Read about International Treaties, Human & Minority Rights in Turkey 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
Monday, 25 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 #107, 97-07-16

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>


430

U.S. Department of State
Daily Press Briefing

I N D E X

Wednesday, July 16, 1997

Briefer: Nicholas Burns

ANNOUNCEMENTS / STATEMENTS
1                       Secretary Albright's Activities:
1                       --7/16-Mtg. w/Swedish FM Hjelm-Wallen
1-2                     --7/17-Denver; 7/23--Los Angeles
1-2,15-16               --7/26-7/29--ASEAN Regional Forum/Post-Ministerial
                          Conference
1-2                     --7/29-30-Singapore
2                       Statement on U.S. Panama Talks/Relations
2                       State Department/Senate Baseball Game/Rematch
2-3                     Support for Nomination of Governor William
                          Weld-Ambassador to Mexico

FORMER YUGOSLAVIA 4-8 French Position on SFOR Detention of War Criminals/ Tribunal 9 Stabbing of American Soldier

NORTH/SOUTH KOREA 9-11 North Korean Soldiers Cross Demilitarized Zone

LIBYA 11-12 UN Sanctions

LEBANON 12 U.S. Review of Travel Restrictions

MIDDLE EAST 12 Doha Summit

SYRIA 12-13 U.S. Senate Legislation re: Syria

CYPRUS 13 Reported Visit of Turkish Deputy PM to Cyprus 13-14 UN Talks on Cyprus

CAMBODIA 14-16 Reports of Arrests/Intimidations/Executions/ of Cambodians/FUNCINPEC 16-17 U.S. Aid/U.S. Embassy Assistance to American Citizens

TURKEY/GREECE 17-18 U.S. Delegation to Region re: Discussion of U.S. Relations

NIGERIA 18 Reports re: Recent Bombings in Lagos

CUBA 18-19 Allegations of U.S./American Participation in Recent Bombings

GERMANY 19 Report of Decision to Create U.S.-German Air Defense Unit


U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE
DAILY PRESS BRIEFING

DPB #107

WEDNESDAY, JULY 16, 1997 1:20 P.M.

(ON THE RECORD UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED)

MR. BURNS: Good afternoon. Welcome back to the State Department for our daily press briefing. Secretary Albright is going to be seeing the Swedish Foreign Minister, Foreign Minister Hjelm-Wallen at 3:30 p.m. this afternoon. That is a press opportunity, an open press opportunity. They will have statements and they will take a couple of questions from all of you. That is at 3:30 p.m. upstairs in the Treaty Room.

Starting tomorrow, the Secretary is going to take a long weekend with her family, with her daughters at her home in Colorado. She will be back, I think, on Tuesday, next Tuesday before she leaves next Wednesday. On Wednesday, July 23rd, the Secretary will be traveling from Washington to Los Angeles. She is going to spend the better part of the afternoon in Los Angeles. I will be in touch with you about the details of her schedule in Los Angeles. There's likely to be one or two public events there. Then she goes on from Los Angeles to Kuala Lumpur in Malaysia for the ASEAN Regional Forum and the ASEAN Post Ministerial Conference. The Secretary will be leading the United States delegation from July 26th to July 29th to both of those fora. The ASEAN Regional Forum is now in its fourth year. Foreign Ministers from 20 countries, including China, Japan and Russia, as well as the European Union, will meet to exchange views on the political and security situation in the Asia-Pacific region.

Following the ASEAN Regional Forum, she will participate and lead our delegation to the Post Ministerial Conference where we have a dialogue with the ASEAN countries on our relationship with them, on the economic and security and political situation, atmosphere issues in Southeast Asia.

Following her visit to Kuala Lumpur, the Secretary will also visit Singapore on July 29 and July 30th. This will be the first visit by a Secretary of State to Singapore during this Administration. The Secretary will review with the senior Singaporean leaders the full range of our very strong relationship, which encompasses a very healthy trade and economic relationship and a very active political and security cooperative relationship. I expect that regional issues, human rights issues, everything that pertains to our relationship with Singapore will be on the agenda. This is a very important relationship. She is looking forward to her visit to Singapore.

Now, she should be returning to the United States, I would think on the 31st of July to Andrews, probably late that evening. This trip then extends from the 23rd of July to the 31st of July. If you have any questions about this trip, please let me know. We will have a sign-up sheet available to all of you who would like to travel with the Secretary, available immediately after the briefing. I am going to take that sign-up sheet down tomorrow afternoon because we do have to get visas for you if you are coming with us and leaving next Wednesday morning.

QUESTION: Overnight in Los Angeles?

MR. BURNS: Overnight in Los Angeles, yes. We have to do that for crew rest. The crew cannot fly more than 15 hours, as you know, by U.S. Air Force regulations, so we have to break up the trip in some way.

I wanted to let you all know that we did issue a statement last evening on Panama - actually, a very important statement. It talked about our current discussions with the Panamanian Government about the possibility of a U.S. presence in Panama after 1999. As you know, we have an agreement in place and has been in place for many years for the transfer of authority over the Canal in 1999, but we are talking to the Panamanians about the possibility of creating a multinational counternarcotics center.

This grows out of the visit in 1995 of President Perez Balladarez to Washington when he and President Clinton talked about this general issue. Since then, over the last two years, we have had a series of informal conversations concerning the creation of a multinational counternarcotics center and the question of whether or not the United States would participate in that center. After these informal contacts we have now agreed to go on to formal discussions. Ambassador John Negreponte is leading the U.S. delegation. We are looking forward to these talks. They are very important talks about the future of U.S.-Panama relations.

Now, on to the really important part of business today. Many of you are no doubt aware of last evening's epic baseball match between the State Department team, led by Madeleine Albright, and the Senate team lead by Senator Jesse Helms, the Hittbillies. I have been authorized to tell you that in her effort to promote bipartisanship, to promote full funding for the State Department, to promote Senate acceptance of the Administration's plan on UN arrears, the State Department team graciously and magnanimously allowed the Helms team to win last evening, 8-to-4.

I can assure you, having spoken to Helms staff this morning, there is no truth to the rumors that Tommy Lee Jones and Will Smith were seen leaving the Helms bench in the ninth inning of the match and that's what accounted for the Helms victory. I guess you guys haven't seen Men In Black. You should see Men In Black and you'd know what I am talking about. I can confirm - I spoke to the Secretary just a couple of moments ago -- that she has instructed her staff this morning to seek an immediate increase in our 150 account for equipment and training for the State Department baseball team. As the Secretary told me just a couple of moments ago, when diplomats lose, they attempt to do so diplomatically; so we will seek a rematch with Senator Helms' team. Jim?

QUESTION: Did the name William Weld, come up in the encounter yesterday around the baseball diamond?

MR. BURNS: I have no idea. The Secretary and Senator Helms had a good time together. Senator Helms wore the tee shirt that Secretary Albright gave him - on the tee shirt, it says, "Someone at the State Department loves me," that tee shirt. The Secretary wore her tee shirt with her number on the back . They had a great time. I am not sure the issue of Governor Weld came up.

QUESTION: Is the Administration backing away from the nomination of William Weld to be Ambassador to Mexico?

MR. BURNS: I know that Mike McCurry made a statement on this this morning over at the White House. Mike said that the President absolutely stands by the nomination of Governor Weld. I would refer you to Mike's statement on that.

QUESTION: The Senator did comment. I was at the softball game and watched the All-Brights lose diplomatically, if you will. The Senator said that he is still opposed to Weld and he can have fun trying and fighting for this ambassadorship to Mexico, but it is not going to happen. Any thoughts from the Secretary on that?

MR. BURNS: Well, all I can tell you is that I think Mike McCurry has delivered the definitive position of this Administration -- the very clear position of this Administration this morning.

QUESTION: So, you are still behind the Governor --

MR. BURNS: Absolutely.

QUESTION: -- for his ambassadorship?

MR. BURNS: Absolutely. We stand by Governor Weld , yes.

QUESTION: Nick, on that same topic, since obviously Mike McCurry said we're going to fight for this nomination and Secretary Albright has what seems to be a good relationship with Senator Helms, what, if anything, will she do to help fight for this nomination?

MR. BURNS: Obviously, the Secretary and the President are totally together on this and totally supportive of Governor Weld. Sometimes it is important to -- especially in conversations with leading members of the Senate, in this case, the chairman of the committee -- to let those conversations take place privately and confidentially without any advance warning from us here at the State Department Press Office.

QUESTION: Do you know when she will be involved in this?

MR. BURNS: The Secretary obviously supports all the President's nominees and will do what she has to do in concert with senior officials in the White House to make sure that we put our best foot forward and support those nominees. Yes?

QUESTION: Nick, is France blocking another NATO effort to try to go after war criminals?

MR. BURNS: Another NATO effort, did you say?

QUESTION: Well, didn't NATO go after two indicted war criminals last week? That's another effort.

MR. BURNS: Oh, that effort. You mean the Prijedor effort where the British captured one and shot dead another.

QUESTION: Exactly. Right.

MR. BURNS: And the question is, did the French try to block that?

QUESTION: No. Are the French trying to block subsequent efforts to go after war criminals?

MR. BURNS: Subsequent to that? I am just trying to understand the question.

QUESTION: Yes, subsequent to that Prijedor operation.

MR. BURNS: Well, all I can tell you is that Jacques Rummelhardt, the French Foreign Ministry spokesman, gave a very clear statement this morning. He said that France supports the detention of war criminals. He said first and foremost, France has always supported that; that France stood by the effort to detain war criminals. We think that is a very strong and clear French statement. We support the French statement and support the position of France. We do believe we have unity in NATO on this particular question, on the need for, first of all, the parties -- meaning the Bosnian Serbs and Serbs,Croatians, Bosnian Government - to turn these indicted war criminals over themselves. We, of course, know and remember that SFOR commanders have always had the authority to detain indicted war criminals and the French statement this morning associated the French Government with these views. We are very pleased about that.

QUESTION: I can read the wire, myself, so I am aware of what the French have said, but my question to you is, apart from what the French have said publicly, can the United States say whether or not the French have heretofore blocked subsequent efforts to the Prijedor operation to go after --

MR. BURNS: I am not aware that the French have blocked any efforts since Prijedor -- not at all, no way, in no way. The French statement this morning, we believe, is consistent with the French position that war criminals ought to be detained and turned over to the Tribunal in The Hague. We congratulate the French for that statement.

QUESTION: How about before Prijedor? Were the French opposed to it before Prijedor?

MR. BURNS: Opposed to the Prijedor operation?

QUESTION: Were they opposed to the Prijedor operation or --

MR. BURNS: I don't believe - I'm not aware that the French were opposed to the Prijedor operation, no.

QUESTION: And another question on this - since the French are basically in control of the area of Bosnia that includes Pale, and since, as you say, that there is standing authority for NATO troops to go after war criminals, why haven't the French gone after Karadzic and others, since they've been seen openly on the street; and U.S. officials, including Senator Lieberman, have reported instances where senior U.S. officials have been at Pale headquarters and seen Karadzic's Mercedes and have been told that Karadzic went out the back door?

MR. BURNS: Well, I think it's unfair to single out the French. I think it's unfair to ask the question of why haven't the French done it. There are multiple nations in SFOR, including the United States. We are all responsible to make sure that SFOR is successful. In this case, you ought to put - and we ought to put - the primary responsibility on Milosevic and on Krajisnek and on Tudjman to come forward themselves and turn these people over.

Now, they have not done that in the last year and a half. SFOR commanders retain the authority to do this on their own. The Prijedor operation was a very successful operation. The operation ten days before that was successful. There have been two operations. We're very pleased about the success, and we ought to keep the indicted war criminals, like Karadzic, sitting in Pale, guessing - guessing as to our next move; and we hope they'll lose sleep over it.

QUESTION: But NATO has no plans to do this again?

MR. BURNS: NATO is not going to broadcast its plans in advance.

QUESTION: Nick, how would you characterize France's support for the war crimes tribunal? Wasn't France instrumental in setting up the tribunal in the first place?

MR. BURNS: France was one of the leading countries that called for the creation of the tribunal. France has supported the tribunal in all respects. I think you have to give President Jacques Chirac credit in the summer of 1995. He was instrumental, along with President Clinton and Prime Minister Major and others at the time, in turning around NATO policy that lead to the very successful NATO air campaign against the Bosnian Serbs in September 1995; and thus, to Dayton. So I think the French have taken - unfairly have been charged, frankly, in the newspapers. I think they deserve some support from us, and they've got it.

QUESTION: But the issue isn't whether the French support the sort of wide-ranging issue of the War Crimes Tribunal and the arrest of indicted criminals. The specific issue is whether the French objected as too dangerous and too risky a specific mission that NATO allegedly had under plans.

MR. BURNS: The Prijedor operation?

QUESTION: No, it was a subsequent one.

MR. BURNS: Frankly, I can't speak to specific plans that NATO may or may not have had. But you've seen two successful operations, and we're very glad they succeeded. We're very pleased that the French have issued the statement they did this morning; and we support it.

QUESTION: Nick, when I asked you about the - go ahead, Betsy.

QUESTION: Do you know if the French were involved in either one of the operations that have taken place? The U.S. was involved logistically, and the British, clearly in the Prijedor operation, used men to go in and make these arrests or attempted arrests. The French don't seem to have been evident at all in either of these --

MR. BURNS: You'd have to address that question to SFOR and the French Government. I simply don't know. It was a multinational operation in Prijedor. I don't know personally the roster of countries that were involved in any way in that. So it's a good question, and I'd refer you to SFOR and the French Government.

QUESTION: Nick, when I asked you about France's position on the tribunal, you of course credited them with playing a leading role in setting it up. Doesn't it stand to reason, does that carry through in France -- wanting to see people indicted by the Tribunal apprehended?

MR. BURNS: Yes, and Mr. Rummelhardt's statement this morning clearly says that. That France wishes to see indicted war criminals apprehended.

QUESTION: Is there some hair being split here that isn't discernible that somehow makes the newspaper report accurate and also France's support for prosecuting war criminals a fact as well?

MR. BURNS: I am not sure I understand the question, Barry, if you wouldn't mind repeating it.

QUESTION: All right. There is a newspaper account that says -- it quotes anonymous officials as saying that France objected to a particular raid or idea of carrying out some arrests. You know, their record - France's record, as you have stated, as the French Government states it, is suggested they would be in favor, at least as much as the United States has been in favor, which is sort of in making arrests.

MR. BURNS: Not sort of, we do favor the arrest of indicted war criminals.

QUESTION: Well, there are 70 people floating around who have been indicted, but I don't want to go off on that tangent. There has been some enforcement, some minimal enforcement. Is France lagging behind the United States?

MR. BURNS: I am not aware of it. In fact, we believe we have NATO unity. The only operation we can talk about is the operation that was concluded. We don't talk about other operations that we may or may not be planning. On that operation, I can say quite categorically the French did not block the Prijedor operation. They certainly did not block it because the operation came off.

QUESTION: Well, of course, they couldn't have blocked it --

MR. BURNS: If that is the charge, then I think one has to defend the French. In general, the French have clearly stated today that they agree with the unified NATO position that indicted war criminals ought to be detained and they ought to be sent to The Hague for trial.

QUESTION: They can feel that way and still think in a particular situation an operation would be ill advised. Now, putting aside the one we know that was carried out, obviously by definition, they couldn't have blocked it; it went through. Did they prevent another operation at some point for whatever reasons they had?

MR. BURNS: Barry, I am not going to talk about NATO planning for any operations because that would give an advantage to the indicted war criminals. I think I have been pretty clear about our view of the French position today and the fact that we very much support the statement made today and the fact that France clearly is identifying itself with the NATO consensus.

QUESTION: You said that France in no way, any way, has France blocked any effort since that operation.

MR. BURNS: Since the operation, right.

QUESTION: Well, then the question that remains is, did they block any before the operation?

MR. BURNS: I am not aware of it.

QUESTION: Oh, okay. Before or after?

QUESTION: You are not as categorical as you are after.

MR. BURNS: No, I'm not aware of it. Here's the problem -- you are asking me to talk specifically about operations that it is not in our interest and plans to talk about. I am not going to do that. I will certainly try to clear the air about the charges made against the French Government. I believe the French ought to be congratulated for what they have said today and for the fact that they have said they support NATO consensus on this, which is that indicted war criminals should be arrested.

QUESTION: So, would you say that story is wrong?

MR. BURNS: Pardon?

QUESTION: Would you say that story is wrong?

MR. BURNS: I am not going to attack the story or the journalist, because it is not in my interest to do so, nor is it my inclination to do so. I have responded I think quite clearly and in a forthcoming way to the questions about the French.

QUESTION: So if you thought the story was wrong, in the interest of truth and clarification of U.S. policy --

MR. BURNS: We are always interested in truth here. You don't have to lecture me on that.

QUESTION: -- and the Secretary of State's --

MR. BURNS: You don't have to lecture on that whatsoever. What I am not going to do, I am not going to get into a specific conversation with you about operations that are best left confidential because that would be foolhardy.

QUESTION: I didn't ask about an operation. I asked you about a story.

QUESTION: Nick, nobody is asking you to compromise security of the nation --

MR. BURNS: Well, come on.

QUESTION: The question is --

MR. BURNS: I think the questions are pointed in that direction and I am not going to do it.

QUESTION: Has there been a difference between the United States and France over tactics?

MR. BURNS: I am not going to discuss that.

QUESTION: You don't want to discuss it?

MR. BURNS: No. We don't discuss private conversations among NATO allies.

QUESTION: Another topic?

MR. BURNS: Yes, Laura?

QUESTION: On Bosnia -- an American soldier was stabbed today. This follows on a series of explosions that have been targeted at the OSCE and other organizations in Bosnia. You expressed concern yesterday and said that there was a heightened sense of security. Can you expound on that a bit today? Is there a greater concern now that an American soldier has been directly targeted by a Bosnian Serb, following the raid and the sentencing on Monday?

MR. BURNS: We have seen the report of the stabbing of the American soldier. I cannot tell you the circumstances that led to that -- what could have caused the stabbing to take place. I think that is under investigation, so I would have to refer you to SFOR on that and to the Pentagon. Our Embassy in Sarajevo is on a heightened state of alert, given the situation there. I would have to refer you to SFOR as to what specific precautions SFOR soldiers are being asked to take. Needless to say, our soldiers, SFOR soldiers are there, very well equipped, stronger than the adversary and certainly ready to defend themselves at anytime. Yes.

QUESTION: Anything about the incident between North and South Korea on the DMZ?

MR. BURNS: Yes. I think you have seen the statement that was made today in Korea by the United Nations Forces. We know that there was an exchange of gunfire between North and South Korean military personnel today. The incident began, according to the United Nations, when a number of North Korean soldiers --14 they think -- crossed the DMZ in to the southern side of the demarcation line about 60 kilometers east of Panmunjom. The United States is obviously concerned by this incident. We are very concerned by the crossing of the line by the North Korean soldiers, the fact that they crossed the DMZ, which they are not permitted to do.

We do believe this incident should be addressed as soon as possible in the framework of the military armistice agreement. The incident certainly underlines the need for effective functioning of the Armistice Commission itself, and the need for a permanent peace on the Korean Peninsula. Thus, it supports our very strong view that the North Koreans ought to join us on August 5th to proceed with the four-party talks and to establish a permanent peace on the Korean Peninsula. As to the particulars, this is now under investigation by the UN military authorities in Korea. I'd have to refer you to them for the particulars of that investigation. I do want to draw attention to the fact that these North Korean soldiers crossed the DMZ.

QUESTION: Nick, could this be construed as an attempt by North Korea to draw South Korea into a military incident, a military conflict? The defector, Hwang, has said to the South Koreans, they would use such a pretext, a ruse in order to start a war and make it look like it was South Korea's fault. Is this possible?

MR. BURNS: It is always perilous to try to understand the motives of the North Koreans. There have been many incidents since 1953 along the DMZ -- some very bloody, some resulting in the deaths of Americans as you remember some time ago. Who knows why they do this? It is a closed, autocratic society, but they ought to observe the agreement, the armistice agreement itself and the rules and procedures governing the conduct of soldiers along the DMZ. They clearly crossed a line, literally and figuratively, this morning. They ought not to have done that.

QUESTION: Nick, I was curious about your language when you said something to the effect of you hope that the North Koreans join the U.S. and the other parties on August 5th. I wondered if there was some reason that you are less confident about them --

MR. BURNS: Well, one never knows about the North Koreans. You have seen that --

QUESTION: I wonder if you have gotten any actual indication from them that they are having second thoughts or --

MR. BURNS: No. We have not received any indication that they are having second thoughts. We expect them to show up in New York on August 5th. My statement was more meant to encourage them to get in the spirit of why we are having the four-party talks so that needless incidents like the one this morning are not repeated and people's lives are not put into danger. There was a serious exchange of gunfire this morning. Obviously, with 37,000 troops in Korea, we were not part of this this morning; our troops were not in that region. But we do not want to see our soldiers endangered needlessly. It was more in that spirit. Yes, sir?

QUESTION: I would like to, please, revisit another subject which is the renewal of --

MR. BURNS: I think we have other Korea questions. I will be glad to go back to you.

QUESTION: Some analysis in Korea has said this incident is engineered by North Korean regime to rally domestic support behind Kim Jong-Il at a time for the --

MR. BURNS: That would be curious logic indeed.

QUESTION: -- kind of a - (inaudible) -- by the North Korean tactics. Do you agree with that analysis?

MR. BURNS: We have no idea what prompted the incident along the DMZ this morning. We have no idea. You will have to consult the North Korean web site and see if there is any elucidation of this incident there. But it would be curious logic, indeed, if they felt that by provoking a military incident they were somehow improving their own situation. This is a country that has to get with it and has to negotiate with us and South Korea and China a peace treaty and a permanent end to the Korean conflict. This morning's incident was certainly not consistent with that.

QUESTION: Nick, will this affect U.S. plans to ship aid to North Korea?

MR. BURNS: It has no effect on it because that aid is designed to assist young kids under the age of six and the elderly. These people are innocent victims of the fact that they happen to live in North Korea. Still on Korea?

QUESTION: Yes.

MR. BURNS: Yes, sir?

QUESTION: I think it is not enough for the United States to - (inaudible) - North Korea not to do it again. I'd like to ask you, do we have any plan to raise the concern to North Korea directly?

MR. BURNS: We have been in touch this morning with both the North Korean Government and the Government of the Republic of Korea, our ally. We have certainly made known our concerns to the North Koreans. We and the South Koreans are trusting and have full faith that the UN military authorities will investigate this properly and will obviously prepare some judgments so that all of us can come out of this with a better understanding of what exactly happened after the soldiers crossed the line. They clearly crossed the line.

QUESTION: What is the response of North Korean officials to United States?

MR. BURNS: I don't want to go into our conversations with the North Koreans. But you can be assured that we communicated our deep concern about this incident to North Korea. Still on Korea?

QUESTION: No.

MR. BURNS: I just want to go this gentleman who had the next question.

QUESTION: I would like to revisit the subject of renewing sanctions against Libya. The Arab League and the African Unity Organization has asked in the last debate in the Security Council that the sanctions would be lifted, giving some indication that the world opinion is now thinking that Libya has made some efforts toward satisfying the demands of the United States and Britain on that. And is the United States thinking that there is a lack of confidence in The Hague justice system to not agree that the two Libyan suspects would be tried there?

MR. BURNS: Well, I'll try to keep this brief, because I want to be merciful to all the reporters that have heard this about 80 times. The United States in no way, shape or form will agree to lift the sanctions on Libya. That is not a consensus in the United Nations, although some countries may mistakenly have that point of view.

We believe that the Libyans are responsible for the fact that Pan Am 103 crashed and everyone on board was killed in December 1989. The Libyans have to have that on their conscience and they have to answer for it.

Nobody in The Hague has agreed - nobody in the International Court of Justice, no justices have agreed to take this court on. It's not an international legal matter; it's a matter between states. The plane crashed in the United Kingdom; the majority of people on it were American citizens. The United States and the United Kingdom would agree to a trial for the two Libyans who we believe planted the bomb either in the UK or in the United States. That is our right. It's not the right of Libya to dictate where a trial is held. It's our right to say where that trial is going to be held because we're the aggrieved states. So there's no possibility that Libya is going to get off the hook here - no possibility whatsoever. You shouldn't even try.

QUESTION: Can I just ask you one more question about the investigation the Der Spiegel said about a former Iranian intelligence agent who said that that was done by an Iranian?

MR. BURNS: Well, I know nothing about a Der Spiegel article; I don't read Der Spiegel. I'm sorry, I don't read German. But all we know is that there has been an intensive investigation and two people who are believed to be the leading suspects - they're Libyan intelligence agents being harbored by the government of Libya. We know where they're living. The Libyan Government should turn them over for prosecution in the United Kingdom or the United States.

QUESTION: How is the situation with the friends of the United States, like Egypt and the others who are affected by these sanctions?

MR. BURNS: We have very little sympathy for anyone for the position that these sanctions should be lifted. These sanctions are in place to protect everyone in the world against Libyan-sponsored terrorism. That is a higher priority than any other priority that can be cited. Yes, sir.

QUESTION: I understand Secretary Albright is reviewing the travel restrictions on Lebanon. As you said, she'll be traveling most of this month. A decision has to be made before the end of July. Can we expect a decision soon? Do you have any inclination where she's going?

MR. BURNS: I'm sure that we'll have a decision. The Secretary is reviewing this. She has met with her advisors on it, as you would expect. I'm sure we'll have a decision by the appointed time, which I believe is the end of July. I can't guess at this moment when that decision is going to be made and when it will be announced; but we're looking at it very carefully.

QUESTION: Okay, another issue in the region - yesterday again you reiterated your position on the Doha Conference in November, the Middle Eastern Cooperation Conference. Yet public indications from their world tells me that some of your allies in the region, such as Saudi Arabia are saying publicly they're not going to attend the conference. Other allies, like the Jordanians and the Egyptians, are reluctant and they say, we will go if everybody goes. Are you hearing something different in private from those governments?

MR. BURNS: We continue to encourage all countries in the Middle East to attend the Doha Summit. We believe it's in their economic self-interest to do so. Secretary Albright has made clear her intention to lead the U.S. delegation. Yes, sir, Talal.

QUESTION: Yesterday's question about the bill in the Senate, concerning Syria?

MR. BURNS: Oh, concerning Syria, yes. I don't have a statement for you yet. I understand that this is - there are lots of amendments being introduced right now and lots of bills. I'm not aware if we've taken a particular position. I do understand that we owe you an answer on that, and I want to get that for you. Unfortunately, I was unable to get that answer for the next briefing.

QUESTION: Tell me, please, if they said the Department position supports the prohibition of any financial dealings with Syria.

MR. BURNS: As I said, Talal, I am not able yet to give you an Administration position, but I will do so shortly. Yes, Mr. Lambros, yes.

QUESTION: Nick, it was reported that Bulent Ecevit, the new deputy prime minister of Turkey and the well-known chief architect of the Turkish invasion and occupation of Cyprus will make a provocative visit to the occupied area of the Republic of Cyprus July 20, the day of the invasion, in order to participate with the so-called celebrities of the Cypriots of Turkish origin. Do you think that kind of provocative visits are, at this time are - (inaudible) -- for a solution to the problem via the UN talks?

MR. BURNS: Mr. Lambros, I'm just not aware of the intention of Deputy Prime Minister Ecevit to make this visit. I'll have to check into that and get back to you.

QUESTION: It seems the U.S. press, by The Washington Post and _The New York Times_ dispatched stories for UN talks on the partition of Cyprus. Could you please clarify the present U.S. policy vis-&agrave;-vis to the Republic of Cyprus, a victim of the continuing Turkish invasion and occupation.

MR. BURNS: Mr. Lambros, I think we've made abundantly clear - probably every day for the last three or four years - what our position is on that. We support a resolution of the Cyprus problem. We support the reunification of Cyprus on a bi-communal, bi-zonal federated basis. The United States, with the leadership of Secretary Albright and Ambassador Holbrooke, are very much interested in supporting the efforts of the Secretary General, Kofi Annan, in moving towards a Cyprus solution. We believe the first round of talks were useful. Now we'll very much support the second round of talks in Geneva.

QUESTION: Do you mean also one ethnicity and one nationality?

MR. BURNS: Mr. Lambros, I don't want to debate specific issues; no, I don't want to debate this. You know the position of the United States; it's very clear, it's very clear. But I thank you for your questions.

QUESTION: No, no, I'm saying vis-&agrave;-vis to the nationality and the ethnicity. This is a most important part of the whole problem. So the stories are focusing to this - that's why I'm raising this question.

MR. BURNS: Our policy is very clear. We want to see a federated state on a bi-communal, bi- zonal basis. We want to see the reunification of the island.

QUESTION: Nick, on another subject - there are reports that - and apparently, pretty reliable reports - that as many as 40 members of the FUNCINPEC party have been assassinated by Hun Sen's people.

MR. BURNS: Yes.

QUESTION: Do these reports give you any new doubts about dealing with Hun Sen, even as part of a coalition government?

MR. BURNS: Yes, they do. We're very deeply troubled by these reports of the executions. We're deeply concerned about the reports of the executions and other reports about intimidation of Cambodians who have been working to build a civil society - people like journalists and labor union organizers, Cambodian citizens who work for private voluntary organizations. Any attempt to arrest or to intimidate or to execute people because of their political views has to be rejected by the United States. It is contrary to all decent standards of international behavior, and it's contrary to the Cambodian constitution.

We have made this point to Mr. Hun Sen, directly -- our Ambassador Ken Quinn has. We will continue to make that point to him. We are deeply troubled by that.

QUESTION: Do you have independent confirmation --

QUESTION: -- have a practical effect on the policy right now, though, does it?

MR. BURNS: In what sense, Carol?

QUESTION: Well, you know, Jim asked specifically about this new information about 40 deaths. And his question - your answer to his question initially suggested that perhaps you were even less disinclined to be supportive of Hun Sen than maybe yesterday. I just wondered if this new information had any new practical effect on your policy?

MR. BURNS: I see what you are asking. Well, I wouldn't say we support Hun Sen in any way. It's not a question of being less supportive or more supportive. We certainly don't support what he has done in usurping power. We certainly reject the actions of executing people, arresting them, intimidating them, threatening Prince Ranariddh.

We also are very concerned about the decision this morning to make the Cambodian foreign minister co-prime minister with Hun Sen. We are concerned because we see no evidence whatsoever that FUNCINPEC, the political party of Prince Ranariddh, has met and has elected on a free basis, on a democratic basis, a successor to Prince Ranariddh.

Prince Ranariddh has two roles. He is the first prime minister of Cambodia; he is also the president of the political party. He is overseas. Many members of his party are in hiding in Southeast Asia or in Cambodia. We fear that some members of his party have been executed and arrested. So there is no evidence that FUNCINPEC met and democratically elected the Cambodian foreign minister to become the new first prime minister.

We urge the authorities in Phnom Penh to refrain from announcing a new first prime minister until Prince Ranariddh's political party has an opportunity to make a reasoned decision on this matter, free of coercion, free of intimidation. The decision on who should lead or represent Prince Ranariddh's political party in Cambodia in the Cambodian Government is up to Prince Ranariddh and his associates. It is not up to Hun Sen, and, with all due respect, it's not up to the foreign minister to make that choice absent the views of Prince Ranariddh.

QUESTION: There's something you don't like about this guy, right?

MR. BURNS: Well, we have dealt with him and in the past, I must say, dealt with him very cooperatively as foreign minister. But we don't recognize him as first prime minister. We recognize Prince Ranariddh to be first prime minister because he was elected to that position by the Cambodian people.

QUESTION: What would the United States like to come out of the ASEAN meeting in regards to Cambodia?

MR. BURNS: The ASEAN delegations meeting or the ASEAN meetings in K.L.?

QUESTION: The ASEAN meetings in K.L.? When the Secretary goes to Kuala Lumpur, what is she trying to encourage ASEAN to do?

MR. BURNS: Those meetings are ten days away. So I think, given the fast-changing nature of the Cambodian political crisis, it is a little early to say we think that a, b, and c can and should happen in Kuala Lumpur. But it's a fair question, Carol.

I think, obviously, Cambodia is going to be a big issue in Kuala Lumpur. We hope that the ASEAN mission of foreign ministers is successful in conveying what appears to be a fairly unified international reaction to the crisis, conveying that to Hun Sen; eliciting the views of King Sihanouk, who spoke out today from Beijing against the executions and against the use of force by the government of Hun Sen; and enabling Prince Ranariddh a chance to say his peace to ASEAN. I think that first has to happen. We need to see what the actions are, as opposed to the words of the Hun Sen government because the actions and the words are at variance right now. The words are beautiful; the actions are deplorable. At the appropriate time -- and that will be at Kuala Lumpur - we will want to have a series of conversations on this with a variety of people.

QUESTION: Does the U.S. --

MR. BURNS: So this is going to be a very important issue, I think, on a day-by-day basis. It's pretty hard, though, to say ten days from now where it is all going to stand.

QUESTION: Does the U.S. Government have independent evidence that these executions have, in fact, taken place?

MR. BURNS: Our embassy does not have physical evidence of the assassinations and the executions. However, there have been consistent press reports and testimony by credible people in Cambodia, many people who are being hunted down are in hiding. That deeply troubles us. We are deeply troubled by all these reports. We feel compelled to speak out about it. Yes.

QUESTION: The U.S. ambassador in Nigeria has apparently been somehow implicated --

MR. BURNS: I think we want to stay with Cambodia for a minute, and then we will go. Yes, Laura.

QUESTION: Will these recent developments have an effect on your - at least your initial inclination to resume the humanitarian aid after a suspension of 30 days? I mean, these developments are very troubling, you indicate. But is it, do you think, going to have an effect on the aid?

MR. BURNS: Well, I am glad you asked because I know there has been a lot of reporting about this, too. Secretary Albright is going to have to look very closely with her advisors at this decision. I think around the 5th or 6th of August, that 30-day period of suspension will expire, and she will need to make some basic decisions.

I think that we are inclined here to try to continue humanitarian programs that clearly benefit average people like the de-mining activities, like the people-to-people programs on HIV prevention and the maternal and child care. But as we have said many times before, if there are programs that Hun Sen is clearly now benefiting from, I am not sure those programs have a good chance of continuing. So these are very difficult decisions.

We don't want to penalize the Cambodian people because of Hun Sen's deplorable behavior. The Cambodian people have been through a lot in the last 20 years - genocide and civil war. Statistically every Cambodian has lost one or many more family members. We want to be very careful to continue assistance to people who deserve it but not to support materially and financially a government that has usurped power for itself in a non-democratic fashion. On Cambodia? Any more on Cambodia before we go on?

QUESTION: Yes, Nick, I wanted to ask about the efforts on the part of the U.S. Embassy to give asylum to those who may be trapped in the country and under threat of death. Can you report anything on the activities of the embassy? Two days ago there was a wire that said the U.S. Embassy wasn't doing all it could.

MR. BURNS: Well, that story we checked out with our ambassador; that story was false. The story alleged that we weren't doing enough for American citizens, when in fact, Ambassador Ken Quinn spent most of the last week concentrating on how to help American citizens. We are very pleased and grateful to him for his efforts. Most Americans have been able to leave. There may be several hundred left, but many, many more hundreds - perhaps even a thousand people --have left safely, peacefully. They have gotten out of harm's way. I think we need to thank our embassy and our ambassador for that. So I would like to reject that charge that he hasn't done enough for American citizens.

QUESTION: What of the Cambodians under death threat?

MR. BURNS: What about --

QUESTION: What about the Cambodians --

MR. BURNS: We deplore any threats against Cambodians, against innocent people or people in the political opposition to Hun Sen. They ought not to be intimidated.

QUESTION: Are they welcome to come to the embassy for asylum?

MR. BURNS: I am not aware that anyone has asked for that kind of protection in the U.S. Embassy, but we have argued face-to-face with Hun Sen that he ceases intimidation. Hold him responsible for what is happening on the streets of Phnom Penh. Dimitris?

QUESTION: Nick, there is a U.S. delegation traveling in southeast Europe, probably Athens and Ankara. Can you give us details about the participants and what is the purpose of this mission?

MR. BURNS: Greg Craig, who is the policy planning director here and a senior advisor to Secretary Albright, is leading a small delegation of officials from the State Department to engage in policy planning talks with the Turkish Government and the Greek Government. I will have to check his itinerary. I don't know if they are going to Cyprus. I will have to check that for you. The intention here is to - he's new on the job - is for him to have an opportunity to talk to his counterparts about our relationships with Turkey and Greece with the intention of promoting them and furthering them. He is a well-placed person to do this. His predecessor, Jim Steinberg, carried on a number of talks like this - policy-planning talks - with many governments around the world. We thought Greece and Turkey were a good place to start.

QUESTION: Can we assume that this is a follow-up to the Madrid Agreement?

MR. BURNS: No, I think it is broader than that. It is not to talk about Greek-Turkish issues. It is to talk about U.S. relations with Turkey, U.S. relations with Greece. Of course, I am sure the Aegean issues and the Cyprus issue will come up and will be raised in these talks, but it is much broader than that. It gets to the American relationship with these two important NATO allies.

QUESTION: How many days they are going to spend in each capital?

MR. BURNS: In each capital?

QUESTION: Yes.

MR. BURNS: I'd have to check Greg's - Mr. Lambros, I have not done a scientific study of the schedule. Now, maybe you have, but I saw Greg on Monday morning, wished him well. He said he was looking forward to being in both Ankara and Athens, Mr. Lambros, and Athens.

QUESTION: Will he focus on Imia, too?

MR. BURNS: I am sure a variety of issues will come up, but you ought to focus on U.S. relations with these two countries as the primary agenda. Yes?

QUESTION: The Nigerians said they want to question the American ambassador there, saying he had some knowledge about these recent bombings in Lagos and elsewhere. Do you have any reaction to that? They are also mentioning a waiver of his immunity for that purpose.

MR. BURNS: I must say, I saw a wire report on this just before coming out. It is a very curious - the wire report is not curious, but the charge is, and the requests are curious. We will have to check with our ambassador in Lagos to see what he makes of all this. I will be glad to address that either later on today if we are able to reach him or tomorrow.

QUESTION: But he hasn't agreed to any sort of --

MR. BURNS: We've only seen the same wire report that you have. I just want to have some time to check into this. It does sound a little bit curious the way that the Nigerian Government is wording its request. But that wouldn't be strange, given the nature of the Nigerian Government.

QUESTION: Nick, on sort of the same subject, has the U.S. heard anything from the Cubans on -- the Cubans were saying that the bombings last weekend had U.S. components in them.

MR. BURNS: We haven't heard anything, Betsy. I know that Bernie Shaw of CNN had an opportunity to interview Mr. Alarcon last night. In good journalistic tradition, Bernie went after - well, he addressed this question several times and from several perspectives. Mr. Alarcon couldn't provide any information that the United States or American citizens were involved in these bombings over the weekend. He talked about problems in the past. So, it does lead us to believe that the Cubans ought to do their homework first before they make outlandish charges like this.

QUESTION: Has anyone from the interest section asked for any information that they might have?

MR. BURNS: We have offered our phone numbers. Yes, we've talked to the Cubans about these incidents. We have told them we had nothing to do with it, that we are not aware of any American citizen involvement. If they have any information, we have told them here and in Cuba, they ought to turn it over to us. They have not been able to do that. Mr. Alarcon was not able to do that on CNN last evening, which I found very revealing.

QUESTION: On Germany.

MR. BURNS: Excuse me?

QUESTION: I have on Germany two questions.

MR. BURNS: Yes, Mr. Lambros.

QUESTION: What is becoming of the decision for the creation of a U.S.-German air defense unit, as it was reported extensively in Europe?

MR. BURNS: Yes. I will have to get back to you on that. It is a good question. I just don't have any information on it. I saw the same stories that you did. We have very close military cooperation with Germany. But I either have to refer you to the Pentagon or try to see if I can develop some information for you.

QUESTION: It's a political decision.

MR. BURNS: Excuse me?

QUESTION: It's a political decision, not a Pentagon matter.

MR. BURNS: No, the Pentagon does have a role to play in military matters, Mr. Lambros. I think we ought to give them their due here.

QUESTION: And the German loan of $90 million to the Iranian firm?

MR. BURNS: Are you talking about the possible German bank loan --

QUESTION: That is right. It's a big issue in Europe.

MR. BURNS: Yes, and I commented upon that on Monday. I have no further comments to make. I am not sure the story has moved at all.

QUESTION: Thank you.

(The briefing concluded at 2:09 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 Thursday, 17 July 1997 - 0:32:54 UTC