 |
Compact version |
|
 |
        |
|
 |
||
|
Friday, 19 April 2024
|
||
 |
 |
|
|
|
U.S. Department of State Daily Press Briefing, 01-04-23U.S. State Department: Daily Press Briefings Directory - Previous Article - Next ArticleFrom: The Department of State Foreign Affairs Network (DOSFAN) at <http://www.state.gov>DAILY BRIEFING Richard Boucher, Spokesman Washington, DC April 23, 2001 INDEX: CHINA TRANSCRIPT_: MR. BOUCHER: Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen. It's a pleasure to be back. And I don't have any announcements or statements, so I would be glad to take your questions. Mr. Schweid. QUESTION: I don't know what new is to be said about it, but now a Catholic bishop, another arrest in China. Is there anything the State Department is doing? Is it getting in touch with the government or whatever? MR. BOUCHER: Obviously we follow the human rights situation in China very carefully, and we raise many of these cases. I have just seen these reports. I am not sure if we can confirm them ourselves at this point. But our concern about the human rights situation in China, our work with China and continual pressing of not only the specific cases of individuals but also the general human rights situation, are quite a solid part of US policy. So we would in the normal course of things find out what we could and raise these issues as appropriate with the Chinese. QUESTION: Last week -- sorry to bring up this Chinese Embassy question again, but the man who spoke with us said that because the human rights resolution failed again in Geneva, that's the last you're going to hear about the US pushing these kinds of resolutions. Kind of ha-ha-ha. Does that make you think that they really aren't getting the message? I mean, you've told us before that even if it doesn't pass, it gets the word out there. But he obviously wasn't buying that. And at the same time, could you give us an update, if you have any, on the American citizens and residents being held? MR. BOUCHER: I don't have anything particularly new on those people that are being held. Obviously they remain of concern to us, and we'll continue to discuss those with the Chinese. As far as a reaction from one particular Chinese official, I don't know, but we're not necessarily talking to that particular official. We're looking for the overall international concern that has been expressed by many people who did vote for this resolution, by many people who hear about it, and by many people, even within China, who believe the human rights situation in China should change. QUESTION: A related question. Can you give us a dump, as we say at Fort Fumble, on where we stand on getting our plane back and any meetings scheduled to discuss the surveillance flights issue? And what is the State Department's current view on the renewal of surveillance flights? MR. BOUCHER: Well, we don't do any of that over here. We don't do whatever they do at Fort Fumble. But I would say a couple things here. The getting the plane back issue is going to be handled in diplomatic channels. There was a meeting last week in Beijing. The outcome of that last meeting we had with the Chinese was to…. We presented them with the plan of how the aircraft could be repaired and repatriated. There will be further discussions of that issue in diplomatic channels, and we will keep talking to the Chinese in that fashion. As you know, it is our airplane; we want it back. As far as further discussions on follow-up on the incident itself, we also talked to them about that a little bit, but at this point nothing is settled. QUESTION: Do you have any update on whether you have received an application for a visa from Chen Shui-bian? Also, the Chinese have demanded that you rescind your tourist visa to former President Lee. I take it that's not on? MR. BOUCHER: No, that's not on. He is a private citizen. Private travel between the United States and Taiwan is part of our relationship, and he qualified for a visa. We thought it was appropriate to give him one. As far as travel by Chen Shui-bian, I don't really have anything new on that today either. QUESTION: Richard, I seem to recall that on the plane, you were going to present some terms of reference or something? MR. BOUCHER: Yes, we were going to present -- QUESTION: Have you done that yet? MR. BOUCHER: I'm not sure. I will have to double-check on that. I don't have anything new on that. But it is a specific question I didn't ask today. QUESTION: It sounds from your description that the Chinese have not really responded? Would that be fair? MR. BOUCHER: Well, when was the meeting? On the 18th, so it has been since Thursday, right? QUESTION: Sure. MR. BOUCHER: The last meeting -- it's been a weekend. Again, have we presented the terms, have we heard -- we have had further discussion with the Chinese, but nothing is settled or set at this moment. QUESTION: But would you care at this moment, is it too early to describe them as either responsive or not responsive? MR. BOUCHER: No. Just we have had some discussions with the Chinese, but there is nothing set on either of these points at this point in time. QUESTION: Can you give us an update on Taiwan, the Administration deliberations on arms and maybe a time-table? Presumably there is nothing to announce right now, but maybe a time- table or sense that -- MR. BOUCHER: There is nothing to announce. Obviously the President or the senior advisors can decide at any moment they want to. There is no particular legally mandated deadline for the process of decision on Taiwan arms sales. This proceeds every year in a very methodical manner; it proceeds according to criteria and procedures that are laid down that concern the legitimate defense needs of Taiwan, and the security situation in the region. So this will continue, we will meet our obligations under the Taiwan Relations Act and the communiqués. The extensive discussions have proceeded, but exactly where it stands at this point, I'm really not in a position to say. And when something is decided, when we have something to say, we will. That's about as much as I can give you. QUESTION: Does the announcement of the security situation in the region include things like China holding on to a US surveillance plane for nearly a month? Is that weighing in, and is there a desire by the Administration perhaps to not make a decision until and unless you get more progress on the airplane? MR. BOUCHER: As we have made quite clear, this is a separate decision, this is a decision that we will make on its own merits, not on temporary issues, and that we will go forward with that. How much to weigh any particular factor or indicator in that process, I really can't do for you. QUESTION: Can we switch to Peru, please, and can you give us an update on the situation there and the interagency process? And can you talk about whether or not there was a meeting here today, and if so, who attended ? Just for openers? Three or four follow-ups, perhaps? MR. BOUCHER: All right, let me start out by expressing our very deep condolences to the family and friends of the Bowers, our concern about Mr. Donaldson, the pilot who was injured. This is a great tragedy. It is a terrible tragedy for these people and for all of us that we're very concerned about. The program itself is an important program, a successful program over the years, to interdict drugs from coming into the United States. I think we all agree that we have to do everything possible to keep drugs off our street. But how this tragedy happened and making sure it doesn't happen again are some things that we are going to have to look into very, very carefully. And you all know that we have suspended the program, and the Peruvians have suspended their interdiction flights, until we can do that. The family members are back in the United States. Our consular personnel were with them, helped them out. They came back Sunday morning to the United States. The father Jim Bowers, the son Corey Bowers, and the pilot Kevin Donaldson returned to the United States on Sunday. We think that the remains of the mother, Veronica Bowers, and the daughter, Charity, can be brought back to the United States today, and we are assisting with that as well. As far as what occurred, I think you've got the basics on the flight, but I'll kind of go back to the beginning of the facts as we know them and go through as much as I can give to you today in terms of what we know. And it's not a particular reticence about any particular aspect of this; it's just we want to know that we know things before we start putting them out. And we're going to be looking into all of this in cooperation with the Peruvian authorities. The Peruvian air force aircraft shot down a private plane that was carrying American missionaries, an American missionary family and their pilot, in northern Peru near the Colombian border. The plane was heading to the Peruvian town of Iquitos, having earlier departed from the town of Leticia in Colombia, and it was mistaken for an airplane transporting contraband drugs. There was a US Government tracking aircraft in the area that was in support of Peruvian intercept missions. For a number of years, this is something we've done. We have provided assistance to Peru in detecting and monitoring suspect aircraft that are passing through certain designated sensitive airspace in an effort to control the flow of illegal drugs. Our aircraft provide location data about airplanes that are flying in the region, those that are apparently without flight plans. We hand off this location data to the Peruvian air force. Peruvian aircraft are responsible for the process of identifying the aircraft and then deciding on any further action. The US aircraft is unarmed. In this particular situation, we acquired information on an aircraft. We passed it through the Peruvian liaison officer, who is aboard our plane, to the Peruvian authorities and then we remained in the area while the events occurred. So we do have a fair amount of information on what happened. I would say initially, from what we know at this point, there are certainly indications that some of our folks, that our folks on the plane, were trying to hold the Peruvians back from taking action in this case. But these are all things that we will look into. We will look into all possible information. We will do it in cooperation with the Peruvian authorities, and we will try to get to the bottom of this matter so that we understand how to make sure this never happens again. QUESTION: How will this accident affect continued United States assistance to the Peruvian drug war? MR. BOUCHER: Certainly the overall effort to interdict drugs is very, very important to us and to Peru and to others in the region. Over the weekend, at the Summit of the Americas, I think the President talked about the Andean Initiative. He talked about the kind of assistance we want to give and support to the counter-narcotics efforts. So those efforts will continue. So what we will need to look at is how exactly we and the Peruvian Government conduct this program to try to figure out what occurred and how to make sure it doesn't happen. QUESTION: Richard, two things. One, you said that the US plane -- the program tracks other aircraft that don't have flight plans. Is it your understanding this plane did not have a flight plan? MR. BOUCHER: No, that is one of the points that has to be looked into. I think, you know, they look for aircraft flying in certain places and certain kinds of airports and certain kinds of flight patterns crossing borders. They try to do a quick check if there is a flight plan or not. In this case, I think they did. They didn't find one. That doesn't actually say…. I mean, that is one of the issues that has to be looked into more carefully. QUESTION: And the other second thing is, do they actually have, the US people check -- MR. BOUCHER: I think the Peruvians check. Through the liaison officer, they check. They didn't find one. But obviously that is a point that has to be looked at. QUESTION: And did this US plane ever make visual contact with the plane, or was it just kind of on a radar? MR. BOUCHER: No, the US aircraft was close enough to see. QUESTION: And they saw the whole thing? They saw the shots? MR. BOUCHER: No, I can't say that at this moment. Again, we are going to look at all the information that we have from our crew, from our aircraft, from people that we have talked to. But I can't give you a description of everything that we know at this point. QUESTION: So you say that there are indications that US officials tried to hold the Peruvians back. Can you explain to us the chain of command, and why -- what controls we have, if any, over these intercepts? MR. BOUCHER: There is, I think, a clear distinction in the process. The chain of command, the control of the operation, is really a Peruvian action. They are the ones who take responsibility for the intercept, the identification of the airplane, and any decisions on what happens. Now, they have a liaison officer who sits aboard our tracking aircraft. So we find something, we tell them about it. They start doing the checks. They then identify the airplane and decide what to do about it. Now, in this case, that process was followed. There are questions about our crew, while not in the chain of command, obviously is in the area monitoring, sees what's going on. And our folks did raise questions and were trying to hold the Peruvians back from action. But, again, all these things will be looked at very thoroughly so that we and the Peruvians both understand what happened. QUESTION: In looking at it, are you trying to get a role for the US officials in having some control? MR. BOUCHER: I think it is premature to specify what will come out of this. But clearly we are going to want to come out of this with whatever it takes to make sure that this kind of thing can't happen. QUESTION: Could you follow up on what steps were taken when you say that the US tried to hold back through Peruvians? How did they do that? MR. BOUCHER: No, I can't go into too much more detail on that at this point. We are still looking at the indications, information we have. QUESTION: If at some point the US was aware that this might not be a narco plane and was told that the Peruvians were going to -- were planning on shooting it down, is there any mechanism for the US to get on some kind of frequency and alert the plane? MR. BOUCHER: That's an "if" question with a lot of pieces that I can't go into. We want to know what we know before we start talking about trying to go into that kind of detail. I don't know the frequencies, I don't know the relationship, the radios, and our guys are going to have to look at that. And we are going to have to look at that very, very carefully in cooperation with the Peruvian Government. QUESTION: Richard, when you say you want to find out exactly what happened, do you mean that you are setting up some kind of formal investigation process with a commission, or what exactly -- MR. BOUCHER: Well, that is a question I can't answer for you. That is still being decided. We are going to look into this thoroughly. We are going to investigate this. We will do that in cooperation with the Peruvian Government. Exactly how we structure that, I don't know. We'll obviously be sending people down to Peru. There will be some kind of team that will go down to Peru to look into this as well and to work with them to begin determining the facts of the shoot-down and the actions that have been taken subsequently. But some of that is being decided during the course of the next few days. QUESTION: Is there a decision on what the lead agency of the United States Government is on this? MR. BOUCHER: Not that I'm aware of. QUESTION: Richard, on a non-question, has this been a problem habitually? Have the Peruvians ignored US advice to hold back previously? MR. BOUCHER: No, these are very careful procedures that were established. And actually, the part of our law that authorizes this program has some of the requirements for these procedures. So they are careful procedures that have been established, been followed, for a number of years. I think over the history of these programs for -- I don't know if it's the last eight, ten, or whatever years-- there have been more than 30 aircraft. There have been no injuries to anyone that wasn't found to be smuggling drugs. So it's a terrible tragedy and a horrible occurrence, but this is the first time something like this has happened. QUESTION: You're saying 30 aircraft have been shot down as a result of this program? MR. BOUCHER: Over the years, yes. QUESTION: Richard, there seems to be a very clear effort by the US to shift the blame and responsibility and put it squarely on the shoulders of the Peruvians. This is a program that is a program that's in cooperation between the US and Peru. Is there a risk, or is the State Department at all concerned that pushing too hard is going to then erupt into a dispute and, you know, ill feelings between the US and the Peruvians, with whom you're trying to cooperate on this very important program? MR. BOUCHER: Well, not to answer a question with an if, but if what you said was true, then, yes, there might be a concern. But it's not. What we're trying to do is as carefully as possible, but as much as possible, is get you all the facts on this situation and tell you what we're looking at, what the Peruvians are looking at. And we and they will work in cooperation to get to the bottom of this. They are as concerned as we are. There was a statement by Perez de Cuellar on Saturday, the Peruvian Prime Minister, where he said the Government of Peru regrets the incident and accepts responsibility for it. So we appreciate the statements that have been issued by the Foreign Ministry, by the Peruvian air force. The air force has expressed deep regret for the loss of human life, and as you know, Prime Minister Perez de Cuellar spoke to the President about it this weekend. So there is just an effort on our part to be responsible about this, to get out the facts as much as we can, as soon as we think we really know things, but then to really proceed and look into this in great detail and find out what happened and draw the appropriate conclusions for future action. QUESTION: There is a report that a couple of years ago, I believe, the US had also expressed some reservations about these flights and were concerned that something exactly like this might happen. Can you explain what was changed or what reassurances were given the US in order to satisfy them that the flights should go on? MR. BOUCHER: I can't deal with a report that may be a couple years ago somebody said something. That's a little too vague. QUESTION: Do you know if it's true? MR. BOUCHER: I have not heard that. There is legislation that provides for these programs, permits these programs. That legislation includes certain criteria that need to be met. We made sure that these criteria were met. We've made sure that it's done with careful procedures. And as I said, over the history of these flights, it seems to have worked. In this case, it was a terrible failure, a terrible tragedy. And we really need to understand that. QUESTION: Congress established these criteria, didn't they? MR. BOUCHER: The legislative history of this is very complicated. It has very little to do with any specific drug interdiction program, frankly. But I'll leave it to the lawyers and the congressmen, the experts on the Hill, to really try to explain the legislative history. But there is a law, I think in the National Defense Authorization Act of 1995, that describes this program. QUESTION: Do we have any other agreements, similar agreements, with other countries down there, like cooperative -- MR. BOUCHER: Yeah, I think it's publicly known, but I don't have the whole list in my head. I'll check for you on it. QUESTION: Richard, can you talk about the State Department's role and INL's role, and whether or not, just for the record -- there has been reporting on it -- but just for the record, is this plane, the American plane involved, an American contractor plane, contracted under an INL contract, a State Department contract? MR. BOUCHER: It is a US Government airplane. It is owned by the United States Government. I don't have any specific information for you on whose name is on the title, which agency. But the personnel on board, other than the Peruvian liaison officer, are CIA contractors. So the CIA contracts for people to staff and fly these airplanes and to carry out the detection efforts that they conduct. QUESTION: Richard, on the facts, can you tell us, one, what kind of aircraft the Peruvians were flying; two, were they firing cannon or machinegun or both; three, roughly how many rounds if we know; and four, what is the situation with the pilot? Is he still on flying status? MR. BOUCHER: I love these Pentagon reporters. The Peruvians were flying -- see, this is when you get to the State Department and these things don't click in my brain -- an A-37-B. I think that's what it was. (Laughter.) I just made it up. But you can get that from the Peruvians. What kind of shooting it was and things like that, I don't know. The pilot, Kevin Donaldson, was injured in his leg or legs. I frankly don't know for sure. QUESTION: The Peruvian pilot, is he still on flying status, or do you know what's happened to him? MR. BOUCHER: You can go ask the Peruvian air force that question. That's not one for me. QUESTION: They are not briefing today. MR. BOUCHER: Well, then ask them. Give them a phone call. I'm sure they'll answer. QUESTION: A change of subject? On Montenegro. Do you have anything to say about the outcome of the elections? And does the United States now have a position on possible secession by Montenegro from the Federation? MR. BOUCHER: Our position is the position we have had that we maintained all along. Really, we have obviously followed the elections there closely. The early results from the election indicate that opinion appears to remain divided on the issue of independence in Montenegro. But our position on Montenegro's status, has remained what it is all along. We continue to believe, as we have said before, as the Contact Group said in Paris, that a democratic Montenegro within a reformed and democratic Yugoslavia is probably best for the region. We have always encouraged a serious and early dialogue between the Montenegrins and the people in Belgrade to try to work these things out on a mutually acceptable basis, to work with Serbia and the federal authorities to try to work out whatever arrangement it is, an arrangement that will suit them. And so we think that we still support, as we have in the past, an early start to sort of serious good-faith discussions and dialogue. QUESTION: Well, Richard, there are reports that -- I mean, since the Contract Group meeting at least -- there have been reports that the Europeans are getting a little more independence-minded; they were waiting for the outcome. Is this going to be an issue where the Europeans and the US have to get their heads together again and try to agree on a common position, or might there be some divergence? MR. BOUCHER: I don't see any. We were in Paris with the Contact Group two weeks ago, and that is a substantial group of Europeans, including the Russians, where we all agreed that, in general, our position is support for a democratic Montenegro within a reformed and democratic Yugoslavia. That is what we would like to see. But the important thing is that there be a dialogue between Montenegro and Belgrade, that they try to work this out in a mutually acceptable manner, and that is what we would hope to see start as soon as they are ready. QUESTION: Do you think this -- does this support your arguments for caution in Kosovo before they start -- before their people start looking towards independence? MR. BOUCHER: I think you have heard our discussions of Kosovo. There is a UN resolution that we are following in Kosovo, and our intention is to follow that resolution. QUESTION: Richard, I couldn't help noticing that your comments on Jonathan's initial question didn't contain the usual laudatory comments about congratulating the people of Montenegro for free and -- you know, what you usually say in these kind of -- MR. BOUCHER: Let me take the occasion, please. We are very pleased that the OSCE's preliminary assessment was that the elections were "pluralistic, accountable and transparent." And that gives us just great pleasure to see. QUESTION: So you're saying you're not disappointed in the conduct of the elections? MR. BOUCHER: No, the conduct again, we are relying on the reports of the OSCE. The conduct was apparently good. We will see what happens in the political process now that the outcome is starting to be known. We will see how things work out. But again, we encourage policies pretty much what we have said before. QUESTION: Richard, are you satisfied with the structure that has been set up for any referendum on independence in Montenegro, as I understand it, 25 percent? MR. BOUCHER: We have seen questions raised by various people about the rules under which any referendum might be conducted. As I said, we will see what the political process in Montenegro produces. We will see how these questions of rules are worked out. But once again, we come back to sort of fundamentally we believe that this should be worked out in a mutually satisfactory manner with Belgrade, and they can sit down and start those discussions, we think, as early as they are ready. QUESTION: Richard, are you saying you oppose an independent Montenegro because you don't want any more redrawing of boundaries in the Balkans that might have an impact on Kosovo and Bosnia? MR. BOUCHER: Did I hear me saying that? QUESTION: I'm asking. MR. BOUCHER: I didn't hear me saying that. QUESTION: Well, why do you think independence is a bad idea? MR. BOUCHER: Because we think that now that you have a democratically elected government in Belgrade that the arrangements for the region are different. It is not the same as having trouble with a Milosevic-dominated military government trying to persecute you from Belgrade. And that the best way to work these things out, to make sure they work out peacefully and to everybody's satisfaction, is to actually sit down, democratic government to democratic government, and work them out. And so that is what we have always supported, and we think that overall there is an opportunity here, an opportunity for democratically elected leaders to make an arrangement that will suit all their needs. QUESTION: No less a person than the architect of the Dayton Accords, Richard Holbrooke himself, is now arguing that independence for Montenegro may not be such a bad thing. He says that basically the concerns are not well founded, that he doesn't see that that could lead to more conflict. Why do you think does the US Government believes that, were Montenegro to become independent, that could spark another conflict? MR. BOUCHER: How soon they forget. (Laughter.) QUESTION: Well, Holbrooke -- doesn't Holbrooke just want another country paying UN dues? Isn't that his -- MR. BOUCHER: No, I'm not going to try to argue indirectly with Dick Holbrooke. I think our position has been clear on this all along. We have seen the election. We are obviously following the developments very closely, but this is the position that we have maintained. We have always felt, as for our interests there, that working this out democratically between the Montenegrins and Belgrade is the best solution, and that is what we look for. QUESTION: Can we move on? I understand that Foreign Minister Peres is going to be here early May. What will he and the Secretary be speaking about? MR. BOUCHER: He'll be here on May 4th. He'll be visiting Washington. The Secretary will see him. We don't have the schedule yet of all his meetings, nor of the Secretary's meeting, and they will be discussing the situation in the Middle East. QUESTION: And what is your take on that situation right now, Richard? Is it good? MR. BOUCHER: Our basic take on the situation is that there has certainly been a continuation of some of the horrible violence. There were terrorist attacks in Israel over the weekend, and we obviously condemn those attacks. There was a suicide bomber attack, a particularly terrible one. I understand there has been more shootings and possible deaths today. We think that these attacks need to cease. There is no justification for terrorism. And people in the region, whether they are Israelis or Palestinians, shouldn't have to live this way. So how are we going to get beyond them? And that is that we are, first of all, engaged. The President has been active in this, the Secretary has been active in this, our diplomats on the ground have been active. We have been working with the parties to try to get discussions of the security situation so we can try to help them bring the level of violence down, make possible the easing of the economic situation and a foundation for returning to peace talks. So we did have security discussions Saturday night between Israeli and Palestinian representatives. Those were fairly high-level security discussions. There was a US representative there to help facilitate, monitor and report back on any developments to the Secretary. We feel it was a useful exchange, but I can't get into details of their discussions. We have continued to urge the parties to resume bilateral security discussions in order to halt the violence. We are pleased that they have maintained those discussions, and we look forward to a continuation of that in the future, and hopefully to bringing down the level of violence over time so that they can get on with some other very important things, like economic development and return to the peace process. QUESTION: It looks like the Israelis are warming slightly to the Egyptian- Jordanian plan. I wondered whether perhaps you had adjusted your position on it. Do you have anything new to say on that? And who was the US representative who attended those security talks? MR. BOUCHER: I don't know. A US Embassy representative. I'm not sure exactly who. On the Egyptian-Jordanian proposal, I think we have said before that we felt that the role that the Egyptians and the Jordanians have played in this process has been very constructive. We have welcomed their involvement. They have been tireless advocates for peace, and we certainly welcome their ongoing efforts to help work with the parties to halt the violence, restore trust and confidence, and then build an environment of peace. As far as any specifics of the proposal, I would leave that for the parties themselves to talk about. QUESTION: Richard, the leaders of Hamas and Hezbollah and Jihad are meeting in Tehran tomorrow for a two-day seminar hosted by the Iranian Government at the highest level. In addition to that, 30 parliamentary delegations from Arab countries are attending. In the light of the latest events and what is happening in the Middle East, can you comment on such a meeting to support the Intifada held in Tehran? MR. BOUCHER: Obviously we are not in favor of it. I didn't know about the specific meeting, but the activities of these organizations, Iranian opposition to the peace process and support for terrorism, have long been major concerns of the United States and continue to be concerns of all of us. The way to resolve this is not through terrorism; the way to resolve this is not through violence. The people of the region, the Israelis and Palestinians, shouldn't have to live with the fear of being blown up if they go outside their door, or being shot if they go outside their door. And it's in the interest of all of us to support that and make that clear. I don't hold my breath, but we would think that everybody in the region would recognize that fundamental and basic fact. QUESTION: The Iranian always rejects your accusation of supporting terrorism. They say they only supply humanitarian aid and political support to these groups. Do you have what you can prove? I mean -- MR. BOUCHER: Well, we all know what these groups have been involved in in the past. We all know what they are involved in now. I don't see how you can say we only give them food, and somehow they decide to go out and bomb things; that's not our responsibility. There is support for these groups, and we are seeing it, and we're opposed to it. QUESTION: Mr. Arafat has suggested that both Israel and the Palestinians simultaneously declare that it's wrong to target individuals. Is that something the US approves of? You've been looking for something from Arafat for a long time now. Is that getting closer to it? MR. BOUCHER: I haven't seen that particular statement. I think there was some thing over the weekend about joint calls for an end to violence. Obviously the parties need to make clear their positions against violence; they need to indicate that the attacks should stop. We have encouraged the parties to resume their bilateral security efforts. They need to deal with each other. They need to talk to each other about how to make the violence go down. We are pleased that the parties are maintaining those discussions. We have seen, I think, some reports that the Palestinian leadership has called for an end to mortar attacks. That is something that we would look for and we would hope that people would honor those calls. So there are ways for the parties to start this process of ending the violence, and we are involved in trying to see that happen. QUESTION: Let me try the other line. That is, the Arab American Institute, an Arab American group obviously, has written -- they say in a statement here -- Secretary Powell asking the State Department to issue a special warning, a caution to Arab Americans. They claim that they are harassed and made victims in various ways by the Israelis. I thought there was a travel advisory out anyhow, but they want something specific to Arab Americans. Is there a point to that, do you think? Are their allegations correct? MR. BOUCHER: I think, first of all, there is information in our Consular Information Sheet for all Americans. There is something in there for Arab Americans, I think. But the warning, the travel warning that we do have now, still encourages all Americans -- all Americans -- to defer travel to this region. And so that's not differentiated between groups, frankly. That's advice for all Americans. QUESTION: Richard, to go back to the Arafat proposal of a joint appeal for an end to violence by himself and by Prime Minister Sharon, my understanding is that the Israelis rejected that proposal. Do you take a position on that? I mean, why -- is this a missed opportunity by the Israelis? MR. BOUCHER: I think I am not going to try to take a position on every possible proposal or possible permutation. What we have seen are a need for the parties to do things, a need for the parties to make statements, carry them out, have people honor them, and do things to stop the violence. And they need to do that for each other. They need to do that, first and foremost, for themselves. They need to do it for each other. So we will continue to facilitate the bilateral security discussions, the bilateral talks. We will continue to encourage them to take specific steps that actually reduce the violence. QUESTION: Yes, but would it be useful if Prime Minister Sharon joined Chairman Arafat in such a -- MR. BOUCHER: Again, we are sort of dealing with one or another proposal that floated here or there. I am not going to try to deal with all of those, endorse some, condemn others. What is important is they try to discuss with each other, work out with each other what they can do. And we will try to continue helping with that process. QUESTION: Do you have anything on this book that talks about the USS Liberty and about 1967? Apparently, a United States surveillance plane heard communications that Israel was planning to attack the ship and sink it, and can you say if the US ever intercepted such a -- MR. BOUCHER: Well, I asked some people about this, but the people I asked were born in 1966, so they didn't have too much on it. (Laughter.) I think what I would say is this is not the first time these kinds of reports have appeared. I don't think we have really had much to say in the past, and frankly I don't really have much to say today on it. You can ask historians and other agencies what they know about it, but much time has gone by and as far as the history of this, I will leave that to historians. QUESTION: Richard, there was a GAO report last week that said that the State Department should sell a small parking lot near the US Embassy in Paris. Can you tell me what the State Department feels about their finding? QUESTION: And this is true of a specifically targeted allocable spot? (Laughter.) MR. BOUCHER: Let me look into the parking lot here for you. There was apparently a General Accounting Office recommendation that we sell the parking lot behind the Ambassador's residence in Paris. I don't think the final report is out. We have not in any way overruled or rejected that. We are looking at the situation. Our new head of the Foreign Buildings Office, who is in charge of all our property, is looking at it, is looking for possible resolutions to get some value from this property. Obviously that study is still ongoing, and so they don't have any conclusions at this point. QUESTION: There’s a press reports that the United States decided not to reduce its forces from Sinai. Is that true? And my second question is, could you kindly tell me the kind of visas issued to the ex-President of Taiwan? Is it multiple, or one entry, and the term of the validity? MR. BOUCHER: I'm not sure I actually have that information. I'll get there, Phil. Phil did the briefing on this on Friday, so he remembers. He knows his visa stuff. QUESTION: You got that job. (Laughter.) MR. BOUCHER: All right. No, I don't have the particular terms of the visa. He is a private citizen. We issued a tourist visa to him on Friday, the 20th. As you know, the visa allows you to come to the border. It is actually the Immigration Service that decides how long you can come in, how long you can stay, and those sorts of questions. Sinai. I hadn't seen those particular reports that we weren't going to withdraw from the Sinai, but I will give him the same answer as I gave for the reports that we were going to withdraw from the Sinai, and that is that there is an overall review being conducted by Secretary Rumsfeld. Part of that review, they will look at all our deployments. We will work with others as we need to in any adjustments we decide to make. But at this point, that review is ongoing and there are no particular suggestions for any particular mission’ recommendations on that that have come out of it. QUESTION: That is probably all true, you have been talking to the Egyptians (inaudible) of the Egyptians said don't do it, and the idea is falling about in the category, who'd withdraw from hot spots. In other words, it's not a live possibility I'm now raising? MR. BOUCHER: You can ask Secretary Rumsfeld about that. He is the one that is conducting the review, as we I think acknowledged last week. He has talked to the Israelis, I think the Egyptians, just to get some reaction and some idea about it. And at this point, whether it comes out in the end as a recommendation that he wants to make or not, we will just have to see. But it is in their hands to look at this first and foremost and make recommendations. QUESTION: A follow-up to Barry's question. There have been allegations by several Arab Americans that they were tortured, they were imprisoned, they were not given due process in Israel, they were strip-searched in the airport. They have held conferences here, they have written to the State Department. You promised to look into these matters and to get assurances that Arab Americans are well-treated and their civil rights are not violated. Can you tell us anything about the development in that direction? MR. BOUCHER: I do believe that in each of these cases where we get such reports we look into them, we raise them as appropriate to find out what happened. We do make clear that Americans -- all Americans -- in our view deserve fair treatment, deserve equal treatment, deserve respect, and we raise these from time to time in specific instances. We try to help the people out who might have problems. So I think our embassies, our consulates in Israel and the West Bank and Gaza, that they are very active on this, and they do try to take care of our citizens. QUESTION: But you did give them, Arab Americans, travel warning to Israel, even before these trouble of Intifada. MR. BOUCHER: I think there has been information in our Consular Information Sheet for quite some time about the difficulties they might face. It is just fair to give them advice and information in advance. QUESTION: Richard, my recollection of this was that they particularly objected to the references in the Consular Information Sheet which seems to endorse the Israeli practice of treating Palestinian Americans as Palestinians, and not as Americans. Are you planning to eliminate any of that language? Is there any consideration going into that? MR. BOUCHER: I am not aware of any particular revision going on these days. I don't know whether people had criticism of one part over another. But as I say, our obligation to American travelers is to give them as much information, the best information, as we can, so that they understand the situation they might be traveling to. QUESTION: Here are a couple quick things. One, do you know anything about death threats against Ambassador Carson in Nairobi, and some arrests that the Kenyan police have made resulting from those? MR. BOUCHER: I don't think so. You would have to check with the Kenyan police on that. QUESTION: Okay. And then two, about meetings today. Deputy Secretary Armitage, despite having no public appointments, in fact did have an interesting appointment this morning with the German Environment Minister, who spoke to people outside. QUESTION: And the Japanese. QUESTION: Exactly. Anyway, can you tell me -- I'm not interested in the Japanese as I am in the German. And also, can you tell us what Secretary Powell is going to be discussing with former President Gorbachev? MR. BOUCHER: Let me check on Deputy Secretary Armitage's meetings. I'm sure we can get from him some readout of those, how they went. Let me, on the meeting with Mr. Gorbachev, I would describe this largely as a courtesy call. Secretary Powell and he went through a lot of history together, separately together, or whatever. They are obviously interested in discussing the current situation in Russia, having the viewpoint of a man that we've known for some time, and so that will be the nature of the discussion. QUESTION: According to the press reports and including in India Globe, do you have any comments that a Pakistani diplomat was arrested in Nepal and they found some explosives and other weapons from him that they were meant to create chaos in Nepal and blaming some other countries or meant for against India? MR. BOUCHER: I don't know. I don't really have anything on that for you. QUESTION: In Japan, as you know, Mr. Junichiro, Junichiro Koizumi appear to win the race for the new prime minister (inaudible) final result (inaudible) report. And at this point, can you give me any comment about him or current situation? And number two -- MR. BOUCHER: Not at this point, no. QUESTION: Okay, (inaudible). What do you expect to the new prime minister, or what is the priority to the US Government in terms of (inaudible)? MR. BOUCHER: I don't think I can describe for you our idea of a prime minister. It's a matter for the Japanese people, the Japanese parties and Japanese Government to decide. We'll leave it to them. QUESTION: Do you have any reaction about today's Greenpeace protest in front of the US Embassy in Ankara? MR. BOUCHER: No. QUESTION: Nobody mentioned the summit. MR. BOUCHER: It was great. I'll give you 20, 50 pages on it. It was very useful, very productive. QUESTION: When are you going to release it? MR. BOUCHER: I think the document is already out on websites. I was told it was already out on the Canadian summit website. QUESTION: Was the declaration unanimous? MR. BOUCHER: Yes, everybody signed it. You saw it on TV. (The briefing was concluded at 1:30 P.M.) [End] Released on April 23, 2001
|
|
 |
|
 |
 |
|
All Rights Reserved.