We don't have to wait until next March. We can take positive action before that. That's the incentive, I think, for the Colombian Government.

QUESTION: That's even if President Samper remains in power?

MR. BURNS: President Samper had a lot of baggage, and so we'll just have to take this one day at a time.

QUESTION: On Albania, what's the latest from that region, and could you comment on this report that's floating around that the United States Government asked President Berisha to step down?

MR. BURNS: All I can say on that is I know that the Chairman of the OSCE -- the Chairman-in-Office, the Danish Foreign Minister -- Foreign Minister Helveg Peterson, did speculate on the possibility of President Berisha's resignation. It's very clear that President Berisha has become the focal point for the anger of the great majority of the Albanian people who are in the streets, because of the collapse of the financial and economic system due to the pyramid schemes in Albania.

But it's not up to the United States to decide whether President Berisha should stay or whether he should go. That's up to the Albanian people. In the meantime, I can tell you the United States is putting its efforts squarely behind the European Union, and the European Union delegation led by the Dutch we think can make a difference in trying to convince this new representative government in Tirana to try to act to enforce some stability throughout Albania.

The OSCE is still involved, and I think we're going to remain very active in a support role of the European Union. In general, Tirana is quieter today than it was yesterday, and yesterday was a quieter day than Sunday or Saturday. We have essentially completed at least most of the activity in evacuating American citizens, evacuating European private citizens from Albania.

Should it be necessary to revive those evacuation efforts, we have our naval forces in the Adriatic; the Italians, the Germans; the British have military forces that can do that. But right now there are probably more people going back in, at least Westerners, than leaving.

There are quite a number of refugees, Albanian refugees, several thousand today alone, trying to make their way across the Adriatic to Italy. The Italian Government has done, I think, an excellent job in trying to cope with the refugee flow. The U.S. military did pick up, as I told you yesterday, a certain number of Albanians who were adrift in the high seas. They rescued 105 Albanians from one vessel that had capsized and another that was on the verge of sinking, and these people have been turned over to the Italian Government in Brindisi, the Italian port of Brindisi.

So we'll keep watching the refugee side. We'll keep a very close watch on the evacuation situation. Politically, the Europeans, I think are doing a very good job of trying to influence the government to pull itself together and to make itself a force for stability, and we agree with that.

QUESTION: Nick, do you have anything beyond what Mr. Berger and Albright said today about the changes in the Russian Cabinet?

QUESTION: On Albania, I have another question, please.

QUESTION: Sure.

QUESTION: Could you tell me whether the U.S. is setting itself up as an intermediary between the various parties? Are we offering our facilities in Tirana as a place where negotiations can be held?

MR. BURNS: I think the European Union is taking the lead on that. The European Union is trying to promote discussions - both intra-governmental discussions between President Berisha, Prime Minister Fino and other senior members of the government.

And at the same time, there is a little bit of organization to the resistance in the southern part of Albania. There are some leaders who have emerged, and the European Union is trying to get those people in touch with the government leaders.

Our United States Ambassador, Marisa Lino, was in touch with Prime Minister Fino and other governmental leaders, and we're playing a role in that, but I think the lead role has been taking by the European Union, as it should. This is a European problem.

Albania is a European country.

QUESTION: Do you like those new reformers in Russia?

MR. BURNS: I think a lot of us who know Mr. Nemtsov, who is the mayor of Nizhny Novgorod, know him as one of the brightest and most capable young reformers in Russia. He attracted a considerable amount of investment to Nizhny Novgorod. His reform program was certainly one of the most impressive undertaken by any city in the Russian Federation over the last five years.

His appointment, the fact that Anatoly Chubais is First Deputy Prime Minister; the fact that you have in Prime Minister Chernomyrdin someone who has led the way to the current success - 70 percent privatization of the economy, a reduction in inflation, and expansion of Russia's trade with Europe and with North America and with Asia. This is a pretty good program.

I remember, Barry, and so do you in 1992 and early 1993 a lot of people felt the Russian economy was on the verge of collapse.

Just about five years ago, this month, they were on the verge of hyperinflation in 1992. It looked like all of their productive capacity was going to be torn apart, and during the course of five years the economy has revived.

One of the interesting aspects of politics in Russia over the last five or six years is that governments have always been comprised of reformers and some people who wanted to hold back on reform. Here you have for the very first time the new senior economic leadership of the Russian Federation, all of whom are committed reformers; and, of course, led by the greatest reformer of all, Yeltsin.

So we think it's a very positive sign. It's a vigorous group. It's a young group, and we're very anxious to work with that group.

QUESTION: Surely you remember when Mr. Yeltsin fired reformers. You know, reformer Foreign Minister, economic reformers.

Do you think he means it this time?

MR. BURNS: There's been an ebb-and-flow quality to -

QUESTION: When he does that, of course, the State Department has no comment and says it's an internal matter. (Laughter)

MR. BURNS: Which I think is a very prudent thing for us to do, Barry.

QUESTION: But this isn't internal; this is external.

Okay. But do you think Yeltsin at this stage of his career is finally, firmly wedded to the kind of reform that will go ahead and maybe not leave so many - create instant millionaires and create a vast poverty belt among senior people particularly.

MR. BURNS: I think communism created the poverty.

QUESTION: You do?

MR. BURNS: Yes, I do. Absolutely.

QUESTION: I don't remember people selling their belongings on the streets during communism.

MR. BURNS: Barry, you couldn't see it, because you weren't allowed in the poorest cities and the poorest corners of St. Petersburg and Moscow.

QUESTION: Now you're seeing (inaudible).

MR. BURNS: Barry, you ask most economists in the West, in Europe or the United States. I think they'd agree that communism is what bankrupted that country, and that liberal economics is reviving it, however slowly and however imperfectly. I don't agree with the premise of your question about Yeltsin, because I remember the premise of your question was -

QUESTION: That he dismissed reformers before.

MR. BURNS: I don't agree with the premise of the question that somehow he hasn't been committed from the start. I've tracked his career pretty closely from 1988 on, and he is just about the most committed reformer that you can find. There's been an ebb-and-flow quality to some of the governmental policy, but we've seen that, with the exception of a couple countries in Central Europe, in almost every other country. The record is pretty good. The Russian Federation has weathered the worse economic storms, and although considerable problems remain, we think they're heading in the right direction. They certainly have the support of the United States, of our European allies, and of the IMF and World Bank; and the IMF, as you know, has a pretty tough standard to meet, and the Russian Government by and large has met that standard over the last five years.

QUESTION: Do they meet G-7 standards, so that G-7 can become G-8? Are they a democracy, industrialized, the leading?

Are they on the same level with Canada and Italy and all the other members of that elite group?

MR. BURNS: Since President Gorbachev and then President Yeltsin began attending these G-7 summits in the summer, there has been an increasing role for Russia, really, with every one.

We would expect that there would be an increasing participation by Russia in the business of the G-7. There is some work that the G-7 does, particularly on the economic side that it will probably continue to do alone. But for the most part we welcome Russia as a member of what we call the P-8 or the G-8 - eight countries getting together as they did at Lyon last summer. But the G-7 still reserves some work for itself, and I think it's a pretty good arrangement.

Jonathan.

QUESTION: Can I go back to NATO expansion?

MR. BURNS: Sure.

QUESTION: You say that NATO is going to expand, charter or no charter. There is growing skepticism on the Hill and concerns on the Hill over the implications of NATO expansion and the Russian opposition. Whether you have a charter or not and whether you expand or not - and, if you do expand, you have to have ratification on the Hill. Aren't you concerned that if you don't have a charter addressing the Russian security aspects of this, that ratification on the Hill is going to be extremely difficult?

MR. BURNS: Jonathan, we want to have a charter. We're the ones that proposed the charter. The United States proposed a charter between NATO and Russia, and we've given our full support to Secretary General Solana who's negotiating it formally. We want the charter to be realized by the time of the Madrid summit, and we're going to make every effort to do so. That's why President Clinton is making this extraordinary effort to go - given his physical condition, to go to Helsinki.

But we're just saying very clearly that if it's not possible, for whatever reason, to reach an agreement on a charter with Russia, then we're certainly going to go ahead with NATO enlargement.

The NATO enlargement decision was made three years ago, in January 1994, at Brussels. It was not made last month, and it should not be a surprise to anybody in the United States or in Europe that we're going to be going ahead with this. It's the major foreign policy initiative of the NATO countries for the next century.

It's very serious business, and I think that the Russians understand that, and we hope that Helsinki might help just a little bit to propel us forward towards that charter.

QUESTION: But my question is if you don't have that charter, what are the prospects for ratification of the admission of the new members by the U.S. Senate, which all the other NATO legislatures are probably going to wait for, before they go ahead with their ratification processes also.

MR. BURNS: Let's just remember what the process is here.

NATO meets on July 7th and 8th in Madrid to make a public decision as to which new countries will be invited in to join the NATO ranks. We don't expect that those countries would actually become members until some time in the early part of 1999 on the 50th anniversary of the founding of NATO. During that roughly two-year period, just under two years, all of us in NATO will be asking our parliaments, our legislatures, to ratify a new NATO, which is an expanded NATO.

There's certainly plenty of time in that two-year period, if we haven't reached a charter with Russia by July 7th, to continue those negotiations to work out a new relationship between Russia and NATO. If NATO and Russia don't reach an agreement by July, it doesn't mean you have to stop trying. You can simply resume the negotiations at any point thereafter.

Howard.

QUESTION: Have you been to the Middle East yet? I stepped out.

MR. BURNS: We haven't.

QUESTION: Okay. In shrugging off the groundbreaking at Har Homa, Secretary Albright went on to call for a resumption of negotiations, saying that's the best way or only way to achieve progress. Is this climate now conducive to resuming negotiations?

How can that be brought about?

MR. BURNS: Again, I don't want to accept, Howard, with all due respect, the stated part of your question that she's shrugging anything off. The fact is that President Clinton and Secretary Albright wished very much that the Israeli Government had not made this decision. They wished that they had reflected and not taken this decision to build at Har Homa or Jabal Abu Ghneim, as the Arabs call it, because it has caused problems in the peace negotiations.

But as Americans with a lot of experience in the Middle East over the last quarter century, we don't see any alternative but to go to negotiations and ask the Palestinians and Israelis to go back to the negotiating table. The only time anything good happens in the Middle East is when the Arabs and the Israelis sit down and compromise. Nothing good happens when people refuse to talk or when people resort to violence, and that's the other thing she said this morning.

We're calling on all sides - all sides, and extremists on both sides, Israel and Palestinian - to refrain from violence, because that's the language of the past, and it doesn't end up doing any good for anybody.

QUESTION: But do you see negotiations resuming at any point soon?

MR. BURNS: I have no idea when the negotiations are going to resume. Now, what do Israel and the Palestinians have ahead of them? They have final status talks ahead of them. They need to agree to set a date and to sit down and begin the final status talks. It may take a lot of work to get them now to do that, and the United States will be in the thick of the action in suggesting that they get together informally to arrange those final status talks.

Ultimately, and given the troubles - we haven't talked about this very much over the last couple of weeks - we'd like to see Israel and Syria and Israel and Lebanon go back to the negotiating table. These are the ambitions that we have. We're in a very difficult period in the peace negotiations. It's a period that's quite troubled with animosity and distrust on both sides, enough to go around, and the only possible and responsible course of action is for them to return to the negotiating table.

QUESTION: Do you have any information on any agreement reached between Yasser Arafat and Hamas, which according to Israeli reports, Yasser Arafat gave a green light to Hamas to carry on some terror acts inside Israel?

MR. BURNS: We have not seen any evidence that Chairman Arafat has given a green light to anybody to incite violence in Jerusalem or the West Bank or the Gaza Strip. On the contrary, we have recent assurances from Chairman Arafat that he stands against violence; that he will encourage all of his followers in the Palestinian community to renounce violence, and that is a very strong and important message from Chairman Arafat.

I know there have been some statements by Israeli leaders today that there's been a green light given. We don't believe it to be true, and we certainly will expect that Chairman Arafat keeps his commitment to Israel and to the United States that there be no violence. We also expect that extremists on the Israeli side will not provoke violence or resort to violence themselves.

Still on Israel? Okay, North Korea.

QUESTION: Do you know what the current status is of the Four-Party Talks and particularly what the U.S. understanding is of the current North Korean position on the talks?

MR. BURNS: I checked just a little while ago, and I'm told that there is no reported progress to date. The United States and South Korea have made a proposal to North Korea. We hope that North Korea will accept it. We're not aware that they have yet accepted it. They have not come back to us to say that.

QUESTION: It seems that the North Korean Vice Minister for Foreign Affairs, Mr. Kim Gye Gwan, is still in the United States. Do you know, is there a possibility that negotiations will continue with him on the Four-Party Talks before he leaves?

MR. BURNS: I understand that Vice Minister Kim Gye Gwan left the United States this morning.

Savas.

QUESTION: Nick, is - Carey Cavanaugh is returned to the States from Europe?

MR. BURNS: I think he's on his way back, if he hasn't come back already.

QUESTION: Do you have anything to report, any substantial results with his meeting?

MR. BURNS: I don't have anything formal to report, Savas, except to say that he was in Europe to consult with the European Union, with Britain, with France and other countries that are interested in the Eastern Mediterranean. One thing that we've remarked upon, there's a proliferation of special envoys on Cyprus.

We'd like to give our support to some common efforts by Europe and the United States to try to see if we can act together for the good in promoting peace discussions on Cyprus in 1997. So part of his trip was to make sure that we are working well with the Europeans.

Britain has, of course, historic - as they say, historic role to play and a lot of influence remaining and a very good negotiator, Sir David Hannay; and the European Union, of course, has an interest in what happens, because a member state of the European Union, Greece, is centrally involved in this drama.

QUESTION: Any comment now that Hwang Jang-Yop has left China for the Philippines?

MR. BURNS: Only to say that we're very pleased that this incident has been resolved peacefully among China, South Korea and North Korea. The Philippine Government has welcomed Mr. Hwang to the Philippines. We think that the basic principle that should have been observed has been observed. If people want to leave a totalitarian society and do so, they ought to be free to continue to where they want to go. That's what happened in this case, and I think it's a very good outcome.

Yes, George.

QUESTION: Do you have anything to say about the latest in Zaire?

MR. BURNS: I do, a little bit. There's a very troubling situation in Zaire. We are watching it very closely. We are all supporting the efforts of Mr. Sahnoun, who is the United Nations negotiator. In fact, tomorrow, there will be an important meeting in Nairobi called by President Daniel Moi. Mr. Sahnoun will present his latest plans to achieve a cease-fire between the rebel alliance and the Zairian Government.

Our Assistant Secretary, George Moose, who has been in Paris for the last two days conferring with the French on Zaire will be traveling to Nairobi for that meeting. The French will be there, the British will be there, the European Union, and Mr. Howard Wolpe - former Congressman Wolpe - will also be representing the United States in Nairobi. So we continue to hope that Mr. Laurent Kabila will stop his rebel offensive, will not attack Kinshasa, and will agree to a cease-fire.

We also continue to urge Mr. Kabila, and particularly the states surrounding Zaire, to help in the provision of humanitarian relief to the refugees. There are several hundred thousand refugees in central Africa.

As you know, the United States has authorized voluntary departure for our own employees from Kinshasa, for non-essential employees and their dependents. There is no ordered evacuation, however, from Zaire and there's really no reason to implement one.

The situation in Kinshasa is relatively tranquil despite these very dramatic events happening near Kisangani. We hope that the Zairian Government can get itself together, get its act together, in order to continue a reform process. I don't think anyone has been happy with the way the last few years have gone in Zaire with the tradition of autocratic rule of Mr. Mobutu.

We are looking for a reform process -- a transitional process towards elections, towards a government that is, of course, representative of the Zairian people. We've been urging that for quite some time, and we have been working well with Prime Minister Kengo on that.

And, last, George, the United States, despite some reports to the contrary, supports the territorial integrity of Zaire.

We do not wish to see Zaire dismembered. We wish to see Zaire remain a unitary state, a very important state in central Africa.

QUESTION: You refrain from calling on President Mobutu to step down. It seems to some that perhaps his resignation might facilitate some sort of peaceful outcome in Zaire?

MR. BURNS: That is not for the United States to decide.

I would note - and I think the French Government has spoken to this today and yesterday - that Mr. Mobutu is ill. He's in France.

He's not on the scene. We do hope that there can be a transition to democratic rule in Zaire. Zaire has not had a democracy for the last 31 years. It's people deserve to have a representative government, some stability - some economic and political stability.

It's very hard to see how that's going to happen without a commitment from the current government to a reform process and a commitment from Mr. Kabila to stop the fighting in eastern Zaire.

QUESTION: Back on Colombia. Can you confirm whether the U.S. is thinking about allowing Colombia to receive military aid and to participate in OPIC and the TDA?

MR. BURNS: I'll be glad to take that question and look into it and get you an answer. Be glad to do that.

QUESTION: On extradition, it seems that President Samper is back now from his pledge to reintroduce extradition as one of the key elements against drug trafficking. What does the United States think about that?

MR. BURNS: Extradition is important because it ensures in certain cases that people who run drug cartels actually are imprisoned for it and don't live in palace-like, hotel-like conditions but actually live in the kind of conditions that you expect prisoners to live in.

The problem in Colombia is, when somebody is indicted, half the time they don't face prosecution and aren't convicted.

When they are convicted, they get to run the drug operation from their drug cell. That's been the record of the major cartel chiefs.

We think extradition is one way to break into that pattern and to send a very stiff message to the narco-traffickers that there's a severe penalty if you're caught.

QUESTION: Do you have anything to say on the nomination of Mr. James Baker as the Personal Envoy -

MR. BURNS: We absolutely do. Former Secretary of State Baker is a very distinguished American. We're pleased and honored that Secretary General Kofi Annan as appointed him to be the Special Representative for the Western Sahara. All of us who worked for him admire him and see him as one of the finest American diplomats of the post-Second World War era. There's no question about it.

This is an extremely challenging international problem. If anybody can make a dent in it, it will be Baker - James Baker - and we wish him the best of luck. He'll have the full support of the Secretary of State and the United States Government.

QUESTION: What is the position of the U.S. Government in that? Is the U.S. Government going to help to settle down this - what is the position?

MR. BURNS: The United States has always followed the lead of the United Nations. Now that the United Nations has a very capable and very aggressive negotiator, Secretary Baker will have the full support of the State Department - our full support. We genuinely wish him well. It's a very tough assignment that he's taking on.

QUESTION: Thank you.

MR. BURNS: Thank you.

(Press briefing 2:12 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 Tuesday, 18 March 1997 - 22:38:33 UTC