U.S. Department of State Daily Press Briefing #87, 98-07-16

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>

U.S. Department of State Daily Press Briefing

I N D E X

Thursday, July 16, 1998

Briefer: James P. Rubin

WORLD BANK
1		Investigation of fraudulent practices
SYRIA
2-5		Proposed oil pipeline deal with Iraq not permitted under UN
		  regime
2-3		US has assurances from Syria it will not break UN sanctions
		  President Asad's first trip to France in 22 years
KOSOVO
5-6		Kosovar Albanian parallel parliament met today for first
		  time
5-6		Serbian police were present, searched party files
6		Parallel parliament meeting a freedom of assembly issue
6,8		Grave risk of destabilization as a result of refugees
		  pouring out of Kosovo
7		No change on NATO preparations
7-8		No evidence Kosovar Albanians are permitting mercenaries to
		  join them
8		Discussion of Kosovo monitoring group
MIDDLE EAST PEACE PROCESS
9,10		US desires comprehensive peace process
9		Israeli withdrawal from southern Lebanon
10		US expects a meeting of Israelis and Palestinians soon
NETHERLANDS
10-11		Gen. McCaffrey's visit
NORTH KOREA
11-12,14	Development, deployment of ballistic missiles
11,14-15	Question of whether North Korea possesses nuclear weapons
INDIA-PAKISTAN
12		Senate action on providing authority to waive sanctions
COLOMBIA
12		Talk about beginning a peace process
12-13		US calls for release of all kidnapped US citizens without
		  conditions
INTERNATIONAL MONETARY FUND
13		Movement on Hill in right direction; long way still to go
CUBA
13-14		US opposes terrorist activity against Cuba

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE
DAILY PRESS BRIEFING

DPB #87

THURSDAY, JULY 16, 1998 12:50 P.M.

(ON THE RECORD UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED)

MR. RUBIN: Greetings. Welcome to the last State Department briefing of the week, which is because that's Thursday, and that would make it our last State Department briefing of the week. Being Thursday, let's give the first question to Barry Schweid of the Associated Press.

QUESTION: I've got two days of questions, I've got to think of a good one. How about a pro forma one? Does State have anything to say about the World Bank fraud investigations, specifically? Is it going to effect relations with these countries - economic programs? Are you the folks that are not going to talk about the World Bank fraud situation?

(Laughter.)

MR. RUBIN: We will get back to you on the World Bank fraud situation.

QUESTION: With a fraudulent or a sincere answer?

MR. RUBIN: With a sincere and effective answer.

QUESTION: At this point, can you speak of any implications for your foreign policy?

MR. RUBIN: Frankly I'm unaware of a fraud investigation at the World Bank --

QUESTION: It led The Washington Post today.

MR. RUBIN: --that relates to what we do at the State Department here, and it's really up to the World Bank to investigate itself.

QUESTION: Apparently it's doing that.

QUESTION: Another subject?

MR. RUBIN: Yes, please.

(Laughter.)

QUESTION: Apparently Iraq and Syria have signed an oil deal to open a pipeline that's been closed since, I think, the '80s or something. How does the United States feel about that; and does this not violate sanctions against Iraq?

MR. RUBIN: We do not believe that this kind of a pipeline is consistent with the current oil-for-food program, and we have made clear to those necessary that it does not. If there is a need for any changes in that program - meaning the ability of Iraq to get sufficient oil to meet the quota set out in the oil-for-food program - they would need to get approval to use this route. So it is a route that is not currently permitted. And frankly, we have received assurances and expect the Syrian Government to live up to the sanctions imposed upon Iraq by the Security Council.

QUESTION: Let's press this a little bit. When you say you've received assure - Iraq and Syria have both said that they have signed this deal and they're going forward with this project. When you say you've received assurances - I mean, presumably you've talked to the Syrians this week. What have they told you?

MR. RUBIN: I am not going to get into any diplomatic contacts. What I'm telling you is that the Syrian Government has assured us that they have no intention of violating the sanctions regime. I am also telling you that this particular pipeline is currently not permitted to be used either in the sense that there is to be no export from Iraq except for those permitted under the oil-for-food program, and this particular pipeline is not specified for approval under the oil for food pipeline.

Often what happens here is deals are made and ideas are put forward, but you have to be very careful to look at when and where and what would exactly happen. What I'm saying to you is that we do not believe that this pipeline as we understand it - again, it's a deal between Syria and Iraq and so we don't have all the details - is not permitted by the sanctions regime.

QUESTION: So Syria says it will not violate the sanctions.

MR. RUBIN: That's its position that it's made known to us many times.

QUESTION: Now, but do you - have they made that known to you recently?

MR. RUBIN: Again, I'm not going to comment on any specific diplomatic contact, other than that it's our understanding of the Syrian position that they do not intend to break the sanctions on Iraq. I am also telling you what our position is with respect to this pipeline.

QUESTION: Okay. Does that mean that Syria is going to go to the Sanctions Committee and try to get away with --

MR. RUBIN: You'll have to ask the Syrians and the Iraqis what their intentions are. I'm telling you what our position is. Our position is that this particular project is not permitted under the oil-for-food program, and therefore it would be violation of the sanctions if it were acted on and implemented in the absence of approval by the Sanctions Committee or a new Security Council resolution that expanded the mechanisms for the oil-for-food program.

QUESTION: The US position is clear. What isn't clear is whether you've heard this from the Syrians after this deal germinated, and if their interpretation is the same as yours and if the deal is going through. I mean, you're telling us about their general stance.

MR. RUBIN: Right.

QUESTION: They would generally, of course, be in favor of mother, God and country, but what about this agreement?

MR. RUBIN: No, I don't know whether they would be in favor of those three things. What I know is that they have stated that they are not going to break the sanctions regime; and those assurances we've received are credible and serious. I am telling you what our position is about the pipeline.

How we go about making sure that this statement of policy by the Syrian Government doesn't change is the business of diplomacy, which we're conducting.

QUESTION: Well, it didn't have to change. If their interpretation is different from yours, they may not need to change.

MR. RUBIN: I don't think anybody's interpretation can be - the pipelines are very clearly spelled out. There are no doubts about what is permitted by the oil-for-food program.

QUESTION: Do you expect the Syrians to go and ask the Sanctions Committee for some kind of waiver on this?

MR. RUBIN: Again, you're asking me to speak for the Syrians. If you have a question about what the Syrians are going to do to make a pipeline that is not permitted by the sanctions regime permitted, ask the Syrians. I'm telling you that it's not permitted; and therefore, to implement it would be a violation of the sanctions regime.

We have received assurances from the Syrian Government that it is not their intention to do so. Whether they want to see this pipeline used after sanctions are lifted, many years from now if they think that's possible; whether they want to try to get approval from the Sanctions Committee to make it used under the oil-for-food program is for them to decide. It's not for us to advise you as to what they're going to do.

QUESTION: If this issue is brought to the Sanctions Committee, would the United States be willing to at least consider it?

MR. RUBIN: It hasn't been. That's a hypothetical question.

QUESTION: Would the United States block this from going forward, pending a lifting of the sanctions?

MR. RUBIN: It's the same question. I just said that I don't see why this is creating such confusion. The Syrians and the Iraqis announced a pipeline. There are only two ways you can do a pipeline if you're going to meet the sanctions requirements. One is to do it after the sanctions are lifted. Two, if you want to do it during the period when there are sanctions, it has to be approved by the Sanctions Committee or the Security Council, pursuant to the oil-for-food program.

We're not interested in telling the Syrians and the Iraqis how to make this deal approved. We're interested in telling you what the sanctions regime requires, what would be prohibited and that the Syrian Government has indicated that it intends to follow the sanctions regime.

QUESTION: Is there any way this could be made a humanitarian exception?

MR. RUBIN: The only way would be if it were used as oil for the oil-for- food program, which is a humanitarian program.

QUESTION: And should it be so used, I suppose it would be acceptable to the US Government, like a Mubarak visit to Libya is.

MR. RUBIN: No, I fail to see the connection and --

QUESTION: Well, I'm just thinking of the last exception to the sanctions.

MR. RUBIN: Linkages are not going to --

QUESTION: Well, there are exceptions to sanctions that the US has supported.

MR. RUBIN: Right, right, and so what I'm saying to you is that this is an issue that is very complex. It involves technical assessments of what oil the Iraqis can produce, what equipment they need to meet those quotas, what the different mechanisms are now for them to export their oil; and all of those things would be factored in to any decision by us if, hypothetically, the Syrians were to follow your advice and go to the Sanctions Committee.

QUESTION: I was just looking for the loopholes that they might try to jump through. But as it stands now --

MR. RUBIN: That's not a loophole, Barry. There is a sanctions regime.

QUESTION: The exception, all right.

MR. RUBIN: It's not a loophole. This is a very effective sanctions regime. It's one of the tightest and most comprehensive sanctions regime in history. Please let me finish my answer. It's been going on for upwards of six to seven years, and it's working extremely well. There are leakages around the edges, but the only approved exemption - not a loophole, an exemption - is the one for the oil-for-food program. Let's remind ourselves what the oil-for-food program is for. It is so that Iraq is forced to use its oil proceeds to provide food and medicine to its people, which it chooses not to use its own money to do.

It is a program that the United States and other countries have put forward designed specifically to alleviate the suffering of the Iraqi people and, frankly, to eliminate the crocodile tears that Saddam Hussein claims to shed for his people when he's trying to argue for sanctions to be lifted. That is not an exemption - I mean, sorry, that is not a loophole; that is a very carefully structured program that serves our national interest on humanitarian terms and because it helps keep the sanctions in place.

If anyone has a specific proposal to change the procedure of that regime, then we will look at it. But it will be looked at in the context of an extremely tight verification system and a very careful analysis of what Iraq's oil production capabilities are and what its export needs are in order to meet the quotas.

As a last point, I don't care to speculate on what we would do if Syria were to hypothetically make such a proposal.

QUESTION: But on the face of it, this agreement is in violation of the sanctions, right?

MR. RUBIN: No.

QUESTION: On the face of it.

MR. RUBIN: Implementation of the agreement, in the absence of sanctions being lifted or an exemption being permitted, would violate the sanctions. But simply signing a piece of paper and expressing one's intention to build a pipeline doesn't violate anything.

QUESTION: Kosovo - actually a couple of developments. The Serb riot police stormed the headquarters of the Albanian political party - the Kosovar political party. The Albanian Prime Minister today said that the flow of refugees, which he puts at several thousand higher than I think you said in the past, is destabilizing Albania - seeming to endorse a position you've taken before. Has the refugee flow increased, do you know?

MR. RUBIN: It is not our understanding that the refugee flow has increased. Often there are different databases that apply in this case. Our understanding of the situation there is that there is scattered fighting throughout the Decani and Pec region. Our embassy personnel continue to travel throughout Kosovo through the monitoring mission, and we are enhancing our ability to gather real-time information.

With respect to the parliament, the parallel of Kosovo-Albanian parliament convened a meeting this morning in Pristina. They elected an assembly speaker and three vice presidents. This is the first time that the parallel parliament has met.

With respect to what the Serbs have done, it is our understanding that Serbian police were present in force. There was no violence, and we saw no reports of arrests made as they entered LDK party headquarters where the assembly session was held and searched through party files.

We do not recognize Kosovo's parliament as an official political institution. But we do recognize the right of free assembly and that this was engaging in the right of free assembly, and that right is vitally important. The kind of heavy-handed intimidation by the Serb police is emblematic of the repressive nature of Slobodan Milosevic's regime in Kosovo, which sparked the current crisis in Kosovo. If Belgrade is ever going to be able to benefit the Serbs in Kosovo or its country in general, they have to learn to change their tactics. Stripping away the legitimate rights of the Kosovar Albanian people using heavy-handed tactics like this in a legitimate expression of freedom of association and freedom of assembly, like the decision to use military force to crack down, are the kind of mistakes that have radicalized the Kosovar Albanian population and make it harder to get the kind of agreement that will serve the interest of both Yugoslavia and the people in Kosovo.

QUESTION: Was Ambassador Hill present when the incident occurred?

MR. RUBIN: I believe there was someone present; I don't believe it was Ambassador Hill. He was here yesterday, and I can't imagine he made it all the way back to Pristina by this morning or the middle of the night.

QUESTION: Have you seen the remarks of the Albanian Prime Minister about destabilizing the refugees -

MR. RUBIN: I haven't seen those remarks, but I had two points to make. One is that we do believe there is a grave risk of destabilization as a result of refugees pouring out of Kosovo. That is the reason why we have made clear that this poses a security threat to Europe and a security threat to the world. It is the reason why the Contact Group and the international community, through the Security Council, has stated that it effects international peace and security.

With respect to the numbers, again, I'm not aware of a ramping up of the numbers, but we may start from different numbers.

QUESTION: He put it 16,000 - 20,000.

MR. RUBIN: We still have our numbers.

QUESTION: Jamie, there were some reports, stories today in papers and there was a briefing over at the Pentagon yesterday in which some people interpreted what was being said was that the fighting had subsided to such a degree that NATO was no longer really considering any sort of military intervention.

MR. RUBIN: Well, interpretations are always a risky business. I've checked with the Secretary on this, and nothing has changed. NATO continues to pursue an accelerated military planning, continues to narrow and flesh out options for the possible use of force; and no option has been ruled out. That is the situation today; it was the situation before any briefing that was interpreted in a certain way; and it's still the situation.

QUESTION: Just a follow-up, the NATO Secretary General said this morning that among the contingencies they were considering was a deploying a force in Kosovo after a theoretical peace treaty to enforce that peace. Is the United States prepared to participate in such a mission?

MR. RUBIN: I am certainly not prepared to make a decision for the Commander-in-Chief here at the State Department on Thursday, as you could imagine. I can tell you that if the Secretary General is saying that they are doing such planning, then they are doing such planning.

QUESTION: I just wanted to follow up on the subject of Kosovo. Yesterday the panel of DOD experts said they had no evidence that there were foreign mercenaries coming into Kosovo --

MR. RUBIN: That sounded familiar.

QUESTION: -- with arms. Does the State Department have any evidence one way or the other about foreign mercenaries?

MR. RUBIN: I think I've said for many weeks now pretty much the same thing; and obviously, my colleagues at the Department of Defense have said pretty much the same thing. That same thing is that we are aware of efforts on the part of the rogue's gallery of mercenaries in these kind of conflicts to seek access to participate in fighting of this kind. We have made clear to the Kosovar Albanians what a dumb idea it would be to accept such assistance. And we're not aware of evidence that such assistance has been accepted and delivered and operating now.

QUESTION: Would it be a fair interpolation of what's just said to say - because several of us are hearing other accounts that Iranians and Albanians and people from Tajikistan are coming in and assisting the liberation army and trying to overthrow Belgrade in Kosovo. Would it be fair to say - is it a fair interpolation of what you just said that Kosovo Albanians - and by that I assume you mean - or maybe I shouldn't make any assumption - the guy you're backing and the people whose views ought to be heard but you're not backing have stopped --

MR. RUBIN: Well said, Barry.

QUESTION: Well, you've got to speak in shorthand here. Have stopped, have rejected efforts by mercenaries to come help them liberate, in their terms, Kosovo?

MR. RUBIN: You choose the verb. What I am under the impression is that entreaties have been made, supplies and assistance have been proffered, but it has not yielded any result.

QUESTION: Jamie, you said - I'm quoting this accurately, I think - "We have enhanced our ability to gain real-time information." What does that mean?

MR. RUBIN: Well, we are working through the Kosovar monitoring group to try to improve our ability to know what is going on there. We are trying to enhance the capability of that group so that it is in a position to accurately report what's going on.

QUESTION: And physically, how are you enhancing its abilities?

MR. RUBIN: Well, I can get you the fact sheet on the Kosovar observer monitoring group that I've provided some general information on in the past. What I'm saying to you is that these monitors are operating and they are trying to improve their ability to know what's going on in Kosovo. That is a very important issue, because it's very important to have independent confirmation of what is going on there; and that is going on through the Kosovar monitoring group that I've described to you in the past.

QUESTION: Are you using satellites?

MR. RUBIN: I don't believe that is a word that we normally use from the podium here. Is today the day to try to trick the spokesman?

QUESTION: No, it's just a straight-out question.

QUESTION: Jamie, do you see an increase in displaced people within Kosovo, as opposed to refugees flowing out to Albania? Do you see them going into other neighboring countries, entities, whatever you want to call them?

MR. RUBIN: Sorry?

QUESTION: The number of people within Kosovo that are displaced - do you see an increase in displaced people, as opposed to refugees going into Albania?

MR. RUBIN: I'm not aware that there has been a fundamental change in the refugee or internal displaced person situation. Most of that happened several weeks ago. At low levels it continues.

There were a lot of displaced persons within Kosovo. There were refugees that flooded into Albania; there were refugees that flooded into Macedonia, the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia. The fact that I indicated we don't see a ramping up of the refugees into Albania, as I understand it, reflects the fact there isn't a lot of movement of people in the thousands, the way there were several weeks and months ago. That would apply, as well, to internally displaced people.

QUESTION: Do you have any comment about the visit to France by the Syrian President?

MR. RUBIN: We note with interest President Assad's first visit to France in 22 years. As I understand it, it's primarily related to commerce. We consult frequently with the French on all peace process issues, and we would be interested to know whether there's been any new views that Assad has that would be helpful to us.

Let's bear in mind that we have been in touch with both sides for some time to see whether we can develop a way to restart the negotiations that have been suspended. We continue to do that because it is very important to develop a comprehensive peace in the Middle East. The Israeli Government wants us to continue to develop that effort.

During the 1996 talks, Israeli and Syrian military and diplomatic officials engaged in direct negotiations. Both Israel and Syria have expressed their interest in renewing and resuming these negotiations, albeit from different bases. We have been in contact with both parties in an ongoing effort to renew these talks. Comprehensive peace requires a resolution of the Syrian- Israeli and the Lebanese-Israeli track.

QUESTION: On that subject sort of, it's been a while now since it became clear that nobody was picking up Israel - and nobody means Syria - was picking up Israel on their offer to negotiate a withdrawal from Southern Lebanon. Has the Administration had further thoughts - are you now in favor, perhaps, of a unilateral withdrawal, a withdrawal within terms of the UN resolution?

MR. RUBIN: There's been no --

QUESTION: Well it must still be negotiated.

MR. RUBIN: There's been no movement in our position. We have said that we would like the resolution implemented. We've made clear that as a practical matter, discussions would need to occur if it was going to happen. We'd like to see the resolution implemented.

QUESTION: Well, then, the discussions aren't happening.

MR. RUBIN: So we'd like to see them happen.

QUESTION: You're still staying with that. (Inaudible) - a lot of policy in the labor government is here in town. Among his many thoughts this morning was that Israel should just simply pull back, under the UN. But there's no switch now, is there?

MR. RUBIN: I have no particular reaction to a non-governmental spokesman. But as far as our view, it's unchanged.

QUESTION: On the Middle East peace process, any word from either the Israelis or the Palestinians on the make-up of the coming meeting?

MR. RUBIN: Well, I saw some press reports indicating that Prime Minister Netanyahu expects to see this meeting take place very shortly. We're in touch with the parties, but it is still our understanding that there will be a meeting of senior officials from the Israeli and Palestinian side. We hope that meeting is helpful in helping to close the gap in between the Israelis and the Palestinians in trying to put the peace process back on track.

QUESTION: Any recent phone conversations?

MR. RUBIN: Nothing new to report on that.

QUESTION: You've said that we're in the end game - frequently you've used that phrase. Is this meeting the end of the end game?

MR. RUBIN: I've said, I think on Tuesday, perhaps on Monday, that although the Secretary indicated the importance of the Israelis and the Palestinians meeting, that doesn't mean that we would not continue our discussions with both sides about issues. There were a couple of issues that we thought could best be advanced if they heard each other out; but there are other issues. So we're continuing to talk with both sides about a number of issues related to the American ideas. But clearly direct contact and what results from that will have a big impact on whether we're able to get an agreement or not.

QUESTION: Just a follow up on the Syrian issue and your reference to the US desire to seek comprehensive agreement - has the Secretary talked to either the foreign minister or any other senior Syrian official anytime recently or could you provide --

MR. RUBIN: I think in the past couple of weeks the Foreign Minister of Syria was here. I'll have to get you the date.

QUESTION: Another subject -- Barry McCaffrey is in Holland at this hour. Did you get to this already?

MR. RUBIN: No.

QUESTION: Okay, well, Barry's pretty down on the Dutch drug policy. He says the liberal Dutch drug policies have produced a crime-ridden disaster in Holland, and he's taken Interpol statistics forward to prove this. Does the State Department back up Mr. McCaffrey with regard to his drug criticism?

MR. RUBIN: Bill, I suggest you take a look at Tuesday's briefing when I had an extended colloquy, I believe for upwards of ten to 15 minutes with some of the Dutch journalists who had questions about this very issue. I'd be happy to get it for you after the briefing.

As I understand it, General McCaffrey is in the Netherlands today, and I'm sure he'll have a lot of things to say to the Dutch officials, and I suspect they'll have some things to say back. But we do support the important work we and the Dutch do together in the global fight against drugs. We have differences as to how we approach our policies domestically, but we think the overwhelming agreement we have on how to fight drugs internationally overshadows the differences that we have on domestic policies.

QUESTION: Jamie, isn't this an issue, though, about zero tolerance with regard to drugs? And doesn't this department basically back up the drug policy czar and the President about zero tolerance?

MR. RUBIN: Certainly we back up the President of the United States' efforts to try to bring changes in supply around the world and changes in the United States as well as demand around the world. We support that and work closely with Barry McCaffrey in that effort.

QUESTION: On North Korea -- North Korea's development of intercontinental ballistic missiles, the Taipo Dong II or something like that, with the alleged ability to reach Hawaii or Alaska - how does that fit in with the intention of the arms control aspect of the nuclear agreement; and what's the status of the arms control talks with the North Koreans?

MR. RUBIN: We have wanted to resume bilateral discussions with them on the question of ballistic missiles as part of a number of things we'd like to do with the North Koreans. We haven't resumed those talks; there hasn't been another session, to my knowledge, in some time.

We are very cognizant of the threat posed by North Korea's ballistic missiles. That threat is built into the threat assessment the Administration has on the threats to the United States from ballistic missiles around the world. The basic way we deal with that is not only to try to deter the development and, ultimately, deployment of such a missile, but also to put ourselves in a position, if necessary, in the year 2000 to make a decision to deploy a nationwide system if necessary. Those are the two ways we deal with the threat. One is to try to convince the North Koreans to not go forward with their deployment; to have a dialogue with them; to show them the benefits to them and the world of not going forward. And simultaneously, as a hedge against that not succeeding, being in a position to act, if necessary, by the year 2000.

Q(Inaudible) - report that was released yesterday?

MR. RUBIN: Well, I prefer - it's a broad question. I mean, I think an answer to that would take 40 or 45 minutes to go through the entire report.

QUESTION: Well, there's a couple things, though, that are most important. It says that there are nuclear weapons, perhaps, at least one or two; that they have deployed the No Dong missile, which is capable, I think, of hitting some bases in Korea and Japan; and that the Taipo Dong is in advanced stages of construction.

MR. RUBIN: Right. The American Government's assessment of the current state of play with respect to these capabilities is not something we share in public. We continue to stand by our intelligence assessments of what the threats are; and I am not in a position to comment on specific intelligence issues.

QUESTION: Do you have any comment on the Senate action to sanctions against Libya and Pakistan?

MR. RUBIN: Yes. There has been some unfortunate interpretations drawn about this. Let me be very clear - we are seeking authority to waive sanctions. There has not been a decision by the United States to eliminate the sanctions imposed as a result of the India and Pakistani tests. We want authority to waive sanctions so that we would have flexibility in our dealings with India and Pakistan to help us meet our objective.

The Senate measure that was discussed would only provide authority to waive the sanctions for a limited period of time. We are not walking back from our sanctions policy towards India and Pakistan, or lifting or easing; and nor is it correct that lifting or easing of sanctions is imminent.

If granted waiver authority of the type now under consideration, the Administration would be not - I emphasize the word not - be prepared to use such authority in whole or in part until there has been substantial progress toward achieving the goal set forth in the United Nations Security Council Permanent Five declaration of June 4 in Geneva and the G statement on June 12. In the meantime, sanctions remain in place; and I can certainly, after the briefing, provide you a list of the myriad sanctions that are in place.

So we are seeking authority should we, as a result of the work that Deputy Secretary Talbott's doing, be able to see changes in the positions of the India and Pakistani Governments that yield substantive progress towards the goals set forth by the Permanent Five. Then, and only then, would we be in a position to consider waiving in whole or in part the sanctions that are now in place.

QUESTION: Colombia's ELN rebel group and Colombia's civil society have reached an agreement in Germany that paves the way for possible peace talks in that country. Do you support such agreement?

MR. RUBIN: The United States strongly supports all efforts that could lead to the initiation of a peace process in Colombia. We note the ELN's pledge to reduce kidnappings, and urge them to end all acts of hostage- taking.

Colombia's insurgent groups have stated their intention in the past to renounce violence as part of a peace process, and we think that is critical. We renew our call upon the guerrillas to release US citizens that are now hostages and fully account for all kidnapped Americans. We urge all parties to the conflict to begin dialogue with the Colombian Government towards a peace process.

QUESTION: What do you specifically think about their call to end kidnappings as long as there is an International Monetary Fund created so that they can engage in their peace talks in Colombia?

MR. RUBIN: We don't think there should ever be conditions put on stopping the kidnapping of innocents; that is not something that civilized people do anywhere in the world and it shouldn't be conditional. Let me say that we call upon them - the guerrillas - to release US citizens that are now hostages, and there shouldn't be conditions placed on such unacceptable acts.

QUESTION: As far as you know, the ELN rebel group - does it hold any US hostages in Colombia?

MR. RUBIN: We've put out in the past the specific names of the groups that are holding American hostages; I'd be happy to get you that after the briefing.

QUESTION: Helms-Burton?

MR. RUBIN: Yes - I don't have much new on that. The White House has indicated that the President is expected to take action in that regard, but I don't know that he has yet.

QUESTION: Do you know when the announcement will come?

MR. RUBIN: I think it will probably come out of a combination of the White House, but we intend to make a senior official available later this afternoon to discuss the issue in detail.

QUESTION: Here or --

MR. RUBIN: Here.

QUESTION: Jamie, there appears to be some movement on the Hill toward replenishing the IMF Fund. Is that your reading, as well -- do you think it now has shown signs of vitality?

MR. RUBIN: They're not at zero, so it's certainly better. But we believe that the whole panoply of foreign assistance and international financial institution funding that is before the Hill needs to be funded if we're going to conduct an effective foreign policy. Clearly, there's been movement in the right direction but we have a long way to go.

QUESTION: Are you aware of any investigation by the Justice Department or the State Department to the Cuban-American National Convention regarding the terrorist attacks that occurred last year in Cuba? Because today the president of this foundation, Alberto Hernandez, says no one from his organization has been requested or interviewed by the government of the United States regarding these attacks in Cuba.

MR. RUBIN: First of all, with respect to investigations, I wouldn't be in a position to discuss with you any particular activities that would've gone on if there were an investigation.

We certainly have made clear that we oppose, in the strongest possible terms, terrorism against any country, including Cuba. We have made that clear, and we would like to see those terrorist bombings resolved for that reason. We've asked the Cuban Government for evidence and I'm not aware they've really provided any significant evidence to us.

With respect to whether there is an ongoing investigation that may or may not have involved an interview with any particular American citizen, you'd have to ask another agency that question.

QUESTION: There is a dispute between Hungary and Slovakia over the construction of the dam in Gabcikovo-Nagymaros. There was a ruling from the international court last year, saying that it was in favor of Slovakia, saying that Hungary is obliged to finish the construction. Now the Hungarian new government lately is indicating that they are not willing to do that. And my question to you is, how do you feel about Hungary not complying with ruling of such an important international body as the international court regarding to the fact that Hungary is going to become a member of NATO and as a prerequisite of becoming a member of NATO is 100 percent compliance with international norms and international law?

MR. RUBIN: Let me say this - given the factual basis of your question and the proposition entailed in it and the importance of this issue, I would rather get you a considered answer after the briefing on that question.

QUESTION: To jump back to Korea, did you happen to say when you expected talks to resume with the North Koreans on ballistic missiles? I don't know if I missed it.

MR. RUBIN: No, I didn't say that.

QUESTION: By the way, could you possibly correct the record on Korea?

MR. RUBIN: Yes.

QUESTION: The US Government has spoken publicly in the past about North Korea's nuclear capabilities --

MR. RUBIN: Whether we have one or two nuclear weapons --

QUESTION: -- Slocombe at the Pentagon, in that period where, obviously, the Administration had a stake in getting public support for the agreement you were reaching with North Korea, said straightforward out in front of everybody that they had produced at least one nuclear weapon; and that was one of the reasons the US was alarmed. So the US has -- to sound the warning - has spoken publicly about North Korea's capabilities that they have.

MR. RUBIN: Well thank you for your historical background on this issue. The question was whether I was prepared to respond to specific intelligence assessments in the Rumsfeld's report that I am not prepared to respond to in this forum.

QUESTION: But Slocombe obviously spoke against an intelligence background when he made those statements. He didn't know himself by going out there and looking at them.

MR. RUBIN: I'm not disputing that. I didn't know - I'm not disputing that there have been government officials who, from time to time for a variety of reasons, have talked about what we think is going on in another country. But to do a point by point rebuttal of an intelligence assessment in this forum is not the way we normally do business.

QUESTION: Of course. Thank you.

(The briefing concluded at 1:30 P.M.)

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