U.S. Department of State Daily Press Briefing #138, 97-09-19
From: The Department of State Foreign Affairs Network (DOSFAN) at <http://www.state.gov>
897
U.S. Department of State
Daily Press Briefing
I N D E X
Friday, September 19, 1997
Briefer: James P. Rubin
DEPARTMENT/STATEMENTS
1,11 Posted Statements on Passport Services, KEDO, Explosion in
Mostar, and Turkish Statements on Cyprus Missiles
1-2,11,13 Secretary Albright's Schedule at UNGA
UNITED NATIONS
3,9-10 UN Reform
BOSNIA
3-6,11 Update on Helicopter Crash and Problems with UN-Leased
Helicopters
MIDDLE EAST PEACE PROCESS
6-8 Update on Ras al-Amoud Housing Situation Agreement
8-9 Secretary Albright's Call for a "Time-Out" on Settlements
12 Doha Summit
CYPRUS
10-11 Security Meeting Between Denktash and Clerides
GREECE/TURKEY
11-12 Possible Meeting of Foreign Ministers Pangalos and Cem with
Secretary Albright at UNGA
NORTH KOREA
12-13 Four Party Preparatory Talks
DRoCONGO
13-14 Status of UN Human Rights Investigative Team
NIGERIA
14 Incident at Farewell Reception for US Ambassador Carrington
CHINA
14-15 US-China Dialogue on Nuclear Exports and Non-Proliferation
Certification
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE
DAILY PRESS BRIEFING
DPB #138
FRIDAY, SEPTEMBER 19, 1997, 12:45 P.M.
(ON THE RECORD UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED)
MR. RUBIN: Okay. We have statements we will post on passport services, on
KEDO, on Mostar explosion, and on the question of Turkish statements on
Cyprus missiles.
Some of you were interested in the Secretary's schedule. She gave you a
flavor of it. I'll try to give you a little more detail, and then as we get
all together in New York - for those of you who are going to be able to
come - we'll try to give you more detail on the press arrangements for
it.
On Sunday, the Secretary will attend a reception hosted by President and
Mrs. Clinton for the heads of delegations. She will then have dinner with
Foreign Minister Primakov Sunday night.
On Monday, she will join the President in his meetings, which include a
courtesy call with UN Secretary General Annan, the UN General Assembly
president. Has the White House put out these meetings yet?
(Laughter)
And other meetings.
On Tuesday, she will have breakfast with the East Asian and Pacific region
foreign ministers. She will meet with the new Japanese foreign minister.
She and Secretary Cohen will meet with both the defense and foreign
ministers of Japan. She will meet with a troika of nonaligned movement
countries. She will meet with the Indonesian foreign minister - this is all
on Tuesday - a meeting with the foreign minister of Korea, then will have a
meeting and dinner with Foreign Minister Qian Qichen. There will be
press availability with Foreign Minister Qian Qichen on Tuesday. There
may also be another meeting on Tuesday in relation to Cambodia.
On Wednesday, she will have breakfast with Foreign Minister Vedrine of
France. She will meet with the foreign minister of Turkey, the foreign
minister of Cyprus, the foreign minister of Greece. She will also host a
lunch with the EU - will attend a lunch hosted by Luxembourg Foreign
Minister Poos of the EU. She will chair a Bosnia Contact Group ministerial
meeting on Wednesday, and chair the first meeting with the Southeast
European Cooperation Initiative foreign ministers. Then she will co-host a
reception with Ambassador Richardson for OAU representatives, also on
Wednesday.
On Thursday, she will chair a UN Security Council session on Africa, a
special Security Council meeting. She will attend the UN Secretary
General's lunch with the permanent five, and will have bilaterals with
Chile, Argentina, Brazil, and the first ministerial level meeting of the
Rio Group. She will also host a dinner for the Summit of the Eight foreign
ministers.
Boy, this one could have gotten me in trouble.
QUESTION: Are you going to be there, Jamie?
MR. RUBIN: We're going to make a special seat for all of you in all of
these meetings.
On Friday, she will attend the first NATO-Russia permanent joint council
meeting, will again meet with Russian Foreign Minister Primakov, will host
a reception for women foreign ministers, perm reps and other key women at
the UN, and host dinner for women foreign ministers.
There will be more, but these are all I can provide you at this time. We
will have arrangements in New York for all of you who are coming and try to
provide information as to the press arrangements. I will be in New York
with her. I will be trying to give regular read-outs and off-camera
briefings.
QUESTION: The second week is the busy week, right?
MR. RUBIN: The second week we're going to get down to business.
QUESTION: There are no Middle Easterners there, I don't think. Is that --
MR. RUBIN: I don't have dates. The second --
QUESTION: They're not in the first week?
MR. RUBIN: The plan would be that the meetings in Washington would occur
this following week.
QUESTION: (Inaudible)
MR. RUBIN: Right. During that first week. And the trilateral with Foreign
Minister Levy and Abu Mazen would be the week after, which I didn't get to
a date yet.
QUESTION: Also Syrian --
MR. RUBIN: And the Syrian foreign minister and the Israeli foreign
minister would be - some of those may be added. I mean, that will all
depend on what happens here next week. I wouldn't rule out a meeting with
Foreign Minister Levy, depending on his schedule. But for now, those are
the confirmed times, as you requested yesterday.
Mr. Schweid.
QUESTION: If she had stayed and taken questions, I would have asked her
what I'm going to ask you.
MR. RUBIN: Okay.
QUESTION: She cited critics (who) believe there's waste and mismanagement.
She spoke of a choice between retreat and reform. I don't get a clear - I
don't have a clear view where she stands on these things. Obviously, she's
reform-minded. Does she think the allegations that the UN is an over-
stuffed bureaucracy that wastes money and is badly managed. Is that her
view, or is it just the view of "critics?" What is the US view of
the way the UN runs?
MR. RUBIN: Okay, I just want you to note which cup I'm taking.
QUESTION: No, I know. Be careful. He gets a paper cup.
(Laughter)
MR. RUBIN: The answer to your question is that Secretary Albright and the
United States believe there is significant room for improvement in the area
of management reform, in the area of waste and abuse. That is why we worked
so hard over the last several years to create an inspector general at the
United Nations, who would be charged precisely with looking into problems;
and just by being there, give a deterrent to any waste, fraud and
abuse that might occur.
She also believes that Secretary General Kofi Annan has been working very
hard to try to overcome these systemic management problems that have
existed for dozens of years at the United Nations; and that we believe that
he is making a serious effort to try to change things and to bring to bear
a new culture in which those changes would eliminate some of that problem I
mentioned.
But because one believes there are problems at the UN does not mean we
shouldn't be funding the UN in full and on time, and I think she made that
point quite clear.
QUESTION: Jamie, a UN-related question.
MR. RUBIN: Yes.
QUESTION: The helicopter which crashed the other day in Bosnia was a UN
lease, apparently, from Ukraine. I've heard that there have been so many
near accidents with some of these leases. Ambassador Gelbard, apparently,
was in one the other day. I wonder whether the US Government is considering
the means by which these top people in the international community are
being transported around that country.
MR. RUBIN: I'm not aware of any review, other than to say that we'll
obviously be working closely with the UN in examining the results of their
investigation as to what the problem was and whether it was related to
anything other than the kind of weather and other problems that have
already been cited.
But I'm not aware that we are planning to rethink how we get around in the
region. Obviously this is a tragic accident. Ambassador Gelbard will be
going out to bring home the Americans who died. As I understand it, the
remains have been moved to the Visoko Pathology Center in Sarajevo, and are
undergoing medical examination by a British-led team.
The process is slow and laborious. As of now, only one body has been
tentatively identified. We have nothing new for you on the cause of the
crash. So the short answer is, before one can jump to a conclusion about
what new practices one should adopt, we want to go through the process of
trying to see what the examination and investigation of the crash
reveal.
QUESTION: Are you aware, for example, that in the passenger compartment -
that these are cargo helicopters, adapted to passenger use - that in the
center of the passenger compartment there is a fuel tank? This apparently
is what blew up and burned all the people and made it impossible for them
to escape. Not only that, but I mean, many of your assistant secretaries
here - or a number of them - have been in similar, if not the same,
helicopters.
MR. RUBIN: Yes, I believe Ambassador Albright has been on such a
helicopter. I believe I've been with her on such helicopters. So we're all
very conscious of the fact that when we travel in theater, in places where
there aren't American military helicopters to travel around, that we may
have a different standard. But again, before one jumps to conclusions about
major problems with that particular helicopter and what happened in that
case, we would like to await the results of the investigation.
QUESTION: Are there no American helicopters in this theater that can be
used for purposes such as transporting top officials?
MR. RUBIN: You'd have to check with the Pentagon for that.
QUESTION: Well, I mean, I think there are. It's obvious. NATO is
there.
MR. RUBIN: Well, then that's what the Pentagon will tell you, Roy.
QUESTION: So my question is, why is the United States Government, and why
are the Western community in general, relying on essentially a UN lease,
which is forced by the UN rules that the US imposes on the UN, to get the
cheapest possible deal, and that tends to be, as you know, Ukrainian/Russian/Belarusian.
MR. RUBIN: I know there's always a tendency to assign blame in tragic
cases like this, but we think it would be better to assign blame after the
investigation.
QUESTION: You said she's been on helicopters like this. Does she have a
choice? Does she ever request an American helicopter?
MR. RUBIN: I don't believe so, no.
QUESTION: She takes what's there?
MR. RUBIN: Well, her military advisors tell her --
QUESTION: Well, I mean, the US takes what's there.
MR. RUBIN: -- what the options are, and one makes a decision whether to
go or not go based on transportation options.
QUESTION: I'm trying to follow up Roy's question, which seemed to be
pertinent. You say she flies around in helicopters like this.
MR. RUBIN: No, I said that I think she has flown in Ukrainian helicopters
in UN operations.
Mike, is that right?
STAFF: Yes.
MR. RUBIN: I believe we've been together on such helicopters.
QUESTION: Not having had an opportunity to elect an American helicopter?
MR. RUBIN: Right, because there are many parts of the world where the UN
is the only organization with helicopters that one needs to use in order to
get to out-of-the-way places in a short enough time so that one can go to
another country in less than six or seven days of driving time.
So one uses what's available. One tries to make sure that the risks are
minimized. I don't believe that there is any conclusive evidence that the
United States' desire for efficiency in the United Nations is the cause of
this crash.
Yes.
QUESTION: Are you aware that Mr. Gelbard was in an air crash the other
day --
MR. RUBIN: I've spoken to him about this crash. He's not mentioned that
to me.
Yes.
QUESTION: I just talked to him this morning, and I understand that, in
fact, there was an air crash. It was a jet-operated escort helicopter. And
it just seems to me, you know, that the pattern is demonstrable now, and
I'm not really clear why - again, just to leave the question on the record,
why is the United States - and the international community - why are you
putting your very top people in equipment which is regarded by most of the
people flying it as totally inadequate and quite dangerous, and not
well flown either?
MR. RUBIN: We'll take that question.
Yes.
QUESTION: Yesterday you described the Israeli - well, Netanyahu's action
of moving the Jewish students out of Dr. Moskowitz's property as productive
-- helpful, I believe, is the word you used. Now that they have caretakers
that are going to be looking after the building - and it seems as though
the Israelis really haven't given up anything, and the Palestinians are
threatening some kind of retaliatory action - they're saying they're not
happy with it. Arafat said it was a trick, et cetera.
Is your point of view still that the action -- what Netanyahu has done --
is helpful? Do you still maintain that position?
MR. RUBIN: I did not say precisely that yesterday, but I'll tell you what
our position is. Our understanding is that the families have left the house
and that they will not be permitted back. Furthermore, there will be no
construction in the neighborhood. Therefore, the nature of the neighborhood
will not change over time.
Secretary Albright did speak to Prime Minister Netanyahu about this subject
in some detail yesterday. We have received explicit assurances from the
government of Israel that teams of caretakers, who are apparently Yeshiva
students, would remain on the ground to conduct maintenance. They will
operate in shifts, but not live in the house. The houses will not serve as
domiciles or residence. Any suggestion that the students will bring in
their families would clearly not be consistent with the assurances we have
received from the government of Israel.
So in short, there was an agreement between the Israeli Government and the
people who had moved into the house. Our main concern - that the nature of
this neighborhood not change over time - appears to have been met. We have
received assurances that it will not change over time.
QUESTION: Can I just follow up, Jamie on one thing? But doesn't having
the caretakers there and their presence exacerbate an already explosive
situation? I mean, tensions aren't getting better between both sides. The
Secretary said she felt as though the situation was worse than she had
expected before her visit, before traveling to the region. Don't you think
the caretakers are going to exacerbate the situation?
MR. RUBIN: What we think is that the important point is that the
character of the neighborhood not be changed. We believe we have received
assurances from the government of Israel that they are going to take steps
to ensure that that not happen.
As far as the teams of students who may be in a caretaker status there, to
maintain the building, that does not strike us at this time as changing the
character of the neighborhood, changing the status quo in any serious
way.
The fact that the Palestinian Authority is concerned about this is not a
surprise to us, but we hope that as they understand better the extent to
which the main concern of the Palestinians - that the character of the
neighborhood not change over time - has been met, and that we have received
assurances that it will not, that the reaction will be as limited as
possible.
QUESTION: Jamie, that pretty much answers it, but still, it's Arafat
who's complained, and its his spokesman who is raising that threat you hear
every other day of an eruption, an explosion. So Arafat says it's a trick
just to keep things symmetrical and all. Will you respond to Arafat? Is it
a trick? Is it a compromise?
He's your peace partner. You don't want to provoke him.
MR. RUBIN: We believe that we have received explicit assurances from the
Israeli Government that the Palestinians' main concern - that the character
of the neighborhood would be changed - has been assured. We believe that
the main concern, the key concern -- we have received assurances that that
won't be a problem.
That doesn't mean it won't be a problem; it means that we've received
assurances that it won't be a problem. So we would hope that as Chairman
Arafat and the Palestinian Authority look at what I just said, that they
will realize that we will be working to see that the assurances that we
received are implemented and followed through on and that, therefore, their
main concern will be dealt with.
How one characterizes this -- I'm characterizing it as an agreement and an
understanding and a result that meets the main concern of the Palestinians,
and therefore the main concern of the Secretary that no unilateral actions
be taken that increase tensions.
If we weren't in a crisis of confidence that we are clearly in, that she
has described in such great detail, this kind of an agreement probably
wouldn't receive the same level of scrutiny or question. So we're just
hoping that, as a result of this important assurance that we've received,
that things don't get out of hand.
Charlie, yes.
QUESTION: Can I go back to the UN, which slipped on my first --
MR. RUBIN: Let's stay on this, and I'll go back to you.
Yes.
QUESTION: The Secretary, when she was in the area, talked a lot about the
importance of not taking, as you said, unilateral actions that create facts
on the ground. Do you consider that putting these students now, instead of
the families, creating new facts on the ground, that makes resuming the
negotiations harder?
MR. RUBIN: I think I've said very clearly, and I'll repeat for you, that
we have received assurances that there will not be a new status quo. The
character of the neighborhood will not change. Therefore, we believe that
the main element, the essential element that this situation could have
created has been alleviated, if the assurances are followed through
upon.
So, no, we don't think that the fact that there are teams of caretakers who
are not going to live there, and construction is going to be not occurring
there, and the neighborhood is not going to change is the kind of
significant unilateral act that we were calling for both sides to
avoid.
Yes.
QUESTION: In her extensive conversation with Prime Minister Netanyahu -
was it yesterday?
MR. RUBIN: Yes.
QUESTION: Did she repeat her request for a time-out on settlements in
general?
MR. RUBIN: I believe that the substance of their conversation was on this
subject, primarily, and a general discussion of how the visit played in the
region and her reflections on her subsequent discussions with other Arab
leaders, and not the kind of detailed discussion of next steps that we
think we need to work on to get ourselves back to the negotiating
table.
I can't confirm for you that she repeated every statement in her speech,
but again, the substance and the bulk of the conversation was about this
issue and about the reflections she had from the subsequent meetings after
they left each other last week.
QUESTION: Could you characterize her reflections on those other
subsequent meetings?
MR. RUBIN: No.
QUESTION: Can you tell us what does time-out mean? Does it mean a month,
five minutes, twenty minutes, like on tennis courts and things like
that?
(Laughter)
What does it mean, time-out? It's a new word in diplomacy. I'm waiting.
MR. RUBIN: We described, for those of you who were with us, in great
detail, what the Secretary's intent was in making that speech. It was to
describe the context and the circumstances under which an accelerated
permanent status talks would succeed; and that if one were to get a moment
where you could, in some shorter amount of time -- in many months as
opposed to several years, or a couple of years -- try to nail down and make
the tough decisions on the final status issues, that that likelihood
that that negotiation would succeed would be greatly improved if there
were time-outs on the kind of actions that have been perceived as
provocative by some of the parties.
So we have had discussions with both Israel and the Palestinian Authority
and other Arab leaders about what we consider the problem areas to be, and
we've had discussions with them about ways in which to avoid those problems
getting out of hand. What I don't want to do for you is give you a glib,
one-sentence answer to the time-out question, because it depends on what
action we're talking about and what each of the sides thinks is necessary
to make it possible to negotiate successfully the permanent status
issues.
QUESTION: Does this mean it's connected with the negotiations?
MR. RUBIN: I think I just said that, yes.
Yes.
QUESTION: Going back to the UN. The Secretary used language, I'm sure
artfully constructed, which sounded to me like the present deal that the
Congress is talking about is the best deal that they're going to get. My
question is, will she diplomatically tell them that, in other words, that
this is the best deal and it's take it or leave it?
MR. RUBIN: Who, the Congress or the UN?
QUESTION: Tell the UN that the deal that Congress is now ready to go with
is the best they're going to get, and to take it or leave it. Not in those
words, obviously.
MR. RUBIN: Well, I'm sure the Secretary would never speak in undiplomatic
language at the United Nations. But I do think she believes that as a
result of her discussions with Chairman Helms, Senator Biden and numerous
members of Congress on both sides of the aisle, that we've got about as
good a deal as we can get. That doesn't mean we won't be working on some
details before this bill becomes a law, if we can get it to that point.
But those would be very much in the detail category.
The basic elements of the legislation are in place, and we believe that was
the best we could achieve. We would like people in other countries - other
foreign ministers who she will meet with - to understand that we've come a
long, long way from a time when Congress was unwilling to put forward
moneys at this level or have any serious discussion, frankly, of repaying a
billion dollars. Now we're in a position where it's not whether we're going
to repay the money, it's under what conditions we'll repay the money.
So we've hopeful that the foreign ministers of these other countries have
enough information about the way Washington works, and as a result of their
conversations with her, to understand if they want the United States to be
able to pay this money and if they want us to get to a point where the UN
doesn't constantly rely on the United States to pay so much of the funds,
that this is a good way to go.
QUESTION: Also on the UN --
MR. RUBIN: Yes.
QUESTION: She mentioned capping the US contributions toward peacekeeping
at 25 percent. That's what it is now, right?
MR. RUBIN: Correct, by law, yes.
QUESTION: Yeah, and the other dues at 20 percent capped.
MR. RUBIN: Correct.
QUESTION: It's now, what, 21 percent, something like that?
MR. RUBIN: No, the regular budget is now 25 percent, and the peacekeeping
budget is now 25 percent. What we are hoping to achieve is a reduction in
the regular budget, down to 20 percent; is that correct? Yes.
QUESTION: Can I go back and do the helicopter question again? Can you -
while you're researching this, can you determine whether it is US policy
that the UN should have sealed bids and take the lowest possible bid for
transportation in contracting out?
MR. RUBIN: You know, when I worked at the UN with the Secretary in New
York, I cannot believe that any written document would say, the lowest
possible bid without regard to the quality of the product, if that's what
you're getting at. I find that almost impossible to imagine. And I can't
understand why you continue to pursue that line of questioning. We're going
to get you an answer to the question of why we take these helicopters.
But the idea that this crash is a result of our sole and complete and
exclusive focus on saving money, without any regard whatsoever for the
safety of equipment in the field that our diplomats go on, is not a fair
conclusion, based on the information that we have.
Yes.
QUESTION: I want to get back to your answer two days ago regarding the
meeting between Clerides and Denktash in Cyprus.
MR. RUBIN: Yes.
QUESTION: Could you tell us what is the agenda of the Clerides-Denktash
talks? Does the US want them to discuss confidence-building measures?
MR. RUBIN: President Clerides and Turkish Cypriot leader Denktash have
agreed to meet soon to discuss security issues, which is the word that I
tried to use repeatedly when I was asked this question. There are no
preconditions on this meeting, and there is no specific agenda.
Which questions the two leaders discuss is up to them. The fact that they
are discussing these key issues is itself positive. Making progress here
will help create a positive climate for engaging on the remaining core
issues of a Cyprus settlement. Any suggestion that I may have made on
Wednesday was not in reference to any particular set of measures but rather
that whatever they want to talk about under the rubric of security is what
they are going to talk about.
QUESTION: I have another question. You mentioned that you have a
statement on Mr. Yilmaz's statements today on the S-300 missiles. Could you
tell us?
MR. RUBIN: Well, I was going to post it, but do you want me to read
it?
QUESTION: If it's possible.
MR. RUBIN: The US continues to believe that the Cypriot Government
decision to acquire S-300 anti-aircraft missiles from Russia is a setback
for our efforts to resolve the Cyprus issue peacefully. At the same time,
we are firmly opposed to threats to address the missile question militarily.
Therefore, we note with concern Turkish Prime Minister Yilmaz's statements
earlier today regarding the missiles. We call on all interested parties
to avoid statements which exacerbate the tensions over this issue.
Yes.
QUESTION: The words precautionary measures that I think Yilmaz used, do
you think that involves any military measures, the words precautionary
measures?
MR. RUBIN: What we're going to do on that is try to get some detailed
discussion of the analysis of what he might or might not have said, and Mr.
Foley will be able to get back to you on that.
QUESTION: Is it reasonable to assume this will come up in her talks in
New York?
MR. RUBIN: I think Cyprus will come up, yes.
QUESTION: Even before that, I was going to ask you, very quickly, if it's
possible that she would try to establish some sort of a three-way meeting.
You have those ministers --
MR. RUBIN: Yes, I think yesterday I mentioned that, as always, in the
case of two close allies like Greece and Turkey, in the event that one is
able to move things to a point where one thinks that a three-way meeting
might be able to achieve something, I think she'd be open to that, but it's
not currently scheduled.
QUESTION: One question.
MR. RUBIN: Yes, please.
QUESTION: What's the date on the economic summit for the Middle East
that's supposed to be held in Doha in November? Is this going to continue
to be held, or is it postponed or going to be canceled?
MR. RUBIN: The Secretary still intends to go to the Doha Summit. As you
know from the reporting on our trip, there were many discussions in the
region about that, and the bottom line is that the more progress we can
make in restarting the peace talks and eliminating the crisis of confidence,
the more successful the summit will be.
Yes.
QUESTION: Jamie, do you have a read-out at all on the first day of the
four-party preparatory talks in New York? And can you also corroborate
reports that a sticking point appears to be insistence by the North Koreans
that US troops and a withdrawal of US troops be on the agenda?
MR. RUBIN: The talks began on schedule on September 18 and resumed this
morning. We don't want to get into particular details of these discussions,
especially when they are getting on. The participants had agreed to break
into smaller groups. This flexibility was used. There was a South Korean,
North Korean and US trilateral meeting to discuss the process. That was
yesterday.
The North Koreans were informed that there has been no change in our policy
on food aid. Decisions on food assistance are based on humanitarian
reasons. We do not use food as a political weapon. American food aid to
North Korea and four-party talks are independent of each other. No change
in that policy has been or is being contemplated.
We don't see yesterday's meetings as signaling anything other than we're
continuing the discussions. I can't really get into the details of those
discussions, other than to say that our view still is that one wants to
keep the agenda general so that one avoids getting bogged down on a
specific issue, like the one you mentioned. With regard to some suggestion
that the US and South Korea proposed 100,000 tons monthly of food aid, all
I can tell you is that the North has repeatedly raised its concerns
about food problems in the talks which we have been involved, including
the four-party process.
There has been no change in US policy. We have not and will not link North
Korea's participation in the four-party talks to other issues, including
food, and therefore the US has made no such proposal.
QUESTION: Can you characterize South Korea's posture in these talks?
MR. RUBIN: I gather, from the people I've spoken to, that it was business-
like.
QUESTION: No unusual demands? No attempts to cut one party or another out
of something or other?
MR. RUBIN: Well, there was a small meeting with the South Koreans and the
North Koreans and the US, so normally when we've seen problems, it's tended
to be to try to cut out the South Koreans, so -
QUESTION: But you haven't seen that, obviously.
MR. RUBIN: Not particularly.
QUESTION: Anything on South Lebanon - on the situation in South
Lebanon?
MR. RUBIN: No, I don't have anything for you. We can post that, take the
question.
QUESTION: When was the Lebanese foreign minister part of the New York
picture?
MR. RUBIN: I haven't seen that on her list. We'll check that for
you.
Patrick.
QUESTION: Can you say anything about -- to change part of the world - the
situation in Democratic Congo, and the hold-up of the UN fact-finding
mission?
MR. RUBIN: Yes, I can, actually. On Wednesday, Ambassador Richardson
called President Kabila to express US concern at one of his ministers'
imposition of obstacles to the UN team's investigation and our dismay at
suggestions criticizing the team.
President Kabila returned the phone call later in the day and insisted that
the UN team begin its investigation in Eastern Congo, and promised
Congolese army security in that region. He said the team's request to
investigate in Mbandaka would be considered only after it completed its
investigation in the East.
We expect the Congolese Government to give its full cooperation to the UN
investigating team, as President Kabila has pledged. The US' future
relationship with the Congolese Government will depend on progress and
democratic reforms, respect for human rights and humanitarian access to all
parts of the Congo.
The UN team must receive full Congolese cooperation, as President Kabila
directly promised Ambassador Richardson. The team is now awaiting
permission from the Congolese Government to travel to the places it has
requested to begin it investigation. We do not believe it should be limited
to one area, and we are going to have the team break up into two parts so
that it can be in a position to go to all parts of the country.
QUESTION: There are those in the Congo that have said that they feel that
this investigation on the part of the UN is unfair because the Mobutu
Government, for many years, was guilty of human rights abuses, and there
was never an effort by the international community to address those. And
here is this new country, this new government that is, they feel, being
sort of trounced on by the foreign community with this intrusive investigation.
How would you respond?
MR. RUBIN: We don't accept that view. We believe that there were credible
reports of serious human rights violations and possible massacres, and that
it was therefore appropriate for the United Nations to put a team together
and demand access to these locations. If we don't think that just because
events occurred in the past that may have involved human rights abuses that
precludes one from trying to get to the bottom of what may have happened
there.
QUESTION: Anything on the Nigerian police breaking up a party for the US
ambassador?
MR. RUBIN: I do. On September 18, at 7:40 p.m., a group of armed men
wearing Nigerian police uniforms forced their way into a private compound
in Lagos and broke up a reception for US Ambassador Carrington. This was a
farewell reception for the ambassador, hosted by a large number of pro-
democracy and human rights groups. The reception was attended by other
diplomats as well as local and international media.
Ambassador Carrington and other diplomats departed the reception unharmed.
We are registering our serious concern about this shocking matter with
Nigerian Embassy officials in Washington and still trying to confirm the
facts.
Yes.
QUESTION: Jamie, yesterday, over at the Senate Intelligence hearing on
China --
MR. RUBIN: Was that a closed hearing?
QUESTION: No, this was an open hearing on China. In this hearing, Mr.
Gary Mulholland testified, and he was well received. All the testimony was
well received by Mr. Kerrey and Mr. Shelby. He testified that the Chinese
have basically stopped talking to the US, will not respond to inquiries by
the State Department about chemical weapons and also about missile
proliferation, both of those proliferations. It was also testified that
they are deceiving - trying to deceive the US on their nuclear proliferation
by small exports rather than the large programs.
So is the US State Department going to favor this lifting of sanctions on
Chinese nuclear exports?
MR. RUBIN: The short answer is that outside experts are entitled to their
opinions, but when they are making judgments about what the United States
Government's access or discussions are or are not, it would probably be
helpful to check with us. We don't believe the Chinese are blocking
discussions on chemical, missile or nuclear weapons.
We still have concerns about whether to certify that China has given clear
and unequivocal assurances that it will meet the standards that are
involved in the nuclear area. We think there's been some substantial
progress, but there's some distance to go. We have not made a decision on
certification. But the facts as presented by your account of his statement
don't resemble the facts as I know them.
QUESTION: Is State still going to recommend --
MR. RUBIN: No, we're not going to recommend certification.
QUESTION: You haven't yet?
MR. RUBIN: We're continuing to work the subject. There's been some
substantial progress. We think more needs to be done to reach the
standard.
QUESTION: Thank you.
MR. RUBIN: Thank you.
(The briefing concluded at 1:35 P.M.)
|
