U.S. Department of State Daily Press Briefing #61, 97-04-24
From: The Department of State Foreign Affairs Network (DOSFAN) at <http://www.state.gov>
1194
U.S. Department of State
Daily Press Briefing
I N D E X
Thursday, April 24, 1997
Briefer: Nicholas Burns
ANNOUNCEMENTS
1,9 Welcome to Visitors and Sons and Daughters of State
Dept. Employees
2-3,8 Secretary Albright's Meeting with Vice Premier/FM Qian Qichen
3,4,6,20 --Upcoming Travel to Russia and Latin America
3 --Activities in Support of Chemical Weapons Convention Vote
3-4 --Comments on Reorganization of the State Department
4 --Meeting with the Dalai Lama this Afternoon
4 --Meeting with Susanna Agnelli, Election Fundraiser for the OSCE
in Bosnia, and Announcement of Financial Support
4 Statement on Behalf of Co-Chairman of the Monitoring Group
NATO ENLARGEMENT
4-7 Status of NATO-Russia Agreement
7,9-10 Status of Romania and Other Possible New NATO Member Countries
9-10 Secretary's Meeting with Slovak FM Hamzik: Discussion of NATO
Candidacy; Czech-Slovak Relations
CHINA
6,8 U.S. Views on Tibetan Quest for Autonomy
13-14 Transit Visa for Taiwanese President Mr. Lee Teng-hui
15-16 Jiang-Yeltsin Meeting and Border Treaties Signed with Russia and
Central Asian Republics
CUBA
11-12 Planned Foreign Investment Agreement Between France and Cuba
AFGHANISTAN
12 Reports of Taleban Destruction of Sacred Statues of Buddha
12-13 U.S. Contacts with Taleban Officials
13 Possible Taleban Links to Narcotics Trafficking
JAPAN
16 Visit of PM Hashimoto
16 Food Aid to North Korea
NORTH KOREA
16 No Link Between Humanitarian Food Aid and Four Party Talks
AL KHOBAR BOMBING
16-17 Extradition of Mr. Sayegh from Canada
BOSNIA/SERBIA
17-19 President Izetbegovic's Letter to Clinton on Dayton Accords
Implementation
MEXICO
19-20 Effectiveness of Counter Narcotics Efforts
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE
DAILY PRESS BRIEFING
DPB #61
THURSDAY, APRIL 24, 1997 1:07P.M.
(ON THE RECORD UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED)
MR. BURNS: Good afternoon. Welcome to the State Department briefing.
We have a lot of guests with us today, and I want to recognize those guests
because it's a very special day here at the State Department.
First, we have three Ukrainian journalists visiting under the USIS
International Visitors Program: Natalia Mychailivna Barynova, who's the
anchor and commentator on National Television of Ukraine; Vyacheslav
Kononchuk, the deputy editor of Internews, the Ukrainian independent TV
company; and Olena Zerniak, the acting director and editor UTAR TV
production studio. Welcome to all of you.
We have the Slovak Embassy press counselor here, Juraj Sivacek.
From the Bureau of Public Affairs, we have Lorena Gonzalez, a student at
Maryland's Montgomery College, a member of our Press Office, and her cousin,
Cristina Aguilera from Paint Branch High School.
I have very good friends of mine from Boston, Joan and Ann Greene, Red Sox
fans to the core, who are here with us, visiting the nation's capital.
Welcome.
A special welcome to all the kids here. We have a lot of kids here who are
visiting with their parents today. Today is Take Your Daughter, and son,
To Work Day here at the Department of State. Secretary Albright met a
group of about 30 or so kids this morning. She spoke to them about the
importance about women believing the central truth of our times; and that
is that girls really are better than boys. (Laughter.) Isn't that right,
girls?
Do all of you girls here agree with that? Right?
The Secretary addressed them. We have, I think, a couple of hundred kids
here today throughout the building. The Department is organizing a number
of programs for them. I want to introduce some of our special guests,
starting right over here with Emily Klosson, who's the daughter of Mike
Klosson. Emily, welcome.
Emily is ten and goes to Flower Valley Elementary School. We have Megan
and Christopher White, the niece and nephew of Laura Byergo in the
Economics Bureau; and they go to Park Side Middle and Elementary Schools.
Right over here, terrific, nice to have you here.
We have Brandi Ward, a student at Sherando High School in Virginia.
She's the daughter of Glen Ward from our Bureau of Public Affairs.
Nice to see you, right over there. We have India Murray, a student at
Oxon Hill High School, the daughter of Christine Murray. India, are you
here? Right there. Thanks for coming. We have Kristin Rogus, Kristin.
We have a big contingent from Vienna, Virginia.
Kristin goes to Thoreau Middle School. She's here with her father, Dave
Rogus.
Then we have some young ladies sitting over here. I'd like to introduce
them. The first lady is Elizabeth Burns. She goes to Louise Archer
Elementary School. Elizabeth, why don't you stand up? (Laughter.)
She's 11. She is a big Red Sox fan, right Elizabeth?
MISS BURNS: No.
(Laughter and applause.)
MR. BURNS: You missed your cue. Well, who do you root for, if you
don't root for the Red Sox?
MISS BURNS: Orioles.
(Laughter.)
MR. BURNS: The Orioles? See, we've got to move the entire family back
to Boston. That's enough, Elizabeth.
(Laughter.)
We have Sarah Burns, Sarah, a 13-year-old from Thoreau Middle School in
Vienna, right? We have Devon Simmons, who's a friend of theirs, also from
Thoreau.
So girls, guys, thanks for coming. You don't have to stay throughout the
whole briefing if you get really bored.
QUESTION: Can we leave too?
(Laughter.)
MR. BURNS: Hey, listen, if you leave, I'll leave.
QUESTION: Are you all going to make available copies of the photo op
with the Secretary and these young girls?
MR. BURNS: We'd be very pleased to do that. Yes, there was a photo
with the Secretary this morning. She gave a really nice speech to all the
girls and a couple of the sons of people who are here today. Anyway,
welcome to all of you. Now, down to business.
The Secretary has a very busy travel schedule coming up, and I wanted to
go through that with you. First, you know that next week the Chinese
Foreign Minister Qian Qichen will be here in Washington for meetings with
the Secretary on Monday - a meeting in the afternoon, a dinner in the
evening. Minister Qichen also has meetings, I believe, over at the White
House and at the Pentagon throughout that week. That is an important visit
because we need to discuss with the Chinese leadership, with Minister
Qichen, the full range of U.S.-Chinese issues following up the Secretary's
visit to Beijing in February.
Second, as I said yesterday, the Secretary will be traveling to Moscow
next week. She'll be leaving on Wednesday. She'll arrive Thursday
morning. She will have meetings with Minister Primakov on Thursday and
then will leave Moscow for Washington on Friday.
This meeting is designed to have the Secretary and Minister Primakov
discuss the latest issues in our efforts to bring about a NATO-Russia
charter or a document to define our relationship with Russia into the
future. I don't believe that this visit will result in a final agreement
on that issue. We expect, however, that we might be able to make some
progress, move the ball forward towards an eventual agreement, we hope by
the end of May. That is a very important visit by the Secretary.
Now, the Secretary will be back on, as I said, Friday from Moscow.
Then on Sunday, May 4th, the Secretary will make a trip to Guatemala that
will focus on showing support for that nation's ongoing peace process,
including the successful demobilization of 3,000 former guerrillas. The
visit will also demonstrate recognition of the commitment to peace and the
internal reforms of President Arzu.
She will then travel on to Mexico that evening, the evening of Sunday, May
4th. She'll be in Mexico ahead of the President for about 36 hours. She
will be leading the United States delegation to the Bi-National Commission
Meetings. As you know, we meet annually. Last year, I think we had ten or
eleven Cabinet secretaries and agency heads on both sides - ten or eleven
on each side, excuse me. She will lead the U.S. delegation.
That is a full review of our relationship with Mexico on everything from
narcotics to border problems to environmental issues to regional trade
issues in advance of the President's visit to Mexico. She will then join
the President on his trip to Mexico, Costa Rica and Barbados. She will be
returning to the United States with the President on Saturday, May 10th.
So that's an important visit that I wanted to let you know about.
Now, in addition to that, the Secretary today, of course, has spent a lot
of time thinking about, talking about the Chemical Weapons Convention
ratification. We are going down the wire obviously on this. The President,
the Vice President, the Secretary of State, the Secretary of Defense and
many others in Washington are all working on this. She is making some last-
minute calls, and we are very hopeful for Senate ratification, although it
is going down to the wire; and we need to keep working at it.
This morning the Secretary addressed the senior staff meeting, which
included all our assistant secretaries in the building.
She talked to them about the issue of reorganization of the foreign
affairs agencies, She said that she believed that this is a huge and
important step forward for the Executive Branch of our government.
Certainly now, we will look towards integrating public diplomacy, arms
control and security issues into one agency over the next three years. We
will have a much tighter relationship, closer relationship with AID. She
really appealed to all of us in the room to approach this creatively,
flexibly and with a certain degree of hope that along with an internal
reorganization of the State Department, we are going to have a leaner and
more efficient State Department in the next two to three years.
Now, this afternoon, the Secretary, of course, will see the Dalai Lama.
You know he'll be here at the State Department in just about an hour to
discuss human rights and religious rights issues with our committee on -
our advisory group on religious freedom.
The Secretary's going to stop by that meeting. She will have a pull-aside
in another room, meeting with the Dalai Lama. We are going to have an
official photographer there. We'll be glad to release that photo to any of
you who would like that.
Now, in addition to that, the Secretary just met at 11:30 a.m. this
morning with Susanna Agnelli who, as you know, is the former Foreign
Minister of Italy. They had a very good meeting together.
Mrs. Agnelli has agreed to be the fundraiser, the international fundraiser
for the OSCE mission in Bosnia-Herzegovina. That mission is supervising
the upcoming municipal elections in Bosnia. The Secretary thanked Mrs.
Agnelli for taking on that responsibility.
More importantly, the Secretary pledged that the United States would now
give an additional $3.3 million to the OSCE's voluntary fund to support
those elections.
This follows on the $5 million pledge that the United States has already
made. We have contributed 55 American government personnel to be socconded
to the OSCE mission in Bosnia to help organize that election. We've
recruited 158 American volunteers to form the staff of those who will be
particularly in a lot of the small towns and cities throughout Bosnia and
Herzegovina.
This is a very important pledge. It represents, I think, the deep
commitment that the United States has to making sure that the Dayton
Process works and succeeds. We certainly hope that all of us around the
world will be able to meet the OSCE's target of $50 million. The United
States has done it's share.
In addition to that last issue that I had for you, we are issuing a public
statement today on behalf of the co-chairmen of the monitoring group; that
is the monitoring group that looks at problems on the Lebanon-Israel
border. There was a recent complaint brought by Israel to the monitoring
group about an incident that took place. The group met on April 23rd
- yesterday - and the statement describes the outcome, the verdict of the
monitoring group.
And with that, Barry, welcome back to you.
QUESTION: Thank you. Nick, you said the charter will not be ready. I
assume it's still a charter. It will not be ready - I assume it's not
still legally binding. What's holding it up? Or is it just a matter of
trying to have dramatic timing?
MR. BURNS: I don't think there's anything in particular that's holding
it up. It is a very important document. It's quite complex. It is taking
time to work out because, I think, it represents so much for NATO. It's
such a big step forward for NATO and for Russia.
The process will be that we'll continue to have bilateral meetings - the
French and the Germans, the Americans, the Brits, and others - with the
Russians. But the central negotiator for NATO is Secretary General Solana.
He will have a meeting with Minister Primakov, I believe, just a couple of
days after Secretary Albright has her meeting with Foreign Minister
Primakov.
What we hope is that President Yeltsin's assessment when he met Chancellor
Kohl last week will turn out to be accurate. And that is that we'll be
able to complete the negotiations sometime in May for signing late in May,
while the President is in Europe for the 50th anniversary celebration of
the Marshall Plan. We'd be very pleased to do that. If it's not possible
to complete the negotiations in May, we'd certainly be willing to complete
them any time thereafter.
But I do want to remind you that no matter what happens on the NATO-Russia
negotiations, we are going forward to Madrid and we will be announcing the
enlargement of NATO and the new countries who will be invited to take part
in that, regardless of what happens on the NATO-Russia front.
QUESTION: You said various bilateral meetings. Basically - not basically,
is that it as far as you know? There's no group meeting? Remember the old
French idea and all? That's it now.
It's going to be --
MR. BURNS: Right, the schedule in Moscow will be the Secretary meeting
with Foreign Minister Primakov. I don't believe that President Yeltsin
will be in Moscow on the two days or the day and a half that we're there.
So the meetings will really be with the foreign minister and perhaps some
other senior officials of the government.
QUESTION: There's going to be no group, you know, Americans, Germans,
French, British?
MR. BURNS: Not that week, no.
QUESTION: Or any time before May that you can see?
MR. BURNS: Oh, it's just hard to --
QUESTION: Or the end of May?
MR. BURNS: I don't want to close off any options. I'm not aware of any
plans for a group meeting, but I don't want to foreclose the option should
it be necessary.
QUESTION: Okay.
MR. BURNS: Charlie.
QUESTION: (Inaudible) - same thing as this trip?
Is it just Washington, Moscow, back to Washington? Is there any other
stop?
MR. BURNS: That's right. Leave, I think, mid to late afternoon on
Wednesday, arrive in Moscow Thursday morning - full day of meetings,
perhaps a couple of meetings Friday morning, leave about noon, and back
here late Friday afternoon; so a very, very quick visit. As you know,
Foreign Minister Primakov has been in the hospital. The Secretary is very
pleased to travel that distance because this is very important. She feels
the need to continue to work with him.
They have developed a very good working relationship. They talk on the
phone. They correspond frequently. They've had a couple of very good
meetings. She feels that she needs to work directly with him on this very
important issue. It's arguably the most important foreign policy challenge
that we have after this evening, when we hope the Senate will ratify the
Chemical Weapons Convention.
Yes.
QUESTION: Does the Secretary agree with the Dalai Lama's demands for
greater autonomy for Tibet?
MR. BURNS: The position of the United States for a long, long time, I
think going back to well before the Chinese Revolution in 1949, is that we
consider Tibet to be part of China.
What we have encouraged is a direct dialogue between the Dalai Lama and
his supporters and the Chinese government officials.
We think that's important. What we are particularly concerned about is
the issue of religious rights in Tibet. We would hope that the religious
and cultural traditions of Tibet can be preserved.
We have been concerned by many of the encroachments on the Tibetan people,
particularly in the religious and cultural fields by the Chinese Government.
We have noted them publicly for many, many years in our human rights
report.
I think the central message the Secretary has today is the message that
President Clinton had yesterday. We will continue to push for an opening
of a dialogue. It's not for the United States to decide whether or not -
what the relationship between the Dalai Lama and the Chinese Government
should be. That ought to be worked out directly between him and the
Chinese Government.
QUESTION: Nick, let's go back to the NATO thing for a moment. Instead
of going through a checklist with you because we'll speak partly in code
here, all the - all the - what should I say, features - positive and
negative, meaning what's not in it and what's in it, are as we know it?
There have been no radical changes made in preparing the Charter?
MR. BURNS: No, and I --
QUESTION: It's still not legally binding?
MR. BURNS: Right.
QUESTION: It's an oral promise by the leaders of whatever - of the
allied leaders that they will - that NATO doesn't menace Russia or
something like that - the nuclear thing remains, et cetera. As we left it
in Helsinki --
MR. BURNS: Well, Barry, I don't want to go through a checklist like
this either.
QUESTION: No, no --
MR. BURNS: But I can just tell you my own appreciation of the current
state of the negotiations is that we are pretty much where we thought we
would be.
QUESTION: Right.
MR. BURNS: The discussions now, of course, are flowing out of the
Helsinki meeting, where President Clinton and President Yeltsin agreed on
the direction in which they want to move. I don't think there have been
any surprises for the United States or our NATO partners.
Secretary Albright and Secretary Cohen gave three hours of testimony
yesterday on this, very specific testimony. The Secretary talked about
what we can and cannot do to reach an agreement. We hope to have an
agreement, but we are not willing to anything to get agreement. You know
that.
QUESTION: Do you know if they happened to touch on infrastructure?
MR. BURNS: Oh, there was - yes, there was specific discussion of all
those issues yesterday. Yes.
QUESTION: Also on NATO enlargement. The Romanian foreign minister held
a news conference this morning, and he said that he was not successful in
winning support by the United States Government for Romania's inclusion in
the first wave of new members.
One, is that - is he assessing it correctly? And, two, has the United
States made up its mind which applicants it will support on the first
wave?
MR. BURNS: Jim, Foreign Minister Severin had a very good visit here,
and Secretary Albright enjoyed her meeting with him.
I want to be clear about one thing. The United States Government has not
told any country privately you're in, you're in, or you're out, and we
haven't said that publicly. We have not yet made a decision in this
government for what our position will be I believe in late May, early June
when NATO must sit down at Sixteen to make this final decision.
We are one of the few governments in NATO that has done this.
Most of the NATO countries have publicly said they support this country or
that country and don't support this country or that country. We have not
done that. We prefer to have private discussions with the Romanians, the
Czechs, the Poles, the Hungarians, the Bulgarians, the Slovenes, the
Russians, the Estonians, the Latvians, Lithuanians, any number of countries
about their interest in membership - or lack of interest in membership.
Then at some point, late spring, early summer we will sit down at Sixteen
and we will make that decision. We gave no positive or negative signal to
Romania this week, privately or publicly, and I think that does distinguish
us in the field a little bit.
The reason we are doing that is because this is a very important decision.
Several countries will be admitted - the exact number has not yet been
determined. This is still an open decision that NATO must make.
But I do want to put the accent on the positive here. Minister Severin is
a very impressive man. Romania has made dramatic positive changes for the
better in its political and economic direction over the last year,
particularly over the last couple of months since their elections, and we
were very impressed with the Romanian delegation.
I just want to make sure I didn't cut you off. Did you have a chance to --
QUESTION: I'd like to do a follow-up to that. Is the Secretary going to
bring up the issue of Tibet with Qian Qichen next week?
MR. BURNS: Excuse me, the Tibetan issue with --
QUESTION: Qian Qichen.
MR. BURNS: Qian Qichen. The Tibet issue is raised at almost every high-
level meeting with the Chinese --
QUESTION: Did she raise it when she was in China?
MR. BURNS: Yes, she did. The Secretary always raises -- Secretary
Albright and Secretary Christopher before her -- always raises human rights
issues with the Chinese leadership and that includes Tibet, where we have a
number of very strong concerns that the religious rights of the Tibetan
people are not being - the Tibetan Buddhists -- are not being respected by
the Chinese Government. So it's certainly part of our ongoing discussions
with the Chinese leadership. I would image that would be on the agenda for
next week.
QUESTION: Nick, on NATO?
MR. BURNS: I just want to make sure we haven't cut --
QUESTION: We can wait. We can just finish --
MR. BURNS: Let's wait. I should just take a moment just to - Bob, I
know you just walked in late. You have a young lady with you. Do you want
to introduce her to us.
QUESTION: My daughter, Emily Deans.
MR. BURNS: Emily, welcome. We have a lot of our kids here today. I
think you are the only daughter or son of a journalist here, if I'm not
mistaken. It's nice to see the Fourth Estate represented. Are you a
basketball player, Emily? Are you the basketball player?
MISS DEANS: Yes.
MR. BURNS: I know your dad coaches, right? That's terrific.
Did you have a good season this year.
MISS DEANS: Yes, we were totally undefeated.
(Laughter.)
MR. BURNS: Totally undefeated? That's awesome. That's terrific. All
right. Ron.
QUESTION: Did the Secretary give negative reaction to the Slovakians
yesterday because of their political problems?
MR. BURNS: Well, the Secretary met yesterday with the foreign minister
of the Slovak Republic, Pavol Hamzik, and they had a good discussion of
bilateral issues. The Slovaks, of course, are interested in integrating
into NATO, into the EU, into the OECD. Minister Hamzik raised Slovakia's
candidacy for NATO, and he emphasized his government's commitment to build
democracy and to integrate Slovakia westward.
The Secretary, in the meeting, took note of the economic progress that had
been made inside Slovakia since Slovakian independence in 1992. But she
also noted that the United States does have considerable concerns about the
democratic evolution of the Slovak Republic, and that we would continue to
want to discuss that with the Slovak leadership. She urged him and she
urged the Slovak Government to take concrete steps to pass a minority
language law and to give opposition members a greater chance of being
represented in the life of the government and certainly to work on the
issue of media and press freedoms, where there have been a number
of problems within Slovakia itself.
So I do want to make sure that you have an understanding of the full
breadth of that meeting. We did note a number of concerns that we have,
along with some of the positive aspects of our own relationship with
Slovakia.
QUESTION: Is there an economic test to NATO membership, as there is a
democracy test?
MR. BURNS: Well, I think in general, as you know, broadly speaking,
without quoting from the Partnership For Peace documents, NATO members
ought to be similar in their governing structure and in what they believe
and in what they practice to the NATO - potential members - to NATO members
who are currently inside the alliance; that is liberal democracies with
liberal market economies -- democracies committed to human rights, to
shared power, to civilian control of the military, and to respect
the borders of their neighbors.
Now, one of the very interesting byproducts of the NATO enlargement process
is to see Ukraine and Poland and Hungary and Romania and some of the Baltic
countries - Estonia and Russia - try to resolve some of the border problems
that have existed for the greater part of a century or more, but particularly
those that have arisen in this century after the collapse of both the
German and the Austria-Hungarian empires after the first world war. So
that's been a very positive byproduct of our effort to enlarge NATO.
But that in general, Barry, is what we're looking for.
QUESTION: Even though Slovakia is trailing by yards and yards behind the
Czech Republic since the split, economically, the concern she registered
was on the democracy front, not on the economic front.
MR. BURNS: That's right because the Slovak Republic -
QUESTION: They have a free market economy.
MR. BURNS: The Slovak Republic has made some impressive steps economically,
but they've lagged behind almost all of their neighbors -- not just the
Czech Republic, but the Hungarians, the Poles, the Balts -- on the issue of
democratization, internal democratization. Yes.
QUESTION: Was the current tension between the Czech Republic and Slovakia
also subject of discussion?
MR. BURNS: That came up in the meeting. It also came up in the meeting
that the Secretary had with Foreign Minister Zieleniec last week, the Czech
Foreign Minister. I said at the time, and we firmly believe this, that we
hope very much that we hope very much that the Czech and Slovak Republics
might resolve their bilateral problems. But we don't believe that the
existence of those particular problems are going to undercut the efforts
of either country to integrate themselves westward.
In the case of the Czech Republic, it should not be an impediment at all to
the Czech Republic's wish to integrate itself into European institutions.
Yes.
QUESTION: Can I - well, no, there are others.
MR. BURNS: Whatever you want to do, Barry.
QUESTION: Well, I want to ask - I think you can polish this up with a
quick son of a gun. The French agreement with Cuba, the trade agreement, I
don't suppose you're happy about that.
MR. BURNS: This is the agreement for --
QUESTION: The trade agreement.
MR. BURNS: The trade agreement, yes.
QUESTION: The French say it's not a provocation, they just have to look
after their business interests. That's not a unique position.
MR. BURNS: The United States has a very clear position.
We have had one for 37 years. We have an economic boycott in place on
Cuba. We believe that's the right policy. We do not favor any other
countries normalizing their economic relations with Cuba.
But what we prefer to do, Barry, and particularly with the European Union
members, I turn our joint attention on the human rights situation in Cuba.
We hope that the French Government, while it's taking this step economically
will also remain active in the fight for human rights in Cuba. We have an
agreement with the European Union that we're going to focus on that issue
together.
We hope that the French involvement will be multifaceted, not just
economic, but they'll call 'em as they see 'em and they'll be objective
when it comes to ascertaining the problems that the Cuban Government has
had in treatment of its own people.
Castro is a major human rights violator. He jails his opponents for very
long sentences. He cracks down on the press. He is the remaining autocrat
in our hemisphere. The French ought to be focused on that as well.
QUESTION: I think this is a somewhat more benign reaction than the
Canadians business with Cuba. The French, who just dealt you a blow on
China in Geneva - what is your hope that France will carry the banner of
human rights? What's it based on?
MR. BURNS: Barry, I think the reaction today is --
QUESTION: (Inaudible.)
MR. BURNS: -- in my own view, is completely consistent with our reaction
to the Canadian visit and agreement earlier.
We are very skeptical that Castro is going to change his stripes.
Now, we continue to hear from a lot of countries around the world, well,
if we just engage with him, if we trade with him, if we give him the time
of day and invite him to international meetings, he's going to change.
Our view is, he's in his seventies; he led a revolution in the 1950s; he's
ruled Cuba for one way for 37, 38 years; he's a dictator.
That's all he knows. He follows Communist political and economic
practices. They have a failed economy. He does not brook any opposition
in his own country. This guy's not going to change his stripes in the
latter part of his life. He's an older man in his seventies.
What we hope is that the younger generation coming up in Cuba -- people in
their twenties and thirties and forties - are going to look towards the
United States and towards Europe and see what can happen when you allow
democracy and liberal economics to be the life of your country. Certainly
the Cuban people are not well off right now. Yes, Betsy.
QUESTION: I've been asked to ask a question on Afghanistan.
The Taliban are threatening to destroy two large 14th Century statues of
Buddha, which the Sri Lankans consider sacred.
They are evidently very exercised about this, and the U.N. has also gotten
involved in this. Has the State Department weighed in on this at all? Are
you aware of this?
MR. BURNS: I have heard about this. I don't know if, in our discussions
with the Taliban, we have mentioned this. I can check on that and get back
to you. But in general, I can say this, we have urged the Taliban, in all
of our diplomatic contacts with them, to be more broad-minded and certainly
more inclusive in the way that they attempt to govern Afghanistan.
We do not recognize the Taliban as the legal government of Afghanistan,
nor any of the other factions.
But we're very concerned about the policies, the internal policies of the
Taliban, which are intolerant of differences that characterize Afghanistan -
intolerant of other ethnic groups, intolerant of women and young girls.
They have kicked young girls out of the schools. They have kicked women
out of the workplace. It is one of the most discriminatory places on
earth towards women.
Our message to the Taliban is, you can't hope to have a normal relationship
with the United States as long as you openly discriminate against other
ethnic groups, other religions and against women the way you do.
QUESTION: Would you check and see on whether -
MR. BURNS: I am certainly going to take the question and see if we have
raised that particular issue with the Taliban but we do have on going
contacts with them, as you know.
QUESTION: When do you meet with the Taliban, and how often?
MR. BURNS: We've met with the Taliban inside Afghanistan . We've met
with the Taliban in Pakistan. We've met with the Taliban in Washington,
D.C. They had a group here I believe, John, about a month or two ago.
They had a Taliban group here in New York and Washington. We met with them
then.
We haven't tried to boycott them. They are the largest and most effective
fighting force right now in Afghanistan so, therefore, we're going to
continue to talk to them. But talking to them doesn't mean that we agree
with them. We disagree with them on many issues. We just hope that the
Taliban and the other ethnic groups, the other fighting groups will at some
point agree to lay down their arms and try to resolve their problems
peacefully, because we're going on 19 years now, Afghanistan has been
in civil war.
QUESTION: Do you think that the Taliban, this strict Moslem Fundamentalist
group, is involved in narcotics trafficking to support their movement which
would, of course, be a gross violation of their principles they purport to
uphold?
MR. BURNS: I can tell you that we are concerned about the issue of
narcotics trafficking among many of the fighting groups in Afghanistan. I
wouldn't just pinpoint the Taliban.
As for the Taliban, itself, specifically, I'd have to ask for - I'd have
to get back to you on whether or not we have determined that they are
engaged in that type of activity. But certainly other groups are, and it
is the scourge of the country, as you know. Yes, sir.
QUESTION: Deputy Assistant Secretary Bader said yesterday that
President Lee Teng-hui of Taiwan is eligible to apply for a transit visa
when he visits Panama in September. Does that indicate a higher degree of
willingness on the part of the United States to issue the visa to him?
Question number two, will this have any impact on U.S.-China relations?
MR. BURNS: Well, thanks for that very provocative question.
(Laughter.)
Let me just say, Jeff Bader is our senior China expert in this building.
All of us have great respect for him. He is testifying this afternoon. I
want to be fair to Jeff. I didn't see his statement, nor have Jeff and I
had a chance to talk about it.
All I can do is point you to the very consistent long-held and very clear
policy of our government and that is that visits by Taiwan's leaders -- any
U.S. agreement to a transit of a Taiwan leader will be on a case-by-case
basis, case-by-case basis, and for the senior leaders in Taiwan, rare, only
considered on a case-by-case basis and certainly unofficial.
Let me go further to say that I am not aware of any consideration by Lee
Teng-hui to transit the United States. I am not aware of any consideration
by anybody in this government to suggest that. We certainly would not
suggest it. It would have to be for him to suggest and our policy towards
China remains constant.
We have a one-China policy. We recognize the People's Republic of China
as the sole and legitimate government in that area and we have unofficial
relations with Taiwan. I want to be very clear about that so that I am not
signaling and nobody is signaling that we are going to change or modify
what we have said would govern our policy on transits by senior leaders of
Taiwan. Rare, unofficial, case-by-case - those are the watch words and
nothing has changed.
QUESTION: Let's talk about the watch words. You have used "rare." Are
you talking about a transit visit or a private visit?
MR. BURNS: I thought I heard in your question a transit visit, so I
responded a transit visit and that certainly would include private visits
as well. Yes? Still on China?
QUESTION: Bosnia.
MR. BURNS: Let's just stick with Asia and then we'll go to Bosnia.
Yes.
QUESTION: Well, this is on China. President Jiang Zemin is having a
good time in Moscow. Do you have any comment on -
MR. BURNS: Have you talked to him? Is he enjoying himself?
(Laughter.)
QUESTION: Did they charge him $80 for his visa application?
(Laughter.)
QUESTION: As they're ripping off the entire Press Corps, which you're
aware of, aren't you? $80 for a visa application because of the short
notice, meaning about a week-and-a-half.
MR. BURNS: Barry, I wasn't aware of it.
QUESTION: You don't need to answer that.
MR. BURNS: I wasn't aware of it.
QUESTION:80 bucks to process a piece of paper.
MR. BURNS: Maybe that will pay for the Romanov jewels to stay in the
United States. What do you think? John's coming to the rescue.
QUESTION: Play along with that stuff -
MR. BURNS: Pardon?
QUESTION: You should try to stop that -
MR. BURNS: Barry, all countries have - I mean let's be fair. All
countries have the right to determine whether or not they want to charge
for visas. Some countries do, some countries don't.
QUESTION: Nobody charges -
MR. BURNS: The United States does -
QUESTION: -- one-tenth of that.
QUESTION: To the traveling Press Corps, the American Secretary of
State.
MR. BURNS: We'll try to make the trip worth your while in other ways.
Yes, sir? Jiang Zemin's visit to Moscow?
QUESTION: Do you have any comment on the declaration and agreements
signed there?
MR. BURNS: Yes, I do. The United States welcomes the agreements signed
between Russia and China because we hope that Russia and China will fully
normalize their bilateral relationship and take efforts to make sure that
the long border between those two countries is stable and peaceful. All of
us remember the 1960s and 1970s and into the eighties when there were
considerable problems along that border and that wasn't good for the
United States. No one wants to see these two very important countries
fighting or not in agreement.
Now, Mr. Jiang Zemin is also going to be signing a treaty with Russia,
Kazakstan, Krygyzstan and Tajikistan, which is a very important treaty.
Those four countries have a 4300-mile border and there have been some
border problems with the Central Asian countries as well as with Russia.
This treaty leads to greater transparency in the military relationships
among those countries and we hope it will lead to an improvement on the
situation along that common border.
I would also say, some of the press has been touting the Jiang Zemin-
Boris Yeltsin meeting as some kind of face-off with the United States.
That is not how we see it. We're in the 1990s now. We're not back in the
Seventies when Henry Kissinger and others were playing triangular diplomacy
among Russia, China and the United States. The world has changed. The
United States then had a competitive rivalry with the Soviet Union. Now,
the United States has a friendship and partnership with the Russian
Federation.
Look what we've done because of that. We've lowered the nuclear threshold.
We have reduced the number of nuclear powers from four to one in Eurasia.
We've vastly improved the chance that we're never going to have a nuclear
altercation between our two countries. We have a policy of engagement with
China. All of this improves stability, security and the chances for peace
in Europe and Asia.
So I was surprised that a lot of the press commentary and coverage was
somehow, this is a bad thing for the United States. We think the meeting
has been positive, and we want to work with both of those countries in the
next century for peace on two continents and in two oceans.
QUESTION: One more follow-up, if I may, Nick. Specifically, both the
Chinese and the Russian presidents are calling for a multipolar new world
order, instead of a unipolar.
MR. BURNS: Well, I think it's very difficult for any group of countries
to get together and diagram, as if you were in a political science class,
what the structure of the world is going to be. Power and influence in the
world are governed by interests, by economic power, military power,
political influence and values.
I think it's very clear that the only country in the world that has all
those things together and moving forward is the United States. That does
not mean that we seek any kind of domination or a unipolar world. We want
to have very close relationships with Russia, China and a number of the
other great powers in the world, and that's the basis of our foreign
policy. Yes.
QUESTION: The Japanese Prime Minister is going to be arriving here
tonight. Does the Secretary have any plans to meet with him?
MR. BURNS: The Secretary will be participating tomorrow in the
President's meeting with Prime Minister Hashimoto. She'll be over at the
White House for those meetings. She'll be participating in the briefings
for the President for those meetings. We're very much looking forward to
the Prime Minister's visit. We want to try to focus it on some of the
security, regional/political issues that are so important to the United
States and Japan. Of course, we'll also talk about economic issues.
QUESTION: Just a follow up - you've said several times that the U.S. does
not consider food aid to North Korea as a political issue, but a humanitarian
one. The Japanese seem to have a bit of a different idea in failing to
respond to the recent request for food aid. Is that something you've
discussed with them? Will you be discussing it during this visit? And will
you be trying to encourage them in any way to separate politics and
humanitarian aid?
MR. BURNS: The answer to the first question is yes. The answer to the
second question is yes. The answer to the third question is, it's really
up to the Japanese Government to decide what it's going to do. We believe
there's a severe food shortage in North Korea. We believe there's an
international humanitarian imperative to meet that food shortage, and we
call upon all countries to contribute.
QUESTION: Nick, the North Koreans have made a food deal a precondition to
four-party talks. They've added a few other preconditions. I'd like to
ask you to comment on those. And the United States in the past have
rejected food aid as a precondition for talks. Now, is this a non-starter
on the part of the North Koreans?
MR. BURNS: Yes. We will not agree to any preconditions to start these
talks. As we said yesterday - and I'm going to be very brief about this,
because we've gone over this every day this week. The central point is
this, if there's a critical food shortage in North Korea, why in the world
would we link food assistance to the slow-as-molasses political talks that
have taken 44 years not to begin? The North Koreans have a direct interest
in getting the food aid there. They surely can't want to tie it political
talks that may or may not begin at any time during this year.
That is our answer. David.
QUESTION: About Mr. Sayegh, who is in a Canadian prison at the
moment.
MR. BURNS: Yes.
QUESTION: He faces an immigration judge soon. It's been reported that
both the United States and Saudi Arabia are interested in having him
extradited back to their countries. Has the United States filed a formal
extradition request with the Canadians?
And which extradition request does the U.S. believe should take precedence
and why?
MR. BURNS: We have discussed this issue of Mr. Sayegh with the Canadian
police and security authorities because we have an abiding, ongoing
interest in finding out who killed 19 American officers at Khobar a year
ago last summer. We will continue to discuss this issue with the
Canadians. Until the Canadians make a public announcement about what they
intend to do with him, I am not going to have a public announcement about
the details of our own discussions with the Canadians.
The Canadians have this person. They have to decide on the proper course
of action with him. Then if they decide on one or another options, perhaps
we will be in a position to comment publicly.
QUESTION: Is there a formal extradition request filed with the court or
not?
MR. BURNS: I just can't answer the question, David. I can't go into the
details of what we are talking to the Canadians about.
QUESTION: Nick - all right, why don't you finish?
QUESTION: Bosnia. The Chair of the Presidency of Bosnia Izetbegovic
sent a letter to President Clinton two days ago saying basically the Dayton
agreement is not being implemented. In a short analysis, Izetbegovic said
that overall the peace process, because of inconsistent implementation and
violation of the agreement obligation, is in crisis. Would you care to
comment on that?
MR. BURNS: Well, we - you know John Kornblum and Bob Gelbard met with
President Izetbegovic last week. The President and the Secretary of State
met with him in late March. There have been a lot of problems associated
with implementing the Dayton Accords. But there has also been a lot of
progress, particularly in the economic area.
The United States and many other countries have troops in Bosnia, have aid
officials in Bosnia who are there to help implement the accords. It's not
particularly helpful to just go out with a complete litany of what has gone
wrong when a lot has gone right.
But all of us know it's a tough battle, and we have got to stay focused on
achieving results. That is how we look at it. We are very pragmatic.
QUESTION: He said that after 16 months - he said that only the military
part is going well. But my question to you is, is it possible that the
Administration is preparing its own analysis of the implementation?
MR. BURNS: You know, the military mission has gone quite well, but
there also have been national elections, which brought Mr. Izetbegovic to
the position where he is. That was quite an achievement after five years
of war. There has been considerable economic assistance that has begun to
rebuild Sarajevo and the other towns in Bosnia and Herzegovina.
I don't think it's fair to disregard what has gone right and to disregard
the enormous effort that the Bosnian people have put in to rebuilding their
own country, and the enormous effort, frankly, that we have made. We have
got young men - American men and women there - who have put their lives on
the line to safeguard the security of the Bosnian people. We've got aid
workers there, and I'm not going to allow that to be dismissed by
some statement. We think the people ought to be pragmatic and they
ought to be focused on what is going right; and we ought to work together
on what is not going right.
QUESTION: I'm sure that Bosnians are thankful for what the United States
did in the past and in what you are doing. But at the same time, I'm just
asking for an answer of those questions, which is he mentioned Brcko,
precisely, for instance. He mentioned elections. He mentioned economic
reconstruction. Fifteen days ago, the World Bank gave $55 million to the
Republika Srpska, precisely to the Republika Srpska. The next credit is
$145, 59 percent is going to Republika Srpska.
Before, you told us that Republika Srpska is not complying so they are not
going to get any money, specifically not from the United States. So what
is your answer on that?
MR. BURNS: My answer is that perhaps the Bosnian Government leadership
ought to think they maybe they want to be as effective of sales people as
we are about what is happening there. I think that is a challenge that I
would put in front of them.
On Brcko, we have set up a process to adjudicate internationally the fate
of that town. On economic reconstruction I very much disagree - I very
much disagree. A lot of good things have happened.
Billions of dollars have gone in -- $600 million from the United States
over three years. I'm not going to paint an entirely black picture for
you. You know the situation better than I do. How about the situation
four or five years ago? Would you want to go back to that? I don't think
so.
QUESTION: If we are going back to that time, and if President Izetbegovic
was willing to give up half of the country, probably Bosnia would never
have gone to war. But I don't want to speculate.
I am asking, is it possible that America is willing to participate in the
partition of Bosnia-Herzegovina?
MR. BURNS: No.
QUESTION: One or two years after Dayton?
MR. BURNS: No, no. We don't favor partition. We negotiate - we
stopped the war and we negotiated the peace for you because we wanted to
see your country whole. We do not favor partition.
All of our military and political and economic efforts are against
partition.
By the way, check with Carl Bildt's office. I would like to see a break-
down of the economic assistance to Sarajevo -- the Bosnian Government --
versus economic assistance the Republika Srpska and Pale. It's probably
about 98 to 2 in percentile terms.
There is no comparison. We have punished the Republika Srpska because of
its failure to comply with its Dayton commitments.
I think you have got to acknowledge that in your questioning.
QUESTION: Yes, I'm totally aware. Carl Bildt sent a letter and report
to Kofi Annan. He said that the returning of refugees is quite well. He
said that freedom of movement is going quite well. But in the Republika
Srpska they have zero refugees going back on the previous territory.
MR. BURNS: That is a big problem. I agree with you.
That is a big problem.
QUESTION: I don't want to argue with you. But my final question is,
would America under any conditions conceive of supporting partition?
MR. BURNS: No.
QUESTION: What if Bosnian Muslims say we would like to do it?
MR. BURNS: I can't - in my wildest dreams, I don't think that the
Bosnian Government is capable or at all interested in proposing a partition
plan. That's an extreme hypothetical example that I don't think merits
much discussion. The Bosnian Government doesn't want to partition itself,
and we don't either; and we are the best friend the Bosnian Government has.
I think that is another useful reminder today. Thank you. It's good to
see you back here. You make life exciting.
Okay. Anything else? Bill?
QUESTION: Take one on Mexico? The New York Times article today says
the anti-drug efforts on the part of the Mexican Government are dead in the
water and that the United States --
MR. BURNS: Well, I don't agree with The New York Times.
The New York Times should have read their wire reports from Mexico City
yesterday and today which talk about the creation of a new anti-drug effort
with new people in it and a rededication of that government to fighting the
narcotics trafficking. I think they ought to be up-to-date in what they
say.
QUESTION: Well, Nick, not only this article, but Mr. Constantine's
report about six weeks ago said that the U.S. was holding back waiting for
the Mexicans to decide what their policy would be.
MR. BURNS: I don't believe he's been quoted accurately because
President Clinton and Secretary Albright and General McCaffrey have all
said we have full support for President Zedillo and his renewed efforts to
fight narcotics. I would invite some of you to sign up for the trip to
Guatemala and Mexico. We have a sign-up sheet in the press office. Come
with us. Listen to the Secretary and General McCaffrey as they brief you
on the narcotics cooperation. It is a big issue. See for yourselves.
Visit Mexico with us.
QUESTION: That's what I saw.
MR. BURNS: Okay. Thank you very much.
(The briefing concluded at 1:53 P.M.)
(###)
|
