U.S. Department of State Daily Press Briefing #125, 97-09-02
From: The Department of State Foreign Affairs Network (DOSFAN) at <http://www.state.gov>
720
U.S. Department of State
Daily Press Briefing
I N D E X
TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 2, 1997
Briefer: JAMES B. FOLEY
BOSNIA-HERZEGOVINA
1-3 Return of transmitter to Pale Serb control; NAC authorization;
Arrangements agreed w/ SFOR and the Office of the High
Representative; US assessment of agreement; details of
Plavsic broadcast time
3 Report of mass grave discovered near Bihac
4 Gelbard whereabouts, accomplishments, travel plans to Brussels,
Luxembourg, London
UNITED KINGDOM
4 US representation at Princess Diana funeral
MIDDLE EAST
4 Israeli obligation to release Palestinian funds, tax receipts
4-5 Attack on road workers on Shehada Road Project; discussion with
Israelis
5 Secretary's travel: no update
5-8 Arrival of Israeli and Palestinian delegations in Washington
this week: Meetings, security and political issues; level of
progress
7 Netanyahu list of Hamas, Islamic Jihad suspects for detention
prior to talks; dismantling the terrorist infrastructure;
status of Israeli-Palestinian security cooperation; recent
arrests
UNITED KINGDOM/NORTHERN IRELAND
8-9 U.S role in decommissioning committee; US support for IRA
cease-fire, message to Gerry Adams
9 US view of Ulster Unionists participation in talks
EUROPEAN UNION
9 Cyprus, Turkey membership status; US support for EU accession
CYPRUS
10 Egypt interception of ship carrying parts for Russian missile
system sold to Cyprus
NORTH KOREA
10 Status of four-party and missile talks
11 Alleged role of CIA in defections
JAPAN
11 Upcoming 2+2 talks
ANGOLA
11-12 Status of sanctions; Savimbi commitment to Lusaka Protocol
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE
OFF CAMERA PRESS BRIEFING
DPB #125
TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 2, 1997 12:45 P.M.
(ON THE RECORD UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED)
MR. FOLEY: Well, welcome. I'm back after some holiday myself, which is an
occupational hazard for a Spokesman, especially a Deputy Spokesman, the
return after vacation.
QUESTION: You want us to be easy on you, huh?
MR. FOLEY: Well, I read the transcript on Friday. I think the Spokesman
requested that you be easy on me. And I know that you follow his --
QUESTION: Orders?
MR. FOLEY: Yes. Barry.
QUESTION: A couple of things, but in different parts of the world, so let
me just do Bosnia first. AP may be alone, I don't know, but the report of a
deal to return radio operation - what do you call it, a transmitter - to
the Karadzic people in exchange for the Karadzic people lowering their
rhetoric. This is a transmitter near Banja Luka. I don't know if it's
generally known, but AP had it today. I wondered, of course, if State
can confirm it, knew about it, thought something about it, had an
opinion, et cetera.
MR. FOLEY: Yes. It's our information that over the weekend SFOR and the
Office of the High Representative did broker an agreement in which the Pale
loyalists would resume broadcasts from that transmitter in Udrigovo, but
would have to meet a certain number of specific conditions.
You may have seen reference to some of those. One is that they provide one
hour of broadcast time every day to President Plavsic. Second, they agreed
that they would refrain from all inflammatory messages against SFOR and the
international community. Third, they would allow the OHR - the Office of
the High Representative - to broadcast unedited messages directly to
Republika Srpska audiences. And finally, the Pale loyalists agreed to
participate in the OHR media monitoring group and, most importantly, to
adhere to its standards.
This is the arrangement that's been worked out by SFOR and the Office of
the High Representative. Obviously, you're going to ask me what we think
about this agreement. We're well aware that the Bosnian Serbs do not have a
perfect track record in terms of fulfilling promises made or fulfilling
commitments formally undertaken, So we are not optimistic that they will
follow through on these promises.
On the other hand, I think it is clear that the Bosnian Serbs are starting
to get the message. They're seeing across the board a more muscular SFOR
approach to implementing Dayton. On the issue of media broadcasts, they got
a very tough message from Ambassador Gelbard in the past days.
They saw the decision of the North Atlantic Council, I believe, on Saturday,
which authorized SFOR -- and I'll quote - "SFOR responded positively to
requests by the High Representative to authorize SFOR to provide the
necessary support to suspend or curtail any media network or program in
Bosnia whose output is in persistent and blatant contradiction of either
the spirit or letter of the peace agreement." I think most notably,
the North Atlantic Council reaffirmed that SFOR will not hesitate
to take the necessary measures, including the use of force, against media
inciting attacks on SFOR or other international organizations.
So I think you've seen a number of developments which have converged to
produce this agreement and this result. As I said, we think they are
getting the message. They have made some commitments. We're dubious about
their willingness to meet those commitments, but on the other hand, they
know that SFOR has authorization to act and will act, so we're going to be
watching them very closely in the days to come.
QUESTION: Even though you're skeptical, the U.S. approves of the deal
struck?
MR. FOLEY: Well, I think --
QUESTION: I mean, with fingers crossed; is that the idea?
MR. FOLEY: I wouldn't put it that way.
QUESTION: Well, they've got a lousy track record. Why enter a deal with
them, I guess?
MR. FOLEY: Well, we respect SFOR's judgment and the judgment of the High
Representative on this. I don't think they have negotiated this agreement
with less skeptical eyes than we have here in the State Department and in
Washington. I think they fully understand with whom they are dealing, but
they are willing to give the Bosnian Serbs a chance. They've made some
commitments. I think we'll be monitoring this over the next few days.
These are specific commitments. We'll be able to stand up here and tell you
whether the vitriol has ceased, whether Madam Plavsic has a sounding board.
I think it is significant if she is able on this transmitter to broadcast
one hour of free programming to the people covered by these areas. In my
opinion that amounts to weeks of propaganda that the Pale clique produces
over those same air waves, because the people of the RS --
QUESTION: (Inaudible)
MR. FOLEY: Well, the transmitter is in --
QUESTION: The transmitter, I mean.
MR. FOLEY: -- in Udrigovo. It's near Bijeljina. I don't have its exact
radius of broadcast, but obviously, it increases her ability to get a
message that the people are -- yes --
QUESTION: It gets to Pale-controlled areas?
MR. FOLEY: Yes, but I don't have the exact scope.
QUESTION: All right.
MR. FOLEY: Yes, Judd.
QUESTION: Have you seen reports of a mass grave being uncovered in -
MR. FOLEY: Just coming in, I heard a report that a mass grave apparently
has been discovered. Obviously, this is a matter, now, where we would
expect the local authorities to cooperate with the tribunal investigators.
I think in the past, of course, there were such sites all over Bosnia; and
it's a complicated, lengthy process for them to go out and secure an area
and then begin the forensic investigations. Obviously, we will support
their efforts in that regard.
QUESTION: But you've just seen that initial report?
MR. FOLEY: I just saw it coming in, yes.
QUESTION: On the broadcasts, on this one-hour-a-day for Plavsic, are
there any conditions? In other words, could they give her one hour between
2:00 a.m. and 3:00 a.m. in the morning? Or does she get to choose?
MR. FOLEY: I think you'd have to ask SFOR what the details are. I have
those commitments, but I don't have them spelled out in that kind of
detail. But there's an assumption behind these commitments that the kinds
of hate-filled propaganda that has been spewing forth from these outlets
will cease and we'll be able to judge whether it ceased or not.
And secondly, President Plavsic will have a platform to address her
citizens throughout the Republika Srpska. So I think your question is
relevant. We'll have to see what the timing is on that, but we'll be
watching that.
QUESTION: Can we change the subject?
MR. FOLEY: Do we have anything more on Bosnia?
QUESTION: Do you know where Gelbard is - when he's coming home; if he's
home, what he has accomplished on his last trip?
MR. FOLEY: Well, he is a peripatetic man. The answer is two-fold. One, he
is here; and secondly, he is leaving today for Europe. He's going to
meetings this week in Luxembourg, London and Brussels to continue talks
with our allies on the subject of the overall political situation in the
Republika Srpska.
QUESTION: Will the Secretary join the talks in London?
MR. FOLEY: No, the Secretary is on leave this week.
QUESTION: Yes, I realize. But she's in Europe and there are things going
on in London. When are these talks, by the way? Are they over the weekend?
Did you say when?
MR. FOLEY: Ambassador Gelbard's talks?
QUESTION: Yes.
MR. FOLEY: Well, he's leaving today, so I believe it's the latter part of
the week - Wednesday through I assume Friday. I'm not certain.
QUESTION: You don't know about whether her plans - of course, it depends
on other parts of this government. But do you know if she's going to be in
London for any purpose?
MR. FOLEY: No, I do not. She's on personal leave right now, as you know.
It's clear what you're referring to, Barry - the funeral arrangements in
London. We're expecting an announcement out of the White House, I think,
within the hour on the U.S. representation.
QUESTION: Can I ask you a question about the Middle East?
MR. FOLEY: Yes. We're finished with Bosnia? Okay.
QUESTION: This is a new month. Do you know if the Israeli Government is
withholding September tax receipts from the Palestinians, as they did in
August?
MR. FOLEY: I don't know. I assume that that is the case because my
information is that regarding the pre-existing funds in question, only
about 30 percent, I believe, had been released to the Palestinians. We
continue to believe that there is an important need to strike a balance
between Israel's security needs and the economic and social well-being of
the Palestinian people. Given those needs, we continue to believe that it
is very important that the Israelis turn over to the Palestinians the money
that is owed to them.
QUESTION: Did you see the report of Israeli settlers stoning workers on a
road, a U.S.-financed road near Hebron?
MR. FOLEY: Yes, it is a U.S.-financed road. It's called the Shuhada Road
Project. It's a U.S.-funded project undertaken by the United States at the
request of both sides. These attacks on U.S. aid workers are simply
unacceptable. We call on the Israeli authorities to ensure the security of
those working on the road so that it may be completed, as called for in the
Hebron agreement.
QUESTION: Israel is party to the agreement, of course. I mean, the road
is explicitly part of the agreement?
MR. FOLEY: It's part of the agreement, yes.
QUESTION: Has the U.S. talked to Israeli officials about this subject?
MR. FOLEY: I'm not aware of specific discussions, but I would be
surprised if we haven't raised it with them because we've regarded it as a
serious incident. Again, this is a road project that was agreed to by the
Israelis, by the Palestinian Authority, and it's an American contribution
to the Hebron agreement, which, of course, is critical.
QUESTION: Do you have the Secretary's Mid-East schedule or any part of it
yet?
MR. FOLEY: I have nothing further to what Mr. Rubin announced on Friday.
When we're in a position to speak more specifically about - he mentioned
the itinerary. He announced where she's heading, but we're not in a
position today to talk about dates and the exact schedule. When we're able
to do so, you'll hear it announced from the podium.
QUESTION: Is the sequence as he announced it, or did he just happen to -
MR. FOLEY: I'm not aware of that. As you know, I was away. I've seen what
he said and the order in which he read it. I'm not sure that's dispositive,
though.
QUESTION: Can we assume Israel first?
MR. FOLEY: I believe so.
QUESTION: Will the two delegations -- the Israeli and Palestinian
delegations that will arrive tomorrow and the day after to Washington will
talk? And what's the purpose of this meeting?
MR. FOLEY: Well, there are two delegations coming separately. There are
no trilateral meetings envisaged. The Israeli delegation is coming
tomorrow. It will consist of senior foreign policy advisors to the prime
minister, as well as foreign ministry officials. The Palestinian delegation
is arriving on Thursday. They are meeting with Ambassador Ross. We expect
that he will review with each side the broad range of issues that the
Secretary intends to raise during her meetings starting next week in the
region. These include both security and political issues.
Yes.
QUESTION: May I change the subject, or is there anyone else --
QUESTION: Okay, hold on, wait a minute. Security and political issues?
MR. FOLEY: Yes.
QUESTION: That sounds kind of balanced. Will there be equal emphasis? I
thought security is paramount until the US is satisfied security is being
provided. You know, forget the political issues; they have to wait for
security. So how can Dennis be talking about political issues?
MR. FOLEY: That's a leading question, Barry.
QUESTION: No, it isn't. It's a perfectly logical outgrowth of the spin
we've been getting here, which is that security has to be provided
satisfactorily to the Israelis and to the U.S. And if it is, then we - you,
they - can move on to political issues. So how can Dennis Ross be tackling
political issues with the Palestinians when security is still uncertain? Is
he ahead of the Secretary on this?
MR. FOLEY: He will be tackling those issues precisely because the
Secretary herself will be addressing those issues during her visit,
starting next week. I think Jamie Rubin was very clear on Friday, when he
announced the trip, that both security and political issues will be on her
agenda.
In advance of the announcement of her trip, back a month ago, when it was
clear that she was contemplating a visit, she stated in her speech, and Mr.
Rubin stated repeatedly from the podium, that we were looking to see
progress on the security front as a predicate to determining the timing of
her trip. In our view, progress has been made. Sufficient progress --
QUESTION: You've had enough --
MR. FOLEY: Sufficient progress, yes, to enable her visit to go forward.
Are we satisfied with the level of progress? We're not satisfied that
everything that we believe needs to be done has been done. We think that on
the security front, the effort has to be sustained. It has to be demonstrated
every day-today and in the future over time. That's an issue that will not
go away. It's not an issue that we solve and then the Secretary goes
forward to address political issues. The security issue will always be with
us.
QUESTION: Sounds like you're saying the Palestinians reached the
threshold. Now the test is whether they keep up what you consider to be an
adequate record. You'd like it better, of course you would, everybody
would. But they've done enough now if they keep it going, you can jump into
political issues like the future of Jerusalem, the Palestinian state, or
whatever these political issues are, right?
MR. FOLEY: Well, the political issues are, as Mr. Rubin said, the first
priority we have is to restore confidence and to do all that we can at this
point to help alleviate the crisis of confidence that has occurred over the
last number of months.
So I wouldn't want to spell out where we're going specifically on political
issues. Her effort will be one that aims to reinvigorate the peace process
on its various tracks. Obviously, it's dead in the water right now.
But on the issue of security, I wouldn't parse it exactly the way you did.
We're satisfied that some progress has been made. We want to see more.
QUESTION: On security --
MR. FOLEY: Yes.
QUESTION: Have you seen the report that Prime Minister Netanyahu has
prepared a list of 1,500 members of Hamas and Islamic Jihad and is
insisting on their detention as a condition for opening talks?
MR. FOLEY: I've not seen those reports. A condition for --
QUESTION: Opening talks again with the Palestinians.
MR. FOLEY: I've not seen that. The issue of dismantling the terrorist
infrastructure, of making arrests, of ensuring that that structure or
infrastructure which has in the past helped contribute to terrorist attacks,
is well-known. It is important that this infrastructure be dismantled and
that everything be done to ensure to the extent that it's possible that
future such attacks don't take place.
I'm not aware of the specific report, and I think Mr. Rubin has established
the practice here from the podium of not getting into the specifics of
those trilateral - those discussions underway in which we're participating
to some degree, and I'm not going to do that. But I wasn't aware of that
specific report.
QUESTION: (Inaudible) she laid out pretty clearly in that speech the
elements of security that she would like to see. And correct me if I'm
wrong, but the only reference you make to an improved climate is cooperation,
exchange of information, et cetera. Has there been any dent in the
infrastructure, for instance? Have there been the kind of arrests, not a
revolving door?
MR. FOLEY: Well, some arrests have been made. There were a number of
arrests shortly after the bombing when cooperation or restored cooperation
was in something of a nascent form. And there have been arrests, I believe,
over the last few days by both Palestinian and Israeli authorities. So
there has been progress in that respect.
Mr. Rubin didn't go into the details, wasn't drawn into the details last
week on the specifics. There has been some progress and results achieved on
areas that I can't go into.
QUESTION: Could I ask a question on a different peace process - on
Northern Ireland?
MR. FOLEY: Yes. Are we finished with the Middle East, to my surprise?
We'll get back to you in a minute.
QUESTION: Okay.
MR. FOLEY: Yes.
QUESTION: On Cyprus --
MR. FOLEY: Well, we'll get to Cyprus later. I'm asking whether we have
any more Middle East questions. Yes.
QUESTION: Okay, it's a two-parter, really.
MR. FOLEY: Yes.
QUESTION: Has the U.S. Administration gone ahead and nominated anybody to
take part in the body which is being set up to deal with the de-commissioning
of paramilitary weapons? And what kind of role do you envision playing in
that body? And also, what's the Administration's message, in particular, to
Gerry Adams, who's arriving later today in the States, and to those others
who will be involved in the talks due to start later this month in
Northern Ireland?
MR. FOLEY: Well, as to your first question, I don't have that answer. I
can look in to see if we have been invited to nominate anyone and whether
we're in that process or not. I don't know, and I don't want to mislead
you.
On the second one, our message will be clear. We welcomed the Sinn Fein
announced cease-fire. We want it to hold. We want to see it truly 100
percent respected on a permanent basis. Secondly, we will encourage the
efforts of the negotiators and of the participants in the negotiations to
make a good faith effort, an effort for the long haul, through the bumps
that will occur if this process gets underway as we hope. We're going to be
urging Mr. Adams to support those negotiations, as I said, through thick
and thin and to maintain the cease-fire throughout that process and
on a permanent basis.
QUESTION: Could I have a follow-up?
MR. FOLEY: Yes.
QUESTION: We know that Mr. Adams is going to be in those talks. He's now
been invited there by the British and Irish Governments. The Ulster
Unionists are facing a crucial decision at the moment. What would be the
U.S. Administration's message for them, should they be getting involved?
MR. FOLEY: Well, we think it's in their interest to participate, as well
as in the interest of all the people of Northern Ireland. They have an
important point of view. They have important interests. They have a stake
in a successful, peaceful outcome. In order for their own perspectives to
be brought to bear, they have to be at the table.
QUESTION: Foreign Minister of Luxembourg, Mr. Poos, made two statements
over the weekend. The first one, he said the talks for the accession of
Greek Cyprus to the European Union would start in January '98 unimpeded, no
matter what happens during the Cyprus talks. And secondly, he said
economically there is no obstacle for Turkey joining the European Union;
but politically, unless, for example, Kurds are giving cultural autonomy,
it is very hard for Turkey to join the European Union. Do you have
any comments on these views that created waves back in Turkey?
MR. FOLEY: Well, as a general matter, we believe that the issue of EU
membership and EU accession is one for the EU to decide. We're not going to
inject ourselves in that debate. As you know, we have believed that the
prospect of Cyprus accession to the EU, we believe, can be a positive
factor in helping produce progress towards a negotiated settlement, number
one. Number two, we believe that Turkish membership in Western institutions,
including the European Union, is an extremely important element in overall
stability in Europe and in the Eastern Mediterranean. It's something
that we support.
QUESTION: So it's all right with the U.S. if Cyprus gets admitted and
Turkey doesn't, if it works out that way?
MR. FOLEY: Well, again, this is a matter for the EU to determine in terms
of the timing. But we think that both are important, both can contribute to
a resolution of tensions in the Eastern Mediterranean.
QUESTION: Would you like one to - would you like them to be dealt with in
tandem?
MR. FOLEY: Well, what we would like to see happen is there to be a
successful negotiation and a settlement of the Cyprus problem. I think that
is our number-one focus. We support the UN efforts in that regard and
remain hopeful that when those talks resume, they will begin to bear
fruit.
QUESTION: (Inaudible) -- if in January the European Union starts these
accession talks with Greek Cyprus.
MR. FOLEY: We would fully support the resumption of the UN talks,
yes.
Yes, Sid.
QUESTION: Have you seen the reports on apparent intercepted parts for
this missile system -- Russian missile system, in Cyprus? The one that was
supposed to have been suspended?
MR. FOLEY: What intercepts, Sid?
QUESTION: Some ship was intercepted, I forget by whom, with Russian parts
from - Egyptian, right - from this Russian missile system that they
apparently has sold to Cyprus and agreed to hold off for nine months, or
something.
MR. FOLEY: Well, I haven't seen that report. I'd be glad to look into it
for you. I'm not sure we'd have a comment. But I don't know about the
incident, so I have to take the question. But as I understand it, President
Clerides back in January stated that no part or component whatsoever of
that system would reach Cypriot shores for, I think, a period of 16 months
is what he said.
QUESTION: Right, that's why the parts going there were intercepted by the
Egyptians.
MR. FOLEY: Well, as you know, we expressed our concern and opposition to
that sale when it was first announced, and that position remains the same.
We took note of President Clerides' unilateral declaration of a 16-month
moratorium, if you will. Again, that's a report I'd have to look into.
QUESTION: You will?
MR. FOLEY: Sure.
QUESTION: Jim, anything from the North Koreans about the four-party
talks?
MR. FOLEY: Nothing --
QUESTION: Anything new?
MR. FOLEY: Nothing new to report to you, no.
QUESTION: Or the missile talks?
MR. FOLEY: No, nothing on either subject.
QUESTION: Did the US say, how about resuming? You were going to wait for -
the US was going to wait for a few days to pass and then say, what about
those missile talks? We haven't - the U.S. hasn't -
MR. FOLEY: I'm not aware that we've had further diplomatic communication
with them on that. We're talking about a short time span. It's less, now,
than two weeks away, or it's the week of the 13th.
QUESTION: Right.
MR. FOLEY: Yes.
QUESTION: How things are going with North Korean defector, Ambassador
Chang?
MR. FOLEY: I have nothing new to report on that.
Yes.
QUESTION: The United States and Japan are, I believe, slated to have two-
plus-two talks in Washington on September 24. Can you confirm that?
MR. FOLEY: Well, if you say so, I would have to assume your information
is correct. I believe that, yes, we are having two-plus-two talks. I'm not
sure if they are in Washington or not. I can check the venue for that. I'll
get back to you with a confirmation.
Yes.
QUESTION: On Angola, the situation of the sanctions to UNITA, what's the
situation now?
MR. FOLEY: One moment. Did we have another --
QUESTION: Yes, on North Korea --
MR. FOLEY: Yes.
QUESTION: The North Korean radio press condemned the ambassador's
defection is a conspiracy by the CIA. Do you have any comment on that?
MR. FOLEY: No comment.
QUESTION: Thank you.
MR. FOLEY: I'm sorry, there was one other question.
QUESTION: On UNITA, the situation with UN sanctions. Can you tell me,
what is the situation now?
MR. FOLEY: Yes, I'd be glad to. It's our understanding that Mr. Savimbi
has indicated a willingness to comply. He's spoken with our special
representative, Paul Hare, and our ambassador in Angola over the last few
days, and has indicated his intention to comply with his commitments under
the Lusaka Protocol. He's aware, obviously, of the Security Council's
decision on sanctions, the implementation of which is delayed until the end
of this month. So the clock is ticking. We've got four weeks and no more
for UNITA to fully comply with the terms of the UN resolution. Sanctions
will automatically be imposed if there isn't full compliance.
So we've had some indications that give us some grounds to believe that
there will be compliance. So we'll be watching that over the next few
weeks.
Thank you.
(The briefing concluded at 1:15 P.M.)
|
