U.S. Department of State Daily Press Briefing, 01-02-02

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>

Richard Boucher, Spokesman

Washington, DC

February 2, 2001

INDEX:

STATEMENT: GROUNDHOG JOB SHADOW DAY
1         Mr. Isaiah Walker Reading EU Ministerial Meeting Announcement
LEBANON
2         Comment on Reports of Missing Administrator from the American
          University of Beirut
IRAQ
2-7       Assistance Programs to Train Iraqi Opposition Groups / Funds for
          the Iraqi National Congress (INC)
SERBIA (KOSOVO)
7-10      Discussions With Minister Djindjic
Comments on Kosovo Independence
MONTENEGRO
10-12     Meetings with President Djukanovic
Comments on elections in Montenegro
Arrangements for Milosevic Indictment / Trial

MR. BOUCHER: Okay, quite a crowd today. Ladies and gentlemen, today is Groundhog Job Shadow Day, February 2nd, so I want to welcome all the students who are with us, and especially all the people who have people shadowing them. I am pleased to be here today with my shadow, Isaiah Walker. This is a terrific program, and I've really enjoyed getting to know him. I hope he has learned something from me. I've certainly learned a few things from him already.

The Groundhog Job Shadow Day began in 1996 by the Boston Private Industry Council. It's now a nationwide event. The program exposes young people to various career options. It focuses on how school and work transfers to the workplace. Today at the State Department we have about 95 students who are seeing this firsthand. Local high school students are matched with a range of Department officials from the Secretary of State on down. Assignments have been made to 24 different bureaus in the Department. Students are from the Washington Math Science Technology Public Charter High School, H.D. Woodson High School or Eastern High School.

I am also pleased to welcome several of the shadow students to the briefing room today, in addition to Isaiah. Phil Reeker is here with his shadow, Shanita Campbell. We have more groundhogs and shadows observing from the back rows, including some students from Minor Elementary School and other local schools.

For more information on the program, you can look at .

And now Isaiah will have a statement, and then I'll be glad to take your questions.

(Laughter.)

MR. WALKER: The Secretary of State Colin L. Powell will host Swedish EU presidency and European officials for the semiannual US-EU foreign ministers meeting on March the 6th in Washington, D.C. Swedish Foreign Minister Anna Lindh will represent the EU presidency. The EU delegation will also include Javier Solana, Secretary General of the Council and European Union, the European Commissioner Christopher Patten, and other officials of the Sweden Government, the European Commission and the European Council Secretariat.

(Applause.)

MR. BOUCHER: Now there's going to be a clamor for a change in Spokesman.

(Laughter.)

Okay, I'll be glad to take your questions on this or other topics. We'll start with Mr. Schweid.

Q: It's not on this. What can you tell us about the missing administrator in Lebanon, if you're aware of it?

MR. BOUCHER: We're aware of it. Let me check quickly to see if we know very much.

The president of the American University of Beirut has issued a statement indicating that the dean of student affairs has been missing since Thursday evening. Our Ambassador there, Ambassador Satterfield, has expressed our concern to local officials. He has been assured that Lebanese authorities are indeed investigating the reported disappearance. Our Embassy has been in touch with the staff obviously at the American University of Beirut.

And at this point I have to stop because we don't have a Privacy Act waiver, and there is not much we can say about the individual and his circumstances.

Q: But were there any statements? Or was there any indication of something to be alarmed about? Any threats that you could share with us?

MR. BOUCHER: I don't think we know at this point. We are just not in a position to say why he is missing. We haven't seen anything that would indicate exactly the circumstances of his disappearance.

Q: A two-part question. First of all, Groundhog Job Shadow Day, does this mean that we are going to have six more weeks of briefings?

(Laughter.)

Q: On a serious note, the new and/or revised policy toward Iraq. In addition to the money that is being freed up by the Administration, are there any military assistance programs considered or under way, such as with US special forces in-country to train the opposition to Saddam Hussein?

MR. BOUCHER: I am not going to try to go forward in this circumstance. Obviously the Secretary and the Administration are looking at Iraq policy. He has talked to the press directly yesterday and at his confirmation hearings about the thrust of that policy to control Iraq's ability to threaten people within his own country, to control Iraq's ability to threaten people in the region. It is clear that the policy is being looked at, and as far as where it goes in terms of the kind of speculation that you are engaging in, I am just not going to do.

Now, I can tell you what is going on with the Iraqi opposition, and I am afraid I have to start out by reminding you of a statement that we issued on October 2nd of the year 2000 -- Philip T. Reeker, the Deputy Spokesman, actually issued it -- that described how we were going to proceed with $4 million of funding to advance the Iraqi National Congress's ongoing operations and to establish new ones.

In that statement we talked about public information programs and other programs that the Iraqi National Congress would be carrying out. That is the policy decision made months ago that is being carried out through what you might call the technical approval of the license for the Office of Foreign Assets Control in Treasury that allows the Iraqi opposition to carry out those activities inside Iraq with US Government money.

So you all know journalists have been going in and out of the north of Iraq to collect information and bring it back and report on things. The Iraqi opposition gather information inside Iraq to help build the case against the Iraqi leadership for crimes against humanity. That is what we discussed in our October 2nd statement. This license is the technical license that allows them to do that using this US Government money. So it's a continuation. It's the implementation in a very detailed sense of the policy that was decided and announced last fall.

Q: We know that --

MR. BOUCHER: Let me finish on this. The license application was submitted to the Office of Foreign Assets Control late last year to spend this money inside Iraq. It was approved, I guess, this week by the Office of Foreign Assets Control. And just say that since the passage of the Iraqi Liberation Act of 1998 we have worked hard to improve the capabilities of the Iraqi opposition, and this is just one of the steps in that process.

Q: Is one of the main thrusts now to enable us to improve our HUMINT, or human intelligence, which, as we all know, is a major problem in that part of the world?

MR. BOUCHER: Well, as I can say, we don't talk about intelligence in public. I have to say, the Secretary has described the policy in his hearings. The Secretary has described the policy in talking to you. We don't have any new announcements to make at this stage. This step that is being reported is an implementation of the policy decided some time ago.

Obviously one of the things that we have been doing, and that the Iraq opposition is better able to do by this license to use US money in doing it, is to collect information that would substantiate a case against the Iraqi leadership for crimes against humanity. But that has been ongoing project and this allows it to continue with US funds.

Q: Does the INC actually have this money in hand to spend? I know they have permission now to spend it. Do they actually have it?

MR. BOUCHER: It should be. I mean, have we cut the check?

Q: Yeah.

MR. BOUCHER: I'm not completely sure, but the money was appropriated in 1999. It's 1999 funds. And we concluded the agreement to give it to them on September 29th, so I assume that they have the funds in hand by now. This just allows them to spend it in northern Iraq.

Q: Richard, a couple of questions on this. First of all, could you tell us in brief what the Secretary thinks of the INC as an organization? And if support for the Iraqi opposition is going to be a key element in policy towards Iraq, why is there no meeting yet set up between the Secretary and the visiting members of the INC leadership? And thirdly, what details need to be negotiated with the $25 million package?

MR. BOUCHER: A lot of interesting questions. I don't have any announcements to make about the Iraq policy and how the Secretary wants to pursue it in its different forms. Clearly he has talked to you about the need to control Iraq's ability to threaten its people and threaten its neighbors. That is what he has spoken of, and I don't have any further announcements or statements to make on other aspects of the policy.

In terms of the 25 million, I'll have to check on the procedures for that. I just don't know.

There's just nothing set up. I don't want people to start drawing conclusions about policy because we have or have not met with various groups around the world. There is 180 countries, thousands of groups. The Secretary is seeing many of them, and I'm just not going to draw any conclusions at this point.

Q: He said that Iraq was one of -- he listed it as one of the top two, second in his list of things that he had to deal with. It seems very strange that he would not be meeting at all with the INC when they're in town, because they're not in town all the time.

MR. BOUCHER: Again, I'm not aware --

Q: Is he considering a meeting?

MR. BOUCHER: I will double-check and see if there are any meetings. I'm not aware that there was any request. It's just not on the schedule at this point.

Q: What about within the Administration? You know, the not very new notion of having interagency groups meet, but you guys put some new emphasis on it. And, you know, rightly or wrongly, this continuation of Clinton Administration policy is being projected as a new initiative of a new administration.

But just to stick to facts, have the key players sat down and talked about Iraq together yet?

MR. BOUCHER: Well, I would invite you to stick to the facts.

(Laughter.)

Q: Would you invite any in specific to stick to the facts? Prominent newspapers?

MR. BOUCHER: Let me put it this way. I know everybody is looking for new and different policies and announcements of new and different policies, particularly on a subject as important to all of us as Iraq. This ain't it. So we'll make the announcements at the proper time.

In terms of meetings and discussion, certainly there have been discussions at various levels within the Administration as the Secretary in particular looks at this area that he himself has said to you is important to him.

Can we change?

Q: No, I want to stay on this. I just want to ask you one thing.

MR. BOUCHER: Okay.

Q: The INC can now, without jumping through any more hoops or going through any more red tape, spend this $4 million however they want it within the confines of the gathering information of possible war crimes and whatever else you had mentioned? There is no more approval process; they can do that?

MR. BOUCHER: Yes, within the confines. I mean, this money is appropriated -- allocated for programs that have a specific purpose.

Q: Right. But if they want to buy --

MR. BOUCHER: This is part of the public information programs that we described last fall.

Q: Right, exactly. But if they want to buy --

MR. BOUCHER: They now are getting the money to go do that. They have been doing that, in fact, with their own money.

Q: I understand.

MR. BOUCHER: What is now different is they can use US money to do that.

Q: I know that. But, Richard, what I am asking -- if they want to buy a ream of paper to put out some newsletter or ask for -- or put up some flyer, do they have to now submit a request -- you know, say, look, this is what we want to do with this money, give it to someone in the US Government, and then they stamp "okay" on it, you can use this money to buy that ream of paper.

MR. BOUCHER: No, they don't. The money as allocated has been granted to them to carry out these functions. Obviously, part of how we work with them in terms of recipient of US Government grant money is to work with them on an ongoing basis to make sure the funds are being spent on things that they were designed for. There is audits, there is consultations and constant discussions.

But no, it is within their purview now to decide how to conduct these programs and using our money to do it. We know what they are doing. We are funding what they are doing essentially, though. It is not like they are walking -- they have a bunch of change on the table and say, now what are we going to do with it? They have been carrying out these programs using their own money, and now our money is going to help them do it.

Q: But suppose they say, "Wow, we've got $4 million here. We're going to go out and buy a tank," or something like that. I mean, you could stop it, couldn’t you?

MR. BOUCHER: Yeah. That would not be one of the purposes for which the money was allocated --

Q: So you could -- so it could be stopped. So they still don't have --

MR. BOUCHER: That is why your original question is -- the answer is yes, within the confines of what this money is for.

Q: Have there been any meetings regarding exactly how to spend the money in this process in the last week or week and a half?

MR. BOUCHER: I don't know. I assume -- you know, we talk to the Iraqi opposition all the time. We have people whose job it is to do that. I assume that they have talked quite a bit about this as they got the grant and as they go through the implementation.

Q: So just to clarify, when they get the grant that was appropriated by the Congress and there is an agreement on generally how to spend it; still, for specifics, there used to be an audit process, or the State Department would approve specific expenditures?

MR. BOUCHER: No, we just answered that question the other way a minute ago, that we don't necessarily approve every ream of paper.

Q: You don't approve every -- but what do you --

MR. BOUCHER: But we do have a process to make sure the money is used for the purposes intended. That is standard in all our aid things.

All right, we're losing our shadows, so let there be light.

Q: One more?

MR. BOUCHER: One more on this?

Q: You called it a technical approval of the license in the Treasury Department. How senior a technician had to approve it? The Post article implied that it was the President and the national security team and the Administration making a decision to grant this approval.

Can you tell us who issued that decision, or did it require the White House or the Secretary?

MR. BOUCHER: My understanding is it didn't go to that level, that it was circulated within the bureaus, in various agencies, as these normally are. I suppose different bureaus may have bucked it up higher and lower, but that it was done at the expert or policy level, but not the senior policy levels.

Q: But there was a State Department official quoted in the article as saying that this is a major step, and you are saying that it isn't.

MR. BOUCHER: Well, don't know who it was, but it is not a new policy. The policy was announced in September. It is being implemented now, and that's the facts.

Q: Well, if you are not --

Q: Richard, do you have any reaction against Turkey's appointment of the new ambassador to Baghdad?

MR. BOUCHER: Obviously we don't think it is a good idea to send envoys of that level to Baghdad, and we regret that the Turkish Government has decided to do this. At the same time, we think it is very important for people to be telling Iraq to live up to its obligations to the international community, and we would hope that the Turks would take this opportunity to make that point to Iraq.

Q: Thank you, Richard. It is nice to see you. Long live Richard.

Well, the question on Bangladesh, and as we speak, the scenario in Bangladesh has been a little bit tense. The former president has been sent to emergency for a heart attack, possibly a heart attack. And Mrs. Ershad, as we speak, is now meeting the Bangladesh Desk officers and some officials.

Are we aware of that? And if that is not the case, would you take this question to have your views --

MR. BOUCHER: I am not personally aware of it. I will be glad to look into it for you, though.

Q: That would be great. Thank you very much, Richard.

MR. BOUCHER: New topic?

Q: Earlier today, Ibrahim Rugova told reporters that there was an understanding in general regarding the independence of Kosovo between him and Secretary Powell. I was hoping that you could clarify what an understanding in general means in this regard. He thinks that Kosovo should receive early recognition.

MR. BOUCHER: I didn't see his exact remarks. Let me say two things, and I can go into both of them more.

In the course of the discussions this morning with Minister Djindjic and the Kosovar leaders -- separate discussions that the Secretary held -- there was, I guess I would say, some common threads that ran through the conversations that show what a different region we are dealing with and what an approach to policy at this stage is going to involve.

Now, it is not necessarily that much different, but you can describe it almost as a unified field theory of Balkan particles, that what is happening in our discussions in the region is we are talking about democracy, we are talking about integration, we are talking about the broader regional cooperation trends. And that was certainly the subject of the Secretary's discussions this morning, that governments are interested in expanding democracy at different levels. They are interested in working out these problems among democratic governments in the region, and doing it because they want the stability that is necessary to show the fruits of change to their populations.

That has obviously military, economic, diplomatic aspects to it, and the United States is going to be involved in those things. As you know, and as the Secretary has said to you and talked to the people he talked to this morning about, President Bush is reviewing the issue of the US troop presence. But the US will be involved in various aspects of things. The Secretary made quite clear we are not going to disrupt things; the US is involved. If they want us to be involved, we will stay involved in all these issues in different ways, and we will talk. We will look at the kind of presence that the US should have to advance these fundamental goals of democratic countries, democratic governments, working things out with each other.

So in that context, if you look at the policy towards Kosovo and the discussions that were held this morning, what they talked about this morning was the development of democratic institutions, constitutional government within Kosovo. And certainly the United States is involved and will stay involved in that, and then proceed down the road to the eventual dealing with other issues in accordance with the UN resolutions. So that process is the same as it was. The framework, the approaches being taken, is the one I described, of democratic governments cooperating and working with each other for the sake of stability and economic development.

Q: Actually, you know, Richard, Eli was almost right in his recitation of the quote, but what Rugova did say was that the understanding was about an early recognition by the US of Kosovo independence, and he said that he believed that that kind of a move would calm the region down.

What did Secretary Powell say to that?

MR. BOUCHER: Again, Secretary Powell didn't address anything in those terms or an issue like that specifically. We talked about the process involved of developing democratic and constitutional government in Kosovo and dealing with the issues under the terms -- within that process.

Q: But did the word -- did Rugova use the word, and did he make that -- did he ask that question? Will the US support early recognition of Kosovo --

MR. BOUCHER: Not in those terms.

Q: So he just made the stuff up?

Q: He just told us that? Yeah, he said that I urged him to recognize --

MR. BOUCHER: Look, I didn't see his exact quote, and you guys are arguing about what exactly he said. So I am not going to try to say that that phrase -- the phrase that Matt told me was not asked specifically. There was no question: Will you support our early independence? Obviously their aspirations were discussed. The Secretary heard from them.

But as I said, in terms of addressing these aspirations, addressing these issues, we look at it. The Secretary talked about it in the context of building a democratic and a constitutional government and dealing with other issues, these issues, these kinds of issues, through that process of democratic governments being able to talk to each other and work things out.

Q: So this is another area of policy that hasn't changed?

MR. BOUCHER: I'm not here to list one way or the other. You all, I know, are writing daily stories on this stuff but --

Q: Can I ask a question, please?

MR. BOUCHER: Yes, please, would you?

Q: Mine wasn't a question, actually.

Q: No, it wasn't a question. You're quite right.

MR. BOUCHER: Let's find somebody with a question.

Q: I've forgotten what it is now. I wanted to ask you to clarify exactly how the United States understands the future status of Kosovo to be. The UN Security Council resolution talks about continuing Yugoslav sovereignty over Kosovo. Can you just clarify that as how the United States believes Kosovo should eventually be defined?

MR. BOUCHER: I think you can take from my earlier remarks that we are not here to specify anything other than say that we are working with this process within the UN resolutions, so we're not departing in any way from the UN resolutions. So that has been the position to follow -- the UN resolutions. That remains the process that's under way.

Q: Can I also ask on a similar subject? Secretary Powell, as I understand it, declined to see President Djukanovic; is that correct?

MR. BOUCHER: We saw -- Ambassador Dobbins, the Assistant Secretary of Eastern European Affairs, met with President Djukanovic of Montenegro. He also met with the Albanian president. There are a lot of things going on with scheduling. Actually, both of these areas have elections coming up, and obviously we don't want to get involved in people's elections, so Secretary Powell did not have a meeting with President Djukanovic.

Q: But would the United States support the view that he should not call an independence referendum, as he says he plans to do after parliamentary elections in April?

MR. BOUCHER: Well, not having met, we didn't get into specific details like that. Our view -- Secretary Powell's view -- remains that our goal is a democratic Montenegro within a democratic Yugoslavia, and that the democratically elected governments -- again sort of going back to the context of how we approach these issues now in the Balkans, democratic governments on both sides should be able to discuss these things and determine how they want to cooperate and how they want to proceed.

Q: So, Richard, was it just a matter of scheduling and the Montenegrin elections coming up that kept Secretary Powell from meeting? You didn't exactly say why they didn't meet.

MR. BOUCHER: There are a variety of factors, some of which I mentioned. But, no, not just this. (Laughter.) No, but it's not simple enough to say it's just this or just that.

Q: What is your -- this building's understanding of where the indictment process of Milosevic -- local indictment within Serbia is? Prime Minister Djindjic said that they were moving speedily along towards indicting their former president.

MR. BOUCHER: You heard it from him; we heard it from him; that's what we know.

Q: And is this something that you are willing to sign on to? Are you willing to accept the fact that he could be -- that Milosevic could be tried first in Serbia before even a consideration of any kind of extradition?

MR. BOUCHER: On the discussion, I would say from both sides, from our side and from our discussion with Prime Minister Djindjic, recognition on both sides that there are two issues. There is two sets of issues: one is the issue of crimes he may have committed domestically in Serbia that need to be tried in Serbia; and then the second, the issue of crimes that may have been committed internationally that need to have international justice, as we have said before.

What the discussion today was the need to work those processes together, obviously for the Yugoslav Government or the Serb Government -- I'm not quite sure whose courts they are -- but for them to work this with the Tribunal. That has been our position before; that was the discussion today. We need to keep talking about this to make sure those two processes can both work in a way that accommodates both needs.

Q: Richard, on that matter, on cooperating with the Tribunal, there seems to have been some softening this week in the Yugoslav position about whether they would eventually extradite Milosevic.

What did Djindjic tell the Secretary on that square?

MR. BOUCHER: I really don't want to get into trying to speak for these other people on issues that we know are important and sensitive to them. I said there was a clear recognition from both sides that there were these two elements, that there needed to be domestic justice for domestic crimes as well as international justice for international crimes, and a desire to work together to make both of these processes -- satisfy both of these needs.

Q: When you talk about domestic crimes, can you define whether you are referring to the allegations of corruption and vote-rigging, or are you talking about something wider which could also apply to crimes carried out in conflict?

MR. BOUCHER: That is for the Serbian courts, the Serbian people, to decide -- the Government in Yugoslavia or Serbia, whichever one tries them and decides on charges. So they will define whatever the charges might be.

Q: Did they?

MR. BOUCHER: No, not at this point.

Q: Did the Secretary share any views regarding the prospects of an internal criminal proceedings against Milosevic and the US certification process for cooperation with the ICTY?

MR. BOUCHER: No. That comes up -- the question of cooperating with the Tribunal and other issues that have to be dealt with in context of our aid program comes up March 31st. We will address it then.

Q: That didn't come up at all in the meeting?

MR. BOUCHER: No, the certification process wasn't discussed.

Q: Thank you.

MR. BOUCHER: Thank you.

[end]

Released on February 2, 2001

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