Contribute to the HR-Net Forum Read the Convention Relating to the Regime of the Straits (24 July 1923) Read the Convention Relating to the Regime of the Straits (24 July 1923)
HR-Net - Hellenic Resources Network Compact version
Today's Suggestion
Read The "Macedonian Question" (by Maria Nystazopoulou-Pelekidou)
HomeAbout HR-NetNewsWeb SitesDocumentsOnline HelpUsage InformationContact us
Sunday, 24 November 2024
 
News
  Latest News (All)
     From Greece
     From Cyprus
     From Europe
     From Balkans
     From Turkey
     From USA
  Announcements
  World Press
  News Archives
Web Sites
  Hosted
  Mirrored
  Interesting Nodes
Documents
  Special Topics
  Treaties, Conventions
  Constitutions
  U.S. Agencies
  Cyprus Problem
  Other
Services
  Personal NewsPaper
  Greek Fonts
  Tools
  F.A.Q.
 

U.S. Department of State Daily Press Briefing #95, 97-06-25

U.S. State Department: Daily Press Briefings Directory - Previous Article - Next Article

From: The Department of State Foreign Affairs Network (DOSFAN) at <http://www.state.gov>


1299

U.S. Department of State
Daily Press Briefing

I N D E X

Wednesday, June 25, 1997

Briefer: John Dinger

ANNOUNCEMENTS/STATEMENTS
1                   Welcome to Visitors
1                   U.S. Conference of Mayors' Resolution Endorsing NATO
                      Enlargement
1                   Extension of Iraq Travel Warning

NORTH KOREA/SOUTH KOREA 1-4 Talks w/U.S. in New York on 6/30 to Discuss Four Party Proposal 3-4 Food Aid to North Korea 5 Missile Talks 16-17 N. Korean Officials' Visit to Sandia Nat'l. Labs

IRAQ 5 Sanctions/U.S. Support for UNSCOM

ISRAEL 5-7 Advanced Computer Export to Ben Gurion University

INDIA/PAKISTAN 7-8 Indian/U.S Senior Officials Meet at Department/Signing of Extradition Treaty 8 India/Pakistan Renewed Discussions

NICARAGUA 8 President Aleman's Visit to U.S./Mtgs. 8 --Immigration/Deportation of Nicaraguans fr. U.S. 8-9 --Cuba

CUBA 9 Dengue Epidemic

FORMER YUGOSLAVIA 9-11 Croatia--World Bank Loan/War Criminals

CAMBODIA 11,18 Pol Pot

CANADA 11-12 Status of Pacific Salmon Talks

ISRAEL 12-13 Arms Transfers fr. U.S.

TERRORISM 13-14 Anniversary of Bombing of Khobar Towers/Investigation 17 Reports of Attacks against Turkish Diplomatic Facilities in Europe 17 Financing of the PKK

JAPAN 14 Comments of Japanese Prime Minister in New York

ARMS CONTROL/NON-PROLIFERATION 14-15 Establishment of Position for Special Coordinator for Anti-Personnel Landmines

IRAN 15-16 Reported Arrest of American Citizen


U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE
DAILY PRESS BRIEFING

DPB #95

WEDNESDAY, JUNE 25, 1997 1:13 P.M.

(ON THE RECORD UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED)

MR. DINGER: Welcome to the State Department. Let me take care of a little bit of business right at the top. First, I would like to introduce some visitors. We have one very small group, singular -- the press spokesman for the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Qatar, Fawaz Al-Attiyya. So, welcome.

And then we also have a much larger group, diplomats and officials from the Israeli Embassy. I am very pleased to welcome you to the State Department press briefing today.

I'd also like to take a moment to note that the State Department welcomes the resolution endorsing NATO enlargement, adopted yesterday by the U.S. Conference of Mayors at its annual convention in San Francisco. The conference voted unanimously to "advocate and support NATO enlargement consistent with U.S. foreign policy objectives." In its resolution, the conference recognized NATO as the most successful defensive alliance in history and characterized the policy of enlargement as a component of purposeful and responsible engagement in global affairs.

As you know, President Clinton and Secretary Albright will attend the NATO Summit in Madrid, July 8th and 9th.

We expect and welcome a vigorous public debate on the proposal to add the new states to NATO. We're encouraged by this sign of support from an organization that represents leaders of both parties and communities across America. The Conference consists of 1,050 mayors, governing cities in all 50 states.

I would point out to you as well, it may not be any surprise, that we are extending our travel warning to American citizens regarding travel to Iraq. This is an extension of the previous warning. The Department of State warns all U.S. citizens against travel to Iraq, and I will leave that in the press office for you to take a look at later. Yes, questions?

QUESTION: Can you give us an update on whether there are going to be renewed talks on North Korea? Four-party talks?

MR. DINGER: We have agreed that Acting Assistant Secretary Charles Kartman will meet with Republic of Korea Deputy Foreign Minister Son Yong Shik and DPRK Vice Foreign Minister Kim Gye Gwan on Monday, June 30th, at the New York Palace Hotel.

The three have met twice previously to discuss the four-party proposal. The first meeting, you will remember, was on March 5th at the joint briefing on our four-party proposal.

The second meeting was April 16th through the 21st , when the North Koreans provided their initial formal response to the four- party proposal.

Monday's meeting has been called for further discussions in which we hope to make further progress in realizing the four-party proposal.

The latest meeting was scheduled as a result of a series of working level trilateral meetings following the April meeting. We certainly hope that North Korea will accept our proposal. When or if that happens, we will make a public announcement.

QUESTION: This is a discussion, this is not a briefing.

MR. DINGER: Right. We offered our briefing on March 5th.

Since then, there has been a round where the North Koreans came back with their formal reaction and since then there have been several working level meetings where we have just discussed the four-party proposal, which we briefed on March 5th.

QUESTION: What is to discuss? Are you talking about the shape of the table or details?

MR. DINGER: Well, Jim, as you know, we do not get into the details of the discussion. We have found that in the case of our discussions on this issue, and other issues regarding North Korea, that we are much more effective if we don't reveal the details of our discussions.

We have said after each of the working-level rounds that have taken place in recent weeks, that we believe the talks are headed in the right direction. We hope that they will continue to head in the right direction, and we hope ultimately - it's difficult to predict exactly when - but ultimately we will go through several other steps here and realize, first, the four-party talks, and then ultimately peace on the Korean Peninsula. But that is obviously, one would guess, quite a ways down the road.

QUESTION: Why aren't the Chinese taking part in the discussions on Monday in New York?

MR. DINGER: Well, these are talks to discuss the four- party talks. The Chinese, we believe, will participate in the four- party talks if they are held. That is the point at which the Chinese enter into the picture formally.

Obviously, we do have discussions with China on the situation in the Korean Peninsula. It's on of the areas, in fact, in which we cooperate quite closely with the Chinese.

QUESTION: John, the South Koreans are quite a bit more optimistic than you on what these talks are going to be about Monday. They are saying that North Korea has, in fact, signaled that it is prepared to begin the four-party talks. And this is a preparatory meeting to iron out the site and agenda and so forth.

What is your reaction to that?

MR. DINGER: I don't really have much of a reaction to offer on that. As I said, we have said over the last several weeks that we thought the talks were headed in the right direction.

We have, in fact, learned that in our discussions with North Korea it is best to be patient and to not get ahead of the story, and that when we have things that we can announce, we announce them. Today we have nothing to announce besides the fact that there will be a senior-level meeting in New York on Monday.

QUESTION: And just for the record, since you have never said it, and no one has ever said it from this podium, what was their initial reaction to this proposal that you referred to a couple minutes ago?

MR. DINGER: Well, actually, the Secretary has mentioned that they expressed support in principle for our proposal, but they did not agree to the four-party talks.

QUESTION: Why didn't they agree to it?

MR. DINGER: Well, as I have just said, we have not gotten into the details of our discussions. We have found that it's best if we do not reveal publicly the content of these discussions.

We find that is just more effective.

QUESTION: Are you now prepared to come forward with more aid, more food aid to North Korea?

MR. DINGER: Well, as you know, our humanitarian aid to North Korea is given on a humanitarian basis. It is not linked to these talks. We, I believe, are the largest donors to the World Food Program for North Korea. We certainly recognize North Korea has a severe food problem. We have no plans at the moment to provide additional food aid. However, should there be another request from the international community for food aid, we will certainly consider it.

QUESTION: Do you think the North Koreans, however, make a link, indirectly or directly, between the food aid which has been given and their agreement to discuss the four-party talks?

MR. DINGER: I don't want to speak for the North Koreans on that issue. You can ask them if they want to make such a link.

We do not, however.

QUESTION: Are you prepared to discuss it on Monday, though?

Are you prepared to discuss it once, if they agree to the --

MR. DINGER: We find that the North Koreans, on virtually every occasion in these discussions, raise with us their severe food shortage. So it would certainly not surprise me if the issue is raised by the North Koreans.

QUESTION: What would be your response? What you just said, we're not prepared - we have no plans at the moment to provide you additional food aid?

MR. DINGER: Well, I'm not going to get into the details of our agenda or our talking points. But our position is very clear and has been since the beginning of this -- we don't link the two; we provide the food aid on a humanitarian basis.

QUESTION: John, the Red Cross has made an appeal recently - I believe within the last ten days - for food aid for North Korea. Is the U.S. considering giving aid under the auspices of the Red Cross?

MR. DINGER: Sorry, I have not seen any report of a Red Cross appeal for food aid. Of course, there have been the discussions between the Red Cross Societies of North and South Korea and all of that. I have not seen that.

Obviously, we frequently see reports that international organizations or entities are preparing a new appeal. I am not aware of any new appeal that is under consideration by us.

QUESTION: John, how will Monday's talks differ from the working-level talks that we have had over the past month and a half or so? Is it just the difference in level? Or is there a difference in substance? Does this represent a major step forward in the right direction you mentioned before?

MR. DINGER: I think what I would say is that we have felt that the talks were headed in the right direction. We have said that after every round of the working-level talks. Clearly, we would not be going to a more senior level if we didn't think that the talks were headed in the right direction.

But I don't have anything beyond that, in terms of speculating about the outcome on Monday -- just nothing I can offer you on that. We have discovered over and over again with the North Koreans that we have something to announce, we announce it, but not before.

I certainly don't intend to do that today.

We have said the talks are heading in the right direction. We have put a very good proposal before the North Koreans. We think they should accept it, the four-party talks, and we certainly hope they will. But I can't predict for you when that might happen.

QUESTION: Did you see that the North Korean official newspaper monitored in Tokyo said that they would be willing to discuss peace as long as there was no provocation of war. Do you think that this is a sign that the North Koreans are coming around to the four-party talks proposal?

MR. DINGER: I don't want to try and read the tea leaves of official North Korean media. We have found that very difficult to do. So I don't think I want to react to that broadcast. However, I did see that report.

QUESTION: Just a quick one?

MR. DINGER: Sure.

QUESTION: Just one more, John. On missiles, what's coming up on talking missiles with the North Koreans? Is that off the stove?

MR. DINGER: No, not at all. I think, though, what I should do is - of course, we did have the missile talks recently in New York. I think I had better refer you to the record, because we did give the readout that we could following that. I just, off the top, of my head don't remember enough of it to recount it off the cuff.

It's best to go back to the record. We discussed that after the missile talks. There was mention of upcoming meetings, but I just don't remember what we said exactly about it. It's best to go back to that. Yes.

QUESTION: Iraq. Do you have reaction to the comments by Rolf Ekeus on the continued Iraqi efforts to evade sanctions?

MR. DINGER: Not much because they speak for themselves.

Mr. Ekeus has done an outstanding job heading UNSCOM in its effort to track and uncover Iraq's efforts to develop weapons of mass destruction. His comments and report seem to be very thorough.

It certainly doesn't surprise us that Iraq continues to make every effort to hide, obfuscate, block efforts to unravel its efforts to develop weapons of mass destruction.

We clearly believe that Iraq remains a threat to its own citizens, to the region, and beyond. This just confirms, once again, the need to maintain sanctions and maintain U.S. support for UNSCOM.

QUESTION: What about the need to toughen sanctions?

MR. DINGER: Well, of course, we just pronounced ourselves, along with the Security Council, just a couple days ago on that issue. Iraq is on notice that it needs to cooperate with UN inspectors or else it will pay a price -- and that price will be paid beginning October 1st. So I think we had, in fact, an announcement on that earlier this week or last week. So I would refer you to that. It was certainly raised in the briefing.

But Iraq is on notice. It has always been on notice. It never gets off notice. It just won't change its way. That is sad for the region and sad for the people of Iraq. We will remain vigilant and very supportive of UNSCOM.

QUESTION: On Israel?

MR. DINGER: Mm-hmm.

QUESTION: Do you have anything there about the sale of a supercomputer to Ben Gurion University -- to the network that runs Israel's nuclear system?

MR. DINGER: I can tell you that as a result of an interagency review last year, access by Israeli institutions, including Ben Gurion University, to advanced computers was significantly improved.

Israel, like all other non-signatories of the nuclear non-proliferation treaty, receives deferential treatment under U.S. export controls governing nuclear dual-use items. For this reason, Ben Gurion University, along with several other Israeli institutions, previously enjoyed only very limited access to high performance computers.

But Israel was reviewed first, under the President's October 1995 Computer Export Control Policy for the purpose of assessing whether such restrictions were appropriate. We gave this very careful consideration and restrictions were substantially reduced for Ben Gurion. Licenses are no longer required for computers under 2000 MTOPS. For computers above this level, there is a case-by-case review with no presumption of denial. For inter-university consortium use, there is a presumption of approval for computers of 2000 to 7000 MTOPS.

Now, we put a notice in the Federal Register to this effect. Publication of that is part of our U.S. policy so we can inform our industry of all special licensing procedures. So, that's what we did.

QUESTION: You're not willing to sell Ben Gurion University a supercomputer. Is that what you're saying?

MR. DINGER: I would send you to the experts. However, I am not at all certain that 2000 MTOPS falls under the category of supercomputer. In fact, while not an expert, I would guess that is not the case.

QUESTION:2000 to 7000 for university use.

MR. DINGER: Well, that is for inter-university consortium use, obviously -- when they are joined up and using a computer jointly. But those will be reviewed.

QUESTION: Without mincing words, whatever the MTOP is for this computer, has the United States agreed to sell it and agreed to allow its companies to sell it to Israel?

MR. DINGER: Yes. Well, let's - it is important to go through it with some detail, though I certainly am not an expert on computers. However, licenses are no longer required for computers under 2000 MTOPS. For computers above that level there is a case-by-case review. Anything above 2000 MTOPS, that's the bottom line. Now, you can get into these other categories of 2000 to 7000. If it's for inter-university use, there is a presumption of approval.

It would go into the approval process presuming it would be approved.

However, there is still a case-by-case review.

QUESTION: Is there a case being reviewed now?

MR. DINGER: I'm not aware of it. I don't know. I don't know who necessarily would be reviewing that. It could well be Department of Commerce. So, you might want to talk to them.

QUESTION: Why do you have this lengthy guidance if there is not some specific case here you're addressing?

MR. DINGER: I think what we have found is that around the world, the capacity of computers has expanded just exponentially.

Anybody who deals with Japan will be somewhat familiar with this issue. What happened is that a lot of computers that, when originally the regime was set up, fell into export controls are now widely available -- so widely available that, in fact, the regime got a little out of sync with what's available on the market. So, that's what's been going on.

There is a presumption, as the guidance said, that people who have not signed - party states that have not signed the nuclear non-proliferation treaty receive differential treatment. So, what we've done is up to 2000 MTOPS for Israel, we have removed the differential treatment for that category. Licenses are no longer required for computers under 2000 MTOPS. Beyond that, they will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis.

I would send you to the experts, but I think you will find that 2000 MTOPS is not an enormously large computer in today's world.

So, it just seemed a reasonable thing to do, which we have done.

QUESTION: I believe there was a meeting between India's deputy foreign minister and Mr. Strobe Talbott. Could you give us a readout on that?

MR. DINGER: Indian Minister of State for External Affairs, Saleem Shervani met Acting Secretary of State Talbott today at 10:30 a.m. Indian Foreign Secretary-designate, Mr. Ragunath accompanied him and he will also meet - Mr. Ragunath will also meet Under Secretary Pickering today and Under Secretary Eizenstat. They discussed several issues of mutual interest. Following the meeting, they also signed a new extradition treaty which replaces the existing 1931 agreement. We believe our new extradition treaty is a mutually beneficial and modern tool for enhancing law enforcement cooperation between our countries.

QUESTION: Are there any extradition requests pending with the U.S.?

MR. DINGER: I'm not aware that we have any at the State Department. But once again, extradition often begins at the Department of Justice, so you might discuss it. I'm not aware of any pending issues. We've been making an effort to update and modernized our extradition treaties around the world. As you can see, the one with India dated from 1931. So, this is part of a global effort and we are very pleased we were able to conclude it with India. I would hope to be able to put it to good use as necessary.

QUESTION: Could you elaborate on some of the issues the two sides discussed?

MR. DINGER: No, I don't have any details for you on any of the issues. They clearly involved our bilateral relationship, regional issues and global issues. We have a broad relationship with India and lots of things on the agenda on each occasion.

QUESTION: Do you have any comment on the good news coming out of the subcontinent, in terms of the Indo-Pak dialogue and the formation of working groups?

MR. DINGER: We have welcomed the most recent meeting of Indian and Pakistani foreign secretaries. Of course, we previously commended renewed discussions between the two countries. The establishment of working groups is a very positive step in our view in this continuing dialogue, and we hope that this will contribute to resolving differences between India and Pakistan. The working groups' agenda, as included in the statement issued at the end of the talks, was quite realistic. It addressed the significant issues which divide the countries and we certainly wish both countries well in this initiative.

QUESTION: On the extradition treaty, can you discuss any changes from the 1931 treaty?

MR. DINGER: You know, I believe that later this afternoon, we are going to have a nice joint communiqu&eacute; on this extradition treaty. So, I can't promise it immediately following the briefing, but we're trying to get it ready for you. That should give you all the details you need. Just check in the press office later.

Yes, ma'am?

QUESTION: The president of Nicaragua was yesterday here at the State Department. Do you have anything?

MR. DINGER: Well, President Aleman is in the midst of a two-day visit to Washington and the State Department. He met yesterday with Under Secretaries Pickering and Eizenstat. He has also had meetings with congressional leaders and with Attorney General Reno. The State Department meetings were cordial and productive. They covered a wide range of issues -- principally, Cuba, property issues we have, and immigration.

President Aleman is obviously very concerned about the deportation of Nicaraguans from the United States and the impact of such deportations on Nicaraguans. We assured him that there will be no massive deportations of Nicaraguans or others and that U.S. Immigration Law will be applied humanely and on a case-by-case basis.

QUESTION: On the Cuban discussion, do you have anything more?

MR. DINGER: No, we share along with Nicaragua -- and frankly, probably every other nation in the hemisphere and we believe most of the nations in the world -- a desire to see democracy come to Cuba. So, they had a good discussion about that joint vision of finally bringing democracy to the only remaining authoritarian state in this hemisphere.

QUESTION: Also on Cuba, there is a Dengue epidemic in Cuba. Is there any warning for people who may travel there?

MR. DINGER: Well, our first warning to the people, to American citizens who may travel to Cuba is, don't go. Dengue fever outbreak is just one more reason to do that. As you know, we strongly discourage U.S. tourism in Cuba. It is, in fact, illegal for U.S. citizens to spend money to travel as tourists to Cuba.

The way we see it, there are any number of beautiful islands in the Caribbean.

(Laughter.)

Most of them, in fact, all of them, feature the additional attraction of having democratic governments that do not deny their people basic international recognized freedoms. Of course, certain categories of U.S. citizens can legally spend money to travel to Cuba and there is an excellent fact sheet available from the Department of Treasury about that. But bottom line is, we don't think people should go to Cuba anyway. I can't see any reason to go there, myself; wouldn't recommend anybody else going there. Dengue fever is just one on top of mountain of reasons not to go.

QUESTION: John, have we talked about any developments in the World Bank situation, the loan for Croatia?

QUESTION: Excuse me, could I just ask one more.

MR. DINGER: Mm-hmm.

QUESTION: You said the extradition issue was - I have been following this hour-by-hour, but I have the impression that a Florida court suspended the planned extradition - the planned deportation. And I also have the impression that the U.S. Government is appealing that decision. Is that correct?

MR. DINGER: I think that has been quite a difficult issue to follow, as you say. One does have to follow it at least day-by- day, if not hour-by-hour. I think I'll leave that to the Justice Department to get into the details of the case that's been underway in Florida.

We have assured Nicaraguans and others, however, that we will do our utmost to ensure that there is no mass deportation and that U.S. Immigration law is applied in a humane fashion.

Croatia World Bank loan. The loan was scheduled for approval under the World Bank's streamlined procedure on June 24th.

We requested a delay on June 23rd and were granted one until June 26th. That was a technical delay that we discussed yesterday. On yesterday, June 24th, we requested that the loan be further delayed for discussion by the full board.

It is our current understanding that the consideration of this loan will not come up until next week, at the earliest, when the full board can meet. At the moment, the Departments of Treasury and State are working very closely together on this issue. We will continue to review all of our options.

I would just make the basic points, of course, or reiterate the basic points. And that is that we have not been satisfied with Croatia's compliance with the Dayton Agreement. That has been particular true in its cooperation on war criminals, on the freedom of movement -- particularly into Bosnia, and on the return of Serb refugees. Additionally, it is very clear that if a state does not comply with one international agreement, for example, Dayton, it does make it a little more difficult to feel confident that that state will cooperate, will implement another international agreement -- for example, through an international financial institution.

So, we hope to have a longer delay during which we can further assess Croatia's performance; and we'll judge this on a case-by-case basis.

QUESTION: There is a little confusion over this because it is my understanding that the word from the White House is that the Administration is "taking no position." We've heard that phrase used in relation to the Balkan before -- taking no position, vis-&agrave;-vis, this loan. And yet here we have now, I guess, by my count, three requests or at least two requests for a delay on this loan. So, can you straighten that out?

MR. DINGER: I certainly can't because I haven't seen those quotes from the White House. I'm not aware of the White House saying that. Our position is quite clear. I just did lay it out.

Now, you get into the technical jargon of World Bank loans and, in fact, I have four pages, I believe, here of background for me describing the technical aspects of this -- no objections, streamlining process, regular process. So, it could be an issue of semantics. You probably don't want me to bore you with going through the details of how World Bank loans work. The bottom line is we think this should be delayed. We think we need more time to observe Croatia's performance for compliance with Dayton and also because this clearly has implications on its willingness to implement other international agreements. We would like to have a longer period to watch this.

QUESTION: One follow-up. There is also some confusion regarding the arrest of war criminals. The administration is telling people on the Hill that we don't know where the war criminals are. However, there are American diplomats being quoted in news stories saying we do know where they are -- that we know that they spend 20 percent of their time in Croatia and the rest of their time in Bosnia. And I am just wondering whether or not, in fact, we do know where people like Mr. Kordic and Mr. Rajic are.

MR. DINGER: We certainly, to the best of our ability, do try to follow where war criminals are. It is certainly not a perfect - we do not have perfect ability to do that. We are quite confident, however, that in the case of Croatia - well, there are two sides to that issue as well. One is whether Croatia can use its influence over war criminals that may be in the parts of Bosnia that are associated with Croatia. That's one issue.

The other issue is whether war criminals, as you state, perhaps don't live in Croatia, but do spend time there, and whether they are apprehended by Croatia as obligated under the Dayton Agreement or not. On both those issues, we are not, at the moment, satisfied with Croatia's efforts. Yes, sir?

QUESTION: Two questions. First of all, has the State Department heard back from Canada on its request to help get Pol Pot back into that country for a trial?

MR. DINGER: We have never gotten into the details of the options that we are looking at regarding assistance to the Cambodians on Pol Pot, so I can't confirm for you what options we're looking into or any responses we've had on any of those options.

QUESTION: Did the Secretary of State make a request to the Canadian Government to see if they could bring him to Canada?

MR. DINGER: We have not given any of the details on the options that we are looking at in order to help the Cambodians pursue bringing Pol Pot to justice.

QUESTION: And just a second question dealing with Canada.

The salmon talks, again, are off; and now both sides are accusing each other of being inflexible. Is there any hope of resuming these talks or are we at a stalemate that they are going nowhere?

MR. DINGER: I have not seen reports that the talks are off. We held talks, as you know, last week, Wednesday through Friday. Those talks recessed last Friday while both sides went to their capitols to consult. I understand that there has been contact by telephone at various levels in the interim. Of course, the President mentioned this to the Prime Minister, and Secretary Albright mentioned it to the Foreign Minister.

We try to remain optimistic about this. We, as you know, are very, very confident that we went into these negotiations some months ago with an attitude of good will, good faith and compromise.

We do not believe that the Canadian negotiator met us in that same spirit. We are very disappointed that the Canadian negotiator walked away from the table May 20th. Frankly, we had a very good proposal on the table -- one that involved real compromise certainly on the U.S. side and probably on the Canadian side as well. If the Canadian negotiator had not walked away from those meetings, we think we would have an agreement today. We are very disappointed.

QUESTION: The Canadians argue that your negotiator doesn't have the authority to make the deal; that the deal has to be agreed to by various parties and that is what is really holding this up.

MR. DINGER: That is a bogus argument because since the outset of these negotiations in 1985, the process has been very, very clear that we act on behalf of our stakeholders in these negotiations. It is an essential element of these negotiations that any agreement must go back to the constituents, the stakeholders for their confirmation.

We regret very much the Canadian negotiator walked away from the process on May 20th, just as we felt we had an agreement that we could take back to the stakeholders and get approval.

QUESTION: Besides talking, you are no further along the line of getting the talks re-started again?

MR. DINGER: We are very hopeful. The problem here is that we went into these talks with two main, and very directly related objectives. One was to preserve the salmon fishery, the fish, off the west coast of Canada and the United States. The other was to do that in a way that allowed for continued salmon fishing. That was the objective. The United States aimed squarely at that objective in a very transparent process, in a very good faith process.

We do not feel that Canada has taken the same aim at those objectives that we have -- the objective of one, preserving the fisheries; and two, preserving a salmon fishery. We really regret that.

Let's go to Talal.

QUESTION: I just want to see if you have any comment on the investigation published yesterday by The Independent, which is a British newspaper, that revealed that most of the American bombs on air-to-ground missiles fired by Israel in Lebanon last year were sold to the United States Army forces and not to Israel.

And as you know, in this operation 200 civilians and 14 guerrillas were killed from pro-Hezbollah people. One thousand seven hundred bombs and missiles were transferred from U.S. military stocks with no prohibition on their use against civilians. That's what the paper alleged.

This also says (Inaudible) -- the system of weapons transferred from the United States (Inaudible) -- become that massive shipments to ordnance to Israel are now undertaken with no publicity or debate. I wonder if you have seen that report?

MR. DINGER: I haven't seen the report. Our security relationship with Israel is, obviously, very well known and I would think very transparent. You might want to check with the Pentagon to see if they have any information on how arms transfers are conducted.

I don't think I want to get into that sort of debate because I don't see that it is essentially a State Department issue.

QUESTION: I don't know why you say it's not a State Department because, well, the paper says the State Department gives the orders and the acceptance of every Israeli request and desire. Whatever it wants is acceded to, quoting a senior retired U.S. general.

MR. DINGER: We have a very, very close relationship with Israel; that's for certain. I believe this is fairly transparent.

I would also point out, of course, the United States, in terms of the issue of civilians being involved in this, the United States was an essential player in setting up the monitoring group regarding Southern Lebanon. That group is operating very, very well. In fact, we just issued a statement yesterday or the day before on the latest meeting in Ankara.

So I haven't seen that report. I think our relationship across the board with Israel is very transparent --

QUESTION: I am very surprised, because the paper is saying that despite four weeks of inquiries to the State Department and the Department of Defense seeking clarification, neither department had felt able to respond to The Independent's inquiries.

MR. DINGER: Well, with all due respect to The Independent, I haven't seen that report. I think our relationship with Israel is very, very transparent in most cases, when we can be. We also set up the monitoring group to try to help avoid or resolve issues involving civilians in Southern Lebanon.

QUESTION: Could you confirm that shipments are transferred without any limitation on their use?

MR. DINGER: No, I think I have to send you to the record, or to maybe DOD. I am not quite sure who is involved in arms transfers to Israel. But I think it's all there. I think if The Independent or any journalist wants to explore this issue, there is probably more than enough on the record to --

QUESTION: It states they made about 30 phone calls to both departments, and neither of them wants to - every one of them sent the reporter to the other department.

MR. DINGER: I don't think I can help you. Maybe they just need to do some independent research.

(Laughter.)

No pun intended with The Independent newspaper. Bill.

QUESTION: Yes, thank you, John. Regarding the alleged eyewitness to the Khobar bombings, Mr. Al-Sayegh, who will be in district court tomorrow morning in Judge Sullivan's U.S. District Court, John, are the reports accurate that the Saudi Arabians were sending some of their law enforcement people here to Washington to interview Mr. Al-Sayegh? And has it happened yet?

MR. DINGER: Bill, you know I am not going to get into that. However, this does offer an opportunity to note that I believe today is the one-year anniversary of the terrorist bomb exploded in front of the Khobar Towers in Dhahran. That, of course, killed 19 Americans.

We share the special grief this day must bring to the families of the airmen who died a year ago. Since then we have made every possible effort to bring those responsible to justice. That process, as we know, is still ongoing.

As we have pursued this investigation, we have received cooperation from Saudi authorities. We continue to give this investigation absolutely top priority. We have reached no conclusion regarding responsibility for Khobar. Just as we have in other terrorist cases, we will take all the time necessary to complete a thorough investigation. Because it is an ongoing criminal investigation, I can't comment on any of the details of that criminal matter.

QUESTION: But, John, the comment about Saudis being invited or welcome to come here and interview this particular witness?

MR. DINGER: No, you might talk to the Department of Justice or the law enforcement authorities. I don't have anything for you on that.

QUESTION: Is there any reciprocation if this the case, from the Saudis? Or can you say --

MR. DINGER: The FBI is in charge of our investigation.

It's an ongoing investigation on which I have no comment. But we do want to express our condolences to the families, again, one year later today. It's a terrible incident.

QUESTION: Any reaction to the comments of the Japanese Prime Minister in New York the other day that brought down the stock market?

MR. DINGER: No.

QUESTION: Do you have any comment on the state of play in Geneva at the UN Conference on Disarmament where a U.S. effort to start work on a global ban on landmines apparently has hit another snag?

MR. DINGER: The issue, I think, to which you are referring is a decision on a special coordinator -- the establishment of a position of special coordinator for anti-personal landmines.

We expect that decision to be taken Thursday, tomorrow, June 26th, before part two of the 1997 Session of the Conference on Disarmament concludes on Friday. The United States strongly supports the appointment of a special coordinator, and we are working to try to make that happen.

As you know, we are committed to a ban on anti-personnel landmines.

We continue to believe that the Conference on Disarmament offers the most practical and effective alternative for negotiating a conference of global ban on landmines. We believe a special coordinator for that purpose is necessary; and we look forward to working hard toward reaching that goal.

QUESTION: And if this effort to get a special coordinator appointed fails, will the United States take another look at the fast track Ottawa conference approach?

MR. DINGER: Well, first, of course, we never like to speculate in the negative about it failing. We hope to reach an agreement on the special coordinator for anti-personnel landmines. Nevertheless, if Thursday's action does not result in that, there is part three of this year's Conference on Disarmament, which begins in late July. We will, if necessary, take it to part three.

Regarding the Ottawa process, you probably know our position very well. We believe the Conference on Disarmament, for several reasons, is the best venue to negotiate a ban on landmines. Nevertheless, we do participate in Ottawa meetings, because we believe those processes can be complimentary. Yes, Betsy.

QUESTION: John, do you have anything more on the American that was reported to have been picked up by Iranian authorities?

MR. DINGER: We, of course, are aware of the report. The reports that we've seen in the press do not give the name of the American allegedly detained. That makes - do you have a name?

QUESTION: Yes.

MR. DINGER: That will make it easier --

(Laughter.)

-- to try to track the information down. I can nevertheless still point out that U.S. interests in Iran are represented by the Swiss Government. We have asked the Swiss protecting power in Tehran, via our embassy in Bern, to verify the report. If the report proves true, the Swiss protecting power will ask for counselor access to the American on our behalf.

Now, I would like to point out that our consular information sheet regarding Iran states very clearly that the Department of State warns all U.S. citizens against travel to Iran. We don't think Americans should travel there. Nevertheless, if an American has ignored this warning and traveled to Iran and gotten into trouble, we will make every effort to assist that American through our protecting power - the Swiss.

There is also an issue, as you know, of Privacy Act. We obviously do not have a privacy act waiver on any American that may be detained.

That will be one of our first steps since - and that is what we are working on through our embassy in Bern, Switzerland.

QUESTION: Have you heard back from the Swiss, John, from your inquiry?

MR. DINGER: Well, this may be added news because, frankly, it was very difficult. There are several American citizens detained in Iran. Most of them are dual nationals. None have given us a Privacy Act waiver. So that's where we are.

QUESTION: Have the Swiss gotten back to you on your specific request about this person?

MR. DINGER: No.

QUESTION: I mean, didn't you - and when did you ask them?

MR. DINGER: I think we asked them yesterday.

QUESTION: Yesterday?

MR. DINGER: Yeah.

QUESTION: And now 24 hours later, they haven't been able to --

MR. DINGER: Well, Iran's a big country. Perhaps this -- what we're talking about here is trying to verify whether an American, previously completely unidentified to us, was arrested someplace in Iran. That's a tall order. We have a lot of faith in the Swiss. But I think we ought to give them a break here.

Yes, sir.

QUESTION: John, can you confirm that reportedly the North Korean delegation for the missile talks recently visited a U.S. military control center?

MR. DINGER: I can absolutely deny that. That did not happen.

QUESTION: (Inaudible.)

MR. DINGER: A military control center?

QUESTION: Yes.

MR. DINGER: No, that's not true. There was a report in the press yesterday about a visit by a North Korean delegation to an unclassified, private installation, I'll call it, a center.

That did take place. That was part of an effort on our part to bring the North Koreans into the global arms control community.

We did arrange this. We have a key objective of the United States Government of trying to, as I say, bring the North Koreans into the global community on non-proliferation.

We did arrange a visit to a private, unclassified facility in order to show them some of the confidence-building measures that are used elsewhere in the world to try to avoid proliferation of weapons. So that did happen. But as you described it, that simply did not happen.

QUESTION: They didn't go back to North Korea?

MR. DINGER: I refer you to the North Koreans for where they are now. I don't know.

QUESTION: Sorry, John, what kind of a site was this?

MR. DINGER: It was a private site, I believe run by Sandia - Sandia, I'll leave it there. That part of it, I believe, was described accurately in the press article. The name of the private firm that was involved, however, was a completely unclassified facility. It was absolutely in the vein of trying to further one of our top priorities of this Administration. That's the non-proliferation of weapons. So, yes, absolutely we did that, and hope it helps toward achieving our goal.

QUESTION: But what does this site actually do? It monitors U.S. missiles or --

MR. DINGER: No, on June 16th, six North Korean officials visited an unclassified facility - the Sandia National Laboratories Cooperative Monitoring Center. They had a one-day workshop on general arms control principles.

Another private organization - the Atlantic Council - organized the workshop. The Atlantic Council is based in Washington; it's a research organization. Sandia National Laboratory is not a United States Government entity. It does have a relationship with the Department of Energy, however.

At no time did the North Koreans have access to any classified information, nor to any sensitive U.S. technology. All items displayed at the Cooperative Monitoring Center are commercially available technologies. The intent of the workshop was to introduce North Korea to general principles of arms control confidence-building measures that have been widely used in other regions of the world.

This was in the furtherance of one of our top national priorities.

Yes, sir.

QUESTION: New subject. Recently several attacks happened in Europe against the Turkish diplomatic facilities. According to the wire report, some of the unknown Armenian terrorist organizations and the PKK cooperated with each other on this attack. Do you have any reaction on the subject?

MR. DINGER: We condemn terrorism wherever and whenever it takes place. I'm not familiar with those reports. I certainly hope that there was no one hurt or injured. We condemn terrorism wherever and whenever it takes place.

QUESTION: Another wire report mentions that the PKK earn $500 million selling drugs to the United States. Do you have anything on this subject?

MR. DINGER: I don't have anything for you on that. We certainly believe the PKK is a vicious terrorist organization.

I don't have anything I can offer you on how it may gain financing.

I would refer you to our annual terrorism report for any comment it may have on sources of revenue for the PKK. It's a vicious terrorist organization. Yes, sir.

QUESTION: Could I ask, MIA talks, which starts today in New York --

MR. DINGER: I think I'd refer you to DOD. They have the lead on POW-MIA issues.

QUESTION: John, will the Secretary be seeing the Japanese special envoy, appointed by the Summit of the Eight, to Cambodia when she's there?

MR. DINGER: I'm not aware that she has an appointment along those lines.

QUESTION: Is one of her objectives in Cambodia to find out what really is going on with Pol Pot?

MR. DINGER: I think it's best to leave details of the Secretary's trip and travel and schedule and agenda to the traveling party, which is on the road right now - in the air, as a matter of fact. In terms of Pol Pot, that issue, if you want I could try to get you an update. I don't have much new to offer, though.

QUESTION: Do you know if the Secretary is even going to Cambodia?

MR. DINGER: I think I'll leave that for the party to discuss.

Obviously, it's their trip, the Secretary's trip, and I'll leave that to them for any updates. Yes.

QUESTION: Do you have any comment on the visit of the Australian prime minister this week in D.C.?

MR. DINGER: The prime minister?

QUESTION: Mm-hmm.

MR. DINGER: I think I'll refer that to the White House.

QUESTION: All right.

(The briefing concluded at 2:01 P.M.)

(###)


U.S. State Department: Daily Press Briefings Directory - Previous Article - Next Article
Back to Top
Copyright © 1995-2023 HR-Net (Hellenic Resources Network). An HRI Project.
All Rights Reserved.

HTML by the HR-Net Group / Hellenic Resources Institute, Inc.
std2html v1.01a run on Wednesday, 25 June 1997 - 23:11:51 UTC