U.S. Department of State Daily Press Briefing #24, 00-03-27
From: The Department of State Foreign Affairs Network (DOSFAN) at <http://www.state.gov>
778
U.S. Department of State
Daily Press Briefing
I N D E X
Monday, March 27, 2000
Briefer: James B. Foley
NORTH KOREA
1 US, Republic of Korea, and Japan Trilateral Consultations in Tokyo,
March 30
RUSSIA
1-3 US Reaction to Russian Election
3,4 Situation in Chechnya Raised with President-Elect Putin
4-5 Access to Chechnya for Journalists, Relief Organizations, Human
Rights Agencies
3-4 Status of Dialogue on ABM Treaty
5 US-Russian Contacts
COSTA RICA
5-6 Reported Arrest in Murder of Two Americans
MIDDLE EAST PEACE PROCESS
6,7,8 Ambassador Ross' Travel to Israel
6-8,9 Results of President Clinton and Syrian President Assad's Meeting
6-7,9-10,12 Update on Israeli-Palestinian Talks at Bolling Air Force Base
TURKEY/ARMENIA
8 US Congressional Armenia Resolutions
TURKEY
8 US Position on Article 312
EGYPT
9 President Mubarak's Visit To US/Meetings with Administration
Officials
CUBA
10 Fidel Castro's Speech/Remarks about Elian Gonzalez Case
IRAQ/NORTH KOREA/SUDAN
10-11 Reports Iraq and North Korea Building Missile Plant in Sudan
BELARUS
11 Violence Over the Weekend
SAUDI ARABIA
11-12 Amnesty International's Upcoming Report on Saudi Arabia
MIDDLE EAST
12-13 Pope's Visit to the Region
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE
DAILY PRESS BRIEFING
DPB #24
MONDAY, MARCH 27, 2000, 1:10 P.M.
(ON THE RECORD UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED)
MR. FOLEY: Welcome to the State Department. I have only one announcement
to make, which is that the United States, the Republic of Korea and Japan
are going to be meeting for trilateral consultations in Tokyo on March 30.
Our delegation will be led by Ambassador Wendy Sherman, and the three
officials will be discussing the range of issues and our ongoing coordination
of policy towards the DPRK.
With that, let me go --we have not the Associated Press, so who would like
to -- hello, welcome.
QUESTION: I'm filling in today. I'm Pauline Jelinek.
MR. FOLEY: Welcome.
QUESTION: I'll defer to the regulars.
MR. FOLEY: Well, we can just pass the buck all around the room, if you'd
like.
QUESTION: The Russian election.
MR. FOLEY: What's your question? A reaction?
QUESTION: Yes.
MR. FOLEY: As you know, President Clinton has spoken already this morning
with President-Elect Putin to congratulate him on his victory in the
Russian presidential elections. Preliminary results indicate that Mr. Putin
won 52.6 percent of the vote. Apparently 95 percent of the vote has now
been counted.
This is Russia's second presidential election taken together with the three
Duma elections and the hundreds of regional and local elections over the
past nine years. This election shows that the ballot box has indeed become
the undisputed way for Russians to select their leaders. So we think this
is an important milestone in the consolidation of democracy in Russia.
The fact that there was a large turnout -- and if you remember there was
some speculation that there might not be a large turnout -- we understand
that 69 percent of eligible voters cast ballots in the election. Thus far,
international observers have not reported any serious violations in the
voting process. The OSCE has issued a report calling the election a massive
expression of the will of the Russian people, but it also cited concern
over imbalanced media coverage and pressure on independent media that did
occur in the context to the elections.
And that's our reaction. A follow-up?
QUESTION: I have one. Do you have any reaction to Foreign Minister
Ivanov's remarks today that Russia will now make changes to its foreign
policy to focus on a more energetic defense of their own national
interests? This could signal more trouble ahead for arms control and
Chechnya, for example.
MR. FOLEY: That's your comment at the end of the statement, I assume.
QUESTION: It's the question. Are you at all worried that these are going
to be potential areas of --
MR. FOLEY: Well, first of all, I'm not aware that the Russian Government
heretofore has been unflagging in its commitment to Russian national
interests, so I don't think that's necessarily presages of something new in
that respect.
Secondly, we look for a partner in Russia that is an advocate of Russian
interest. That's what we expect. Indeed, we would like to see a Russia that
is not only consolidating democracy but one that is consolidating the free
market economy and instituting the rule of law that's helping the Russian
people to get back on their feet after these years of transition --
difficult years of transition. I think the Acting President himself noted
that there was a significant protest vote, as he called it, and that's
to be expected given the dire economic circumstances in Russia.
In terms of foreign policy though, which is what you asked me about, we've
seen that statement by Foreign Minister Ivanov. I think we'll need to be in
touch with the Russian Foreign Ministry at various levels to see if his
statement indicates any change in basic policies. We don't anticipate
that.
That Russia will, as I said, be an advocate for Russian interests is not
necessarily new or surprising. What is important is that if nations,
including the United States, pursue their national interests, that they
find ways to achieve common ground on behalf of shared objectives. We
believe we have an enormous amount of work we can do with Russia in various
fields, first and foremost in the security field, in the field of promoting
stability in the greater Europe, in the field of arms control, and in the
field of economic relations. We want to work together with Russia.
We want to work productively with Russia and, indeed, we hope that
President-Elect Putin will follow through on his statements that have
occurred over the last months about the need for economic reform, to
protect the rule of law, and to respect the basic rights of citizens.
QUESTION: Can you tell us, please, what's happening between Israeli and
Palestinian side at Bolling?
MR. FOLEY: We'll come to that later, undoubtedly.
QUESTION: To what degree do you think the Administration will be
successful in pursuing those different categories that you just mentioned,
given political elections in this country and uncertainty and all that
entails? Do you think you'll be able to check off some boxes this
year?
MR. FOLEY: Well, I don't expect there to be any flagging on our part in
terms of pursuing productive relations with Russia and work on common areas
of interest that I indicated a minute ago. It's hard to comment on the
electoral process in this country. We don't do that from the State
Department. I think both leading presidential candidates have indicated the
importance of the relationship with Russia. I don't think anybody disputes
that the United States has a national interest in a Russia which continues
to move in the direction they've moved in over the last ten years -- in
terms of consolidating democracy, in terms of economic reform and
growing prosperity for the Russian people. That's in our national
interest.
We have, nevertheless, areas of disagreement, notably Chechnya, and that is
something that I think, as was indicated in the White House statement, that
the President raised with President-Elect Putin. We believe that the
Chechnya conflict is, aside from a humanitarian black eye, it is also a
dead end for Russia, we believe, in that we don't see a military solution
as ultimately possible in Chechnya. We believe there has to be a political
solution. In order for there to be a political solution, there has to
be a political process of dialogue, of reaching out to credible Chechen
interlocutors.
And we hope the new Russian Government will find its own way towards
achieving a political solution in Chechnya. Until that happens, we have
serious and profound disagreement. But in terms of our ability and this
Administration's ability to pursue not only the agenda with Russia but our
foreign policy interests around the world, I think there's no question that
the President, as he demonstrated over the last week, is firmly engaged on
the foreign policy front.
QUESTION: How realistic is getting an understanding on ABM this
year?
MR. FOLEY: Well, we are talking with the Russians. Based on Secretary
Albright's last meetings in Moscow, including with President-Elect Putin,
there was a willingness on the Russian side to continue the dialogue. We
don't see eye-to-eye about our support for the building of a national
missile defense. We believe, nevertheless, that, again, it is possible to
find common ground with Russia on this matter because we believe Russia
also faces the threat of the development of long-range missile capabilities
in regions closer to Russia than to the United States and that this is an
area that we ought to be able to work on together.
That's not to predict an early positive outcome or a positive outcome of
these talks at any point. We have to see. But we've seen a willingness on
President-Elect Putin's part to discuss the issue, and we both agree on the
importance of the ABM Treaty. We happen to believe that it's possible to
reconcile the Treaty, to preserve its principles, and also to move forward
with meeting our legitimate defense needs.
QUESTION: We often hear that the Secretary or -- and today the President
has brought up Chechnya, but we don't hear what President, now-elect, Putin
says in return. We often hear that he has expressed willingness to talk
about ABM. Is this because when she brings it up there is dead silence on
the other end of the phone or something like that? It seems like if he gave
her or gave other US officials reason to believe that he was going
to be constructive about investigating the human rights abuses in Chechnya
that that would be reported back to us in some form, and we don't hear it
much.
MR. FOLEY: Well, first of all, if I had been privy to the President's
conversation with President-Elect Putin, I wouldn't be in a position to
talk about it. I wasn't privy to it, so I am unable under any circumstance
to talk about it. But as a general point, though, I think you're right,
that we've not seen movement on the Russian side. We've not seen a
recognition, at least a meaningful recognition on their part, that they
need a political process, that there is no military solution.
We believe that if they reflect on it carefully over time, they will come
to this conclusion, that this is going to be a continuing breeding ground
for instability, even for terrorism, and that in order to meet Russia's own
stated objectives, it will be necessary to start a political solution.
Obviously, we have very serious human rights concerns about the situation
in Russia and we've been attempting -- we and many other nations around the
world, including the leading European nations and the EU -- to persuade
the Russians to do the right thing in terms of opening up Chechnya to
access by journalists, by relief organizations, by human rights agencies.
I believe that High Commissioner Mary Robinson will be making a trip to
Moscow and Grozny in the early part of April. We look forward to that trip.
We will look forward to her report. And we very strongly urge the Russians
to take advantage of the willingness of the international community to work
on the humanitarian aspects of the crisis in Chechnya, to use that
opportunity to help meet the humanitarian concerns of the people in
Chechnya.
QUESTION: Even as the Administration has been accusing Russia of not
letting journalists and international agencies into Chechnya, Russian
Foreign Minister Ivanov has been saying that that is incorrect, that there
has been access. Given that that's their psychological position, and you've
just said yourself you've been trying for months to persuade them, what new
steps --
MR. FOLEY: I did indicate that it's something the Russians have engaged
with other countries on. As you indicate, there have been visits but we
don't see the kind of sustained cooperation and access that is necessary
both to shed a spotlight on what's been happening there and then to begin
to really alleviate the suffering that's been occurring there.
QUESTION: Given that there seems to be this difference, what new steps
now that Vladimir Putin has become President can the Administration take?
Will there be a consideration of a resolution in Geneva, for example, now
that he's in place?
MR. FOLEY: Well, Secretary Albright spoke to the situation in Chechnya in
her speech before the Human Rights Commission in Geneva, so I would refer
you to her remarks. Obviously, with what's going on in Chechnya, it is a
matter of legitimate concern and focus on the part of nations participating
in the Human Rights Commission.
As to what might happen specifically in Geneva on this matter, I think time
will tell. It's too early to say. We are in active consultation with other
members and with the EU, other members of the Human Rights Commission. We,
as I indicated, are looking forward to Mary Robinson's visit to Moscow and
to Grozny and to her report. We're looking for the Russians to take some
concrete steps having to do with the ICRC, having to do with access
to the region, having to do with investigations of allegations, serious
allegations of human rights abuses. And so we'll have to see how that
develops over the next few weeks.
QUESTION: I wonder whether the State Department feels that enough of the
conversations that go on between the United States and Russia go on at the
appropriate level. I mean, as a way of strengthening institutions in Russia,
shouldn't more of the discussions be going on at the institutional level
rather than at the head of government or the Secretary of State level or
head of state level?
MR. FOLEY: I'm not quite sure I understand the question. I mean, we have
a panoply of relationships, especially since the end of the Soviet Union, a
monolithic society where everything was controlled by political authorities
at the top. You now have a thriving civil society in Russia. You have a
multitude of contacts between private Americans, private Russians, NGOs,
think tanks.
QUESTION: Between governments.
MR. FOLEY: And officials at various levels from different ministries and
departments. They're below the surface. I think the press tends to focus on
the big contacts, President-to-President, Secretary to Foreign Minister,
but those contacts do go on and of course we have a very effective Embassy
led by Ambassador Collins in Russia which is in touch with all of the
relevant ministries and throughout Russian society as well.
QUESTION: Can I switch subjects?
MR. FOLEY: Yes.
QUESTION: In Costa Rica, do you have any comment on the report of an
arrest there in the murder of two Americans?
MR. FOLEY: I do. We have been informed by the Costa Rican authorities
that they have detained one individual in connection with the murders of
Emily Eagen and Emily Howell. It is our understanding that the individual
who has been detained is allegedly a minor who was in possession of a gun
that reportedly matched the bullets collected by forensics experts.
Costa Rican authorities plan to hold a press conference today to release
information about the investigation. I don't have more information myself
about it. I can tell you, though, that the US Embassy is keeping the
families of both victims informed. Our understanding also is that the Costa
Rican authorities are not, at least at this point, releasing the identity
of the arrested individual. Their investigation, though, is ongoing.
QUESTION: Can I talk about the Middle East?
MR. FOLEY: Yes, ma'am.
QUESTION: Dennis Ross went to brief Prime Minister Barak today in Israel.
Is it just to brief him about what happened, or is he carrying specific
ideas? And can you tell us about them?
MR. FOLEY: Well, I'm not in a position to share his talking points or his
agenda publicly, but I think the White House was clear yesterday in Geneva
that Ambassador Ross would be traveling to Israel to brief the Prime
Minister on the results of the meeting between President Clinton and
President Assad yesterday. That's the essential focus.
QUESTION: And on the Palestinian-Israeli track, what's going on at
Bolling? I mean, how long are they going to be talking? Do you have a date
for this session?
MR. FOLEY: Yes.
QUESTION: And we heard there might be some problems about -- in the talks
about the third redeployment, the Palestinians want to discuss with the
Israelis and the Israelis are not interested.
MR. FOLEY: Actually, on that point, it is a matter that they have
discussed. It hasn't predominated by any means. They have been largely
focused on permanent status issues. As you know, the aim of these talks is
to try to rapidly reach a framework agreement that would enable the parties
to resolve all of the outstanding permanent status issues by September 13th
of this year -- a very ambitious agenda. But they have discussed the
issue of the third interim stage withdrawal, and we expect -- they've
agreed to discuss it again in the future.
In terms of logistically or procedurally where they are, the parties -- the
Israelis and Palestinians -- continued their discussions over the weekend.
They are meeting today. They will be meeting again tomorrow. Secretary
Albright is going to meet with both delegations together today. Our
assessment of the talks is that they have been serious, intensive and
indeed productive. We expect that the parties will return tomorrow to brief
their leaderships and to resume their negotiations in Washington in the
next few weeks. I don't have a specific time or date for the resumption,
but they will be coming back to Washington.
QUESTION: But tomorrow -- it's ending tomorrow, the first session?
MR. FOLEY: Yes, they will meet again tomorrow and then depart tomorrow.
That's right.
QUESTION: You mentioned that the met again at the weekend?
MR. FOLEY: Yes.
QUESTION: It's just a detail, but I understood they were breaking. Was it
both days or --
MR. FOLEY: They were breaking? I'm sorry.
QUESTION: I understood that they took a break at the weekend.
MR. FOLEY: Well, from the beginning of the Sabbath, Friday evening until
sundown Saturday, they did not meet or work, but they did meet and work on
Friday and on Saturday and on Sunday.
QUESTION: About --
MR. FOLEY: Don't tell me you forgot your question.
QUESTION: About Clinton -- no, I don't think so. About Clinton and Assad
in Geneva
QUESTION: Can we stay with the Palestinian talks?
MR. FOLEY: Sure. We'll come back to you.
QUESTION: Is the meeting that the Secretary's going to have at Bolling
with them, or here?
MR. FOLEY: No, here.
QUESTION: What time?
MR. FOLEY: I'll get you that afterwards.
QUESTION: On the meeting in --
MR. FOLEY: Let me hasten to interrupt to say that I've said about all I
have to say about the President's meeting. Mr. Lockhart, I think, had
something to say after the meeting yesterday in Geneva. I don't have much
beyond that today.
QUESTION: I understand, Jim. This is not your territory exactly, but you
know, little progress is one of the descriptions -- that the talks between
Syria and Israel were not advanced much, if at all. Are those characterizations
that you would agree with or would you say that this did, in fact, advance
the cause of peace between Israel and Syria?
MR. FOLEY: Well, whether the meeting becomes, in hindsight, an event that
led to progress will only be known to us in hindsight as events develop in
the course of time. What we can say now, though, and it's important to be
clear, is that there remain differences between the two sides.
What is important is that as far as the United States is concerned, and not
only the United States but indeed the Israelis and the Syrians, is that we
are going to continue working with the parties. They want us to continue
working with them. All sides agree on the importance of continuing these
efforts to clarify positions and needs so that there is confidence that if
negotiations resume they will have a reasonable chance of success and
progress.
And so we are not going to give up the effort. It's important to continue.
The stakes are important. The prize of peace is worth the effort, and we
are going to continue to work with them to try to clarify positions and see
whether agreement is possible.
QUESTION: So Dennis Ross makes the next step, basically?
MR. FOLEY: I didn't say that.
QUESTION: No?
MR. FOLEY: He's briefing the Prime Minister of Israel today. He returns
tomorrow. And we've not really spoken from this podium about our lines of
communication to the parties, but we will be in touch with the parties.
QUESTION: Another subject. What can you tell us about Turkish-Armenian
relations and will you offer to rescind some American Armenian attempt to
push several resolution against Turkey in the legislation by several states
throughout the United States? You know that there are two resolution
pending before the US Congress on the so-called "Armenian Resolutions."
What is the US State Department reaction?
MR. FOLEY: Well, this is not a new issue. I think it has cropped up in
previous years and, like past administrations, we oppose the legislative
measures that you mention to deal with this very sensitive issue. We
believe that such measures can have the inadvertent effect of hurting
efforts to encourage improved relations between Armenia and Turkey.
President Clinton and Secretary Albright met with Turkish and Armenian
leaders in Istanbul in November -- also they met in Davos in January -- to
promote the process of building peace and stability in the Caucasus that
will secure improved relations between Turkey and Armenia. That process
continues, and that's what we're emphasizing.
QUESTION: And also, according to some press reports, the Turkish chief
prosecutor claimed that US push hard to change Article 312 in Turkey in
order to save the former Istanbul mayor -- his political life. Can you
confirm?
MR. FOLEY: There has been no such pressure, and I think that the Turkish
Minister of Justice has, in fact, made that clear. We have -- I'll be frank
-- encouraged progress on human rights and democracy in Turkey, including
wider freedom of expression, and that is a general principle. But we
believe that Turkey should make changes in this area not to please us or to
please Europe, but in order to enhance democracy for all of its citizens.
The bottom line, though, is that these are matters for the people of Turkey
to decide on what kind of society they want and how to achieve it.
QUESTION: Was there any Israeli officials in Geneva so that the President,
President Clinton, could determine that the positions of President Assad
were not enough to bridge the gap? This is one track.
And the other thing, President Mubarak is here. Is he meeting with
Secretary Albright and is there any mediation on the Egyptian side on the
Israeli-Palestinian or the Israeli-Syrian tracks?
MR. FOLEY: Well, that's a lot of questions. As to whether there are any
Israeli officials in Geneva, I would be surprised if there weren't Israeli
officials in Geneva. As to whether that's in any way pertinent to your
question, I doubt it. I'd have to refer you to the White House. I wasn't in
Geneva. I believe that the President had adequate means of talking to
counterparts at his level in Israel. Dennis Ross is now in Israel to meet
with the Prime Minister, so I don't think the question, as I said,
is pertinent.
In terms of President Mubarak, obviously, he is a man of vision and
influence in the region and we are going to be discussing with him over the
course of his visit a whole range of issues both bilaterally and regionally,
including the Middle East peace process. He's been very helpful in that
area historically. I wouldn't attach the word mediation to it, but he's a
friend of the peace process and has played a very constructive role in that
regard.
I believe Secretary Albright is meeting with him tomorrow and, of course,
he's seeing the President and Vice President and others while he's
here.
QUESTION: You've qualified the Israeli-Palestinian talks when they begun
as "brainstorming sessions."
MR. FOLEY: Yes.
QUESTION: And now you've said that they have been productive. So they've
gone a bit further than brainstorming? Have they begun -- has there been a
narrowing of gaps? And on what specific issues of the --
MR. FOLEY: I'm not going to get into the issues -- sorry, you'll be
surprised to learn. But they've gone well, though. I think that's the
fundamental point. As Mr. Rubin indicated, yes, these were brainstorming
sessions; in other words, a session characterized mostly by the exchange of
ideas. They haven't put pen to paper to this point, but they've gone
well.
There's a real, as Mr. Rubin said last week, a real sense of common destiny
and a sense that they're partners and that they need to work these very
difficult issues out successfully. But I'm not in a position to parse for
you. This is the first round here in Washington. They're going home
tomorrow. They're going to come back. And, obviously, it's a shortened or
an accelerated agenda if we want to get the final distance to a permanent
status agreement between now and September, but I don't have a specific
progress report for you.
QUESTION: Do you have any comment on the speech by Fidel Castro this
weekend threatening the United States with sending another Mariel and --
MR. FOLEY: I'm tempted to comment. But I think it's no accident, as the
communists like to say, Mr. Castro gave the speech the evening of the
Academy Awards here in the United States. I'm not sure what category he
would be up for. He spoke for five hours. I don't think there's a
supporting actor category in the Cuban cinematography industry (Laughter).
Nevertheless, he made some very intemperate remarks we believe that reveal
more about him than they do about the real issues in this case.
This is a serious matter involving Elian Gonzalez, and the United States
Government is trying to find a fair, prompt and orderly solution to the
issue. The Department of Justice has followed a deliberate process,
consistent with our laws and procedures, and the United States will not be
intimidated or pressured into taking actions that are inconsistent with
these principles. So any threats or innuendoes expressed by the government
of Cuba are, in fact, irrelevant to the disposition of this case.
QUESTION: Is there special measures going to be taken to protect the
Interests Section in Havana?
MR. FOLEY: Cuba knows its responsibilities under relevant international
conventions to protect diplomatic persons and installations, and we fully
expect Cuba will meet those obligations.
QUESTION: Change of subject?
MR. FOLEY: Sure.
QUESTION: A William Safire article claims that Iraq and North Korea may
now be working together building a new ballistic missile plant in Sudan,
and this was a topic on the Sunday shows with Trent Lott saying, if that's
true, the US should be prepared to take military action. And even former UN
Chief Inspector Richard Butler says, in fact, it could be true. He didn't
say it is true, but he says it could be true. Do you have any reaction?
MR. FOLEY: I'm not sure Mr. Safire says more than that either. I read the
article.
QUESTION: But even the Senate Republican leader --
MR. FOLEY: We take all such information extraordinarily seriously. And if,
obviously, we had information on this subject, it's not something that
lends itself to public discussion because it would be based on intelligence
matters. But as I said, we take seriously reports of transfers of
proliferation concern and we investigate them thoroughly. And we have
consistently stated that North Korea's missile proliferation activities are
of serious concern to the United States. We continue to press vigorously
for restraints on North Korea's production, deployment, testing and export
of missiles and missile technology. And those issues indeed will be central
to the next round of US-DPRK talks.
QUESTION: (Inaudible) the pressure is going to be on North Korea side if
they're collaborating with Iraq? I mean we don't have much --
MR. FOLEY: You are postulating something that I'm not agreeing to. I'm
saying that we follow these kinds of issues of reports or concerns about
proliferation very seriously. We monitor them. We follow them. We don't
talk about intelligence. We can't publicly, so I can't comment on the
report specifically.
QUESTION: Any statement on the violent turn of events in Belarus this
weekend?
MR. FOLEY: I have to take the question.
QUESTION: Okay, thanks.
MR. FOLEY: I'll try to get you something this afternoon.
QUESTION: Also, Amnesty is releasing a major report on Saudi Arabia
tomorrow. Do you have anything on human rights in Saudi Arabia?
MR. FOLEY: Tomorrow?
QUESTION: Yes.
MR. FOLEY: If I could give tomorrow's briefing today, I would be I think
promoted instantly. But I don't.
QUESTION: So they're going to be focusing on just the general human
rights set of issues --
MR. FOLEY: Well, you've been here long enough to know that even on the
day of we haven't necessarily received a given report and digested it and
analyzed it, so it may not even be tomorrow that we'll comment on it. But
we'll look for it.
QUESTION: I'm not asking for a reaction to the report in advance. I'm
more like saying could you tell us what the Department's position is about
human rights in Saudi Arabia?
MR. FOLEY: Yes, I could, in a way, by directing you towards our Country
Human Rights Report that was issued very recently.
QUESTION: Secretary Albright will meet with the Palestinians and the
Israelis. When? And you said that they are coming in a few weeks before
they mentioned that they will go back for a few days and come back.
MR. FOLEY: No, I did say that. Yes, that they meet, they're continuing
their discussions today and tomorrow, and they go back home tomorrow.
QUESTION: But they will come back after several weeks or several
days?
MR. FOLEY: Several weeks. A few weeks.
QUESTION: But time is pressing. I mean, the deadline is in May, and they
were supposed to go home for five days at the beginning and then come back
for the second session. So why is it --
MR. FOLEY: Well, they will be coming back for a second session soon.
QUESTION: But in a few weeks.
MR. FOLEY: Soon.
QUESTION: In a few weeks.
MR. FOLEY: Well, I may have misspoken. You're pressing me on a date, and
I'm not in a position to give you a date. We'll hopefully be able to do
that shortly. But as I said, let me quote myself, "We expect them to resume
the negotiations in the next few weeks."
Was there another question?
QUESTION: At what time will they be meeting Mrs. Albright? Will they be
comments by Mrs. Albright --
MR. FOLEY: They may be meeting very shortly. No, it's not a public
meeting. But I would expect soon.
QUESTION: You said she's meeting both sides together at the same
time?
MR. FOLEY: Yes. In her office, yes. Any other questions?
QUESTION: I was just going to ask that -- the Pope has finished -- he
gave support to the various meetings and talks over the last five days. He
did what he does best for Israel, the Holy Land generally. Does the State
Department have a particular point of view about the Pope's visit?
MR. FOLEY: I think Mr. Rubin spoke elegantly about it last week when the
Pope had just begun his visit. Obviously, he brings a powerful message --
brought a powerful message of reconciliation to a very important, vital,
historically important and dangerous region. And I can only speak for
myself. I thought his words were profound to all peoples, to all religions,
and one hopes that they will fall on fertile ground.
Thank you.
(The briefing was concluded at 1:41 P.M.)
|
