Visit the Canadian Hellenic Broadcasting (CHB) Homepage 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 #123, 97-08-27

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>


1170

U.S. Department of State
Daily Press Briefing

I N D E X

Wednesday, August 27, 1997

Briefer: James P. Rubin

STATEMENT
1           U.S. Supports Mediation to Resolve Continuing Conflict in
              Republic of Congo

NORTH KOREA 1-2 Suspension of US-DPRK Missile Talks/Implication for Nonproliferation Efforts 3 Prospect of Rescheduling Missile Talks 3,7 Impact of Suspension on Four-Party Talks 3 Clarification of Status of North Korean Defectors 4 Next Steps in Process 4-6 Reaction of North Korea to Defection of Officials and to US Response 7 Impact of Suspension of Talks on Food Aid Shipments 8-9 Secretary's Role in Decision to Admit North Korean Defectors to U.S.

BOSNIA 9 Secretary's Call to President Milosevic re: Implementation of Dayton Accords 9,11 Amb. Gelbard Travel to Moscow and Belgrade/Discussions with Russia on Plan for OSCE-supervised Elections in September and October 10 US Reaction to Session of Republika Srpska Assembly 12 US Assistance to Bosnia/No New USAID Loan Package 13 OSCE Media Experts Commission Citation of Pale Broadcasting for Inflammatory Rhetoric

MIDDLE EAST 13-14 Proposed Dam Construction Along Yarmouk River/Impact on Peace Process 14-15 Israeli Decision to Lift Closure of Bethlehem 15 Upcoming Travel to the Region by the Secretary and by Amb. Ross 15 Public Announcement on Kuwait

RUSSIA 15-16 Seizure by U.S. Coast Guard of Russian Fishing Trawler in Bering Sea

CYPRUS 16,19 EU Accession Talks/Department of State Officials Overseeing Cyprus Policy

LIBYA/GERMANY 16 Arrest in Italy of Libyan Suspect in Bombing of LaBelle Discoteque

NAGORNO-KARABAKH 17 Report of Rejection of OSCE Plan to Resolve Conflict

CUBA 17 Criticism of USG by BTTR Leader Basulto

MEXICO 17-18 Status of Amb-designate Weld/Reaction to Operation Rio Grande

JAPAN 18 U.S.-Japan Civil Aviation Negotiations

PANAMA 18 Possible Deportation of La Prensa Editor, Gustavo Gorriti


U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE
DAILY PRESS BRIEFING

DPB #123

WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 27, 1997 12:45 P.M.

(ON THE RECORD UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED)

MR. RUBIN: Welcome to the State Department briefing. Our current plan is to not brief tomorrow and to brief again on Friday, rather than doing what we did last week. We're trying to confuse you as much as possible.

Let me start by reading a statement on behalf of the Department. The U.S. deplores the continuing conflict in the Republic of Congo, and is concerned about the recent escalation of the fighting there. We continue to believe that the mediation sponsored by President Bongo of Gabon in Libreville, with the support of Special Representative Sahnoun and Brazzaville Mayor Kolelas is the most promising venue for bringing the parties together. We urge President Lissouba and ex-President Sassou to put aside personal interests and seek a peaceful solution that will stop the fighting and stop the tearing apart of the Republic of Congo. We'll be posting that statement after the briefing.

Let's go to questions. Barry Schweid.

QUESTION: Jamie, did the North Koreans cite the asylum situation as the reason for calling off today's talks? And if they did or didn't, is there a logical connection, so far as the U.S. is concerned?

MR. RUBIN: They did not cite exactly the reason why they decided to postpone the talks in their communication to us late last night. Obviously, it's connected. We regard the decision as disappointing. We believe that these talks are in the national interests of both sides. Stopping proliferation is a goal that should serve both our interests and their interests. It's a natural follow-on to the successful negotiation of the nuclear framework agreement that stopped their nuclear program. We would like these talks to be rescheduled.

At the same time, the people who work on this issue, as I've said to you before, are long-distance runners. They've been through a lot of ups and downs in the area of negotiating with the North Koreans. We've seen cases where incidents of this kind - like the submarine incident last year and the other defection of Mr. Hwang earlier this year - did temporarily interfere with the diplomatic processes of negotiating agreements in the interest of the United States.

So our diplomats are determined. They're in it for the long haul. We'll be hoping that they change their mind and return to the talks.

QUESTION: What's in it for North Korea? I mean, Egypt. Presumably Egypt doesn't use U.S. aid money to pay for that technology, if you want to deal with that. What's in it for them to behave like a respectable member of the community?

MR. RUBIN: There are so many parts to that question, I don't know which to go into. But --

QUESTION: Well, you said it's in the interest of both sides.

MR. RUBIN: All right.

QUESTION: What's in it for North Korea? What could they get out of this?

MR. RUBIN: Just the way we saw, in the nuclear framework agreement, the North Koreans make a decision that involved, as you know, their freezing their nuclear program, stopping their production of materials that might be used in a nuclear program and proceeding toward some movement in the area of diplomatic activity with the rest of the world. The rest of the world regards the sale of missiles, like the Scud missile to Iran as a profoundly dangerous thing, and so long as a country like North Korea is prepared to engage in that activity, it will find itself outside of the mainstream. So it would be in the interest of the North Koreans to not find themselves outside the mainstream, and it would be in the interest of the United States to make sure that that kind of missile proliferation was stopped.

Yes, Steve.

QUESTION: What efforts has the government made to reschedule these talks?

MR. RUBIN: Our government?

QUESTION: Mm-hmm.

MR. RUBIN: I'm not aware we have made any. The normal practice when I was in New York was, there were phone conversations and faxes back and forth between the missions in New York, as one of the ways in which communications were held.

I was woken up late last night to be informed of this, as I assume others were, so it's a pretty recent development. There would normally be some period of time, days, before one would try to test the waters and see whether there wasn't another date that might prove itself convenient to the North Korean delegation.

QUESTION: Can I take that to mean you do expect to reschedule, then, as soon as possible?

MR. RUBIN: Not that we expect to, that, obviously, we'd hope to and will be using whatever diplomatic channels we think is appropriate to try to test the waters at the appropriate time. But, for now, we know the meeting didn't happen, and we're sorry about that.

Yes, in the back.

QUESTION: Ambassador Li, at the UN, said that the four-party talks might also be affected by this. Had you set a date for the next preparatory meeting? And if so, do you have any indication that is also going to be put off?

MR. RUBIN: We have set a date, the week of September 15, in New York, for the discussions between the four countries to prepare and pave the way for this important negotiation, designed to promote stability on the Korean Peninsula and to replace the armistice that's been in place there for a long time. We have, again, no reason to believe, at this time - and I add today the word at this time, which I neglected to add yesterday - to believe that they will not show up at those negotiations to pave the way for four-party peace talks. That is some weeks away, and we're hopeful that this will proceed on track.

Again, in particular in this case, we believe that this kind of a negotiation is one that is in the interest of all the people who live on the Korean Peninsula. It's designed to make it a safer place, a more stable place, and ultimately a more prosperous place. So I think it should be clear that that is in the interest of all the people who live there.

Yes.

QUESTION: What can you tell us today about the state of the asylum application? I gather that there was a change in the position from what you said yesterday.

MR. RUBIN: Let me do my -- I hope, my first and hopefully something resembling my last mea culpa. I did, technically, misspeak with regard to the word asylum yesterday. The correct situation is as follows. We have decided to allow these people to come to the United States. At present, they are here under a protected status or parole status. Their case will be dealt with under US law. With regard to the request by the North Koreans to return them to North Korea to face criminal charges, we have no extradition treaty with the DPRK, and we

expect these people to continue to stay here under this protected status.

With regard to what will come next in the process, it's a very tricky area - especially when you get in this kind of a case where an ambassador from the North Korean regime was involved. There are certain confidentialities and protections in the system. So it's very hard to get into much detail. I would refer you to the INS to get into a general discussion of how one goes about getting this kind of asylum. The granting or denial of asylum is a matter under the jurisdiction of the INS, which is part of the Department of Justice. We advise and consult on this role.

What I can tell you is, there's no timetable for the completion of this process. It depends upon the circumstances of individual cases. So they're here under protective status and the exact details of how they go through the normal subsequent steps in this area is something that INS is going to have to go through with you.

QUESTION: How many are there who are actually under protective status?

MR. RUBIN: As I said yesterday, the ambassador and his wife were brought here, or are here, and his brother in Paris and his family. I can't be more specific.

QUESTION: No, could you be more - could you clarify, you said charges. Who of this group - who --

MR. RUBIN: Sorry, I'm --

QUESTION: Your reference to North Korea wanting to charge these people.

MR. RUBIN: Yeah, I believe they put out a statement seeking their return to face criminal charges.

QUESTION: I mean, what is the U.S.' understanding, even though it's probably academic. Who is it they'd like to try? The ambassador and the trade man and the wife?

MR. RUBIN: I'm not responding to a public statement from the North Koreans.

QUESTION: Okay.

MR. RUBIN: We have no --

QUESTION: They haven't told you anything.

MR. RUBIN: That's correct, yes.

QUESTION: Jamie?

MR. RUBIN: Yes.

QUESTION: A North Korean official said - was quoted as saying that he felt North Koreans feel as though it was an insult for the United States to take in these defectors, and that's why they're boycotting the talks. What is your response to that?

MR. RUBIN: We did not take them in as an insult.

QUESTION: The North Koreans said that it was an insult to them that the United States took the defectors in.

MR. RUBIN: Right, and the United States did not provide them protective custody as an insult.

Yes, David.

QUESTION: On that same point, this question of criminal charges and insults and so on - when did the U.S. first hear from the North Koreans that they regarded these individuals as criminals and wanted them back, and regarded it as an insult that the U.S. was taking them in? Was that only in public statements in the last 24 hours or so? Or is that a position they've taken for a while? I mean, we're trying to figure out whether this is revisionism or whether these people - they are saying that they had charged - that they had ordered them back some days ago or some time ago to face charges; that they had been fired and ordered to come home. Any evidence to support that?

MR. RUBIN: In order for me to answer that question accurately, I would have to engage in a discussion that I've been prohibited from having; and that is the circumstances that preceded their decision to come to the United States and the circumstances under which they came here.

All I was referring to with regard to the extradition treaty was the public call by the North Koreans. I was pointing out that we don't have an extradition treaty or a mutual legal assistance treaty with the North Koreans.

QUESTION: Let me narrow it down further, then. Did the United States, prior to these public statements, hear from the North Koreans that they regarded these people as criminals?

MR. RUBIN: Again, I don't know exactly what we knew and when we knew it on this case. But to answer that question intelligently, I'd have to reflect things that went on prior to their decision to come here, which, as you know, yesterday I was extremely reluctant to get into, and I'm under the same restrictions today. I apologize for that.

Yes.

QUESTION: Did the State Department provide any of these individuals travel documents to enable them to--

MR. RUBIN: That would again fall into the category of the details under which they got here.

Yes.

QUESTION: Yes, Li Gun made a very angry statement --

MR. RUBIN: Who?

QUESTION: Li Gun, the ambassador, the North Korean ambassador at the UN, made a very angry statement this morning, basically reiterating what has just been discussed. So I would ask, have you seen that statement from Mr. Gun? And basically, does this government believe that it is wise to grant asylum to these people in view of the disruption of relations with North Korea?

MR. RUBIN: That's easy. Yes.

QUESTION: One technical question. Apart from the telephone call yesterday calling off the talks today, has the U.S. Government had any communications with the North Korean Government?

MR. RUBIN: Since?

QUESTION: Since they arrived in this country.

MR. RUBIN: My understanding is there were communications in the last couple of days with regard to the preparation for the talks and other aspects of this case, but there weren't discussions focused on this case, if I can give you an elusive answer. Again, it's our practice to try to avoid detailing specific diplomatic exchanges; but last night's conversation was not the first time this issue came up.

QUESTION: Just to follow up, in other words, they have not addressed any communication directly to the U.S. Government with these charges of misappropriation or whatever?

MR. RUBIN: I haven't seen that. I haven't heard about that. The only reference to a formal charge is what I referred to as was said publicly.

Yes.

QUESTION: When did you find that your statement yesterday about the political asylum is wrong? Is the change of the status related to today's cancellation of the talks in New York?

MR. RUBIN: No. I think I started to try to contact some people early in the evening, and the decision by the North Koreans was not communicated to us until the middle of the night. As I said, I was woken up at 1:15 a.m. this morning.

QUESTION: Jamie?

MR. RUBIN: Yes.

QUESTION: I'm sorry if I'm not getting this, but both brothers are, in fact, seeking asylum in the United States?

MR. RUBIN: Again, I'm going to be reluctant today to use that word, in light of the legal complications. I said that both of them are here under a protective status, a parole status, and the steps that follow from that are steps that you need to address directly with the INS.

QUESTION: You can't say whether they are even seeking to take it from there?

MR. RUBIN: I could repeat my same answer, but what I've been advised is, for legal and confidentiality reasons, using the word that you used is not a word that I should use.

Yes.

QUESTION: I have one - sorry --

QUESTION: Let me just do this really quickly.

MR. RUBIN: Yes.

QUESTION: Would investigation into this possible criminal activity, would that be something that would normally be taken into account in this process of asylum?

MR. RUBIN: You have to ask the INS that question, and the Justice Department.

Yes.

QUESTION: Will U.S. shipments of food aid to North Korea be affected by all of this?

MR. RUBIN: We provide food aid to the North Korean people, the children, not because we support the North Korean regime or we support many of the activities that they take, which we don't support and we strongly object to. We provide that food because we are a nation that believes in humanitarian principles. When there are starving children involved, we want to do what we can to help alleviate that suffering.

Can we try another subject?

QUESTION: One last question?

MR. RUBIN: One last question, yes.

QUESTION: In light of North Korea pulling out of the missile talks, would you now characterize the upcoming four-party talks as damaged, seriously damaged, not at all? How would you characterize it? Do you think that the North Koreans would --

MR. RUBIN: It's a legitimate question. All I can say is that we believe those talks are in the interests of both sides, for the reasons I answered earlier. We have no reason to believe, at this point - at this time - that those talks' schedule will change.

Yes.

QUESTION: Let me come back to my question of yesterday. Did the Secretary of State or the President get involved in the decision to admit these North Korean defectors to the United States?

MR. RUBIN: As far as the President is concerned, I would refer you to the Martha's Vineyard White House for an answer to that question. As far as the Secretary's involvement, the Secretary has been aware of this situation for some days now. But with regard to the question you asked yesterday, that was about granting the word that I'm not going to use today; and that, as you can see, has not happened yet. So neither the Secretary nor the President would have been involved in that kind of a decision.

QUESTION: Right. But in the - just the decision to admit them under an emergency status, under this parole status, the Secretary could very well have been involved in that.

MR. RUBIN: As I said, she was aware of the fact that these people were seeking to come to the United States in the recent days. As far as the process by which those decisions were made, how they got here is a subject that I am not in a position to discuss publicly.

QUESTION: Did she urge that they receive this parole status?

MR. RUBIN: She --

QUESTION: Did she ask for it? Did she argue for it? Did she give an opinion?

MR. RUBIN: I think the Secretary of State supports the fact that they are here and supports the decision to have them be here and supports the status under which they are now here and believes that this was appropriate given the circumstances. We hope that in the coming days and weeks the missile talks can get back on track. We've overcome obstacles of kind in the past. The people who do this work know they should be able to buy plane tickets, pack their suitcases and unpack them.

So if you're saying, was there a foreign policy consideration that might have played in here, the Secretary supports their --

QUESTION: Right, but from what you're saying -- from what you're not saying it sounds like she did not - I mean, the Secretary of State has the obligation to oversee the different aspects of a foreign policy. So admitting these people has resulted in the cancellation of the talks. She might have brought that to bear on a decision if she actually had weighed in on the decision. If somebody else made the decision, and she just simply went along, then --

MR. RUBIN: I can check with her. I take your point. I can check with her precisely her involvement and try to call you on that. But having spoken to her about this over two days now, I have no reason to believe that the decision to provide this status for them was something she was unaware of or that it was something that she was concerned could have this other impact and should not, therefore, have been made. On the contrary, everything that I know tells me that she is fully supportive of the fact that we brought these people here, despite the risk that it might cause what it caused.

But again, when it comes to North Korea, we're in this for the long haul. The negotiators who work this issue understand there can be temporary interruptions, but that the negotiations will get back on track. If you go back to the Agreed Framework, you will see many instances where there were long pauses. But at the end of the day, we brought home an agreement that advanced American security, stopped the North Korean nuclear program, and has proved to be working quite successfully.

QUESTION: Bosnia?

MR. RUBIN: Yes.

QUESTION: Do you know anything about Milosevic going to Banja Luka?

MR. RUBIN: I've heard the reports and seen the reports to that effect. What I can tell you about that is that we do not know whether indeed he is going to go. The Secretary did speak to him earlier in the week, as I reported to you, and made a very strong case to him that it was time for Mr. Milosevic to get off the fence. It was time for him to get on the side of those who support the Dayton Agreement - the peace agreement that Milosevic himself signed; and that that person was Mrs. Plavsic, the elected President.

QUESTION: Did he suggest that he go to Banja Luka?

MR. RUBIN: No.

Any more on Bosnia? Yes.

QUESTION: About Ambassador Gelbard's timetable regarding the visit to Belgrade.

MR. RUBIN: Yes, Ambassador Gelbard is scheduled to leave this afternoon, fly to Moscow and have meetings on Thursday and Friday; and meet in Belgrade with Mr. Milosevic on Friday.

Yes.

QUESTION: I had a question on Russia.

MR. RUBIN: Let's go to the back, there.

QUESTION: Okay.

QUESTION: One more on Bosnia, please.

MR. RUBIN: Sure. Are those the cheap seats back there?

(Laughter.)

QUESTION: Indeed. Cheap seats and standing room, that's what we got. Dick Holbrooke said this morning that one of the first topics on the agenda that Ambassador Gelbard would have with the Russians is the return of refugees in Prijedor, where the Russians have not been helpful. Can you enlighten us as to the state of discussion with the Russians about that?

MR. RUBIN: I have not heard that that is the specific package. I think Ambassador Gelbard told me that one of the prime issues he's discussing with the Russians is the plan for OSCE-supervised elections in September and October. There were some concerns the Russians had about that that he wanted to address directly with them, because we want to make sure those elections are on track.

More broadly on Bosnia, I --

QUESTION: Excuse me --

MR. RUBIN: Yes.

QUESTION: On that subject, Holbrooke also said that the first of those scheduled elections should be postponed and the two should be held in conjunction. Is that your position?

MR. RUBIN: That is not the U.S. Government's position at this time.

More broadly, I would point out that we regard the decision yesterday of the so-called RS Assembly as illegal. That Assembly has been dissolved by a constitutionally-elected president. The corruption and criminality of the regime in Pale has become more and more clear to the people of Bosnia. Their call to suspend elections, their call to take back the transmitters, their call to reject the constitutionally-elected President all demonstrate that they are on the wrong side of history.

History is now moving in the direction of those in Bosnia who are trying to support the peace agreement, support democracy, and support the rule of law. Those who continue to find themselves left out are going to find that the train of prosperity and integration into Europe is going to leave with them not on it. We urge more and more people in Bosnia, in the Serb parts of Bosnia, to recognize that it's Mrs. Plavsic's efforts that are going to bring them support in the future.

Yes, Judd.

QUESTION: In light of that, how do you analyze or how does the U.S. Government analyze the meeting yesterday that Plavsic had with the top military commanders, half of whom didn't show? Are they are on the wrong side of history, too?

MR. RUBIN: Yes. Mrs. Plavsic is the constitutionally-elected leader of the Republika Srpska. We think that the military should be respecting the civilian control of the military. We're concerned that they are not. She is commander of the armed forces. The RS military is responsible to her. The High Representative has made this point in letters to Mr. Krajisnik and Mrs. Plavsic. The principle of civilian control of the military is a fundamental democratic norm. We also have seen evidence recently that additional police forces are seeking to be restructured so that they can join those who are on the side of those supporting Dayton.

You can look at these things, and if you want to continue to find the glass half empty, you can see that. But there is a clear and marked shift in the Republika Srpska in favor and towards the leadership of Mrs. Plavsic in trying to get their country and - I'm sorry, their region back on track , their entity - please strike that - their entity back on track, and the direction is clearly in her favor. Yes, there are some holdouts; but more and more with each passing day we're seeing concrete evidence that the tide is in favor of those who support Dayton.

Yes, Roy.

QUESTION: How serious a problem do you think it will be for holding elections that the Assembly -- which is, pretty much I guess, under Karadzic's control -- has, it seems like, thrown down the gauntlet, saying they don't want the OSCE in, they are suspending the agreement? How can you send in OSCE people to towns that they control when their safety, obviously, is no longer guaranteed?

MR. RUBIN: Well, certainly, that's a problem. I'd just ask you at the flip side; and the flip side is that so long as the TV in that part of the world was going to spew out that kind of venom, there was never going to be an opportunity to have a free and fair election. Now a very large percentage of the people in Bosnia, in the Republika Srpska, the entity that's part of Bosnia, are going to be able to hear relatively objective news broadcasts, and that will give a greater opportunity for us to have a free and fair election there.

That doesn't mean there aren't numerous obstacles to overcome between now and the scheduled elections in September and October. That's what Ambassador Gelbard is doing in Moscow. He's talking to the Russians so that we can get the OSCE on board, working as hard as they can to provide the best possible environment for free and fair elections. But we obviously have a long way to go.

Barry.

QUESTION: (Inaudible) -- assistance to Mrs. Plavsic's government?

MR. RUBIN: Yes.

QUESTION: Apart from the lumber companies, which has been announced out there.

MR. RUBIN: There was some mis-reporting or - let me rephrase that - some might have misinterpreted what they read in the newspapers this morning. As far as I understand it, our entire program is $60 million for Bosnia. There is a roughly $1 million loan program that has been in place, and will continue to be in place, to provide small - 10,000 tranche loans - to businesses; and that there is no new announcement expected with any AID trip. And there is no $60 million plan. There was a $9 million assistance package that is going to shortly be distributed to those municipalities that have worked with the government in Banja Luka to implement Dayton. Those would involve projects like roads and waterworks and schools and that nature.

QUESTION: And there even may still be a discrepancy. You sure that's dollars and not deutschmarks?

MR. RUBIN: Well, they told me it was under $1 million. So let's use the phrase, under $1 million. I was trying to give you something to work with - whether it's $450,000 or $650,000 or $750,000, it's somewhat under $1 million. But it's definitely not $60 million.

David.

QUESTION: Jamie, can you give us an update on --

QUESTION: Follow up?

QUESTION: Oh, do you have a follow-up on that?

QUESTION: Yeah, just quickly, David. Clarification - the $1 million - under --

MR. RUBIN: Under $1 million.

QUESTION: Under $1 million for small businesses, is that earmarked to Bosnian Serb areas?

MR. RUBIN: To those areas that would fall into this decision we've made to provide assistance to those municipalities where they are doing what needs to be done to allow refugees to return, to allow freedom of movement, and to respect the Dayton Accords.

QUESTION: Banja Luka, not Pale?

MR. RUBIN: Correct.

QUESTION: So, Jamie, can you update us on the level of supervision by SFOR of uniformed forces in Republika Srpska, and specifically the force that was, at least, being used to protect Dr. Karadzic?

MR. RUBIN: I will try to get you more information at the next briefing, but that's really an SFOR question.

Yes.

QUESTION: Middle East?

QUESTION: Libya?

QUESTION: Just one more Bosnia?

MR. RUBIN: Yeah.

QUESTION: Has there been any - is there an agreed view now within the U.S. Government and also with its allies on what to do about the radio and TV transmissions which have been denouncing SFOR, treating it as if it were a remake of the SS?

MR. RUBIN: We regard the propaganda and rhetoric coming out of that transmitter as an obstacle in our effort to pursue peace. The OSCE Media Experts Commission issued a statement yesterday citing the broadcasts of the kind you mention in Pale for grave and continuous violations of the provisional election commission rules and regulations.

We want this broadcasting to stop, to stop using inflammatory rhetoric, and to stop furthering the cause of those who are opposing peace. So we believe that kind of propaganda, that kind of broadcasting is damaging to the process that we're trying to pursue in Bosnia.

QUESTION: My question is what are you going to do about it?

MR. RUBIN: Any decisions about what we're going to do about it, if I know where you're heading, I'm not in a position to talk about right now.

QUESTION: May I ask about the Middle East?

MR. RUBIN: Yes.

QUESTION: The Israelis' proposition to build a dam on a disputed piece of Syrian land, and they want to do it with the help of Jordan. You have said over the past weeks that there is a crisis of confidence in the region and both sides need to turn down actions or turn off actions that are going to thwart the peace process. How do you view this dam proposition? The Israelis are saying they are going to go ahead with it. Has the Secretary been in contact with the Prime Minister about this?

MR. RUBIN: Not to my knowledge, about the dam. The issue here is a little confused. There are different reports as to where the location of the dam would actually be. It is our view that the site for the proposed dam should be determined by the two interested parties -- Israel and Jordan -- at a site mutually agreed upon by them and one that takes into account issues of sovereignty in this area.

We don't know precisely where this is going to end up being constructed, if it's ever constructed. But again, we think that there are important interests for Israel and Jordan involved -- and obviously, Israeli and Syrian interests involved -- and these all need to be considered.

As far as the original report is concerned, if it turns out, which we don't know yet, but if it turns out to be on disputed territory of the kind originally reported, then it is not the kind of move which would help build the confidence that we think would be necessary to negotiate solutions to outstanding disputes. But again, there's no way to make this judgment at this point because the specific location of it we've talked to the Israeli government about, and it's a little unclear as to where it is actually going to end up.

QUESTION: Sorry to interrupt you,, but in light of what's going on in Southern Lebanon and the tensions that are in the region, even a gesture toward this - is that good to even make a gesture, for the Israelis to be talking about it?

MR. RUBIN: Again, you're trying to steer me in a direction I'm not going to go.

We don't know where this dam is going to be built. There are conflicting reports. We are consulting with the Israeli government. I said if the reports of it being on the disputed territory turn out to be true, then this is not the kind of move which would help build the confidence that we believe is necessary for peace in the Middle East. But if that's not the case, and the interests of the parties involved are not jeopardized, then it would be a different story.

So I'm not in a position to tell you what the result of this decision is because the details of it have not become clear.

Lee.

QUESTION: Jamie, the Israelis today said they are lifting what the Palestinians have termed "the siege of Bethlehem." I'm wondering what the U.S. Government response is to that. And does that affect the chances of Secretary Albright's making a trip to the Middle East?

MR. RUBIN: Let me say that Secretary Albright welcomes this decision. We think it's a step forward in the process. We have understood Israel's need to deal with security threats in the past, but we've also been concerned about the effect of closures like this on the daily lives of the Palestinian people. We hope that the right balance can be struck between Israeli security needs and the economic and social well-being of the Palestinians. We do not think that making it impossible for Palestinians to function in their daily lives contributes to greater mutual confidence or, ultimately, to progress in the peace process.

So we welcome this decision. We think it's a step in the right direction. As far as the Secretary's travel is concerned, I've seen various reports out of the region of people suggesting that she will or she won't go, based on what they might or might not have done. Let me say, the Secretary has made the decision in principle to go to the Middle East very soon. When she has decided that the circumstances merit a timetable and a specific plan, I hope to be able to be the first to tell you that.

QUESTION: What about Dennis Ross?

MR. RUBIN: Nothing new on a Dennis trip at this point.

Any more on the Middle East?

QUESTION: Yeah, one.

MR. RUBIN: Yes.

QUESTION: I don't know if you touched on it while I was out, the Kuwait warning.

MR. RUBIN: Yes. I did not touch on that while you were out. The Department of State issued a public announcement on August 26 advising US citizens that the Embassy in Kuwait has an unconfirmed report of a possible attack on an unspecified American location in Kuwait in late August. How's that for specificity?

As part of our travel safety program, we routinely issue information about security threats to Americans. We have no additional public information on this reported planned attack, and we are going to put out an announcement at the end of the briefing, or it may already be out there.

Yes.

QUESTION: It was interesting to hear that it's now a function of the State Department to determine who's on what side of history. If you could comment on that in regards to Russia, that would be interesting, but I also have a specific question. The boat that was captured in the Bering Sea, the Russians seem to have made an official presentation to the State Department about that, asking for a release of the boat. Is there a response?

MR. RUBIN: We are currently reviewing the Russian Government's request and will respond through official channels. We do not agree with the Russian characterization of this case as unclear. The U.S. Coast Guard spotted the ship within the U.S. economic exclusion zone on August the 15th, based on our measurements - and pretty accurate systems, at that. The ship is now detained in the port of Kodiak in Alaska. The vessel and its crew have been granted all of the port courtesies, such as storage, electricity, fresh water and telephone access normally granted to foreign fishing vessels. The future of that ship will depend on the outcome of the investigation, which is still in progress.

QUESTION: Technically, the relationship in this sphere is based upon an agreement, I understand, from 1988 on fisheries. Is that true?

MR. RUBIN: I can get you more information about this. We believe that the fishing activity was inside the zone, and that the Coast Guard acted properly in seizing the vessel pending an investigation by the assistant U.S. attorney's office and the National Marine Fisheries Service.

Yes.

QUESTION: Yesterday Italian Foreign Minister Lamberto Dini said since the Greek-Cypriot Government does not represent the whole island of Cyprus, there's a need for a formula according to which both the Turkish Cypriots and Greek Cypriots can enter European Union together. Since this seems to be contrary to the U.S. approach, given the fact that U.S. accepts Greek- Cypriot Government as representing the whole island, could you comment on this?

MR. RUBIN: With whom the European Union negotiates in upcoming Cyprus accession talks is a question for the European Union to decide. EU leaders have worked to ensure that the Turkish-Cypriot and Greek-Cypriot communities can participate in the accession process. We welcome and encourage those efforts.

The U.S. recognizes the government in Nicosia as the legitimate government of Cyprus. We nonetheless maintain contacts with both Greek-Cypriot and Turkish-Cypriot leaders.

Yes.

QUESTION: One more --

QUESTION: Different subject?

MR. RUBIN: Yes, one more on this subject.

QUESTION: On the arrest of the Libyan alleged terrorist in Italy today, connected with the bombing of a disco in Berlin, do you have anything on that?

MR. RUBIN: We have seen these press reports. If true, we applaud the counter-terrorism cooperation between the government of Italy and Germany that led to the arrest of this suspect. We are pleased that the rule of law is being applied in the La Belle disco bombing case.

As you know, two American soldiers were killed in that attack and 200 other persons were wounded, including 64 Americans. The United States has followed the La Belle bombing case very closely and we remain committed to seeing justice done.

Yes.

QUESTION: The foreign minister of the so-called Republic of Nagorno- Karabakh recently made a statement that Nagorno-Karabakh already rejected latest OSCE plan - a plan which Azerbaijan and Armenia accepted as basic mechanism for solving conflict. Do you have any comment about this?

MR. RUBIN: I'll try to get an answer for you officially.

Yes.

QUESTION: On Cambodia, I asked a question about two days ago about Ken Quinn being back in Washington. Did you --

MR. RUBIN: Yeah, we did not hear - he is not here.

QUESTION: On the two planes that were downed last year in front of --

MR. RUBIN: Yes.

QUESTION: -- (inaudible) Basulto, from Brothers to the Rescue, was in Washington. Today some Miami stations are reporting some statements that he's more inclined to believe now that the whole thing could have been avoided if the United States - the United States Government could have avoided the whole incident. Do you have anything on this?

MR. RUBIN: Yes, I was working for then Ambassador Albright in New York when this incident occurred. It was the role of the U.S. Government to try to deter flights of this kind, to try to inform those who were putting forward flight plans that would involve being in the wrong places that they faced the risk of losing their licenses. But in the case involved, we have no reason to believe that there was a failure to warn the pilots.

This was a simple case. It was a case of cold-blooded murder by Fidel Castro's military of three American citizens and another Cuban-American.

QUESTION: Latin America?

MR. RUBIN: Yeah.

QUESTION: I have two questions. In Congress, the Republicans are still breaking apart regarding the support for Governor Weld. Is the United States Government doing something to try and stop this kind of action against the decision of President Clinton? And I have another question on Mexico. I know you didn't comment on diplomatic notes. But the Mexican Government is still rejecting this Rio Grande program on the border. Do you think this kind of action by the Mexican Government or the action by the United States could affect the bilateral relations in terms of immigration discussions?

MR. RUBIN: We'll try to get you an answer on the second question. As far as Governor Weld is concerned, nothing has changed. The Secretary and the President believe that the gentleman deserves a hearing and that if his case is heard by the committee, the members will see that he's qualified for the post. We can't answer that question fairly until he has a hearing.

QUESTION: Gerry Adams is coming next week with a delegation. I just wondered if the State Department has received any requests for talks with officials here from his delegation.

MR. RUBIN: I would be surprised if he didn't meet with someone. I don't know the level yet.

Yes.

QUESTION: What about Japan open skies? What is the sense of urgency as far as an open skies agreement in this area, given that U.S. carriers certainly, right now, have about 60 percent of that market? And to what degree will the U.S. Government resist what at least one airline has characterized as the Japanese Government position of seeking a managed trade agreement here?

MR. RUBIN: Let me try to get you some specific information. But I am going to post a statement on this after the briefing about the negotiations that have begun on the air services agreement. That may have some of the answers to your question. If not, we'll try to get someone to answer specifically.

QUESTION: Is there anything in the magical in the September 31st deadline?

MR. RUBIN: Deadlines are usually involved for procedural reasons, but we'll try to get you a specific answer for that.

Yes, over there, please.

QUESTION: On Panama, I write for La Prensa daily newspaper in Panama. We're very concerned about the proposed deportation tomorrow, forcibly, of one of our editors - a man by the name of Gustavo Gorriti. Numerous human rights organizations have protested this as a violation of freedoms of press and expression. Human Rights Watch has written to Secretary Albright, asking her to take a strong stand in the case. Could I ask you to comment on how you view this proposed deportation?

MR. RUBIN: The U.S. Government does not question the Panamanian Government's authority to enforce its immigration laws. However, the decision to remove the residency status of a world-class journalist such as Gustavo Gorriti -- I hope I didn't do damage to his name - raises questions about Panama's commitment to freedom of the press. We have made our views known to the Panamanian officials, and hope the decision will be overturned.

QUESTION: To follow up, please? That statement is a week old, sir, and I wonder if due to the fact that the forcible deportation is going take place tomorrow, if you have any new view on that.

MR. RUBIN: This view hasn't changed.

QUESTION: You promised to give us information about the trip of Ambassador Eizenstat to Central America. What did he achieve, regarding Cuba, with the Central American countries --

MR. RUBIN: Well, I'll make sure that if we promised information --

QUESTION: You promised us an announcement for Mr. Tom Miller, the new coordinator for Cyprus the other day, but so far there is not anything to this effect. And I would like to know why Mr. Holbrooke has been replaced by Mr. Miller as the new coordinator.

MR. RUBIN: That is not correct.

QUESTION: (Inaudible) - today?

MR. RUBIN: Let me give you some information on this that will surely enlighten the rest of the group. Assistant Secretary for European and Canadian Affairs Marc Grossman oversees policy for Cyprus. The post of the special Cyprus coordinator is the top full-time position in the European Bureau, charged with coordinating Cyprus policy. Tom Miller, the former DCM in Athens, has been appointed to this position.

Special Presidential Emissary Richard C. Holbrooke reports to the President, to the Secretary and to the Assistant Secretary. Within the Bureau, the Office of Southern European Affairs is charged with overall policy implementation for that region. Office Director Steven Mull, Deputy Director Peter Petros and two country officers deal with Cyprus issues.

QUESTION: Do you know if an American ambassador will be in Moscow for the Gore-Chernomyrdin Commission?

MR. RUBIN: Our ambassador?

QUESTION: Yes, the new ambassador

MR. RUBIN: I don't see why not.

QUESTION: He is not confirmed yet.

MR. RUBIN: I think he's been confirmed, yes, he's confirmed. He was confirmed.

(The briefing ended at 1:32 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 v1.01a run on Thursday, 28 August 1997 - 2:07:47 UTC