U.S. Department of State Daily Press Briefing #133, 97-09-12
From: The Department of State Foreign Affairs Network (DOSFAN) at <http://www.state.gov>
658
U.S. Department of State
Daily Press Briefing
I N D E X
Friday, September 12, 1997
Briefer: James B. Foley
ANNOUNCEMENTS
1 Contact Group Statement on Municipal Elections in Bosnia
BOSNIA
1-2 OSCE and Pres. Tudjman's Role in Securing Bosnian Croat
Participation in Upcoming Municipal Elections
2-4 Russian Opposition to SFOR Support of Pres. Plavsic and Actions
Against Pale Serbs
4 Pres. Krajisnik Response to OHR Warning to Pale-controlled
Transmissions
5 US Aircraft's Ability to Broadcast or Jam Pale-controlled
Transmissions
5 U.S. Congress Helsinki Commission's Decision Not to Send Election
Monitors
ARMS SALES
5-6 Reports of Russian SCUD Sales to Armenia and Missile Sales to
Cyprus and Iran
6-7 Russian Missile Gyroscopes Discovered in Iraq
CHINA
7-8 Return of Sun Microsystems Supercomputer
8 China's Announcement of New Privatization Efforts and WTO
Accession
MEXICO
9 Arrest of Mexican Anti-Drug Unit for Drug Trafficking
9 Ex-Governor Weld's Nomination
CUBA
9 Arrest of US Citizen Allegedly Assisting Cuban Dissidents
10 Arrest of Salvadoran in Hotel Bombings Case/DoJ-FBI Involvement
CYPRUS
11 Archbishop of Cyprus' Comments on Politics and Religion
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE
OFF-CAMERA DAILY PRESS BRIEFING
DPB #133
FRIDAY, SEPEMBER 12, 1997 12:50 P.M.
(ON THE RECORD UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED)
MR. FOLEY: Someone put pineapple juice in my pineapple juice. I don't
have a particular announcement. We are posting a statement by the Contact
Group that was agreed, I think, sometime last night, perhaps early this
morning European time, on the municipal elections in Bosnia. But you can
see that posted afterwards. So I am ready to go, George, to your first
question.
QUESTION: Well, with the elections just two days away, do you have a
particular message for the 2 million or so registered Bosnian voters on
this momentous occasion?
MR. FOLEY: Vote. In a word. I have, I would say, a reaction to the news
that the HDZ, the Bosnian Croat party, has agreed to participate in the
elections. As we said when the Pale Serbs decided to abandon their boycott,
we think participation in the election process is in the best interest of
the Bosnian people. The OSCE has done an excellent job of preparing for the
elections. It has assured free and equal conditions for all. So, again,
we urge all the voters in Bosnia - Bonsiak, Croat, and Serb - to
take advantage of this opportunity to voice their preference in a peaceful
and democratic fashion.
I understand that last evening Ambassador Frowick and Mr. Klein and the
High Representative Westendorp were in meetings in Zagreb with President
Tudjman and others, and that President Tudjman played a positive role in
helping to encourage the Bosnian Croats to reverse themselves and to
participate in the elections. So we would salute President Tudjman for
meeting his commitment in this instance, under Dayton, to influence parties
in Bosnia in a positive direction.
However, there have been reports this morning that, to some degree, some of
the HDZ representatives are trying still to re-negotiate the terms of their
participation in the elections to reopen some of the issues that apparently
were settled last night in Zagreb. So we categorically reject those
attempts. The OSCE, as I said, has done an excellent job. It has prepared
elections that will offer free and equal conditions for all. We trust that
President Tudjman will continue to exercise the positive influence
that he began to exercise last evening in Zagreb.
QUESTION: Jim, in talking about trying to re-negotiate the terms,
apparently the OSCE did alter the voting rules in Mostar to accommodate the
Croats. And how can you say that this is a - or how can you stand by this
kind of election process when in order to get the Serbs they kind of
negotiated a little change this way, to get the Croats in, they have - I
mean, is this the way elections should be conducted?
MR. FOLEY: Well, first, Carol, I can't comment on the specifics of what
was negotiated because I am not privy to those details. You would have to
speak ultimately to the OSCE in effort to get those kind of details. But
clearly the discussions tend, I believe, to revolve around voter registration
lists. And it can be, I'm certain, given the post-war conditions in Bosnia,
be complicated. But I think you can be assured though that the OSCE is
applying conditions in making its decisions that favor fairness and
favor participation. And so I would not question the decisions that
they have reached, but you would have to ask them for the specifics of what
those agreements were. Howard.
QUESTION: Given the potential in that climate for abuse and fraud in the
election process, what measures is SFOR going to take to try and ensure
that things go right?
MR. FOLEY: Well, I spoke to that a bit yesterday in terms of SFOR's
mission during the elections, so I can draw from some of what I said
yesterday. SFOR's overall mission, as you know, in Bosnia is to achieve a
secure environment, and it acts, insofar as the elections are concerned, in
support of the OSCE in helping to assure a secure environment throughout
the country and to allow elections to proceed fairly and without hindrance
or violence or intimidation.
As for what specifically SFOR will be doing in order to achieve this secure
environment, they will be acting to allow freedom of movement for all
eligible voters, they will be monitoring cantonment sites, polling stations
and polling sites.
QUESTION: Are you concerned that most of the voters seem intent on voting
along ethnic lines rather than non-ethnic lines?
MR. FOLEY: I wouldn't want to predict the outcome of the elections,
George. What we're looking for is widespread participation as an affirmation
of the democratic process itself and as a validation of the processes that
were launched by Dayton that we trust will continue to lead to consolidation
of the peace and a consolidation of a single Bosnia entity, Bosnian state.
I stand corrected. Yes, Howard.
QUESTION: The Russians, apparently, want the U.S. and NATO to lay off
folks in Pale. Can you comment on their comments?
MR. FOLEY: Well, you're referring to a press report that was in the
papers today.
QUESTION: Churkin's reported comments.
MR. FOLEY: I don't have a readout myself of the meeting that the report
was based on, but what I can say is that the peace implementation council
that met in Sintra in Portugal on May 30 specifically declared that the
High Representative has the right to suspend or curtail any media network
or program whose output is in persistent and blatant contravention of
either the spirit or letter of the peace agreement.
Russia, of course, participated and supported this declaration, and only
last Friday the Contact Group met to reaffirm some of those Sintra
principles, in particular, to affirm the right, indeed the obligation, of
the High Representative to act in order to ensure free and fair media and
to eliminate propaganda which incites against SFOR and which works against
the interests of peace and stability.
So we are confident that we are in agreement with the Russians on these
important matters. SFOR's actions are fully consistent with decisions, as I
said, taken by NATO, taken by the Contact Group, in consultation with and
including the participation of Russia, and any SFOR action that may be
taken in this regard would be fully based on a specific request of the High
Representative.
I think you are asking also a more philosophical question though about the
relationship between Russia and, say, the United States or NATO in our
overall efforts in Bosnia. And you'll remember that before Dayton the
differences of view among the great powers, to include Russia, were more
pronounced - and that's an understatement - during the years of fighting.
One of the inspirations of Dayton was not only to create the peace
agreement and enable first IFOR and then SFOR to go and deploy to insure
the peace. But it also enshrined the basis consensus among the major
nations, including Russia on the aims that we all shared in Bosnia. That
remains the case.
We believe we are in full agreement with the Russian Government on the
future of Bosnia, on the implementation of Dayton. There have been
disagreements from time to time at various moments over tactics. But those
disagreements have always been resolved and overcome. On the specific issue,
though, that was referred to in the press report concerning the freedom of
media and the need to act against hostile propaganda, the Russians have
voted with the other members of the Contact Group.
QUESTION: The underlying issue in that, if I could just follow, is that
the Russians have not taken steps to distance themselves from people in
Pale. Are you concerned about that, that they are still aligned with
them?
MR. FOLEY: I'm not sure I can share the premise of the question. The
Russians have assured us at very high levels, including very recently that
they are in complete accord with the other members of the Contact Group and
members of the SFOR coalition on our political aims in Bosnia. As I said,
there have been differences over tactics from time to time. But we don't
see any cause for alarm. Carol.
QUESTION: Do you then think - I mean, was Churkin speaking out of turn?
Or was he just speaking for effect? Publicly for effect.
MR. FOLEY: Again, I haven't personally had a readout of the NATO council
meeting that took place yesterday. Maybe your colleagues in Brussels might
have a closer view. So I can't really comment on what he may or may not
have said. Nor can I comment about the context in which he might have said
certain things. I think that's important to give a fair answer.
But we are confident going into the elections, though, that we are going to
be facing the challenge of the elections with a united front. There will be
a Contract Group meeting, I think in London on Tuesday next week.
Ambassador Gelbard will be attending. I spoke to Ambassador Gelbard this
morning. He's optimistic that the elections will go forward successfully.
That is really the critical milestone. Yes. Still on Bosnia?
QUESTION: No.
MR. FOLEY: Do we have other questions on Bosnia? Yes, Laura.
QUESTION: Have you received an answer - or not you - but has the High
Rep's Office received an answer to the letter that they sent concerning the
conditions to be met for the transmitter?
MR. FOLEY: You always ask the right questions, Laura. Yes, I understand
that there has been an answer. The question is whether I can find the
answer. Yesterday, the High Representative received a letter from President
Krajisnik in response to the very explicit warning that was delivered to
him on the Republika Srpska media situation. In the letter, Krajisnik
promises to respect the Udrigova agreement and to work with the OHR-
sponsored media support group. You might be interested in my comment on the
letter.
I don't have very much to say. We welcome the letter. It says what it says.
The international community will now be guided by immediate and concrete
actions, not paper promises. But I can say that we have seen evidence of
this kind of behavior before, where on the Pale side, there is resistance
and a digging in of heels, and then promises made, and then action -
reaction threatened, and then promises made again. They have made an
explicit commitment now to do what they said they were going to do and
which they failed to over the past week. You can judge for yourself the
level of credibility and optimism we think that the Pale Serbs have
demonstrated on similar occasions. But we are going to have to leave it to
SFOR and the OHR on the ground to judge in the coming hours and days.
QUESTION: Do you have a sense of whether or not there's a time frame,
though, for this second--you know, now that they have pledged, once again,
to uphold these sanctions?
MR. FOLEY: Well, among other things, they promise to attend a meeting of
the media support group, which is sponsored by the OHR today in Sarajevo. I
think that meeting would have already taken place by now. So you can check
with your colleagues to see if they showed up. It's a pretty clear
commitment. I heard, myself, from a press outlet this morning, and I don't
know whether it's true, that there may have been an OHR broadcast over the
SRT transmitter. But you will have to follow that up yourselves. So perhaps
they are starting to demonstrate compliance. But I would have to refer
you to the international authorities in the field. Yes.
QUESTION: Do you have any comment about the decision the U.S. Congress
Helsinki Commission not to send observers for the elections in Serbia with
the explanation that present conditions make impossible even remotely free
and fair elections in Serbia? What is the position of your Department?
MR. FOLEY: This was a commission in Helsinki, you said?
QUESTION: The Helsinki Commission of the U.S. Congress.
MR. FOLEY: Yes. Well, that's the first I have heard of it. I would be
happy to take the question and look into it to see if we have a position on
it. Yes, Carol.
QUESTION: The Krajisnik letter. Does this mean that you're not going to
be jamming radio broadcasts?
MR. FOLEY: Well, I'm not sure we were ever going to be jamming radio
broadcasts. I think there has been some misreporting or misunderstanding on
that particular question.
QUESTION: (Inaudible.)
MR. FOLEY: Well, the fact is that the mission of the aircraft is to
provide airborne broadcast services. It is essentially a flying radio and
TV station that is equipped with high-powered transmitters. It does not
have the capability to produce its own programming and, if utilized, it
would broadcast programming provided by the OHR. It has a jamming
capability but its mission, its primary mission, is to broadcast, not to
jam. Yes.
QUESTION: I'm just trying to figure out if that letter from Krajisnik
reduces the likelihood that that jamming equipment, that jamming capability,
might be used.
MR. FOLEY: Well, again, its primary mission is to broadcast, so whether
the letter - forget the letter. Whether the follow-up to the letter, the
actions of Pale SRT media are sufficient as to obviate the need for such
broadcasting, I can't say. Again, I would have to refer you to the Office
of High Representative and to SFOR.
Anything else on Bosnia? Yes.
QUESTION: This past Monday when Azeri foreign minister Hasan Hasanov met
with Turkish Foreign Minister Ismil Cem, reportedly the Azeri foreign
minister gave very detailed information, documentation, of the Russian SCUD
missiles sold to Armenia and already deployed on Armenian soil. In the past
when this question was raised, the State Department said that it had no
information, evidence, of any missiles being given to Armenia, let alone
SCUD missiles.
I have two questions: One, is there a different assessment today? Does the
State Department have any indication that Armenia has Russian-made SCUD
missiles; and, two, since Russia, as you know, also gave sophisticated
missiles both to Greek Cyprus, and we understand helping Iran to develop
even more sophisticated ballistic missiles, is there a heightened concern
that Russia is encircling a very key NATO ally with these sophisticated
offensive weapons?
MR. FOLEY: Well, first, I'm not sure that our assessment has changed,
concerning your first question. I would have to check with our experts to
see if there has been any reason to reassess our previous judgment on the
issue.
Secondly, to my knowledge, there has been no delivery, so I would have to
challenge your premise. There has been no delivery of any Russian missiles
to Cyprus. As to the question of missile cooperation with Iran, I addressed
that extensively a couple days ago from this podium. We take such reports
extremely seriously. They are the subject of ongoing investigation and also
of high-level consultation with the Russian authorities. I have nothing
further to add on that though today.
QUESTION: But the gist of my question is, so there is no heightened
concern right now with the Administration?
MR. FOLEY: There is a permanent heightened concern regarding efforts by
Iran to acquire weapons of mass destruction and the means to deliver them.
That is unchanged.
QUESTION: Russia -- there is no concern about Russia? That was my
question. Aren't you concerned that Russia is following some sort of plan
in distributing these missiles all around in the region?
MR. FOLEY: First of all, again, on the question of missiles to Cyprus, I
said there had been none. Secondly, on the question of Armenia, I said I
would look into it to see if our assessment has changed. So the very
premise of your question, I am not accepting because there are some holes
in the reasoning.
But on the issue of cooperation with Iran, as I stated the other day, we
are concerned, indeed, about these reports of Russian entities perhaps
cooperating with Iran on missile developments. I won't read through
everything that I said the other day, but we are following up on them.
QUESTION: Jim?
MR. FOLEY: Yes.
QUESTION: Can you - did you see today's Washington Post news about the
Russians selling some missile part to Iraq right now? And still you are
keeping - are you keeping to, still, only the concern about the Russian
arms trade? Or do you do something about this business?
MR. FOLEY: It's not new information. That's my answer. This activity was
reported extensively in the press in 1995. They obviously - these reports
continue to highlight the critical importance of maintaining sanctions on
Iraq and the key role played by UNSCOM in detecting and dismantling Iraq's
weapons of mass destruction program. Again, according to the press
reporting, it's understood that the gyroscopes that were mentioned in the
article were smuggled out of Russia without the knowledge of the Russian
Government. This is what, in fact, the Russian Government told us in
1995 when we raised this issue with them at senior levels. Carol.
QUESTION: On China. The New York Times had a story today saying that
China has agreed to return this Sun Microsystems supercomputer that it
misused. Is this true? And what can you tell us about this decision?
MR. FOLEY: The Commerce Department - you are talking about the reports
that we had earlier in the summer about the supercomputer?
QUESTION: Right, the Secretary publicly expressed concern --
MR. FOLEY: Yes. The Commerce Department discovered, actually, this
problem during the first of what will be ongoing reviews of high performance
computer exports to a number of countries including China. The problem
involved the unauthorized retransfer within China to an end-user engaged in,
among other things, military-related research and development. Such a
retransfer would have required a U.S. export license, which had not been
obtained by the initial China end-user. So the Commerce Department began an
investigation into this retransfer. I can't comment any more specifically
on the Department investigations that are being conducted as a result
of this review. But we approached the Chinese Government immediately on the
issue. Our discussions with the Chinese focused on identifying the facts
and crafting a pragmatic solution to the problem.
The Secretary raised this issue with her counterpart Vice Premier and
Foreign Minister Qian and he promised to look into the problem. After doing
so, the Chinese Government informed us that, while they viewed this as a
legal transaction, they understood and were sensitive to our concerns. We
are pleased with the rapid response and the cooperation of the Chinese
Government, which helped us to identify a mutually acceptable solution to
this issue, specifically that the computer is now in the process of being
returned to the U.S. vendor. We regard China's willingness to engage on
this problem as a positive indicator for future actions with China on
technology transfer issues.
QUESTION: But when will that be actually back in the hands of Sun
Microsystems?
MR. FOLEY: I don't have that. It's in the process, I believe, of being
transferred. I don't have the exact date.
QUESTION: Are you concerned at all that while this mega-computer was in
Chinese hands that they were able to at least derive some information that
could help, or use it - I suppose it was functioning while it was there -
to, you know, advance their military plans? I mean, they may be giving it
back to you now which is, as you say, a welcome gesture, but maybe they
already put it to some use that advances the goals that you didn't want to
be advanced.
MR. FOLEY: Obviously, and maybe unfortunately, I don't have the technical
expertise myself to answer such a question, which would require a
sophisticated examination and analysis. And maybe there are people either
in the company or in the U.S. Government who could make such an assessment.
You might want to talk to the Commerce Department. But I couldn't answer it,
at least not now. I could perhaps ask whether we have the expertise
in this building and if anyone has done the analysis.
QUESTION: When were you informed of this decision?
MR. FOLEY: I don't know. I think it was not long ago, but I don't have
the date.
QUESTION: And is the company going to be reimbursing China for the
equipment?
MR. FOLEY: I don't know.
QUESTION: Do you know to whom it was re-transferred?
MR. FOLEY: I don't know specifically. It was re-transferred, as I said,
for the purpose of military-related research and development. But I don't
have anything more specific. Bill.
QUESTION: Yes, a question in two parts on Mexico.
MR. FOLEY: Do we have anything more on Asia?
QUESTION: Yes.
MR. FOLEY: I'll come back to you, Bill.
QUESTION: The Chinese party - well, Chinese president yesterday announced
a sweeping change in privatization and his intents to sell off state-run
enterprises. And I was wondering how you viewed this, and do you anticipate
that this would help China's bid for the WTO?
MR. FOLEY: Well, those are important discussions that we are having with
the Chinese and that other of our partners in the WTO are having with the
Chinese, and they involve a number of difficult issues where, in order to
qualify for membership, certain reforms, market-oriented reforms, are
necessary.
This announcement of a broader move towards privatization is a welcome
development, but I think it will take a little time to examine those
decisions - what was stated, what may follow. But as for the specific
status of where we are in our discussions with the Chinese on the issue of
WTO membership, that is a matter for the negotiators right now. I don't
have a readout on that, but I think that the announcement that was made
yesterday is something that we do salute, and certainly as a general matter,
the trend away from unproductive state-owned enterprises to more of a
market-driven system. I promised Bill.
QUESTION: Thank you, Jim. I'm referring to Molly Moore's article here in
the Post on the whole entire staff of the air interdiction squad of the
Mexican drug agency being arrested for importing and transporting cocaine.
Mr. Jorge Madrazo Cuellar says he is terribly embarrassed by the rampant
corruption in the drug agency. I would ask you first if you have any
comment on that.
MR. FOLEY: Well, it is a disturbing report, but it is also encouraging
that the Mexican Government is determined to root out this problem. They
understand better than we do what they are facing. President Zedillo, first
and foremost, has been clear that this may be Mexico's number one national
security threat.
We applaud this action on the part of the Mexican Government to arrest
these 18 personnel who were assigned to this unit. We were informed about
the arrest shortly after it happened and we understand from Mexican
officials that the three pilots have been held over for trial and the rest
remain under house arrest pending further investigation.
QUESTION: Jim, if I could follow up with a political hot potato, Mr.
Helms and a number of others --
MR. FOLEY: It's almost lunch time, Bill.
QUESTION: Mr. Helms and a number of others have been up there today on
this particular issue. They say that Mr. Weld is not qualified to take over
in such a crisis situation in Mexico, a crisis that is much like that of El
Salvador in the '80s when a man named Pickering was put on the job and
cleaned up and came out a hero in El Salvador. Isn't it really, for a man
of the stature of Mr. Pickering, to go down and help the Mexicans?
MR. FOLEY: You are recommending a change of employment for Under
Secretary Pickering?
QUESTION: No, I said a man of Pickering's stature. A man of Pickering's
experience in dealing with troubled areas.
MR. FOLEY: Well, Mexico is one of our most important bilateral relationships
and it does indeed require an ambassador of eminent standing and qualifications.
We have felt all along that Governor Weld meets those qualifications.
Carol.
QUESTION: There's a report about Cuba, there is a report in Granma today
that a U.S. citizen was detained for questioning in August and he admitted
working for a U.S. group helping Cuban dissidents. Do you have anything to
say about this?
MR. FOLEY: I got word of that just coming in, and I don't have any sort
of official reaction. The word I got, it was a press report indicated that
the person concerned may have been involved with Freedom House, which is a
non-governmental organization that's working on democracy and human rights
issues. I think, though, that we would be likely to treat this allegation
on the part of the Cuban Government the way we have become accustomed to
treating such allegations; in other words, as baseless and unfounded.
Yes.
QUESTION: Yesterday -
MR. FOLEY: Excuse me. Is this also on Cuba?
QUESTION: Anything new on the arrest of the Salvadoran?
MR. FOLEY: No, nothing new, George. I can give you the same message that
I did yesterday, which is that we have received no official response at all
from the Cuban Government, no formal communication, no communication
whatsoever. That is what we are looking for.
QUESTION: I know you said that yesterday. I just need to follow up. Janet
Reno made a comment to reporters yesterday. Admittedly, it wasn't very
elaborate, but she said that they have followed up some of these allegations.
I mean, on the one hand, you say the United States Government can't act
because you haven't gotten an official request or any official information
from the Cuban Government.
MR. FOLEY: Right.
QUESTION: On the other hand, she says they at least have done some work
on some allegations. There seems to be somewhat of a disconnect there.
MR. FOLEY: No, I wouldn't say disconnect. We have different missions,
obviously. The State Department is not a law enforcement organization. You
would have to ask either the Justice Department or the FBI themselves about
their activities, but we manage our bilateral relationships around the
world.
The Cuban Government has made all kinds of noises in the press in a public
forum about accusations, and we regard their words as lacking seriousness
insofar as they have failed to provide any formal requests or communicated
anything officially to us in the way of information, evidence or, indeed,
requests. So that is what I was responding to.
QUESTION: Have they conveyed anything unofficially, Jim?
MR. FOLEY: Not to my knowledge. In fact, we have not been sitting
twiddling our thumbs either. We have been proactive on it. Our representatives
in Havana have actually demarched the Cuban authorities and, again, there
has been no response or answer at the other end.
Yes. I'm thinking more about hot potatoes. It's nearly 1:30.
QUESTION: Yesterday, Archbishop of Cyprus, which he was visiting the
United Nations, I believe, he said that federation for Cyprus is a big
luxury because we will have three or four governments and everybody works
for the government. And, also, he claimed that all the Turks, which they
live in the northern part of the island are actually of Greek origin, and
they choose as a religion Islam, later. Do you think that this kind of
statement is helpful to find a solution for this island?
MR. FOLEY: Well, you know we support a bi-zonal, bi-communal federation
as the ultimate negotiated outcome that can bring peace and stability to
Cyprus, and I would merely reaffirm our support for that principle.
Thank you very much.
(The briefing concluded at 1:25 p.m.)
|
