U.S. Department of State Daily Press Briefing #20, 00-03-09
From: The Department of State Foreign Affairs Network (DOSFAN) at <http://www.state.gov>
630
U.S. Department of State
Daily Press Briefing
I N D E X
Thursday, March 9, 2000
Briefer: James P. Rubin
IRAQ
1 UN Security Council Has Received a Complaint From the Iraqi Foreign
Minister on American Delegation's Travel into Northern Iraq /
American Delegation Travels to Northern Iraq to Work with Kurdish
Officials to Promote Reconciliation between Kurdish Groups
PAKISTAN
2 Easing of US sanctions / Prohibition of US Foreign Assistance /
Presidential Visit / Concern on Lack of Democratic Rule and
Terrorism
IRAN
4-6 US Prepared to Have and Has Offered to Have a Direct Dialogue Based
on Mutual Respect / MEK Releases Video on Human Rights Abuses /
Status of MEK Operation in Washington
NORTH KOREA
6-7 US-North Korea Talks in New York City / Preparation for High-Level
Visit to Washington /Dialogue Focusing on the Steps North Korea
will Need to Make to Meet US Concerns on the Issue of
International Terrorism
MIDDLE EAST
7-8 Arms Control and Regional Security (ACRS) / Activities of the Arms
Control and Regional Security Efforts to Resume the End of June 2000
VIETNAM
8,9 Public Announcement on Reports of Threats of Violence Disrupting
the 25th Anniversary of the End of the Vietnam War
CAMBODIA
9 UN Team to Travel to Cambodia on March 16th for Further Discussion
on a Khmer Rouge Tribunal
CHINA (Taiwan)
9 US Arms Sales Based on the Taiwan Relations Act
CUBA
10 US Immigration Policy
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE
DAILY PRESS BRIEFING
DPB #20
THURSDAY, MARCH 9, 2000, 12:30 P.M.
(ON THE RECORD UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED)
MR. RUBIN: Welcome to another performance of the on-time State Department
briefing. We see the wire services as usual, the hardest working members of
the State Department Press Corps - at least some of the wire services --
and one network. And I'm just going to keep mumbling, just for a few more
minutes, until some of your colleagues decide to visit with us. Mumble,
mumble, mumble, blah, blah, blah.
QUESTION: In what areas has our policy changed? (Laughter.)
MR. RUBIN: OK. I have no statements. I'm here to answer your questions.
Barry.
QUESTION: Well, it's a little bit out of left field maybe, but the Iraqi
Foreign Minister is complaining to the UN Security Council that an American
State Department delegation has gone into northern Iraq. They don't like
it. And I wonder if you could respond to that? Have they got their facts
right? And do they have a cause for complaint?
MR. RUBIN: Yes. We have from time to time sent delegations to Northern
Iraq from the regional bureau there, to work with the Kurdish officials in
Northern Iraq, to promote reconciliation between the officials there to
ensure that they comply with and live up to the agreement they reached in
Washington that the Secretary of State negotiated with them.
So those visits do occur from time to time, and they generally occur
without the support of the Iraqi Government. And we're aware that the Iraqi
Government doesn't support such visits. But we have made clear, while we
recognize the territorial integrity of Iraq, that we think it's important
and appropriate for us to meet with Kurdish officials in northern Iraq, and
we will continue to do so as we see fit.
QUESTION: You mean reconciliation between Kurdish groups?
MR. RUBIN: Right. Matt.
QUESTION: I want to find out if you have an answer to my "four-headed
man" question from yesterday?
MR. RUBIN: Well, what I've got for you is a recommendation, which is that
you look on www.state.gov, and you will find all the visits the Secretary
of State has made in this administration. And those will be there for all
the time of Secretary Albright and, I believe, Secretary Christopher.
If you're interested in Secretaries of State before that, I would welcome
your contacting the Historian's Office, and I will urge that they give you
listings of all the visits the Secretary of State has made, and then you
can make your own judgments about what the proper fitting of this one-eyed
man with the three legs is, and then draw your own conclusions. But we
certainly want you to have access to all the trips that have been
made.
QUESTION: I have a second question on the same Pakistan issue.
MR. RUBIN: Sure.
QUESTION: And I would appreciate it if you could keep the level of
snideness, which I am sure is going to accompany your answer, to a
minimum.
MR. RUBIN: Only to the same level as the questions.
QUESTION: So about a year ago, there was a coup in Niger, in April, and
the US, as is required by law, suspended all of its bilateral assistance.
Niger is the second poorest country in the world. I don't imagine the US
assistance was huge, but it was still suspended.
Two days ago, a statement was released with your name on it saying that the
Secretary had found that the new government in Niger, which was elected
democratically in November, was a democratic government and these sanctions
were lifted.
I realize that Niger is not Pakistan, and that the two are very different.
But the point is, is that they - that Pakistan, General Musharaff, has done
absolutely nothing, which you have said, of setting a time table for
returning to civilian and constitutional rule. Your concerns about
terrorism are still very great, your concerns about elements of their
government supporting those terrorists and also supporting the Taliban and,
by extension, perhaps, bin Laden, are still very great. And yet they are
being rewarded with a visit from the President.
So my question is, why should we not see that, when the stakes are very
high, that the US is applying - applies a lesser standard to this when,
perhaps, some would argue that a higher standard should be being applied in
a case like Pakistan?
MR. RUBIN: First, let me say that there is no one approach to diplomacy
in this world: that it is our job to make judgments. And if we had a simple
formula for all behavior, we wouldn't need a Department of State; we would
need a computer, and we could plug in the inputs and get the outputs. So,
in each case, we make a judgment as to what we think is best for our
national interest.
I think the cases that you've described are apples and oranges. We have not
removed Pakistan from the prohibition on foreign assistance, in light of
the fact that it has not taken the steps to restore civilian constitutional
democratic rule. So unlike Niger, there remain the same set of measures in
place about the foreign assistance that we provide. So we are consistent as
we approach the assistance to Pakistan and Niger.
There is no pre-required, pre-approved, pre-stamped, pre-packaged plan for
what interaction the United States Government has with countries that
undertake coups, or countries where there are violations of democratic
practices. Instead, what we do is make a judgment, in each case, as to what
level of interaction is appropriate, given the national interest.
So we've met, and I recall briefing about a meeting we had with the FARC,
the terrorist group in Colombia, because we thought it was appropriate to
meet with the FARC. We have said we'd be prepared to meet with officials of
the government of Iran, even though there is concern and statements by this
government about Iran being a state sponsor of terrorism.
So what the flaw in the attempted syllogism you were creating is that
diplomatic contact is not the same as applying the rules of the Foreign
Assistance Act. And let me be clear, the visit of the President of the
United States is not a reward for Pakistan. They may call it that, but it's
not. And I think it will be clear when the visit is over that the President
will have reflected, very strongly, our profound concern about the lack of
democratic rule in Pakistan, and the concerns we have on terrorism and
other matters.
QUESTION: So in fact the visit of the President is a punishment for
them?
MR. RUBIN: I mean, I think we're now engaged in what I would call a
process of a bit of - I'm not sure we're making any progress here. It is
not a reward for the President of the United States to stop in Pakistan and
meet with the leadership there, when we see that kind of meeting is an
appropriate way to try to achieve our national security objectives,
including avoiding the possible confrontation and the extremely negative
consequences of a confrontation between India and Pakistan.
I recounted yesterday the extremely important role the President played in
being able to avoid a major conflict in Kargil last summer, because he had
lines of communications open with both leaders. And that's something that
we believe is in the national interest.
QUESTION: I mean I don't want to belabor this, but it would seem by
reports from Pakistan yesterday, that those lines of communication were
exactly -- and the fact that the President was successful -- was exactly
the reason that the coup happened.
MR. RUBIN: I think it's not clear at all, and I think that would be --
QUESTION: Well, that's what Sharif said yesterday.
MR. RUBIN: If you gathered in this room the 97 major experts on Pakistan,
I can assure you that no significant group of them would say that the coup
happened because President Clinton met with Nawaz Sharif last summer.
QUESTION: No, no, that's not what I said.
MR. RUBIN: I think they would say the coup happened because of a number
of factors, and that's not one of them.
QUESTION: I didn't say that. That's what you said that I said.
What Sharif said was that his backing down because of the President was one
of the main reasons why there was this --
MR. RUBIN: I think we indicated that we had major problems with former
President Sharif - Prime Minister Sharif's approach to democratic issues.
He was shutting down newspapers, he was denying the ability of parties to
operate. We had major problems with the leadership, their commitment to
democratic practices. And it is not our view, nor do I suspect it is the
view of most experts, that the reason the coup happened is because of him
backing down. The coup happened as an accretion of a number of steps.
QUESTION: Will there be an opportunity for the President to directly tell
the Pakistani people why he is there?
MR. RUBIN: I am not in a position to detail the President's schedule,
provide any new information about the President's schedule. But I will
encourage my colleagues at the White House to do so.
QUESTION: Can I ask you on Iran again?
MR. RUBIN: Sure.
QUESTION: Maybe I can refine my sloppy questions today by saying, David
Newsom, a former Under Secretary of State, wrote a piece in the Christian
Science Monitor. Again, we hear this from a lot of people, that we should
and are -- the US -- actively pursuing a dialogue with Iran.
Is the US now actively engaged in approaching Iran for the purposes of
talking to them?
MR. RUBIN: I think I have indicated publicly, on numerous occasions, that
we are prepared to have a dialogue. I think I have indicated on a number of
occasions that there are a number of different channels of diplomatic
communication between the United States and Iran. Some of those have been
named and some of them haven't been named. I do not intend to comment on
what goes on in those private diplomatic channels. But I think in
this case, it is fairly evident that we are prepared, have offered
and would be willing to have a dialogue based on mutual respect, where we
would raise our issues of concern and they would raise their issues of
concern.
QUESTION: One last thing on it. Khatemi years ago, a couple of years ago,
said he wanted to talk to the US. The US - I think Secretary Albright must
have said several times - we want to talk to them. So what's going to make
it happen? Who moves first? How does this happen
MR. RUBIN: I think the Iranian position is that they are not prepared to
talk to the US government.
QUESTION: They are going to tell us they don't like us.
MR. RUBIN: No, no, the Iranian position is they are prepared to have a
dialogue of civilizations in which there are people-to-people exchanges,
scientific exchanges, exchanges of academics, sports exchanges. But they
have, to date, not been willing to have a direct dialogue. Our view is that
we should approach such a dialogue on an unconditional basis, where we
would raise our issues of concern and they would raise theirs. That's been
our view. They have a different view.
QUESTION: Today an Iranian opposition group that's based here in
Washington released a video as they have before, possibly two years ago,
which they say is a secret video that's been sneaked out of Iran. Two years
ago it was showing people being stoned to death. And this one apparently
shows prisoners with their eyes being gouged out. Is there any - does the
State Department have any contact with these Iranian opposition members,
especially as we're trying to increase our contacts with them?
MR. RUBIN: Well, I don't know which group you're referring to. There are
some groups that we definitely don't have contact with.
QUESTION: MEK?
MR. RUBIN: Yeah, that is not one we have contact with. They're on our
list of terrorist organizations. And despite the fact that we once met with
the FARC, we do not share a lot of interest and communication with the MEK -
- for that reason. But let me add to that we have made clear in our human
rights reports a number of concerns that we have about things in Iran that
have taken place, including the issue of the Baha'is, the issues of
the 13 Jews, a number of other issues, and I'd be happy to get you a copy
of that report. And our investigators and our researchers try to cull as
much information as possible in putting that report together.
QUESTION: Do you see these videos ever, or do you just completely boycott
their information?
MR. RUBIN: I would be surprised if we weren't - we'd be happy to see a
video. We consider a number of sources of information in making these
conclusions. With respect to the authenticity of that videotape, it's
impossible for us to judge.
QUESTION: On the MEK, the Justice Department doesn't seem to be giving a
very high priority to investigating the status of the MEK operation in
Washington. Have you heard of any developments on that front? Are you
urging them to be more active on this, because obviously this is a gesture
which the Iranian Government would very much appreciate?
MR. RUBIN: I suspect my colleagues at the Justice Department would not
agree with your characterization. They give a high priority to the
implementation of all of our laws. And one of the laws involved here
requires us to ensure that terrorist organizations are prevented from
getting funds and raising funds here in the United States.
I would be happy to refer this question to my colleagues at the Justice
Department and try to get you an answer on what they have done with respect
to that, but it is certainly our intent to fully comply with the law and
follow through on the necessary work on each of the terrorist organizations.
QUESTION: One of the measures supposedly meant to be taken against them
is denial of visas which is, to some extent, a State Department affair.
MR. RUBIN: Right. But in these cases, I don't know the specifics here but
it is just important to have the generalities right. There is often
dispute. As some people say, some people are in some organizations or have
an affiliation with some organizations, and other people say they are
simply not affiliated with those organizations. It is often difficult to
prove charges and countercharges. But I do have every reason to believe
that our Justice Department colleagues are working hard to implement the
law, and anything we can do to help implement the law more rigorously, we
would be happy to do.
QUESTION: Jamie, last year, a very senior State Department official
equated the MEK with the National Resistance Council, which are the people
who put on this show this morning in a downtown hotel, and have offices in
the National Press Club. And according to that designation, they are not
supposed to have even offices. They are not supposed to be able to exist in
the US.
MR. RUBIN: OK, it may be that you more accurately read the statutes and
more accurately applied the law than our lawyers. And so all I can offer is
to get our lawyers to look at that and to offer me some information to
provide you. George.
QUESTION: Do you have anything on the North Korea talks, the first full
day of which was yesterday?
MR. RUBIN: Yes. They have been meeting in New York. The talks have been -
they would prefer it for me to do these things by memory, I guess - it's
not in mine. Is that helpful?
Ambassador Kartman and the US delegation continue to work with the vice
foreign minister, Kim Gye Gwan and their counterparts in the North Korea
delegation to finalize preparations for the high-level visit which we
expect to begin in a month. Ambassador Sheehan will continue discussions we
have had in the past with the North Koreans on terrorism issues in separate
talks with his counterparts today. The dialogue with the North Korean
delegation will focus on the steps it would need to make to meet our
concerns on the issue of international terrorism. We have described
in the past to Pyongyang in detail what steps they would need to
take to meet our serious concerns on this matter.
QUESTION: Did you happen to know who Sheehan is talking to?
MR. RUBIN: The name of his counterpart? I can check that for you.
QUESTION: And has Sheehan started his talks with this guy?
MR. RUBIN: It's happening today. I don't know whether - I suspect they
have.
QUESTION: You have a venue for that?
MR. RUBIN: In New York: same location.
QUESTION: North Korea will visit this weekend in Washington, do they have
any schedule for visit --
MR. RUBIN: I don't know what North Korean delegation you're referring to,
visiting Washington.
QUESTION: Not this weekend?
MR. RUBIN: I'm not aware of such a visit, but I will check for you.
QUESTION: The Middle East?
MR. RUBIN: Sure.
QUESTION: Do we have any details on - kind of logistical details for the
resumption of talks --
MR. RUBIN: Nothing today.
QUESTION: How about the revival of the Committee on Regional Security and
Arms Control? And also now that the peace talks maybe will resume, anything
concerning the Committee on Refugees?
MR. RUBIN: In Moscow, the joint declaration issued by ministers noted the
importance of reaching an agreed comprehensive agenda for the working group
on arms control and regional security, informally known as ACRS, and called
on the parties in the region to intensify their efforts to reach this
agreement and resume their work with the help of the co-sponsors, with the
goal of getting the formal ACRS negotiations and activities under way
within a few months.
Is it the American understanding that we will seek to resume these
activities of the arms control and regional security efforts before the end
of the first half of the year 2000, that is before the end of the sixth
month of the calendar, which would be the end of June.
QUESTION: Is there a date?
MR. RUBIN: That is as far as I can offer you at this time. More generally,
we are working on the peace process. Ambassador Ross is returning here, and
when we have a date set we'll let you know the site of the negotiations.
QUESTION: And on refugees - Committee on Refugees?
MR. RUBIN: I will have to check that for you.
QUESTION: One second, this is going to be a very quick answer I'm sure.
ILMG meeting?
MR. RUBIN: Nothing new on that.
QUESTION: I apologize for not having warned you in advance - you may not
have anything on this. Count Lamsdorff said today he was shocked to
discover that the US side does not consider the issue of German state
reparations for World War II and Holocaust issues to be closed. And I was
under the impression that Mr. Eizenstat told him this. This seems to refer
to the reparations which were done in the '50s and '60s.
MR. RUBIN: I will have to check on that. I will check that for you.
QUESTION: Something else --
MR. RUBIN: The hardest working wire service is keeping it going
here.
QUESTION: Late yesterday, you all put out a public announcement about
threats, reports of threats of violence disrupting the 25th anniversary of
the end of the Vietnam war. And the announcement was couched very
strangely. It said that there have been reports that individuals inside and
outside Vietnam - the warning was for Vietnam and Cambodia - that people
would try to disrupt this with violence. I am just wondering if you can
extrapolate?
MR. RUBIN: We tend to not want to get more specific than we get in those
reports. But I will see if I can get you a briefing from our consular
people about that specific public announcement.
QUESTION: Basically what I am just wondering is, were they press reports
or --
MR. RUBIN: Usually, reports are multiple. When we use the word "reports,"
it's multiple.
QUESTION: Also sticking in the same region, I see that Mr. Boyce was in
Cambodia today or yesterday, talking about the Khmer Rouge trial, and I am
wondering if you have anything to add to his comments?
MR. RUBIN: What I can say about that is we understand the Secretary
General has announced a team will travel to Cambodia on March 16th for
further discussions with the government there on a Khmer Rouge tribunal. We
welcome this announcement and remain hopeful that the issues raised by the
Secretary General in his letter can be resolved. We share his objective of
achieving credible justice with international legitimacy for those senior
Khmer Rouge leaders. Both the UN and the Cambodian government have
demonstrated a willingness to work together to achieve justice. In that
spirit, we are strongly encouraged that UN and Cambodian officials
will meet soon in Phnom Penh for further discussions.
QUESTION: Back to the Vietnamese announcement, the announcement referred
rather vaguely to Vietnamese authorities taking protective measures,
tougher protective measures. Does that include at the US Embassy and at US
businesses?
MR. RUBIN: Let me get you information that I can in terms of what
protective measures have been taken. As a rule, we try not to tell those
who might - that would be important information for people to know what we
have done and what we haven't done, so let me check what I can say about
that.
QUESTION: Did you get a question yesterday about increased scale of PRC
spying in this country, especially by students? Can you comment on such an
article as was?
MR. RUBIN: The State Department doesn't normally comment on intelligence
activities in the United States. We understand that FBI Director Freeh and
CIA Director Tenet testified before Congress on counter-intelligence issues
on the 7th and the 8th. They would be in a position to elaborate on
intelligence issues inside the United States by foreign governments.
QUESTION: On the spying, do you have anything to add to this new report
on - new "old" report on spies in NATO --
MR. RUBIN: I think the short answer is that NATO believes that this
allegation is not true, or not proven. But NATO has spoken to that more
precisely than I can.
QUESTION: Have you seen the statement by a Chinese official today
demanding an end to US provision of air defense systems to Taiwan?
MR. RUBIN: We make our decisions to provide assistance and arms sales to
Taiwan based on the Taiwan Relations Act and the various communiques. We
have made announcements in the past couple of days about our intent to sell
certain equipment, and those will go forward based on our judgment of what
is appropriate to ensure defense of Taiwan, and to follow through on the
Taiwan Relations Act. I think the fact - it is not new for the Chinese
to object to any arms sale to Taiwan. We have made considerable arms sales
to Taiwan. I've gone through lists with you in the past of all that we've
done in recent years. There are other sources for that information, and we
will continue to do what we think is best, regardless of Chinese statements
of opposition.
QUESTION: (Inaudible) - what the status of this Taiwanese request for the
Aegis --
MR. RUBIN: We don't normally comment on specific weapons systems until
after we've decided.
QUESTION: Perhaps I misheard you. I thought you said you made some
announcements recently on the --
MR. RUBIN: Yeah, I think the Pentagon put that out yesterday on various
air defense systems that were agreed on.
QUESTION: Last one from me. There's been a lot of - I mean everyone's
been talking about Mozambique lately, and the efforts to help there. But
there's another, although slightly less catastrophic disaster in Madagascar,
and I don't know if you will have anything on this, but is there any US aid
going there?
MR. RUBIN: Let me check on that for you.
QUESTION: Thanks.
MR. RUBIN: You broke the record.
QUESTION: Any elaboration - what's the procedure now after the meeting in
Sharm el-Sheik?
MR. RUBIN: In response to one of your colleague's questions, I said I
don't have any announcements for you about the venue. When I do, I
will.
QUESTION: But do you have any reaction to the meeting in Sharm el-Sheik,
the results?
MR. RUBIN: We think the meetings between various senior officials is
important and constructive, and we're going to continue to work on this
problem.
QUESTION: Can you give us any color from Havana on the continuing
protests and the latest Castro speech against US immigration policy?
Yesterday he said the mission didn't get him the figures in time to give a
speech about how many people illegally immigrate every day? And in light of
the Elian case today which has closed for the day - good news for all of us
- has been recessed for the day, anything --
MR. RUBIN: Obviously I have no comment on the Elian case. That is being
conducted by the courts.
With respect to Castro's latest harangue on some particular aspect of US
policy, we think we have a good policy, and we're sorry he doesn't.
(The briefing concluded at 1:03 p.m.)
|
