U.S. Department of State Daily Press Briefing #76, 97-05-16
From: The Department of State Foreign Affairs Network (DOSFAN) at <http://www.state.gov>
1208
U.S. Department of State
Daily Press Briefing
I N D E X
Friday, May 16, 1997
Briefer: Nicholas Burns
ANNOUNCEMENTS
1,10 Welcome to Press Briefing Visitors
1 Secretary Albright's Meeting with Foreign Minister Levy
2 Approval of NATO-Russia Agreement
2 Albanian Election Law
2 U.S.-Cuba Migration Accords
2-3 Secretary Albright's Upcoming Schedule
UNITED KINGDOM
3-4 U.S.-UK Relationship
7 Conversations with U.S. Regarding Terrorism
MIDDLE EAST
4,6 US Aid to Jordan
4-6 Dennis Ross' Travel in Region
6-7 Possibility of Secretary's Travel to the Region
9-10 Revitalization of the Peace Process
7-8 Israel: Alleged Wiretapping/Spy Case
ZAIRE
11-12 Mobutu's Departure from Kinshasa
12 U.S. Assistance in Promoting A Transition to Democracy
12-13,15 U.S. Relationship with Mobutu
13 Probe into Mobutu's Assets
13-14 Possibility of Continuing Talks Between Rebels and Government
14-15 Assessment of Kabila's Leadership
15 Foreign Assistance to Kabila's Forces
TURKEY
15-16 Allegations Against Mrs. Ciller
TURKEY/GREECE
16-18 Conflict in the Aegean
CROATIA
18 War Crimes Issues
RUSSIA
18 Sentencing of Russian Citizen
FRANCE
19 President Chirac's Trip to China
HONG KONG
20 Political/Human Rights
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE
DAILY PRESS BRIEFING
DPB #76
FRIDAY, MAY 16, 1997 1:10 P.M.
(ON THE RECORD UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED)
MR. BURNS: Good afternoon; welcome to the State Department.
I'm delighted to see all of you. I want to welcome Russian journalists,
here under the auspices of the USIA International Visitors Program.
We're very, very glad to have you with us. I was hoping to welcome
Mrs. Erlanger, the mother of Steve Erlanger, but I don't see her.
Perhaps they'll come in the middle of the briefing. No one's seen Steve,
right?
QUESTION: He was fired.
MR. BURNS: He was, huh? I also want to welcome a group of officials from
the Department of Defense Office of Public Affairs.
They've been with us this morning. They have been discussing, with a
variety of people in the Department of State, how we do public affairs
here. They're under the auspices of Julie Reside, our Press Officer who
did a stint over at DOD last year, actually.
I just want to say we appreciate very much all the cooperation we have with
you, with Ken Bacon, your terrific spokesman; we're glad to have you with
us.
Now, on to Secretary Albright's activities today. Secretary Albright just
completed, just about 45 minutes ago, an excellent meeting with David Levy,
the Israeli Foreign Minister. Mr. Levy was quick to give credit to Dennis
Ross for a very useful trip to Jerusalem and to Gaza this week. In fact, I
just heard that Dennis is on his way to a meeting with Chairman Arafat in
Gaza, so his trip has not yet ended. He'll be leaving, I think, tonight on
the midnight flight and be back in Washington tomorrow morning to report to
the Secretary.
Minister Levy and Secretary Albright discussed at some length the efforts
by the United States, Israel and the Palestinians to revive the peace
negotiations. They reviewed where those negotiations stood, the efforts of
Dennis Ross to bring people together this week - which he did, as you know,
in Tel Aviv. Minister Levy also raised the issue of the death threats
against Palestinians who sell land to Israelis. There was a rather
detailed discussion of the efforts of Iran to finance Middle East terrorist
groups.
I can tell you, there was complete agreement between Israel and the United
States this morning that both of us, working with other countries, have to
make sure that we have the capability to contain Iran.
In this respect, we hope very much the European countries, in the wake of
the Mykonos trial, will make every effort to send a very stiff message to
Iran that its support for Middle East terrorist groups, which is quite
evident, must stop. So, an excellent meeting with Minister Levy, and I'll
be glad to take any questions that you have on that.
I also wanted to note - you've probably heard the news but it's very
important - that the North Atlantic Council, meeting this morning in
Brussels, announced that it has approved officially as an alliance the
NATO-Russia Founding Act. This clears the way for formal signature of the
document by the heads of state and government in Paris on May 27th. Of
course, President Clinton will be there with President Yeltsin and the
European leaders for that occasion.
I wanted to say a word about the situation in Albania, which is quite
difficult today. The Albanian Parliament, dominated by President Berisha's
Democratic Party, passed an election law early this morning. We have not
yet seen the exact text of that law. It apparently incorporates some of
the changes suggested by Prime Minister Fino and by Dr. Vranitzky, the OSCE
personal representative.
Nevertheless, this law was passed without the participation of the
opposition parties in Albania. The United States shares the disappointment
of Dr. Vranitzky in the election gamesmanship by some of these political
parties in Albania. They failed to make sufficient effort to reach a
compromise, and certainly the leading political parties failed to include
the opposition parties in this parliamentary vote this morning. Therefore,
the United States urges all Albanian political forces to cooperate fully
with Dr. Vranitzky and the OSCE mission.
I am going to be posting a statement today after the briefing concerning
the U.S.-Cuba Migration Accords. We are marking the second anniversary
this month of the May 2, 1995, Migration Accord between the United States
and Cuba. If you have any questions about that, we will be glad to take
them.
Now, in terms of the schedule next week for the Secretary of State, on
Monday morning, the 19th of May, the Secretary is hosting a breakfast
meeting with the new British Foreign Secretary Robin Cook. This will be
Secretary Cook's first official visit to the United States since being
named Foreign Secretary by Prime Minister Blair.
The Secretary welcomes this early opportunity to consult with Secretary
Cook and to further strengthen the very warm, special, productive ties
between the United States and the United Kingdom.
Secretary Albright and Foreign Secretary Cook will exchange views on a wide
range of subjects. I know that they will want to discuss the recent
negotiations between NATO and Russia, and other European security issues.
They certainly will want to take a look at compliance with the Dayton
Accords.
As you know, the United States has had a number of concerns, which we have
expressed publicly this week, about the lack of commitment of Croatia and
of Serbia to the Dayton Accords. They will certainly want to talk about
Hong Kong reversion and the implications of that for all of us and, of
course, the direct role that the United Kingdom is playing in that. I
understand that Secretary Cook will also see National Security Advisor
Sandy Berger and Secretary of Defense Cohen during his visit to Washington.
Further events next week: as you know, after the breakfast meeting with
Secretary Cook, Secretary Albright and Senator Biden will be traveling up
to Wilmington, Delaware. We've released that schedule. For those of you
who would like to cover that, or even to go up to Wilmington, please let
John Dinger or Nancy Beck or me know this afternoon. We want to make
provisions for you. But nearly all of the events on the schedule are open
events on Monday.
On Tuesday, at 11:30 a.m. - that's May 20th - the Secretary will have a
meeting with the Foreign Minister of Pakistan, Foreign Minister Ayub Khan.
That's a very important meeting, especially considering the recent meetings
between the Indian and Pakistani leadership, which have been quite hopeful.
On Wednesday, the Secretary attends at 9:00 a.m. the U.S. Conference of
Mayors Drug Control Policy Summit, along with President Clinton, the Vice
President and others, at the White House.
On Thursday, May 22nd, the Secretary has testimony at 10:30 a.m. before the
Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on Foreign Operations. That evening,
she'll be flying to New York for the Fleet Week Dinner. I think we've
mentioned that to you once before.
Then on Friday, she has two meetings - Friday, May 23rd - the first is a
meeting and working lunch with Foreign Minister Yoo of the Republic of
Korea. She has invited him to visit Washington.
Then at 4:30 p.m. she has a bilateral with the Prime Minister of Slovenia;
so a very active week. Then of course, the following week, the Secretary
and the President will be traveling to Paris and The Hague. The Secretary
will be going on to Portugal for the NATO ministerial meetings. So it's a
busy time for all of us. With that, Barry and George, glad to go to your
questions.
QUESTION: Nick, I'm sure the phrase "special ties" was not accidental.
But let me make sure you're saying what you're saying. Does the United
States now have, is it presumed, a special relationship with Britain?
MR. BURNS: Barry, we've always had a special relationship with the United
Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland.
We did, certainly, with Prime Minister Thatcher and Prime Minister Major,
and we absolutely do with Prime Minister Blair. I think there's a sense in
our government that we're going to work very well with Prime Minister Blair
and Foreign Secretary Cook. The Secretary was one of the first officials
around the world to congratulate Secretary Cook. She called him from her
aircraft when she was returning to Washington from Moscow, two weeks ago
today. She invited him for an early meeting. She was very pleased he
could come. So I think we do have a special relationship. It continues;
it's a very important relationship for us.
QUESTION: One heard a lot of it in the Reagan-Thatcher years, but then it
sort of disappeared, the phrase. I just wondered it it's coming back to
life.
MR. BURNS: Well, I think it's always been there. I think it's an
accurate way to describe how the United States and the United Kingdom
cooperate together - not just on bilateral issues, of course, or even
European issues, but all around the world on a variety of issues. I think
we find - we Americans - that when the chips are down, we have excellent
communication and cooperation with the UK.
QUESTION: Will there be open press photo op for that?
MR. BURNS: I don't believe there will at that hour of the morning, no.
But we are working to give all of you access to the Secretary next week, as
we did today. I would expect that would happen on Tuesday or Wednesday.
QUESTION: Levy's session - the session between the Israeli Foreign
Minister and Secretary Albright --
MR. BURNS: Yes.
QUESTION: You didn't mention the aid package to Jordan.
Did that come up, and was there agreement?
MR. BURNS: I don't know. I talked to the Secretary - there were two
meetings, actually. We had a meeting of both delegations.
Then the Secretary and the Minister met together alone, just with
interpreters, for about 15 minutes. The Secretary said it did not come up
in that meeting. But as you know, we are looking at ways to expand United
States assistance to Jordan in a substantial way. We have talked to the
Israeli Government at the highest level about this. You heard what
Minister Levy had to say about this at the press conference. So it's
certainly an issue of discussion between the United States and Israel. It
just didn't happen to come up. The Secretary has already had prior
discussions with the Israeli leadership on this issue.
QUESTION: And on your description and the Secretary's description of the
Ross expedition, there seems to be a sharp variance between your assessment
- plural, assessments - and those of the Palestinians, one of whom called
the process clinically dead today. How do you explain this difference?
MR. BURNS: I don't know what kind of games are being played here. All I
can say is this: that the Secretary sent Dennis Ross out there in good
faith, with the expectation that the Israelis and Palestinians would
respond to him in a substantial way. Dennis was able to put together an
important meeting of senior Palestinian and Israeli officials two nights
ago in Tel Aviv, at the home of Ambassador Indyk. He has then gone on to
have conversations, subsequent to that, with Prime Minister Netanyahu; and
he's right now heading into a meeting with Chairman Arafat.
The main point that the Secretary wants to stress today is that the
Israelis and Palestinians need to take ownership of the peace negotiations.
They're the ones who have to make the compromises necessary to have forward
movement politically. It is not appropriate to criticize the United States
in this process. For a quarter of a century, we have led the effort to
achieve peace in the Middle East. We've been tremendously successful with
the parties, just over the last four years. When you hit bumps in the road
and when there are problems, it is not appropriate to strike out at the one
country that is trying to put these peace negotiations back together.
So I know the Secretary believes very strongly - and this was implicit and
explicit in her conversation with Foreign Minister Levy this morning - that
it's up to the Palestinians and the Israelis to make these decisions to
propel these negotiations forward.
We are there. We are offering ideas, and you know what? We will continue
to be there. We are experienced enough as diplomats to know that when you
hit a problem in the road, you keep on driving and you keep on heading down
that road. That is exactly what she intends to do.
She is looking forward to Dennis' return so she can talk to him about our
tactics and our strategy. But we are going to go forward, and we expect
that the Palestinians and the Israelis will be there with us.
QUESTION: Is that when you --
QUESTION: Can I - can you confirm that President Mubarak opted out of
the meeting - a scheduled meeting today with Dennis?
MR. BURNS: No, I cannot. All I know is that Dennis flew to Sharm al
Sheikh last weekend, had a good meeting with President Mubarak, had a good
meeting with His Majesty King Hussein. He's had a very good series of
conversations, all throughout the past eight or nine days with Arab
leaders, as well as with the Israelis.
QUESTION: When you hit bumps in the road, sometimes it's a strain on the
driver and you switch drivers. You know, there has been grumbling in the
Palestinian camp - not so much - not so personal this time, but it got
fairly personal a while back that Dennis Ross is tilting towards Israel's
position. Would you imagine - well, without - if you don't want to get
into that - I mean --
MR. BURNS: No, I would like to get into that.
QUESTION: Will he remain, as far as you know, in the job he now has?
MR. BURNS: Absolutely, positively. The one person who has been a
constant in American policy from the Reagan Administration, to the Bush
Administration, to the Clinton Administration is Dennis Ross. He is among
the most respected people in our government.
He has the absolute confidence of Secretary Albright. She believes in him
and she fully stands behind him.
And these ridiculous allegations that somehow he is prejudicial towards
one party versus another, they don't really deserve much comment. Anyone
who knows him, anyone who has seen the contribution that he has made to
real progress over the years, knows that that is absolutely laughable.
So we stand by him. He is going to remain the major negotiator working
for Secretary Albright and the President and that is all.
That is the way it is going to be.
QUESTION: Can I quickly roll back just for a moment,
on the Jordan issue?
MR. BURNS: Yes.
QUESTION: You asked -- the Administration asked for what's a 75 percent
- a 75 percent increase in the economic and military aid to Jordan. My
question really is more technical than anything. The consideration of
additional aid is above and beyond the additional aid you are already
seeking, I assume? Is it?
And secondly, I'm not sure about the process. I'm not sure whether you
can ask for more aid, or if you have to work within what you have asked.
And that, of course supports the notion you'll take it out of Israel's
total.
MR. BURNS: Right. Yes, Barry, I'm looking at a sheet that details our
bilateral economic and security assistance to Jordan from Fiscal Year 93 to
Fiscal Year 98. I understand that beyond the request the Administration has
already made to the Congress, we are looking at ways to expand
substantially assistance to Jordan. We have not yet arrived, within the
Administration, at the appropriate option that we think is the best option.
We've discussed a variety of options inside the Administration, obviously
with the Congress and obviously with the Jordanians and the Israelis and
many other countries.
So that will proceed; and we hope that we're successful in identifying a
way to put some substantial support behind the special efforts that King
Hussein has made for peace.
QUESTION: Does it have to come out -- are you restricted in your options?
Does it have to come out of money already - I mean, forget the - putting
aside the politics of Congress being very skeptical of foreign aid
generally, but then again, automatically reinforcing Egyptian - continuing
Egyptian and Israeli aid at current levels, can you go beyond your request
or must you find the money, at least technically, in someone else's aid?
MR. BURNS: There are a variety of options available to us -- this is the
best way to answer your question -- a variety of ways, under current
legislation, that we could possibly increase aid to Jordan. So we want to
identify the best vehicle. Then the next important step, obviously, having
discussed this with Jordan and other countries, is to talk seriously to the
Congress.
The Congress holds the purse strings. We respect that. We want to work
very cooperatively with Congress. But we have not identified the vehicle,
and I think we have a variety of options over a broad spectrum.
QUESTION: Nick, the Secretary continued to show a fairly clear lack of
enthusiasm for travel to the region. She said she would go when the time
is right. Can you define that?
MR. BURNS: Well, Howard, I would just quibble a little bit with the
question. I don't think she's showing any lack of enthusiasm for travel to
the Middle East. She simply wants to go there when it's useful for her to
be there. As she said, the Middle East has come to her. The Foreign
Minister was here this morning. She has spoken on the phone with every
major Arab leader, since she took office. As you know, she and the
President have seen every major Arab leader concerned with the
Israel-Palestinian peace negotiations since February. So there hasn't been
an urgent need for her to travel.
She is very willing to go out to the Middle East. At this point, we need
to obviously - it has to be a time when it's useful. At this point, we
obviously need to see some forward movement by the Israelis and
Palestinians.
QUESTION: Nick, regarding the Secretary's meeting with Mr. Cook, I assume
the issue of terrorism will be a topic of discussion.
There's been a lot of complaints about the --
MR. BURNS: I think this is related.
QUESTION: -- the activity --
MR. BURNS: Are you relating this to the Middle East?
QUESTION: Well, yes, I am. There's been a lot of activity with regard to
the statements of Osama Bin Ladin, who has attacked the United States and
threatened the United States, threatened the President, who's been getting
quite a lot of coverage in London.
His compatriots are able to operate freely. Even in the House of Commons
there have been complaints about how freely these groups can operate. I
wonder if that will also be a topic of the discussion with Mr. Cook to try
to --
MR. BURNS: I'm not aware that that's going to be an agenda item for the
Secretary and Secretary Cook. They have a lot to discuss. But obviously,
the fight against terrorism is something where we've had excellent
cooperation with the United Kingdom.
It's a major issue for the United States. I'm sure that will come up in
some of the conversations that we have with the UK.
I'm just not aware that's a subject currently on the table for Monday.
Don't take that to mean that it's not important, because it is. Yes, sir.
QUESTION: Did the question of alleged wiretaps come up in the meeting?
MR. BURNS: It did not. It came up in the press conference.
One of our enterprising reporters asked about it.
QUESTION: Well, that's why I'm following up.
MR. BURNS: Barry asked about it. It did not --
QUESTION: I'm following up for enterprise.
MR. BURNS: -- come up in the meeting.
QUESTION: -- ask about easy things.
MR. BURNS: I know, it's ironic. It did not come up in the meeting, no.
QUESTION: There was no question about the recent tip over alleged spying
or --
MR. BURNS: It did not come up.
QUESTION: -- by the United States?
MR. BURNS: It did not come up in the meeting, no.
QUESTION: Have you verified - have you tried to verify - I don't mean you
personally. Has the government tried to verify that the ambassador wrote
that letter?
MR. BURNS: Barry, as you know, we have an excellent relationship with
Israel. If you're asking --
QUESTION: -- you don't spy on them?
(Laughter.)
MR. BURNS: Barry, if you're asking me about the allegations that have
been made in the press about spying.
QUESTION: It's not allegations, it's a letter, letter.
MR. BURNS: That's the s-word, spying, to go along with the i-word --
QUESTION: Surveillance.
MR. BURNS: Surveillance and spying, to go along with the i-word,
intelligence. As you know, I am shackled. I can't talk about those
issues.
QUESTION: Can you talk about Zaire?
MR. BURNS: I can talk about the z-word, yes.
QUESTION: Before you go to Zaire --
MR. BURNS: Yes.
QUESTION: Can I just do one more on - you made a reference before to the
Israelis and the Palestinians having to take back ownership, or take
ownership of the talks. When did they lose it?
MR. BURNS: Well, clearly, Charlie, the peace negotiations have been in a
state of crisis now for several months. We said that. The peace
negotiations have not moved forward for several months. It's up to the
United States to do everything we can to help the Israelis and Palestinians
revitalize the peace negotiations.
But we cannot do that if they are not willing to make the appropriate
efforts to move it forward. That was Secretary Albright's major point
privately with Foreign Minister Levy.
We need to see both Palestinians and Israelis make these determined efforts
for peace. All the mediating in the world is not going to make that
progress if the parties to the negotiations don't have the will to move
forward. That was her major point; and it's a point not just for the
Israelis, by the way. It's equally made to the Palestinians.
QUESTION: You're speaking in a conditional, hypothetical tense. Would
you care to turn that into a declarative statement?
MR. BURNS: I didn't realize I was.
QUESTION: Well, sure, "if the parties are unwilling".
Are the parties unwilling? Have you detected - has Dennis Ross detected
unwillingness on the part of one of the parties, the other or both --
MR. BURNS: We --
QUESTION: -- not to make that effort?
MR. BURNS: We think there is an interest in moving forward,
but we need to judge both by their actions, by what they're able to do to
move the negotiations forward. I think there was an excellent discussion
with Foreign Minister Levy. He says that Israel wants to move forward. Of
course we want to work with the Israeli Government on that basis.
Sometimes the Palestinians say that they also want to move forward; and we
want to work with the Palestinians on that basis.
I just hit back a little bit earlier on these very negative statements
coming out of some Palestinian officials. They are not warranted.
QUESTION: You used the phrase "playing games" - both sides are playing
games?
MR. BURNS: No, I said I didn't know who was playing games on some of
these very negative statements. Now, I would say today that Foreign
Minister Levy was very quick at the very beginning of the meeting. After
he had wished the Secretary a happy birthday, he said that the Israeli
Government appreciated Dennis Ross' visit over the past week. It had been
a very useful visit for the Israelis, and that was good to hear. That was
very good to hear.
QUESTION: Can you confirm that the second meeting of the security
officials from the Palestinians and the Israelis, together with the
Americans, did not come off as scheduled?
MR. BURNS: The larger meeting? I'm only aware of one meeting this week,
Jim, and that was the meeting on Wednesday evening between the senior
officials. I'm not aware of a second meeting, but I can check that for
you.
QUESTION: Yes, we were reporting from there that there was another one
scheduled last night, which did not happen.
MR. BURNS: Yes.
QUESTION: Because one or another party did not show up.
MR. BURNS: Right, and I just can't help you with that.
But we can check into that. I just wasn't aware a second meeting had taken
place.
I should interrupt the questioning and just - we have to recognize a very
special visitor, Mrs. Florence Erlanger, who has just arrived in the
briefing room, accompanied by an erstwhile journalist of _The New York
Times._ Mrs. Erlanger, we can assure you that your son is doing a very good
job, a very good job.
MRS. ERLANGER: Thank you.
MR. BURNS: He even sometimes roots for the Boston Red Sox, which is
always appreciated.
(Laughter.)
QUESTION: (Inaudible.)
MR. BURNS: Not always. I shouldn't say erstwhile, Ben.
Is that your definition of erstwhile? No, the current, prolific reporter
of The New York Times.
QUESTION: Do you know something we don't know?
MR. BURNS: No, I don't know anything. He's doing a wonderful job.
MS. ERLANGER: I'm still a Red Sox fan.
MR. BURNS: You're still a Red Sox fan?
MS. ERLANGER: Mm-hmm.
MR. BURNS: Thank you very much. We are down to a fighting few. They're
in last place.
QUESTION: Can we move on to Zaire?
MR. BURNS: We can move on to Zaire, George, yes.
QUESTION: What do you have in mind for Zaire now that President Mobutu
apparently has fled the capital?
MR. BURNS: Well, first of all, the current situation as we know it is
that President Mobutu has left the capital for his hometown. We are not
completely sure of what his plans are from there, although there are
various rumors about foreign travel.
We know that his Information Minister says that President Mobutu has given
up his presidential powers, but not his post. All this needs to be
confirmed. Lots of things are being said in a fairly chaotic environment.
We have also heard many public statements from Zairian Government officials
that the city has been declared an open city.
What we hope is the following, as Secretary Albright told you.
Number one, that with the departure of President Mobutu from Kinshasa,
perhaps the way is now open for a peaceful transition of power in Zaire and
the avoidance of an armed assault, a military assault on the capital city.
That would be, obviously, the preferred solution because that would spare
the lives of the many hundreds of thousands of civilians in Kinshasa.
Number two, the United States encourages Mr. Kabila and his rebel alliance
to acquit themselves in the most civilized way, meaning the following --
that the interests of the civilian population are taken into account first
and foremost; that every effort is made to avoid bloodshed; that every
effort is made to contact those Zairian government officials who remain in
Kinshasa - many have left - to work out military arrangements that would
allow for the entrance of the troops and a transition to take place on a
peaceful, stable basis.
Number three, we hope very much that as this transition occurs, the people
who take power are reform-minded; that they bring to their positions and
responsibilities a commitment to economic reconstruction of a very poor
country with a shattered economy; that they think of themselves as the
group that can bring the nascent roots of democracy to Zaire; and that they
will prepare the country for elections. That is very important, in fact
even a critical step that Zaire be prepared for elections so that at some
point in the future the Zairian people can decide things for themselves.
As the Secretary said, this is a moment where Zaire now has an opportunity
to look to the future instead of to the past, towards democracy, towards
elections, away from dictatorship, and away from the crushing poverty that
it has known since independence in the early 1960s.
So we are hopeful that today's events will provide for peace and stability.
Now, we are mindful of the security of 310 American citizens, private
Americans who remain - that's our count - in Zaire; 180 of them live in
Kinshasa. We are attempting to contact all of them to tell them to keep
their heads down and to take every precaution as this transition period
unfolds.
You know that our basic advice to American citizens is to get out of Zaire
if they can do that, by whatever means, if those means are currently safe.
Some of the avenues, I think, have been shut down over the past couple of
days. We are maintaining our embassy staff at 25. That included
Ambassador Simpson. We think it is very important for the United States to
have diplomatic representation at a time like this.
As you know, we have significant American military forces in the area. We
hope it is not necessary to use those forces. There are no current plans
to do so, but they are there to protect American citizens should that be
necessary.
QUESTION: Is assistance being planned to help promote a transition to
democracy?
MR. BURNS: I know that in conversations Ambassador Richardson has had
with Mr. Kabila -- and Ambassador Richardson is trying to reach Mr. Kabila
this afternoon -- in prior conversations Ambassador Richardson has made it
clear that if we see in a transition a good faith effort to lead Zaire out
of its current troubles towards a democratic future, then of course the
United States will be quite willing to contribute to supporting those
elections, to supporting a reform government. I mean through political
support and obviously through whatever other support we can give, including
financial support.
As far as I know, we have not given Mr. Kabila any kind of specific
financial commitment, and this commitment is conditioned, obviously, on a
process that will be democratic and open and peaceful. Still on Zaire,
David? Yes.
QUESTION: Nick, I wanted to see if you could look at the broader question
a little bit, which is over the last couple of decades, we have had people
from - or several decades - leaders we supported from Batista, Somoza,
Marcos, and others, and when they left, the transitions were uneasy at
best. Can you talk about what maybe will be done differently this time or
what we'll be doing?
MR. BURNS: Well, I can't say much about Batista. That was back I guess
just a couple years after I was born, David, so I can't speak to that.
QUESTION: But you know your history.
MR. BURNS: But I know my history. I can just talk about Mobutu. There's
no question that the United States was a major supporter of President
Mobutu for many decades. He was an American ally during the Cold War.
There is also no question that President Bush and, certainly, President
Clinton did a great deal to distance themselves from President Mobutu over
the last five, six, seven years and with very good reason.
It became apparent to us in the early 1990s -- very apparent -- that
President Mobutu was not interested in moving Zaire forward; that a clique
of advisors around him and members of his family had enriched themselves at
the expense of the government of Zaire; that he preferred dictatorship to
democracy. As you know, the United States cut off its aid program many
years ago. We have dealt, really, very little with Mr. Mobutu over a
number of years now, certainly, for the life of the Clinton Administration,
so it is not as if this transition in America's relations with President
Mobutu is happening along with his exodus from power. Not at all. It all
happened several years ago.
Now, for many, many years and for the life of this administration, the last
four years, the United States has consistently called for representative
government, economic reform, economic reconstruction and political
pluralism; and that's what we stand for today. I don't think there are
many tears being shed today, frankly, for the departure of a regime that
has seen its better days. What we hope is, that the people who come in, in
this transition of power, govern Zaire responsibly and with the wishes and
the interests of the Zairian people in the forefront of their own plans.
QUESTION: Is there any word today as to whether the rebel alliance has
asked the U.S. to look into any assets of Mobutu's that may be in this
country and to freeze them?
MR. BURNS: Well, we have seen public statements to that effect; but,
still, Betsy, I don't believe we've had an official representation made to
us that we ought to freeze Mr. Mobutu's assets. Now, we are not aware that
Mobutu has significant financial assets in the United States. He appears
to have them in Europe.
I know that the Swiss Government has announced this morning a preliminary
measure about his assets in response to a call from the rebel alliance.
But, in general, our belief is that this is really an issue for Zairians in
the transition. They have got to figure out how they handle these very
difficult questions.
We don't believe it is an issue where the United States needs or should be
in the forefront. Judd?
QUESTION: Nick, for several weeks, now - it may be even longer - the
U.S. has been urging Mobutu and Kabila to meet, to work out a peaceful
transition. You're still calling for a peaceful transition, although
Mobutu appears to be leaving the scene. Who - is there an effective
representative of the existing Zairian Government for Kabila to negotiate
with to your knowledge?
MR. BURNS: That is a very good question. I think that remains to be
seen. Fortunately, what we have is the leadership of the South African
Government, President Mandela, which continues to offer its good offices.
We hope since the Army has not reached Kinshasa that there can be
discussions to work out a peaceful transition militarily and then,
subsequently, in a civilian way.
The South African Government, I know, is trying to do that, as are we.
QUESTION: These talks at this point would be military to military,
though, right?
MR. BURNS: Well, certainly, with the rebel alliance.
I don't know who's doing the talking from Kinshasa. The city appears to be
emptying out of senior officials. We hope that some would remain to
maintain law and order until the rebel alliance reaches the city.
QUESTION: Nick?
MR. BURNS: Laura?
QUESTION: You have said in the past couple of days that this period of
time would be a test for Mr. Kabila as to what kind of leader he might be.
And you have acknowledged that he was a bit of an unknown quantity before
he -- before his alliance started to make great military gains. Do you
have a better assessment of what kind of leader he might be? Do you feel
that his -- in the course of the last couple of weeks, when various
officials have met with him face to face, is his word good?
MR. BURNS: I don't believe we have a different assessment to make, but I
know that Ambassador Richardson felt, in meeting Mr. Kabila, that
Mr. Kabila now appears to understand that the allegations made against the
rebel forces in and around Kisangani, the brutal treatment of the refugees
up there, the persistent allegations of a massacre of some of the Rwandan
Hutu refugees, that those allegations need to be taken very seriously.
Kabila has told Ambassador Richardson that he will deal with this, that he
will discipline his soldiers who engaged in inappropriate and uncivilized
behavior and that he wants the transition to be as smooth as possible. All
that is positive.
It is still true that we are at a time of testing for Mr. Kabila.
He does not have a track record as a government leader. He has held a
variety of political and ideological positions throughout his long career
and opposition, and we hope that he will be a responsible leader who
believes in what the Zairian people deserve; and that is economic reform
and reconstruction and political freedom.
So, the time of testing continues for him. We believe the sentiments that
he's expressed are more positive in recent weeks. We wish him well. We
want to be able to support a democratic transition; but we need to see the
actions, and I think the jury is out on the actions.
QUESTION: Kabila is not alone in this situation and even the military
operation has had strong backing from Museveni and Kagame and others in the
area. And they have different plans.
Museveni spoke the other day in Kampala and he said he wanted to bring
these nations of Eritrea, Ethiopia, Sudan, Uganda, Kenya, Tanzania, Burundi
and Zaire into one nation under a federal state, and he quoted - and this
is a quote -- he says, Museveni says, "As Hitler did to bring together
Germany, we should also do it here. Hitler was a smart guy, but I think he
went a bit too far by wanting to conquer the whole world."
MR. BURNS: Well, you know --
QUESTION: Isn't this something that's very unnerving to --
MR. BURNS: I think that we're mixing apples and oranges here. The last
time I checked, President Museveni was the president of Uganda. We are now
talking about Mr. Kabila, who is not a Ugandan, he's a Zairian. I've never
heard publicly, and I don't believe that any of our government officials
have ever heard privately, Mr. Kabila say that he wants to unite various
countries in Central Africa. It's an important part of the world. It's an
important part of the world. Zaire is an important country. We want to
see peace and stability.
QUESTION: Is it not true, Nick, however, that Kabila and his forces have
received backing from Uganda and that Kabila, himself, has said that he
speaks once a week with Museveni, obviously about the political situation
in that part of the world?
MR. BURNS: Well, I think it is apparent to everyone that Kabila's forces
have received outside assistance - both from Burundi, Rwanda, Uganda and
Angola. That is not a secret, and we would hope that the cooperation among
all those countries will be very close and very fruitful in the future.
Zaire needs friends and it needs help. We would hope that the countries
surrounding Zaire would be helpful to Zaire in this moment of crisis.
QUESTION: Before Mobutu disappears totally from the stage, as you
mentioned he was an ally of the United States. Does the United States now
accept responsibility for propping up a man who was corrupt and brutal and
a dictator who impoverished his country?
MR. BURNS: If you are asking me to criticize the actions of every
administration from President Kennedy to President Reagan, I am not going
to do that. There was something called the Cold War that was the dominant
foreign policy issue of our time for many decades. The United States had
many friends around the world to help win the Cold War, which we ultimately
did.
If you are asking me what has President Clinton done from the day he took
office until today, I can tell you that President Clinton's policy has been
one of some distance from President Mobutu. We haven't had an aid
relationship. We have rarely met him. We have consistently and publicly
urged, throughout the life of this Administration, for reform and for
democracy and for a transition. I am the spokesman of this State
Department in 1997. I can't speak for the State Department in 1963 or
1973.
Yes.
QUESTION: Turkey. Labor Party leader in Turkey, Mr. Perincek alleged
that Mrs. Ciller worked for the United States Department at the Near
Eastern Bureau in 1973 and that same year she was dispatched to Libya --
the very same year -- as a State Department employee. And also he says --
MR. BURNS: Who is this person?
QUESTION: Mr. Perincek, the leader of the Labor Party.
Also, he says Mrs. Ciller met with Qadhafi in 1992 when she was a State
Minister in the Turkish Government on the behalf of the United States
Government. Do you have a comment on that?
MR. BURNS: I have never heard these allegations. I don't know them to be
true. It's all news to me, and I just cannot confirm any of what you have
just told me.
QUESTION: But you will take the question?
MR. BURNS: Well, we will look into it. But it appears to me to be a
silly allegation to make. We might look into it, but I have just never
heard these allegations before.
QUESTION: He also alleged that Mrs. Ciller was a CIA asset.
MR. BURNS: Well, I'm not going to respond to that. That doesn't deserve
any comment. Mrs. Ciller is the Deputy Prime Minister and Foreign Minister
of one our allies. I'm not going to dignify that with a comment.
QUESTION: Nick?
MR. BURNS: Yes, Ugur.
QUESTION: Another Administration spokesman yesterday talked about the --
MR. BURNS: Another Administration spokesman?
QUESTION: Yes, at the Pentagon.
MR. BURNS: Oh, good, you mean Ken Bacon.
QUESTION: Yes, Ken Bacon.
MR. BURNS: My friend Ken Bacon, good. Some of his people are here right
now.
QUESTION: He speaks for the Administration, doesn't he?
MR. BURNS: He speaks for the Administration, absolutely.
QUESTION: Okay.
MR. BURNS: I just wanted to know who we were talking about.
QUESTION: Yes, Mr. Bacon said at a high-level consultative committee
meeting in Crete between Greek and U.S. officials --
MR. BURNS: That's right.
QUESTION: NATO Secretary General Solana's five proposals to bring down
the tensions in the Aegean was discussed. And at the end, he said that "I
understand the Turks are prepared to accept them." Are you aware of any
objections from the Greek side to these five proposals that Bacon
characterized as an important contribution to stability in the Aegean?
MR. BURNS: Well, first of all, let me say that was a brilliant statement
by Spokesman Bacon, and I support everything he said. Secondly, let me say
- isn't that the right answer?
And it's sincerely meant.
Secondly, I can tell you the United States supports the efforts by the NATO
Secretary General, Mr. Solana, to devise measures to reduce the risk of
incidents and accidents in the Aegean Sea.
We have been engaged in efforts to reduce tensions between Turkey and
Greece. We did have a meeting with the Greek military on the Island of
Crete, and questions regarding specific measures either country is prepared
to accept should be directed to those countries. But we are hopeful that
Secretary General Solana can be successful in making progress between
Greece and Turkey.
QUESTION: Did you hear from Turkey and Greece on this issue?
MR. BURNS: Yes, we have, but I don't think I'm at liberty to tell you
what they told us. I think we will have to let them say what they want to
say in public.
QUESTION: Ken Bacon seems to feel that he is at liberty to comment on
the Turkish --
MR. BURNS: I think he is - I agree with everything he said and I am
perfectly in line with Ken Bacon. Yes, Dimitris?
QUESTION: Can you respond to the five specific proposals, the specific
proposal, not in general, reduce of tension --
MR. BURNS: We support the efforts of the Secretary General and we have
discussed with him and with the Greeks and Turks some of the proposals that
have been put forward. I don't want to comment publicly on the specific
proposals, because we think by keeping them private we have the best chance
of moving forward.
QUESTION: But they are public.
MR. BURNS: Well, they may be public because newspapers have printed them,
but I am not a newspaper --
QUESTION: No, no. The official transcript of the Pentagon has them.
Mr. Bacon --
QUESTION: Announced them.
QUESTION: -- announced them.
MR. BURNS: As I told you, I support everything Ken Bacon says.
QUESTION: Any agreement on any of these proposals so far as of today
that you know of?
MR. BURNS: I would rather let the Turkish and Greek Governments
characterize their positions on this.
QUESTION: Nick, Foreign Minister Granic held a news conference this
morning and he disagreed with your characterization of his meeting
yesterday with Secretary Albright. As an example, he says Croatia is eager
to support the war crimes tribunal. He says that no indicted war criminals
are on Croatian territory and that Croatia cannot be held responsible for
indicted war criminals who are outside Croatia. But you did mention
specifically yesterday that the war crimes issue was brought up yesterday
by the Secretary.
What is it that Croatia is doing - is not doing that they should be doing?
MR. BURNS: Well, first of all, let me just say that there was a long
discussion of the war crimes issue yesterday between the Secretary and
Minister Granic. Secretary Albright was not satisfied with that
discussion. It is true, it is a fact that since the Dayton Accords were
signed, at various points, there have been indicted war criminals on the
soil of Croatia and the Croatian Government has not arrested those people
and transferred them to the Hague for prosecution. That is undeniable. We
know it to be true.
She raised specific names. Secretary Albright raised specific names with
Minister Granic. She also raised the unacceptable mob violence by Bosnian
Croats against elderly Serbs who are driven, hundreds of them driven from
their home two nights ago. She raised the problems in the Croatian
Government's actions in denying the rights of Serbs to go back to their own
homes in the Krajina region.
These are very serious problems. We have the facts.
Sitting with Secretary Albright were our Ambassador to Croatia, Peter
Galbraith, the Administrator of Eastern Slavonia, Jacques Klein. These
people are on the scene and they reported in the meeting - Jacques Klein
reported in the meeting to Minister Granic that Croatian Government
behavior had not met our test or any kind of reasonable international test.
I am sorry to disagree with the Foreign Minister. We respect him as an
individual. We want to work with him productively, but we disagree and we
hope that our message was heard yesterday.
There is considerable unhappiness in our government, and that includes the
Secretary of State, about the unwillingness of the Croatian Government to
put its best foot forward in meeting its commitments on the Dayton Accords.
QUESTION: Nick, do you have any comment on the sentencing of a Russian
citizen on charges related to his contacts with the American Embassy in
Moscow?
MR. BURNS: I have only seen a wire report on that this morning. We have
not been able to confirm that with the Russian Government. I think we
better talk to the Russian Government first. Then perhaps on Monday I
could give you an answer to that.
Yes, Carol.
QUESTION: I came in late, I don't know if you addressed this. Did you
have anything to say about Chirac's trip to Beijing?
MR. BURNS: I've not been asked about it.
QUESTION: Do you have anything to say about -
(Laughter.)
MR. BURNS: Nothing in a general way, no.
QUESTION: Human rights --
MR. BURNS: We know that President Chirac has gone to China. But unless
it's a specific question, it's hard for me to respond.
QUESTION: Well, on human rights, on the airbus deal, on the statements
that were signed. I mean, there's a whole slew of things. If you don't,
that's fine.
(Laughter.)
MR. BURNS: It's fine with me, too.
(Laughter.)
QUESTION: You were critical of France's stand and some European
countries' stand on human rights in Geneva. France seems to have gotten
its reward. Do you have a comment?
MR. BURNS: We think that democratic countries have an obligation to stand
up for human rights in China. There are more than a billion people in
China. China has been rid of nearly all of its political dissidents
because of the actions of the Chinese Government. We're a democratic
country, and we did stand up for human rights.
Now, we may have lost a procedural vote in Geneva, but I think we've earned
the gratitude of the democrats in China, and of people who believe in human
rights around the world. We're not going to back away from telling it like
it is on the issue of China and human rights. We want to have a full,
multifaceted relationship.
We think you can do both. We hope that we'd be joined in that by European
countries who are also democratic. They ought to have an interest in human
rights in China, too. Yes, sir.
QUESTION: Hong Kong.
MR. BURNS: Yes.
QUESTION: Hong Kong's - (inaudible) - government announced to some -
(inaudible) - its proposal on the public demonstration and counter public
political groups. So how do you assess the situation in Hong Kong? And do
you think that the transition is slow, or this is some negative sign?
MR. BURNS: Well, just a comment on the announcement yesterday from Hong
Kong. First of all, the United States has believed very strongly that the
existing ordinances adequately protect human and political rights in Hong
Kong. Those ordinances, of course, were drafted by the
democratically-elected legislative council.
Now, we know that the revised proposals announced yesterday by C.H. Tung do
reflect some of the concerns expressed by the people of Hong Kong. But
nevertheless, we don't see a reason to change the present laws. We don't
see a reason to revise the human rights laws, because politicians who were
elected by the people drafted those laws. It's always better to go about
living under laws -- better to have them drafted by democratically elected
politicians, than by appointed officials.
So we very much stand by the current democratic laws, the current laws, and
don't see any reason why they need to be amended in any way.
QUESTION: Thank you.
MR. BURNS: Thank you.
(The briefing concluded at 1:55 P.M.)
(###)
|
