 |
Compact version |
|
 |
        |
|
 |
||
|
Wednesday, 18 December 2024
|
||
 |
 |
|
|
|
U.S. Department of State Daily Press Briefing, 01-04-06U.S. State Department: Daily Press Briefings Directory - Previous Article - Next ArticleFrom: The Department of State Foreign Affairs Network (DOSFAN) at <http://www.state.gov>DAILY BRIEFING Richard Boucher, Spokesman Washington, DC April 6, 2001 INDEX: CHINA TRANSCRIPT_: MR. BOUCHER: Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen. I don't have any particular announcements or statements. I think you've heard from the Secretary already this morning, so I'd be glad to take any further questions you might have. QUESTION: On the photo -- the Chinese have given members of the family a photo -- MR. BOUCHER: We've given members of the family a photo. QUESTION: You have? MR. BOUCHER: Yes. QUESTION: Well, what do you make of it? I mean, what does the photo say? Does it say anything that -- MR. BOUCHER: The photo says that our people in the meeting on Tuesday took a photograph of the family members, and we provided the photograph to the families so they could see their loved ones. QUESTION: And if the loved ones look at the photograph, as I'm sure they do, will they get any contrary impression to the one we've been given that everybody is just in great shape? MR. BOUCHER: Again, I'm not going to speak on behalf of the families. Don't expect me to start doing that now. We're taking care of the families. We're giving them information. We're giving them photographs. Do you think we should take a picture of the families and -- of the individuals and not show it to the families? QUESTION: By extension, you might as well give it to the media, too. MR. BOUCHER: I think we do things for the families and we try to take care of them. QUESTION: Do you have any -- can you say whether you are in the process of drafting a letter with the Chinese which lays out the framework of a resolution of this? MR. BOUCHER: Can't say that. QUESTION: Why, then -- well, perhaps you can tell us exactly what Senator Warner was just talking about. MR. BOUCHER: I'm sure Senator Warner told you what he was talking about. QUESTION: Yeah, but -- QUESTION: Richard -- QUESTION: Hold on, he's not going to get away -- MR. BOUCHER: I'm going to keep moving around. QUESTION: You're not going to get away that easy on this. (Laughter.) Senator Warner mentioned that a letter was being drafted. He also talked about a special meeting of committee. Now, is he completely wrong? Is he out of the loop on this? MR. BOUCHER: I don't have anything to say on what Senator Warner might have said. QUESTION: Richard, he's talking about Secretary Powell as giving him this information. MR. BOUCHER: I managed to catch only the tail end of Senator Warner and read only the front part of the transcript, but at least what I heard he said he was not speaking on behalf of anybody in particular. QUESTION: When he was briefed by the Secretary yesterday, that this is what the Secretary told him was going on. MR. BOUCHER: I'm sorry, I'm not in a position to talk about what Senator Warner may or may not have said. QUESTION: Let's talk about what really is, then. Is there such a meeting being set up, whether Senator Warner said it or not? MR. BOUCHER: Sorry. What such a meeting? QUESTION: A meeting between the two sides that will enable the experts who are most knowledgeable about aircraft and other matters to sit down and assess the facts. MR. BOUCHER: The Secretary talked to you about exchanging explanations. He said that was what we saw as part of the solution. And we told you since then -- he has told you, I've told you -- that we are working on ways of doing that, finding ways to do that, finding ways to resolve the issue, finding ways to exchange explanations and to reach a better understanding of this situation. So, beyond that, I am just not prepared to go today. QUESTION: You are not ruling out that that could be between experts at a table from both sides? MR. BOUCHER: It could be at a table or not with a table. (Laughter.) QUESTION: Right. Richard, can you say whether the people who met with the families today were able to meet with them without Chinese officials present? MR. BOUCHER: Yes. They met with the air crew. It was, as you know, General Neal Sealock, our Defense Attaché from Beijing, Ted Gong, our Consular Section Chief from the Consulate General at Guangzhou, met with the air crew today. They met with all of them in a group for some time, I believe, without any Chinese presence, and then they met with some of the individuals as well. QUESTION: Would you categorize at this point our access as free or unfettered, or fettered and restrained? MR. BOUCHER: I don't think I can completely characterize it for you now. Obviously it is not completely open. We can't just drop in anytime and go see them. We would like as much access as we can; we would like regular access; we would like unfettered access. Clearly, in the meeting today there were a few less fetters than there were on Tuesday, but as far as having the kind of access that we are looking for, we will continue to press for free and completely unfettered -- QUESTION: (Inaudible) come home? MR. BOUCHER: I can't make any predictions. QUESTION: Was there anything that the airmen told our officials today that you can tell us? Before you had said that they had talked about being interrogated by the Chinese. Is there anything else like that? Have the Chinese continued to question them? MR. BOUCHER: I went through with several of the people who got the readouts. I didn't go through the whole readout myself. There was no new mentioning or indication of questioning at this point. Now, whether that is just because we don't have a complete readout, or they didn't ask the question. But there certainly -- the Secretary I think said to you earlier -- was no indication of any kind of mistreatment or interrogation, you might say. But exactly whether the Chinese are still asking them questions about the accident or not, I don't know. QUESTION: Would the United States like to see some sort of written agreement or documentation of this process? MR. BOUCHER: I'm not going to comment one way or the other on the ways that we might resolve this. QUESTION: Richard, what role is the UN playing and if the US have asked the United Nations for any help or play any role? Also if this matter came up between the Secretary and the Indian Foreign Minister's visit here. He just left the building. MR. BOUCHER: I don't think there is any particular discussion with the United Nations at this point. The details are being discussed between the United States and China in very intensive bilateral discussions that for the last day or two have been in Beijing and Washington. So far today, they have all been in Beijing. The subject did come up in the Secretary's meetings with the Indian Foreign Minister. They just generally discussed the situation. There was nothing particular that we're asking the Indians to do in this situation. QUESTION: (Inaudible) Chinese Ambassador to come in at all this afternoon? MR. BOUCHER: I don't know of any meetings with him scheduled at this point. Jonathan, you were asking when is the next contact? QUESTION: Yes. MR. BOUCHER: Even at this very late hour there is still the possibility of more contact in Beijing, so we will have to see where it occurs. There is nothing particular -- QUESTION: There's nothing here? MR. BOUCHER: Nothing specific scheduled here or in Beijing at this moment, but I don't want to rule it out happening in either place. We haven't -- in Beijing they haven't shut down for the night. QUESTION: Will there be any contact with the Jiang Zemin party or anybody in -- MR. BOUCHER: Not that I'm aware of, no. QUESTION: Richard, do you know when the next meeting of this maritime cooperation commission -- MR. BOUCHER: The maritime military -- military maritime consultative arrangement? QUESTION: Right. You said it was San Francisco. MR. BOUCHER: Previously we checked. It was scheduled late April to have a regular meeting, but obviously -- well, obviously you can figure out anything else you want to figure out. I'm not going to go into comment. QUESTION: Well, is the venue still the same? MR. BOUCHER: I'm not aware of any change in that but -- I'd just leave it at that. QUESTION: Now can we just take a step back? Without any -- MR. BOUCHER: A step back? Good. A step further, no. (Laughter.) QUESTION: I think it will be a step back maybe and a step further, perhaps. And you decide whether you want to go there or not. Is this the kind of forum that the United States and China might look to, or the United States might look to, to have a discussion about incidents such as these? MR. BOUCHER: I think we can consider that there might be various ways of discussing the explanations, discussing the incident -- the accident. Let's stick to the same terminology. I don't think it is in our interest at this stage in the discussions to start specifying one way of having these discussions or another. This commission exists. It has regular meetings. I suppose it could have other meetings. I suppose other things could be set up. There are always diplomatic channels. So I don't want to start at this point fixating or fingering a particular mechanism. We are discussions with the Chinese about the precise details, but in order to carry out these discussions productively, constructively, I think it behooves me to stop, not to speculate or to lead you in any particular direction. QUESTION: Okay. Well, did Senator Warner's comments this afternoon hurt the process? MR. BOUCHER: I'm afraid I don't have anything to say about Senator Warner's comments. QUESTION: Since you say you're talking about the specific details, is that the specific details of what happened, or could you explain more -- specific details about a release? What kind of details? MR. BOUCHER: The way the Secretary described it, rather precise ideas as to how to bring this to a conclusion, how to establish the process of release of the crew, return of the aircraft, exchanging explanations, expressions of regret, those sorts of things -- precise ideas about how those elements -- about how the elements that we are interested in and the Chinese are interested in can be brought together so that this can be concluded. QUESTION: So by using "precise," we are quite far along, then. You're not just talking in generalities anymore. Yes, no? MR. BOUCHER: Yes. QUESTION: And he also said, though, that -- MR. BOUCHER: Yes, we are not talking in generalities, anymore. As far as characterizing how far along we are, I think I'd just say we are moving forward. We are encouraged by the fact that we are moving -- QUESTION: But he also said they are exchanging precise ideas and papers. Is that an implication of some sort of joint statement or agreement, or this letter that Senator Warner didn't talk about? MR. BOUCHER: I don't remember the Secretary using the word "papers". QUESTION: Yes, he did. QUESTION: He used papers. MR. BOUCHER: All right. Okay, papers. No, that's okay. No, I'm not going to define the papers any -- oh, yes he did. "And exchanging ideas and papers, and there has been movement." I'm afraid that is as far as I can go. QUESTION: Richard, as part of this letter-drafting person -- (laughter) -- are you now thinking of sending anyone senior to Beijing? MR. BOUCHER: As far as this exchange of ideas and papers, I don't have anything new on any speculation about what might be inside the exchange of ideas and papers. QUESTION: But are you thinking of sending over anybody senior to Beijing? MR. BOUCHER: I don't have anything to say on that. QUESTION: To use a term from the peace process, can you talk about the "parameters" of the ideas? (Laughter.) I mean, I'm asking because, is this simply just about the terms for getting back the crew and the plane, or is this in some way laying out the "road rules," if you will, for how to deal in espionage issues in the future with China, or are you talking about greater bilateral concerns? MR. BOUCHER: I thought I took an oath on January 20th never to use the word parameters again. (Laughter.) We are talking about the modalities. (Laughter.) We are talking about the modalities. We are talking about the ways in which to bring this to a conclusion. The ideas, the elements, to bring this to a conclusion. And then that is as far as I can go at this point. QUESTION: Richard, you said that in the second meeting with the crew there was no talk about further interrogation -- an attempt by the Chinese to interrogate them. But are the Chinese still telling you that they would like to interrogate the crew? MR. BOUCHER: I don't think the Chinese ever used that word, frankly, not with us. QUESTION: Well, did they say that they would like to question the crew? MR. BOUCHER: I mean, what is important to us with the crew, we know from before that the crew said they have been asked questions about the accident. There was no -- in as much of the readout as I have of the latest meeting -- there was no specific mention of that, so I can't tell you one way or the other whether they are still asking questions. But there was no mention of mistreatment or specific interrogations. QUESTION: Richard, you talked about exchanges of ideas and pieces of paper with the Government of China. Can you say whether we are exchanging ideas and pieces of paper with Qian Qichen and Jiang Zemin while they are on their trip in South America? MR. BOUCHER: I think it is for the Chinese Government to keep in touch with their leadership as they travel. As you know, the Secretary wrote a letter to Vice Premier Qian Qichen Wednesday evening that we passed to Ambassador Yang so he could forward it through their system to Vice Premier Qian and any other members of the Chinese leadership that needed to see it. At this stage, the discussions are being held between -- for most of the last 12, 16, perhaps more, hours -- the discussions have been between our Ambassador in Beijing and the Assistant Vice Foreign Minister Zhou Wenzhong. Each of them we know -- we assume -- are communicating with other people in their governments. Our Ambassador certainly talks to Washington, talks to Deputy Secretary Armitage, Secretary Powell throughout the night and into the morning and during the day. QUESTION: Did he ever get a written response to his letter -- Secretary Powell? MR. BOUCHER: I don't think there would be something that -- no, not a letter, "Dear Colin from Qian Qichen." I mean, not that precise a response. But the whole discussion is a response. It's the ideas that we put forward, that the Secretary has put forward in writing or orally, the ideas the Chinese have put forward, and then working with these ideas to try to bring this to a conclusion. So in a way, yes, the Chinese responded to the elements of the Secretary's letter and we have responded to some elements that they have raised, and now we're trying to work to bring this to a conclusion without any prediction at this point of when we might be able to do that, or even without any certainty that we will be able to do that in this fashion. QUESTION: Richard, you just went a step beyond what you said before about this letter. The Secretary actually set out a list of -- here's something that we could do, what would you think if we did this? A list of, you know, a variety of possibilities that -- MR. BOUCHER: The letter was a piece of paper with ideas, and that's about as far as -- QUESTION: Yeah, but you just said some of the ideas that the Secretary put forward. Before, the description of the letter had been an expression of -- a restatement of the regret for the loss of the -- MR. BOUCHER: That's in there, too. QUESTION: Right. But there had never been anything said -- and the US desire to see this over with and you guys want your plane back and the crew. MR. BOUCHER: That was in there, too. QUESTION: Right. But you had not said before that there were ideas in there the Secretary had suggested about resolving the situation. MR. BOUCHER: Well, then I am properly castigated for having said something new. QUESTION: No, I want -- I want you to expand on it. I think it's great that you said something new. MR. BOUCHER: No, I'm afraid I'm not in a position to expand on it. I was trying to give you as much of a sense of how this process was working as I could without getting into the details that are in fact being discussed, without getting into the real -- to the ideas. QUESTION: Are the Chinese still requesting an apology as part of any settlement? MR. BOUCHER: I think that's a question you have to ask the Chinese. I think I've seen statements today from Foreign Ministry and elsewhere that talked about the apology. Our position certainly has not changed on that point. QUESTION: As the President of China travels around to seven different states in Latin America, there will be a lot of receptions, diplomatic receptions, no doubt, in which American diplomatic personnel may be in contact with him. Will they make any overtures? Will any exchange take place? MR. BOUCHER: I can't predict everything that might happen. Having been at those occasions before, that's not necessarily the best place to try to buttonhole a visiting president and work out the details and sensitive parameters of negotiation. So I think the emphasis should be on the channel we are using, and that is to have our Ambassador talk very frequently and closely with the Assistant Foreign Minister in Beijing and then leave it to the Chinese Government to communicate with their leadership. QUESTION: In the meeting with the Secretary and the Indian Foreign Minister, if India offered any help in this Chinese standoff or if US asked -- I mean, Secretary asked the Foreign Minister any help in this connection? MR. BOUCHER: Nothing like that transpired. They were interested obviously in where things stood. They talked to some extent about the broader relationship with China and the region. They discussed a number of regional issues as well as the bilateral ones. QUESTION: Richard, by my calculations, it's almost 2:30 in the morning in Beijing. What is it that's keeping them up this late? Have they been up this late other nights? Is there something that you can say they're actually engaged in now? MR. BOUCHER: At this precise moment, there is not meeting going on. But I think, as I said, they haven't closed down for the night. I was not able to determine at this point where there is going to be another meeting in Beijing, but I they are still open and ready should there be a chance of one. So we have been going back and forth with the Chinese at all hours in various places. Certainly our Ambassador has been working 24 hours a day and our Embassy has been working 24 hours a day and been in touch with the Chinese at all kinds of early hours and late hours. So I'm not too surprised. It is very early in the morning, though. And in the past few days, we've tended to shift the action at some point from Beijing and let them get some sleep, or try to get some sleep or whatever, and then pick it up here. I don't know whether we'll do that today or if we'll just continue on periodically through the night in Beijing. QUESTION: What does it look like for the weekend? Are we on -- I mean, I realize you don't have meetings set up, but do you expect things to continue at full steam ahead? MR. BOUCHER: I would basically expect us from the US side, including the people in Washington and the Secretary, to be working this 24 hours a day, seven days a week, as long as we're still seeing our crew members detained, as long as we don't have them back with us, and as long as we have yet to resolve these issues. So as long as there is a prospect of resolving these issues, we'll keep working it. QUESTION: I have two questions. Was Secretary Powell up again in the middle of the night talking to the Ambassador? And also, has there been any consideration at all of him postponing his trip or sending someone else to the Contact Group meeting? MR. BOUCHER: Not at this point. We're working this issue. Should that question arise, it would arise closer to the time of the trip. I'm not aware that it has arisen at this point. And you know the Secretary has the kind of communications he needs wherever he is, so many of the things he's doing -- talking to Admiral Prueher, talking to people at the White House and the Pentagon, working with our China experts, many times working with Deputy Secretary Armitage -- can be done anywhere he can get to a telephone or a secure telephone, depending on what he has to talk about. So he is in good communications wherever he travels, so I haven't heard that question arise at this stage. In terms of his activities last night, he got calls late last night -- I don't know, 11 o'clock, midnight, something like that -- and then I think he got calls first thing in the morning. So it wasn't a lot of time in between, but I think he -- I don't think he was up at 2:30 a.m. At least he hadn't said that today. QUESTION: Richard, has it been any hindrance -- the appointments, the lack of appointments, in the building? I mean, I realize Armitage is a very experienced diplomat and handling everything fine, but there is not so much staff underneath that has yet been put into place. Well, the new staff or the new appointments. MR. BOUCHER: I don't think I would cite any particular aspect of that at this point. As you know, Deputy Secretary Armitage has been working this very intensely. Under Secretary Grossman has been working on this. He called in the Chinese Ambassador on Sunday and had the meetings. So we have had people in place. I suppose clearly we would like to have the Assistant Secretary for East Asian Affairs on board, but we have plenty of expertise, certainly plenty of China expertise and people on the desk, and at senior levels in the Bureau that are working this very intensely as well. QUESTION: I was just thinking, because nobody is getting any sleep, so somebody needs to stay up. MR. BOUCHER: Well, we all do that periodically in our lives, and certainly the welfare of 24 Americans is worth it. QUESTION: A new issue? If you can give some readout on the meeting between the Secretary and the Indian Foreign Minister? MR. BOUCHER: I think the Secretary gave you some at the door. Let's see if there are things that I should mention that he didn't. That's usually not the case, but I'll make an attempt this time. QUESTION: Well, he didn't mention much. MR. BOUCHER: He mentioned economic issues, proliferation issues, trade issues, issues of the region. I would say in terms of regional issues, they talked a bit about Indonesia, they talked a bit about Sri Lanka, they talked about -- the Secretary asked about Kashmir, and he was given a rundown on that. They talked quite a lot of economics in terms of the US-India economic relationship, the way it worked, levels of trade, things that might be keeping that from reaching its full potential, and sort of the nature of that relationship. And they talked to some extent about the overall bilateral relationship, the importance that we attach and that India attaches to really having some detailed cooperation, in many, many areas with India, the compatibility and necessity of two democracies working together. QUESTION: How about the lifting of the sanctions against India? MR. BOUCHER: The issue of sanctions was discussed in general terms. I think the Indian Government is quite aware that we have our laws and we intend to follow our laws. But really at Secretary Powell's invitation -- because the Indian Foreign Minister said he doesn't normally raise this as one of his topics -- but at Secretary Powell's invitation, they talked a bit about the sanctions and the effects. But it is quite clear for us that we do have our laws and we intend to follow our laws. QUESTION: (Inaudible)? MR. BOUCHER: No, I couldn't do that. I wouldn't want to do that off the top of my head. I will have to get that for you in writing. QUESTION: Just, do you mind if we follow one more? What were the discussions on (inaudible)? MR. BOUCHER: I would say the Secretary asked the Foreign Minister to explain the current situation as he saw it, and to gain his understanding of current developments. Certainly we have welcomed the recent Indian offer of talks, and the Foreign Minister referred to that. So we have, I think, made clear that we welcome that. I would add that we would encourage all groups to take advantage of the offer and to enter into talks to reduce violence, to foster a process of dialogue. QUESTION: When President Clinton traveled there, traveled to India, India and the US set up this kind of agreement, kind of an outline or blueprint of how they wanted their relationship to go forward. Does the Bush Administration intend on working from those ideas, or are they scrapping that and starting fresh? MR. BOUCHER: They are not scrapping it. The Secretary referred to sort of all the documents that had been worked on previously between the US and India. I don't want to say that it is strictly sort of that framework. I'm sure that this Administration will have its own ideas about how to proceed, but certainly the Secretary referred to being very familiar with that whole basis of what had been done before, and again stressing the importance of the kind of very broad cooperation in any number of areas that we want to have with India, that we look forward to having with India. QUESTION: Did they talk about Afghanistan at all, in terms of regional issues? MR. BOUCHER: Not in the lunch when I was there. They had some one-on-one time at the beginning in a small meeting, just the two of them for a while. It wasn't mentioned as one of the topics they discussed. QUESTION: Richard, you seem to be implying that the set of remaining sanctions are mandated by law. Is that the case, or is there some that the Administration has the discretion to remove? MR. BOUCHER: That is the kind of detailed question I don't think I can answer at this point without going back and looking very carefully at the listings. QUESTION: Did they talk about Pakistan? MR. BOUCHER: Yes, the subject of Pakistan came up, primarily in relation to the discussion of Kashmir. And as I said, the Secretary was interested in the Indian Government's view of the situation in Kashmir. QUESTION: On the trade issues, Richard, you mentioned that they talked about things that are keeping the trade relationship from reaching its full potential. Could you elaborate on those? Is that -- MR. BOUCHER: Well, they discussed a number of trade and investment situations. First of all, the very positive areas where things have grown. Under Secretary Larson participated as well, talked about high technology, talked about the potential in biotech, they talked about some of the sort of investment climate issues in India that might be impediments. They did talk about sanctions and to what extent that modified or held back some of this potential. They talked about some of the specific cases of company problems, disputes that had arisen that seemed to hold back other investors. So it was a discussion of sort of any of the number of factors that might affect the relationship in the economic area, but with a view to I think identifying the elements that one might work on, either separately or in some cases together in order to resolve issues that held it back, because we saw not only a very healthy economic relationship, but one that had still a lot of potential to grow much, much farther. QUESTION: Richard, on proliferation, the last administration was pushing India and Pakistan quite hard to sign CTBT. This Administration has said that it has no interest in seeing CTBT ratified and it's not going to bring the treaty -- it won't send the treaty up to the Senate to be ratified. What did the Secretary say about CTBT, if anything, to Foreign Minister Singh? And if he didn't say anything about it, how exactly are you going to be pushing the Indians and the Pakistanis on nonproliferation? MR. BOUCHER: Most of the discussion of nonproliferation and the overall strategic issues was in their private meeting, so I'm afraid I don't have any particular readout of some of those issues for you from that portion when they talked together. The CTBT was not mentioned in the larger session that we had at lunch. QUESTION: As a matter of general principle, are you pressing the Indian Government to ratify or sign the CTBT? MR. BOUCHER: I will have to check on that. QUESTION: A UN war crimes tribunal representative says he has handed over the indictment -- I'm sorry, the arrest warrant -- for Milosevic, and says he has been promised it will be served. Any comment on that? Any -- is that promising? MR. BOUCHER: As I think I mentioned yesterday, we didn't attach a particular significance or importance to the delivery of this document. Obviously it's better that it be delivered properly than not. But our basic position has not changed. We support the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia. We have urged Yugoslavia to cooperate fully with the tribunal. We have urged them to cooperate in Mr. Milosevic's transfer, and we have made clear that cooperation is one of the elements. There are several others that we will continue to examine as we look at things like the donors conference. QUESTION: Don't you think if they don't deliver it, though -- I mean, they are clearly showing just a week after the aid was passed along that they are not cooperating? MR. BOUCHER: Well, as I said, we described it yesterday as a fairly routine procedure to deliver this. As you mentioned, the news today is that it has been accepted and is going to be delivered. That is better than not delivering it, but I don't attach a great significance to it. QUESTION: But they had said that they were -- because it doesn't necessarily mean they will deliver him anyway, right? MR. BOUCHER: No, that's not what I'm saying. QUESTION: Why would you say it's not -- MR. BOUCHER: It's better to have it delivered than not to have it delivered. I think that is the fundamental position I am taking here. But there is not any greater significance than that to it, as far as I can tell. QUESTION: Richard, can you tell us about the security situation at the embassies in the three South American countries? MR. BOUCHER: Again, one of these issues where it is difficult for me to say too much, but let me give you the basic facts. Our embassies in Asuncion, Montevideo, and Quito, along with the Consulate General in Guayaquil are closed to the public today because of security concerns. I am not in a position to go into the details. Each post will be closed for the weekend, which is normal. Each post will review its security posture over the weekend and then decide whether to reopen to the public on Monday morning. I want to remind you that we put out a Worldwide Caution on January 5th, which said that some posts may temporarily suspend their operations, and that is what has occurred in this situation. QUESTION: Richard, can you tell us whether in all cases we are talking about a related threat, or whatever it is? I mean, is it -- or is it just -- MR. BOUCHER: I think as much as I can go into the threat is to say that there was information about a potential threat to these missions, and that we thought it prudent to close them while -- QUESTION: One potential threat to all missions? MR. BOUCHER: That's the way I just described it, yes. And we thought it prudent to close them while we checked it out. QUESTION: Is it related to Usama bin Laden? MR. BOUCHER: I can't -- QUESTION: Well, how about this? Did the information -- can you be a little bit more specific about where the information might have come from? Could it possibly have come from the Italian police, who recently arrested some people who were charged with threatening the Embassy in Rome? MR. BOUCHER: That matter in Italy, and I think some other countries -- those arrests are still under investigation, so I wouldn't try to draw conclusions at this point or at this distance. And no, I am not able to go into any more detail about what the potential threat might have been. QUESTION: Or where it might have originated -- where the information might have originated? MR. BOUCHER: Or where it might have originated, yes. QUESTION: Not the threat, but the information. MR. BOUCHER: Neither the threat nor especially the information and its origin would I be able to share. QUESTION: Were those the only embassies that were closed? MR. BOUCHER: Yes, those are the ones that we closed for this. QUESTION: Can you list them again? MR. BOUCHER: Asuncion, Montevideo and Quito, as well as the Consulate General in Guayaquil, Ecuador. QUESTION: Anything on the meetings between the visit of the Cypriot Foreign Minister Ioannis Kasoulides with Assistant Secretary of European Affairs James Dobbins, as well as a number of other high State Department officials? MR. BOUCHER: I'm afraid I don't have anything on those meetings. I know he is having a number of meetings, and then of course the Secretary will see him on Monday. QUESTION: Do you have any comment on the letter was delivered yesterday to the White House from 87 Senators and from 200 House lawmakers calling on a total redefinition of the US relationship with the Palestinian Authority, particularly to limit travel of key Palestinian officials and to list some of the member organizations on the list of international terrorist organizations? MR. BOUCHER: Let me see if I do. The simple answer is we are aware of the letter but we haven't seen it yet. So in terms of details, no particular response. We do take the views of Congress seriously and we'll give full consideration to the letter. QUESTION: Richard, to follow on that, what impact is this likely to have on the peace process? And then a follow on that, is there a peace process? MR. BOUCHER: What is this, the letter or -- QUESTION: The letter. MR. BOUCHER: The potential for cutoff or something like that? QUESTION: Well, yeah. MR. BOUCHER: You know, at this point, I don't think it's fair to speculate to a letter that we haven't really read and that we haven't formulated a position on. I think it's important to remember that our assistance to the Palestinians is provided through nongovernmental organizations and what is called programmatic funding. US assistance doesn't go to the PLO or to the Palestinian Authority. We provided emergency assistance to help ease their economic privation. I think January 2001 was the latest time that we redirected nearly $57 million in programmatic funding to meet their emergency needs. There is $10 million of this that goes to assist municipal services, 4 million for health-related activities, nearly 9 million from the State Department's emergency refugee migration account. So that assistance is purely humanitarian in nature and, as I said, none of the money is provided to the Palestinian Authority or the PLO. QUESTION: The Key West peace talks. The leaders are coming to Washington on Monday to meet with President Bush. Does that note some kind of progress? Is there going to be some kind of agreement? MR. BOUCHER: They were going to do a briefing today in Key West, and I think I'll leave it to that. I really don't have an update for you here. QUESTION: The Japanese Prime Minister Yoshiro Mori, who was here last month and has publicly announced his resignation, he is going to step down later this month. Do you have any comment on that? MR. BOUCHER: No, I don't. QUESTION: Fidel Castro had some interesting things to say to the Inter- Parliamentary Group meeting in Havana, this morning I think. He said that he would not make any more speeches if it could be proved that his government had tortured or killed dissidents. Would you be likely to take up the challenge? The second thing was that he accused the United States of a number of bad things, including its probable disregard of Latin America for having named Otto Reich, of Cuban origin, as Assistant Secretary of State for the region. Are you aware of this palpable state of mind of Latin America? MR. BOUCHER: I guess it's too easy to take potshots at that one. Let me say two or three things. First of all, I was doing other things this morning and didn't have a chance to listen to every word that Fidel Castro might have said. Sorry, I was busy with other more important things. Second of all, the challenge, I don't think, is too terribly difficult a one to prove. The facts are quite well known in the world, and I think I'll leave it to that to say that they're there. As far as the appointment of Mr. Reich, I think -- I don't think we've consulted with Mr. Castro to find out his opinion. QUESTION: Then you don't want to take a shot at addressing the IPU after having thrown two Czechs in jail? MR. BOUCHER: I limit myself to three shots a day. QUESTION: Richard, some Vietnamese officials are complaining that the White House has yet to send the free trade agreement to Congress and saying that the US-Vietnamese trade relationship might be damaged if that isn't done. Can you update us on the status of that agreement? MR. BOUCHER: No, I'll have to check on the status of that. There are a number of trade issues that are being considered. Certainly the Administration has expressed its support for that agreement and its intention to go forward. I just don't know exactly where it stands. QUESTION: Back to Israel -- QUESTION: Wait, can I go to Vietnam? Are you aware of any movement afoot to bring -- in Cambodia, actually -- to bring to the United States Vietnamese -- anti-communist Vietnamese who fled into Cambodia and are now fleeing arrest in Vietnam? Are you aware of -- MR. BOUCHER: Are they refugees? I mean, we have regular refugee programs. QUESTION: No, this would be an asylum case. MR. BOUCHER: It works out to the same thing. I'll double-check and see if there are new cases arising in Cambodia or something like that. QUESTION: Just one more. Yesterday, you said that we were unclear on the facts regarding the unfortunate shooting of the convoy returning from the bilateral security -- or trilateral security talks in Israel. Do we have any more information on this? MR. BOUCHER: I don't think we do. Remember, I said yesterday that Prime Minister Sharon said that we would look -- that he would look into it. So I don't think I've seen anything new from the Israeli Government at this point. QUESTION: And do you have any comment on his suggestion that there will be a joint Israeli-Palestinian task force to investigate this? MR. BOUCHER: I hadn't seen it, but certainly we have always supported directly bilateral cooperation between the parties on security issues. QUESTION: On that issue, do you have any plans to facilitate any more meetings in the near future between the Israelis and Palestinians? MR. BOUCHER: We are prepared to be a facilitator. We will certainly be responsive to the desires of the parties, should they be interested, or should they plan to convene another such security meeting. We have long encouraged both sides to resume bilateral security cooperation, so naturally we would support any such initiative QUESTION: Might you take the initiative, instead of just hanging around waiting for them to invite -- to ask you? MR. BOUCHER: We have, I think, said we would be happy to facilitate. We made clear to them we think it is important that they meet together. Whenever they are read to do so, we would be happy to help out. QUESTION: Thank you. MR. BOUCHER: Thank you. [end][End] Released on April 6, 2001
|
|
 |
|
 |
 |
|
All Rights Reserved.