U.S. Department of State Daily Press Briefing #49, 97-04-04
From: The Department of State Foreign Affairs Network (DOSFAN) at <http://www.state.gov>
U.S. Department of State
Daily Press Briefing
I N D E X
Friday, April 4, 1997
Briefer: Nicholas Burns
ANNOUNCEMENTS
1-2 -- SERBIA: Secretary's Mtg w/Opposition Leaders: Purpose, Other US
Events -- US Concern Over Lack of Reform in Serbia; Serb Refusal to
Participate in New York Conference on Ethnic Relations, Including
Kosovo Situation
2-3 -- FSI (Foreign Service Institute) 50th Anniversary, Secretary's
Speech 4/9
3 -- IRAQ/TURKEY: NEA Acting A/S Welch Travel to Northern Iraq, Mtgs
w/Barzani, Talibani; Ankara Peace Process for Kurds; Turkish
Participation
3 -- SRI LANKA: Statement on Positive Political Developments
3 -- ALBANIA: US Support for Vranitzky, OSCE Mission
3-4 -- DEPARTMENT: Document Release, FRUS on CUBA Crisis; Praise for
PA/HO
CHILE/AMERICAN HEMISPHERE
4-6 -- U.S. Policy on Sale of Fighter Aircraft; Release of Marketing
Information
5-6,19 -- U.S. Regional Arms Sales Policy, Review; Sales of Advanced
Fighter Aircraft
IRAQ/TURKEY
6-7 -- Kurdish Talks: High-Level Discussions, Follow-Up Meeting; U.S.
Commitment
7 -- Welch-Deutsch Trip; Previous Travel by U.S. Officials to Northern
Iraq
17 -- Iraq Government Complaint About Illegal Entry of American
Officials
17 -- U.S. Policy on Territorial Integrity of State of Iraq, Not
Government of Iraq
MIDDLE EAST PEACE PROCESS
8-11 -- Albright-Mordechai Talks: U.S. Concern over Settlement
Thickening; Har Homa Construction; Israeli & Palestinian Concerns;
U.S. Ideas on Next Steps
10 -- Oslo Accords and Settlements
11 -- Significance of Netanyahu-King Hussein Meeting
11 -- Prospects for U.S. Personal Contact with Chairman Arafat
VIETNAM / CHINA
11-13 -- Vietnamese Refugees Screened in Hong Kong: Forced
Repatriation, Resettlement --Appeals Process, Additional Status
Review
CHINA
13 -- Dalai Lama Visit to Washington, Meetings with U.S. Officials
TURKEY/IRAN
13-15 -- Turkey-Iran Pipeline Deal; U.S. Assessment of Iran-Libya
Sanctions Act Violation; Additional Information Pending/Possible G-7
Summit Review
IRAN/LIBYA
15 -- Other Reviews of Possible Iran-Libya Sanctions Act Violations
SERBIA-MONTENEGRO
15 -- U.S. Expectations for Kosovo Region; Territorial Integrity of
Serbia-Montenegro
GREECE/TURKEY
15-16 -- Alleged U.S. Embassy/Athens Attempt to Prevent Imia/Kardak
Rock Concert
MACEDONIA, FORMER YUGOSLAV REPUBLIC OF
16 -- UN Discussion of Resolution of Name Issue
RUSSIA/BELARUS
16 -- U.S. View of Cooperation Agreement
ZAIRE
17-19 -- Rebel Cooperation on Refugee Assistance: Airlift of Zairians
Permitted; No Permission for Rwandan Refugee Assistance
18-19 -- Death Rate Among Refugee Populations
18 -- South Africa Peace Talks
CANADA/TERRORISM
19-20 -- Prime Minister Chretien Visit; Bilateral Relations;
Satisfaction w/Contacts re Detained Saudi Bombing Suspect
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE
DAILY PRESS BRIEFING
DPB #49
FRIDAY, APRIL 4, 1997
(ON THE RECORD UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED)
BURNS: Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen. Good afternoon. Welcome
to the State Department briefing. I have a couple of things to let you
know about and then we'll go to questions.
First of all, as you know, Secretary Albright is meeting with the
Norwegian Foreign Minister now. Actually, that just concluded.
She'll be meeting this afternoon with the leaders of the Serbian
opposition. I want to say a few words about that meeting. She'll be
meeting with Vuk Draskovic, Zoran Djindjic, and Vesna Pesic, the three
leaders that are so familiar to everyone from the demonstrations that
took place November, December, and January, after the municipal
elections.
The Secretary will use this meeting to underscore the very strong
support that the United States gives to democratic change in Serbia.
Only by accepting international norms of democracy and human rights
can Serbia take its place in the community of nations.
I understand that in addition to the visit to the Secretary today,
these three leaders will attend a conference in New York on the
situation in Kosovo. This is a project on ethnic relations. They have
other events today, including, I believe, a press conference.
I want to say a further word about the actions of the Serbian
Government. While we welcome the Serbian Government's implementation
of the results of the November 17th municipal elections, we are
distressed by the lack of implementation of the remaining
recommendations made by the OSCE Mission of former Spanish Prime
Minister Felipe Gonzalez, including media reforms, media freedoms, and
electoral reforms.
The United States supports the efforts of the Zajedno coalition and
the other democratic forces in Serbia to lead Serbia out of the dead
end it current finds itself in, and to begin the process of developing
a modern European country.
The Secretary will also discuss a range of other issues affecting
relations between the United States and Serbia, including the human
rights situation in Kosovo. I told you that they're going to be
attending a conference on ethnic relations. The issue of Kosovo will
be a primary issue at that conference that these three leaders will
attend.
This is an important opportunity for Serbs and Kosovar Albanians to
discuss the situation in Kosovo. We're very pleased that the Zajedno
leaders have agreed to take part in this. We are dismayed, however,
that the Serbian Government has refused to attend this conference. We
consider this an unfortunate sign that the Milosevic regime is
unwilling to address this important issue.
The continued denial of basic human rights to the Kosovar Albanian
citizens of Serbia is unacceptable. It constitutes a major impediment
in the improvement of relations between the United States and Serbia.
As you know, the United States does not support separatism or
independence of Kosovo. We respect the territorial integrity of
Serbia-Montenegro. We encourage the Kosovar Albanians to play a role
in the political system -- the political and economic life of Serbia
itself.
At the same time, we call upon the Serbian Government to remove the
underlying causes of the Kosovar separatism -- Serbian police
brutality, the act of discrimination against Albanians, the refusal of
the Serbian Government to engage in a serious dialogue with the
Kosovar population about their many, many problems. I want to give you
that background because, for a variety of reasons, there's only a
camera spray today. It's very late in the day, and I wanted to draw
some attention to that meeting.
Secretary Albright is going to have a busy week next week. One of the
important events will be Wednesday, April 9. Secretary Albright will
celebrate the 50th Anniversary of the Foreign Service Institute in
northern Virginia, with a speech at the Institute's one-day symposium,
"Diplomacy for the 21st Century." This is going to take place at 9:15
a.m. She'll take questions from the audience, students and faculty.
The press is invited. We already have a long list of journalists who
will be coming. I would encourage you to sign up and to accompany the
Secretary or meet her out there.
After the Secretary's speech, she's also going to be meeting with some
students and faculty of FSI, including its Director, Teresita
Schaffer. I encourage you to consider covering it. Beginning at 10:30
until noon, there will be a panel discussion moderated by Under
Secretary of State Tim Wirth, well known to all of you. It's entitled
"Foreign Policy and Domestic Politics: Conflict and Consensus in the
21st Century." The panelists include Tim Wirth, Richard Haass of the
Brookings Institution, and Sam Lewis, formerly of the State
Department, of the Institute for Peace.At 12:15 p.m., Ambassador Bob
Gallucci will give the keynote address for the day. This entire
program is open to media coverage, and I really encourage you to cover
it.The FSI, of course, is indispensable to the Department of State and
all of us who need to learn archane foreign languages and be trained
as Foreign Service and Civil Service officers. The 50th Anniversary is
a very significant event in the life of that institution.I told you
yesterday -- on another subject -- that our Acting Assistant Secretary
of State, David Welch, was in northern Iraq. I can tell you again
today that he and Bob Deutsch, our office Director for Northern Gulf
Affairs, visited northern Iraq on the 3rd and 4th of April, yesterday
and today. They had separate meetings with Mr. Barzani and Mr.
Talibani. They also held meetings with the Turkman Front, the
Assyrians, and the Peace Monitoring Force. This was the first official
United States visit to northern Iraq since Saddam Hussein attacked
Irbil in August 1996. It was also the highest level American visit in
many years.
The visit demonstrates the continued engagement of the United States
in promoting stability in northern Iraq and in giving us a chance to
help improve the humanitarian situation of the people in northern
Iraq.
The discussions focused on the peace process that was launched in
Ankara in November and December of last year. The Turkish Government
participated in this visit and was a key partner in this visit. We
believe -- the United States believes -- that this peace process is in
the best interest of all the people of northern Iraq. All sides agreed
on the need for early and rapid preparation for a next high-level
meeting in Ankara in the coming weeks.
The discussions also covered the overall situation in Iraq in light of
Secretary Albright's recent speech on developments in Iraq. It also
concerned implementation of U.N. Resolution 986.
All parties reaffirm their commitment to the unity and territorial
integrity of Iraq, and they pledge to work against terrorism.I'll be
glad to take any questions you may have on that. Just very briefly,
we're posting a statement today on the situation in Sri Lanka and some
positive steps that have been taken the Sri Lankan Government and the
opposition just in the last day to resolve that terrible ethnic
conflict in Sri Lanka. I would like to encourage you to read that
statement after the briefing.
Last evening, we issued a statement on the situation in Albania -- in
particular, our support for the OSCE mission led by former Austrian
Chancellor, Franz Vranitzky. I'd like to refer you to that statement.
I'll be glad to take any questions on Albania.
And, last, the Department of State is mandated by the Congress to
publish a history of the foreign relations of the United States. Our
most recent volume that we are issuing today is quite significant.
It's a volume on the Cuban Missile Crisis of 1962. This volume
provides the most comprehensive, historical record of the entire
confrontation between the United States and the Soviet Union over Cuba
back in 1962. October 16-28, 1962, was the most intense period of the
crisis.
The volume documents on an hour-by-hour basis, in unparalleled detail
the actions of the United States Government during that period. All of
the Kennedy-Khrushchev correspondence on Cuba is printed in this
volume. It also contains more than 50 CIA documents.
I don't believe any previous volume of our Foreign Relations series
has contained so many CIA documents dealing with so many aspects of
the contribution that the intelligence community made to the formation
of American policy during the Cuban Missile Crisis. I would like to
refer you to this, those of who are particularly interested in Latin
America and U.S.-Soviet relations at the time.
We have a detailed description of the contents of the volume available
in the Press Office. You may purchase a copy, as you know, from the
government. You can just peruse a copy in the Press Office if you
don't want to purchase one.
I'd like to take this time to congratulate our Historian of the
Department of State, Bill Slany, and his staff on the preparation of
this volume. They turn out many volumes per year. They publish the
history on a 30-year timeline. They do a terrific job, and I want to
thank them for their efforts.
QUESTION: Five years --
BURNS: Pardon?
Q: They're five years late.
BURNS: Actually not. Actually not. I think we've been able to certify
every year that we're meeting the Congressional limits here. It's
interesting because, here we have a volume on the Cuban Missile Crisis
but we have volumes on the Johnson and Nixon Administrations also
coming out. This is a special volume. I think it will add to the
scholarship -- there's an effort underway at Harvard University to
revise Graham Allison's seminal work Essence of Decision. I know that
Harvard is very interested in this as are a number of other scholars
around the country.
Q: Nick, there's a story in the paper today suggesting that the U.S.
is prepared to sell high-performance fighter planes to Chile. This
suggests a softening of the previous policy. Do you have anything on
that?
BURNS: Yes. I'm sorry about that story because it didn't quite capture
the reality of what's going on. I want to correct the record here.
Thank you, George.
The United States Government has decided to allow American companies
which wish to compete in Chile's selection of a modern, advanced
fighter aircraft. We've allowed them to do so by allowing them to make
technical information on the capabilities of the aircraft available to
the Chilean Government so that the Chilean Government can measure the
obvious superiority of American products against other foreign
aircraft.
This is for marketing information only. It does not constitute an
American Government approval of an actual sale. This was made so that
our companies -- our American companies -- would not be at a
disadvantage in the competition. It's really technical detail that's
being provided.
As you know very well, George, the Administration is in the middle of
a review on its conventional arms transfer policy in our own
hemisphere in Latin America. That review is on-going. While it is
on-going, before any final decisions are made as a result of this
review, the current American policy remains in place and unchanged.
That long-standing policy is that we will address potential transfers
of conventional arms in the context of restraint.
We've never had a ban on American military sales -- conventional sales
-- to Latin America at any time. But we've had a policy of restraint.
We've had an opportunity to talk to a number of Latin governments
about this just in the last couple of weeks, including the Argentinian
Foreign Minister, Foreign Minister di Tella, two days ago. I wanted to
correct the record because that story just -- I'm not saying it was
the fault of the journalists; I think it just didn't come out right.
Q: What's the point of giving technical information to a potential
client if it is not going to be followed up with a sale?
BURNS: The point is that we're in the middle of a conventional arms
review. We can't predict, of course, with any degree of certainty the
results of that review.
But in the meantime, since these competitions actually go on for many,
many months in some countries -- years -- we didn't want any American
companies that might be able to do this in the future, possibly, to be
knocked out of the competition early on because they couldn't even put
in front of the Chilean Government the basic technical information
about the fighter aircraft.
So it doesn't constitute U.S. Government approval of any potential
sale. It just says, okay, you can go and take the first step. But
we're not saying that this constitutes our agreement that you can go
to the ultimate step. We'll have to see.
Q: Under current policy, these kinds of aircraft presumably could not
be sold; is that correct?
BURNS: Excuse me?
Q: Under the current policy of restraint -- the kind of aircraft that
Chile is in the market for -- could not be sold?
BURNS: To be precise about this, we have a policy of restraint. It's
not a policy of a ban on arms sales. We do take these on a
case-by-case basis.
Q: So you don't know for sure either way whether this would be --
BURNS: We're in the middle of a review. I can't anticipate eventually
what decision is going to be made as a result of that review. We
didn't want to put our companies at a disadvantage in the middle of
this -- our own review.
Q: That wasn't the question I was asking. The question I was asking
is, under the current policy of restraint, would the sale of this kind
of aircraft be a violation of that restraint?
BURNS: As I said, we have not approved many sales of this nature in
the recent past, but we do take things on a case-by-case basis. I want
to be accurate about that.
Q: Going back to your readout on the Kurd situation, you talked about
a high-level meeting. Are you talking about a meeting between Barzani
and Talibani?
BURNS: As you know, that hasn't happened in a very long time. We'd
like to see that happen. I don't know if that will happen at the next
meeting.
But, Jim, just remember. When Bob Pelletreau, our then-Assistant
Secretary went out to Ankara in November and December, he put
together, with the assistance of the Turkish Government and the U.K.
-- what we call an "Ankara Peace Process." This is the three Western
governments using their influence with the major Kurdish factions --
the Assyrians, the Turkomans, the other minority groups in northern
Iraq -- to try to bring them together in the wake of Saddam Hussein's
aggression last autumn.
What we know is going to happen, as a result of the meetings over the
last two days, they've agreed -- the KDP and the PUK and the other
groups -- to have another meeting, probably in Turkey in the next
couple of weeks. I can't predict who will attend that meeting on
behalf of the KDP and the PUK.
But, obviously, we'd like to move this process forward so that some
day, Mr. Barzani and Mr. Talibani decide to sit down together in the
interests of stability in northern Iraq. Right now their
representatives can do that, and we can meet with these leaders
individually, separately but not together, but we'd like to move the
process forward to that end.
Q: Were there any specific events over the last couple of weeks that
was the occasion for the visit by Welch and Deutsch to northern Iraq,
or is this part of the ongoing process?
BURNS: It's part of the ongoing process. It's meant to further sustain
and really help to move forward the Ankara peace negotiations. But I
think also in light of the Secretary of State's speech of March 26th
on Iraq, David Welch and Bob Deutsch wanted to explain that speech to
the leaders of northern Iraq and wanted to assure them that the United
States is fundamentally committed to safeguard the rights of those
people and to help them in a very difficult situation where Saddam
Hussein is clearly an aggressor against them.
Q: Did you call this the highest level visit to the region in the last
few years?
BURNS: American visit.
Q: Yes.
BURNS: Yes.
Q: Is that true? Hasn't Bob Pelletreau been to the region?
BURNS: Bob Pelletreau's been to Ankara, but I don't believe --
Q: No, no, the region as well.
BURNS: I don't believe into northern Iraq, no. David Welch is the
Acting Assistant Secretary. Mr. Deutsch, who's our Office Director,
had visited northern Iraq in the past. I don't believe Bob Pelletreau
did.
Q: (Inaudible)
BURNS: Would you like to defer to Jim?
Q: No, that's okay.
Q: The Secretary said this morning that she'd expressed her concern to
Defense Minister Mordechai about the thickening of the settlements.
Specifically, was she talking about existing settlements being
thickened and expanded? Did she in her concern mention the
construction in Har Homa?
BURNS: The Secretary raised yesterday with Defense Minister Mordechai
the issue of the announcement by the Israeli Government yesterday of
the construction of additional housing units for existing settlements
in the West Bank and Gaza Strip, and Defense Minister Mordechai
explained that these were not new settlements. They're what is
referred to what is generally referred to as the "thickening" of
existing settlements. As the Secretary said, she noted our concerns.
Our concerns, of course, are long-standing on activities of this type,
but primarily I think the sense that she was able to give the Defense
Minister was that the peace negotiations are in a very difficult
moment. Now is surely not the time to add to the difficulties. Now is
the time to try to create new cooperative events and initiatives to
bring the Palestinians and the Israelis together.
I think as we look at the current situation, we want to improve the
environment -- the political environment between the Israelis and
Palestinians. We want to stabilize the situation, which is quite
unstable with all the violence in the West Bank and Gaza Strip. We
have our own ideas for how to move this situation forward. We know
that we have a responsibility and a self-interest in bringing the
Israelis and Palestinians together.
We're going to share those ideas, first and foremost, with the parties
-- with Prime Minister Netanyahu and Chairman Arafat. We're not going
to share them with all of you, with all due respect. We're going to go
into a cone of silence publicly about our deliberations, but we're
very active. As a result of the discussions with King Hussein,
Secretary Albright's telephone discussions with the Prime Minister --
Prime Minister Netanyahu -- and Chairman Arafat we are developing our
own ideas, and we're going to put them forward. We'll listen to the
ideas of the Prime Minister and Chairman Arafat as well, because, of
course, they bear the prime responsibility for the success of the
peace talks.
I think we also undertake this series of negotiations with a sense of
history that there have been very many difficult moments just in the
last 12 months as well as over the last several decades. We've always
been able to overcome those difficult moments. We've always been able
to find a way with the parties to move the process forward. So we
approach this situation with that in mind, and we're determined to use
our influence for the good here.
Q: And the second part of my question: Did she raise the issue of the
construction of Har Homa?
BURNS: I'd have to check my notes. But, Jim, suffice it to say the
Israeli Government understands the views of the United States. The
President and the Secretary of State have said on many occasions,
quite recently, that we regret very much that that decision to build
housing units in Har Homa was taken. So there's no question that the
Israeli Government understands our concern about that.
I must say, however, in reporting about this meeting, it was a very
good meeting. They didn't know each other well, of course, but they
had met before, but they had a very good meeting. They talked very
directly and in a very friendly way to each other. We're very good
friends with Israel. It was a meeting that was pragmatic because they
exchanged ideas on how we can help try to resolve some of the problems
between the Palestinians and the Israelis.
Q: Nick, you say that this position on the thickening of existing
settlements, the United States has long-standing opposition to that,
but that's really not the case.
BURNS: I said we had a long-standing position on that.
Q: Well, the position was, as I understood it, going back to Bush and
Baker, was no new settlements, but the expansion of existing
settlements was okay as long as it was -- I forget the catch word --
"natural growth." It appears now that there's a change in policy to be
opposed even to the thickening of existing settlements.
BURNS: No change in policy. I've been very careful with my words
today. The Secretary told you herself upstairs, she noted our
concerns. In the past we've said that these kinds of developments
create tension, and that's exactly what she was referring to when she
said she knows our concern.
Q: No, you didn't. You all didn't say that the expansion of existing
settlements creates tension. You said new settlements create tension.
This is something new.
BURNS: Sid, I said it yesterday. I said it six months ago. I said it
about two years when this kind of thing was happening. This has been
our consistent position all along. We've not changed our position on
this. We've been very careful and precise in what we've said publicly.
Q: I'm sorry, I have to differ. I don't think you're correct, but the
record will reflect.
BURNS: I am correct. I have great confidence in what I'm saying.
Q: The record will reflect this is correct.
BURNS: I stand by what I'm saying, Sid. I know what I'm talking about.
Q: Nick, does the U.S. think that the building of housing on existing
settlements that predate a Palestinian-Israeli agreement is a
violation of those agreements?
BURNS: Judd, that's a --
Q: It s kind of a technical question.
BURNS: It's a very technical question. I don't have the Oslo accords
in front of me. I think we have a well known position on the issue of
settlements. I don't think I need to repeat it in great deal for
everyone today.
Q: I understand the concern about tensions, and so forth, but from a
legal perspective, I was inquiring whether --
BURNS: I'm not a lawyer, so I don't like to get into legalities. But
I've given your our position, which is well known. I should also say,
just to remember another important issue that was discussed in the
meeting with Defense Minister Mordechai was the issue of security.
Obviously, the United States believes that the Palestinians must
undertake every effort to promote a good environment free of
terrorism. Security is important. Maintaining agreements in Oslo is
important, but the environment needs to be improved.
Q: Just to round out the record, I need a "no comment" from you.
BURNS: You need a "no comment" from me.
Q: Yeah, I'm anticipating one.
BURNS: We'll see if we can do that.
Q: Just to round out the record. Reports in Israel say that the United
States intends to ask Israel for a six-month freeze on all settlement
activity. Is that in fact one of the ideas floating around?
BURNS: I'm not going to get into speculation publicly about our
positions the ideas that we're putting forward, the Israelis and
Palestinians. I'll have to give you a "no comment" on that, Jim.
Q: In the discussions with --
BURNS: I won't explain my "no comment."
Q: In the discussions with the Defense Minister, did she raise some of
the other concerns of the Palestinians, namely the confiscation of
land, the demotion of houses, and so on and so forth, which are having
I mean, the Deputy Mayor of Hebron has lost his house to the Israelis
bulldozers. It's a rather interesting commentary.
BURNS: She did not go into those issues. She raised the issue of the
thickening of the settlements. Most of the conversation was taken up
with a pragmatic discussion of how we can move forward, and that's
what she did in the meeting. It was a good meeting.
Q: How much significance are you placing on the meeting Monday between
Netanyahu and King Hussein? Do you expect that to move this process
any?
BURNS: It's significant. It's positive that they will meet together
out in Minnesota. It's also significant that the Prime Minister will
be at the White House to talk to the President, but these meetings are
part of a continuum, the process of trying to bring the Israelis and
Palestinians back together has been underway for some time. The United
States has been very active over the last several weeks in that
effort.
Q: Well, I have a Middle East question, and then I have a question on
something else. If we are going to be presenting our views on the next
steps to Netanyahu on Monday, are there any plans for Arafat to come
here or for anyone to go to have a meeting with him a face-to-face
meeting to give him the same
BURNS: I'm not aware of any plans for Chairman Arafat to visit
Washington next week, but we've been in touch with him the Secretary
has been by phone. Ed Abington, our Consul General, has been in touch
with him and will remain in touch with him very closely throughout the
weekend and next week, as you would expect.
Q: How about the week after? You said next week.
BURNS: The week after? I think I can safely commit to you that we'll
be closely in touch with Chairman Arafat and Prime Minister Netanyahu
the week following this and the week following that. We're always
closely in touch with all of them.
Q: I have a follow-up. I understand you have some guidance on the
status of Vietnamese refugees in Hong Kong, and have they exhausted
all avenues of attempts not to go back to Vietnam?
BURNS: Do we have a mole in the Press Office? You understand I have
guidance you've seen my briefing book?
Q: No, I haven't.
BURNS: This is a sacred briefing book.
Q: I've talked to unnamed sources.
BURNS: You think it's Bill Gertz? Okay. What's the question. I'm
suspicious now.
Q: This process isn't all that mysterious.
Q: True.
BURNS: It's opaque.
Q: The Vietnamese refugees who are in Hong Kong, many refugees have
been there for some time, since the end of the Vietnam war. With China
taking over Hong Kong, the Chinese have made it very clear that they
want these people out of there, either taken to third countries or to
be repatriated back to their own country. What is the status of these
people now? Have they exhausted all avenues to prevent their going
back to Vietnam, if that's what they choose? What is going to happen
to these people?
BURNS: As you know, the comprehensive plan of action, which was an
international program of many countries to take action on the issue of
Indochinese refugees it made first asylum in Southeast Asia and in
Hong Kong and I can give you the numbers in a minute. There were
thousands of people who were in that category. It screened the
Vietnamese refugees in Hong Kong and other parts of Southeast Asia to
determine if they were indeed refugees.
I think in the case of Hong Kong, since 1975, 200,000 Vietnamese boat
people have arrived in Hong Kong. Over 140,000 of the 200,000 were
determined under the Comprehensive Plan of Action to be refugees, and
they have been resettled in third countries, including many in the
United States. Another 64,500 individuals were determined not to be
refugees, and of these I believe 60,000 have been returned and some
returned voluntarily to their homes in Vietnam.
We understand there are currently 4,000 Vietnamese asylum seekers
remaining in Hong Kong. The Hong Kong Government expects to repatriate
these individuals back to Vietnam prior to the July 1 reversion of
Hong Kong to China. I know that there's a particular issue, Betsy,
about 39 Vietnamese boat people who are seeking to have overturned
Hong Kong's determination that they are not refugees and therefore do
not qualify for resettlement in third countries. I understand that
there's a judicial review from the Hong Kong high court which is
underway right now.
Q: Do you know if these people lose that attempt at staying out of
Vietnam, if they are repatriated back to Vietnam, would the U.S. again
review their cases to see if there is
BURNS: I can check for you. I'm not an expert on all the steps in the
review process, but I believe this is probably the final court of
appeals, because they were determined not to be refugees, and
therefore they would be returned to Vietnam. They are appealing that
decision. I'm not aware of any additional review that would be
possible, but I think it's a specific enough question that we should
probably check it and get back to you.
Q: Do you have anything on the Dalai Lama's visit? Do you know who
he'll be meeting with? The White House has said he'll meet with some
administration people.
BURNS: I don't have the particulars, but we can take that question and
get back to you on it.
Q: New topic. Two on the Iran-Libya sanctions bill. Earlier this week,
Turkey announced it had awarded a contract to a Turkish company to
build its half of the pipeline that's supposed to carry Iranian gas to
Turkey, and this makes it look like Turkey's going ahead with this
contract that the State Department has wished that Turkey does not go
ahead with. Does this bring us any closer to making a determination as
to whether the deal violates the law?
And also I understood there's a working group on ILSA for the G-7
summit, or can you tell us in what context it's going to come up at
the G-7?
BURNS: Yes. On your first question, we're obviously certainly aware of
the announcement by the Turkish Government this week. We've been in
close touch with the Turkish Government to determine the details of
the announcement so that we can determine whether or not this action
and other actions would constitute any kind of violation of the
Iran-Libya Sanctions Act.
The United States has not determined that this particular action or
any other by the Government of Turkey would trigger sanctions under
the Iran-Libya Act, but we continue to look at this issue, and we'll
keep it under review.
On the second question, I'll have to check for you. I'm not completely
aware of all the working groups that have been put together for the
G-7 summit, but that should be fairly easy to find out.
Q: Do you expect it to come up, though, at the G-7?
BURNS: Do we expect it to come up in Denver?
Q: Yes.
BURNS: It's probably too far in advance to predict all the issues that
will be discussed in Denver. I know that most of the time that we get
together with the Europeans, Helms-Burton and ILSA tend to be raised
in the conversation.
Q: Your statement about Kosovo, what exactly --
BURNS: Mr. Lambros, Sid wants to stay on this question. Then we'll go
to you.
Q: Just to clarify the review of this transaction. You're saying that
you determined that at this point in the review you've determined it
does not violate U.S. law, but that you're going to continue looking
at it? You've sort of finished a phase of the review, and you're
passing judgment on it, or is it an ongoing process, and you'll have a
final decision in a couple of weeks?
BURNS: I'm glad you asked, because I don't want anyone to be confused
by this. We have asked the Turkish Government to give us additional
information, additional to the announcement this week, so that we can
understand in the fullest possible way one of the dimensions of this
new activity underway with Turkmenistan and Iran and other countries
this pipeline deal in Central Asia. So that's an ongoing process.
We do not have all the information that we probably need to have on
that particular deal. That's number one.
Number two, we have not determined to date, as of April 4, 1997, that
Turkey's actions and initiatives are in violation, but we'll obviously
keep this whole issue under review.
Q: Would it be fair to say you can't pass judgment until you get
additional information?
BURNS: I think it's fair to say that we are seeking additional
information.
Q: I don't understand how come you still lack some information on this
transaction. Is Turkish Government not cooperating enough in getting
the details?
BURNS: I don't mean to infer that in any way. The Turkish Government's
been very cooperative with the United States, but they just announced
what was it, two days ago, three days ago? -- publicly the dimensions
of at least the Turkish participation in this international pipeline,
and we were intrigued by the announcement and simply wanted to know
more. But we find excellent cooperation with the Turkish Government.
Q: But your review has been going on for many months.
BURNS: Yes, it has.
Q: And, secondly, can you tell me if there are any other transactions
or companies or countries that are being reviewed under the plan now?
BURNS: I'd have to check. ILSA is a fairly broad law, as you know, and
it does cover a lot of different countries and activities. I'd have to
check. That's a good question.
Q: Yes. On your long statement about Kosovo today, what exactly do you
expect from Serbia to do for the Kosovars since you were very
disappointed from the Serbian policy so far?
BURNS: I think I explained that. We expect better Serbian Government
treatment of the Kosovar population an end to police brutality, an end
to discrimination against the Kosovar population, the ability of the
Kosovars to participate freely and equally and fully in the political
and economic life of Serbia-Montenegro. These have been long-standing
American concerns and in part one of the reasons why we've maintained
the outer wall of sanctions on the Serbian Government is because in
part our dissatisfaction with the Serbian Government's actions towards
the Kosovar population.
Q: If the Albanians will move to the independence or the autonomous
status, then what is your position?
BURNS: We've been very clear that the United States does not support
separatism or an independent Kosovo. Kosovo is part of
Serbia-Montenegro. But we do support the enhancement and the
fulfillment of the basic rights that all Kosovars should have in the
larger country, Serbia-Montenegro.
Q: And for the upcoming music and dance festival on Imia, May 25th,
organized by the Greek magazine Nemesis, could you please confirm
information today that your Embassy in Athens asked the Greek
Government not to allow this event to take place in order to protect
the status quo ante of the islet?
BURNS: I will check on whether or not the United States Embassy in
Athens made such a demarche. I do not know if they did. But I'd be
intrigued to know what kind of rock groups you signed up for this
concert? It's such a small it's about the size of the State
Department, I think, Imia-Kardak.
Q: The last time it's big enough --
BURNS: How many rock musicians and how many people can you fit on
Imia?
Q: (Inaudible) But it's enough to have an event, something like that.
One more question. It was reported at the State Department the British
proposed behind the scenes the name, "Republic of Macedonia-Skopje"
for FYROM at the U.N. the other day. I'm wondering then why the State
Department did not propose another appropriate name like "Republic of
Skopje-Macedonia" for the final solution to the problem.
BURNS: You know, Mr. Lambros, that's a very sensitive issue the issue
of the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, and I don't think it's
appropriate for me to speculate on some of the private discussions
that are underway to resolve that problem. But we want to resolve it.
We support the efforts of the U.N. and others to do so. In the
meantime, we have our excellent American Ambassador, Chris Hill, in
Skopje, who followed the tragedy of last night's Red Sox loss to the
Angels, 2-0. I'm sure he was listening on VOA.
Q: Have you commented yet on this agreement between Russia and
Belarus, and, if not, could you do so now?
BURNS: Oh, I think we've had a few things to say, basically that we
are not reflexively opposed to efforts to bring two countries
together, but we do believe any such process should be voluntary; that
it should reflect the mutual wishes of the peoples of both countries;
that the people should have an opportunity to express themselves; that
the resulting union or, if you want to call it that, does not draw new
lines in Europe, is not divisive at a time when we're trying to unify
Europe.
That's been our basic view. Obviously, we have great respect for the
Russian Federation, which is a free and democratic country. It's hard
to join those words, however "free and democratic" to Belarus, and
there has been a significant amount of action by the Belarusian
Government over the last couple of weeks to deny basic human rights to
the people protesting in Minsk, to the media which is being subjugated
by the government in Belarus. That's why we have this policy of
selective engagement with Belarus. We want the Belarusian Government
of Mr. Lukashenko to understand how profoundly concerned we are by its
anti-democratic demeanor.
Q: Can I go back to northern Iraq. This morning Iraq Government
protested United States and the United States diplomat, saying that
they entered Iraq territory without visas. Do you have a comment on
that?
BURNS: I'm sorry, but Mr. Saddam Hussein gave up his right to check
visas at the door in August 1990 when he invaded Kuwait. Northern Iraq
is a place where we seek to protect the Turkmans and Assyrians and
Kurds from the perfidies of Saddam Hussein. He doesn't have any right
to object to American diplomats in northern Iraq, because he is a
violator of the human rights of those people. So I think the Baghdad
regime ought to just concentrate itself on the real problems of its
country. They've got suffering people. They have women and children in
centers in Baghdad that can't be adequately fed, because they're too
busy spending money to enrich the Saddam Hussein family itself.
Q: Any progress on Zaire, getting food --
BURNS: I think we want to just stick on this for a minute. Then we
need to go to Zaire, because there has been a development today.
Q: How does the Administration reconcile this idea that Saddam
Hussein, Baghdad's regime, cannot check visas at the door and the
respect for territorial integrity of Iraq?
BURNS: We respect the territorial integrity of the State of Iraq, and
we wish to see Iraq preserved as a nation-state in the Middle East. We
do not respect the Saddam Hussein Government which started a war,
which led to the deaths of many people, which violates the human
rights of its own people. There's a very clear distinction there.
Saddam Hussein is being contained. He's not a normal person. He's not
being treated like a normal person or a normal leader. He is being
subjected to international containment, and that will continue, and
the U.N. sanctions will continue because the United States will make
sure they do.
Q: Did you get any cooperation from the Zairian rebels on getting food
into Kisangani, thereabouts?
BURNS: I can tell you that I believe we just heard today that the
International Committee of the Red Cross has received permission from
the rebel alliance to airlift Zairian citizens these are internally
displaced Zairians from Kisangani to Goma, and the operation is
expected to begin shortly.
These are Zairians. But a great many of the affected people who are in
danger of starvation and certainly malnourishment, but also
starvation, are Rwandan Hutu refugees. The UNHCR and ICRC have not yet
been given permission for these people to leave.
So again we've called upon Mr. Kabila and the rebel alliance. We call
upon him again today to give that permission, so that the United
States can help fund this effort to bring the people out of Kisangani,
from the two sites south of Kisangani where they have collected.
The only good news I can give you is that for the first time just over
the last couple of days the relief agencies have been able to reach
these people. But, as you know, we believe that at least 50 people
died at Lula last weekend, and there's a very disturbing report from
the Spokesman of the U.N. High Commissioner for Refugees today that
they believe that at least a minimum of 120 people per day are dying
in the refugee camps.
Surely, it's in the interest of the rebels to allow humanitarian
access to these people. The United States has provided $3 million to
fly these people out, 20-30,000 of them, to Goma and to other
countries, so that they can be cared for and their lives can be saved.
We do implore Mr. Kabila to allow this access.
I would also note that the European Union, along with the UNHCR, the
World Food Program and UNICEF, issued a joint appeal today to the
rebel alliance. This was led by Mrs. Emma Bonino, the EU Commissioner
for Humanitarian Aid a joint appeal to allow international access to
these people.
The United States has been issuing the same appeal for the last 48
hours. We issue it again today. We'd like to join the efforts of the
European Union and others and to implore the rebels to meet these
concerns.
At the same time, we're aware that the Zairian Government and the
rebels have agreed to meet this weekend in Pretoria, in South Africa,
under the leadership of the U.N. negotiator, Mohammed Sahnoun, and we
wish these talks well. We hope they can lead to greater political
stability in Zaire, to a cease-fire, an end to the fighting, and, of
course, we support the territorial integrity of Zaire. That goes
without question throughout this process.
Q: A follow-up. Many of these Rwandan Hutus might have been involved
in the genocide that are now at risk of dying?
BURNS: I think it's clear that some of the people who participated in
the genocide of 1994 remain Rwandan Hutu refugees Rwandan refugees in
Zaire. That's very clear. But we're talking here about well over
100,000 people.
Most of these people are innocent civilians who found themselves in
the middle of a civil war. They've been denied international aid
because the rebels won't let the aid get in. We do know that people
are dying. So we have to act quickly. The United States fully supports
the U.N. and we're funding this operation to bring these people out by
air.
Q: You mentioned that relief workers were able to reach some of the
refugees?
BURNS: That's right.
Q: Was that under the protection of Kabila's troops? Or they just
looked the other way, or what?
BURNS: As I said, the only positive news I can give you is that the
relief agencies have reached some of these refugee collection points.
Just today, there's permission to bring out the Zairian citizens. We
need permission to bring out the Rwandan citizens and the other
African citizens who are affected by this.
Q: I want to go back to the very beginning of the press conference I
mean, the briefing in regards to the sale or the possible sale or the
review of possible sale of planes to Latin America.
Is it your view that the region is much more stable now and that there
would be no danger in doing so? And (2), you said that it could be
reviewed on a case-by-case basis. In the past, since the restriction
was put into effect in the Seventies, has there been any sale of those
type of planes?
BURNS: Of advanced fighter aircraft?
Q: Yes.
BURNS: I'd have to check. I know there's been sale of conventional
military weaponry of different sorts. I'd have to check if there's
been any sale of advanced fighter aircraft on the second question.
On the first question, I think it's implicit in our remarks that we've
not completed our review of our conventional arms transfer policy.
Therefore, we've not changed the policy. The policy exists. It's one
of restraint of weapon sales to the Latin countries.
One more question.
Q: Yesterday, you declined to answer questions about these reports in
the New York Times that the FBI has not had access to the Saudi being
held in Canada. But this is a different angle. Next week, the Canadian
Prime Minister is going to be here, Mr. Chretien. It sounds like this
is going to come up. Can you comment on how this might come up during
the meeting?
BURNS: Yes, I can just say that we're looking forward to the visit of
Prime Minister Chretien. Canada is our closest ally, our largest
trading partner. I think the President and the Prime Minister and the
others meeting will want to underline our very strong bilateral
relationship; one billion dollars in trade everyday; 200 million
people per year cross the border. It's an extraordinary relationship.
We're going to have a lot of issues to discuss bilateral issues, trade
issues, some species protection issues, environmental issues, European
security, and certainly the issue that you referred to. I think
they'll all be raised.
We're very pleased and satisfied with our discussions with the
Canadian Government on the issue of the Saudi citizen who is being
held by the Government of Canada. It's an important issue. We
Americans certainly because 19 of our soldiers died at Khobar are
determined to find the people who killed them.
But I can't comment specifically on this man who is being held by the
Canadians. It's an issue that we prefer to discuss privately with the
Canadian Government.
(###)
|
