 |
Compact version |
|
 |
        |
|
 |
||
|
Wednesday, 18 December 2024
|
||
 |
 |
|
|
|
U.S. Department of State Daily Press Briefing, 01-05-14U.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 PRESS BRIEFING Richard Boucher, Spokesman Washington, DC May 14, 2001 INDEX: STATEMENT TRANSCRIPT_: MR. BOUCHER: Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen. Let me start out by telling you we'll have a full statement in writing on the Japanese whaling program. The vessels have departed for the North Pacific to resume their whaling program. This is the second year of a expanded two-year lethal whaling program. They have announced the intention to take both sperm whales and Bryde's whales, in addition to the minke whales. We spoke out about this in the past and obviously we'll be talking to other governments, as well as looking ourselves at our concerns on this issue. We support the international moratorium on commercial whaling and have expressed our opposition to Japan's expanded scientific program. Q: It's a remake of this -- MR. BOUCHER: This is the second year of a two-year program they announced last year. We were opposed to it last year. We're opposed to it this year. Q: Has it widened this year beyond what it was last year? MR. BOUCHER: I don't know what the exact numbers are last year, whether they took the same number as they're intending to take this year. But certainly continuation of this two-year program is of concern to us. Q: But last year you came out and condemned it, and used those kinds of words, and then you canceled attendance at a couple of meetings. First of all, are you condemning it this year? And second of all, are you looking at the same or similar steps as you took last year in kind of a reaction? MR. BOUCHER: I remember the language being "strongly opposed," but we're just as strongly opposed this year as we were last year. And second of all, yes, we will be talking to other governments, including members of the International Whaling Commission. We will be coordinating with other governments and looking at what we can do to express forcefully to Japan our opposition to take steps that we feel are necessary to make clear that they are isolated internationally in terms of this program. Q: Beyond what just happened to the minor trade sanctions which were imposed or were going to be imposed on Japan in retaliation for the -- MR. BOUCHER: As I remember it in the last administration, President Clinton reported to Congress on December 29th. At that point, they had not decided on any specific trade sanctions; noted that he would consider looking at imports from whaling equipment manufacturers, but that remains pending at this point. There's nothing new on that. Q: Does the new Administration have a position on it? Is it recommending any particular -- MR. BOUCHER: I think particularly with regard to this year's program, if they start taking these whales-- first and foremost we'd like to talk them out of it--but if they do start taking these whales, then we would be looking at a similar process of examining the possible implications under the Pelly Amendment. Q: Have you had any kind of contacts with the Japanese to address their concerns that, at this point, the international numbers regarding the number of these whales? I mean, they have disputed this all along. MR. BOUCHER: We have had, I think, repeated contacts and discussions with the Japanese about the issue. We have listened to their arguments. I think we don't think they stand up. We certainly don't think they justify a lethal whaling program. Q: You say that you're still hoping to talk the Japanese out of it? I mean, it seems a bit late now, right? Their ships have already left. I mean, you want them to turn back? MR. BOUCHER: The option, in theory, still exists. I am not holding my breath. Q: Okay. And the other thing is, with regard to the consideration of the sanctions, since the Secretary of Commerce now is the same Secretary of Commerce as -- MR. BOUCHER: No. The Secretary of Transportation now is the Secretary of Commerce before. Q: Never mind. MR. BOUCHER: (Laughter.) That's it. Mr. Schweid. Q: A quick technical question. When the Secretary comes down, will he take questions? I ask because that has something to do with how we spend our time now. He's bringing down a Mid-East visitor. Will he be available for questions? Do you know at this point? MR. BOUCHER: It depends on his mood at the time, frankly. Sometimes he tries to make himself available, but generally when he comes down he doesn't do a press conference. That's at 2:45 or something. That's after he meets with the Jordanian Foreign Minister. Q: Yes, so I was going to ask about the Jordanian but we'll wait until he comes down. At least the Jordanian will speak about the Jordanian. MR. BOUCHER: He usually says something, Barry, right? Q: So let's go to missile defense, right? The Canadian Government has already dismissed it, but Canada, which Marc Grossman visits tomorrow, is Canada in the bag on missile defense? Do you put them in the yes column? MR. BOUCHER: I don't know that I have stood here and tried to characterize governments as in the bag or in the yes column one way or another. Q: Well, I mean, in the bag -- that it's going to go for it. MR. BOUCHER: I think my general practice through the last 20 years has been to leave it to other governments to speak for themselves. I am not going to try to speak for Canada today. We are sending a high-level envoy, Marc Grossman, our Under Secretary for Political Affairs, up to Ottawa tomorrow to consult with them on missile defense. We look forward to good and serious consultations. But I have to say, right from the beginning, we haven't said we are going out to bag them. We are not going out to collect a bunch of pelts on missile defense. All these consultations were based on the premise that we wanted to talk to people while our ideas were under review, while our thoughts are being formulated, and in none of these capitals have we gone out to try to sort of collect chits in any way. It's a discussion with allies at a formative stage of our policy. Q: A group went to Ukraine Saturday, right? MR. BOUCHER: That's right. Avis Bohlen, the Assistant Secretary for Arms Control, Deborah Kagan, one of our experts, went there on -- let me double- check the date if I can. Where am I here? Number one -- I can't find it. It probably is Saturday. The 12th. Was that Saturday? Yes, that was Saturday. Q: With the Russians taking the position they're taking and the US position seems to be, look, we're trying to explain it to everybody, I'm having a problem maybe you can resolve. I thought -- and maybe I should have looked it up -- but I thought I heard the Secretary of State testify early on that we're going to consult, we're going to talk to people, we're going to talk to everybody, we're interested in everybody's views -- all of the above; but when it comes down to it, if we decide we need a missile defense for our own needs, our own strategic needs, we're going to go ahead with it. Now, does that statement still stand? MR. BOUCHER: Absolutely. The Secretary has made clear, the President has made clear, that we intend to proceed with defense, and defense is part of our strategic paradigm, our strategic framework. We are in a position, I think, of needing to talk to our allies and friends and partners and countries that might be affected so that they understand, first of all, our strategic thinking and, second of all, so that we can hear from them on the various factors that need to be considered as we proceed, to look for various areas of cooperation, to look for how we can do some things better. The President has made clear, the Secretary has made clear, this is not simply a matter of building some technology. This is a matter of revising one's thinking about how strategic balance works in the modern age; of looking at offensive reductions, how to accomplish those; looking at nonproliferation, how to accomplish that task better; and adding defense to the paradigm so that people understand that we need some sort of defense. And as you know, people in the world are talking about theater defenses. The Russians have made a proposal on European defense. We've talked to allies and friends about cooperative defense efforts, and national missile defense will be part of that defense structure. Q: Last question. On Friday then when the Secretary sees Ivanov here, will he be talking to him in any substantive way about weapons reductions, which the Russians have been in favor for quite some time and which the Clinton Administration was in favor of, but you really didn't get into negotiations? They were setting guidelines and whatever. MR. BOUCHER: As the Secretary discussed with Foreign Minister Ivanov in Paris, as the President discussed in his speech, as our team discussed when they went to Moscow, the Secretary will be talking to them about the full range of this strategic framework, including offensive reductions and how they should be accomplished, including nonproliferation efforts, including defense. Q: Richard, according to India Globe, India has endorsed President Bush's missile defense system. And also, Deputy Secretary just returned from India, including this issue he discussed with Indian high-level government officials, including Prime Minister. And if you can just have any comments, and also about his visit overall. MR. BOUCHER: The Deputy Secretary was in India last week. He briefed Prime Minister Vajpayee, other senior Indian officials, on the US missile defense efforts and more broadly on the need to move beyond Cold War thinking and to develop a new security framework. India welcomed those consultations. I think Deputy Secretary Armitage said he was gratified by India's positive response. We anticipate obviously that our discussions with India will continue. And as you noted, Deputy Secretary Armitage is back in Washington today. Q: Just to follow up while we're in the area, Pakistan's Foreign Minister is coming here sometime next month. And number two, the Prime Minister in exile, Ms. Bhutto, she is planning to return to Pakistan, but they are again saying that she will be arrested. So if she is carrying any kind of message from here, or any -- what -- any connection -- not connection, any advice from here? MR. BOUCHER: I don't think we have any, but I will leave it at that. Not that I am aware of. Q: On his visit to the US, the Foreign Minister's? MR. BOUCHER: Let me double-check and see if there is anything I can confirm for you at this point. Q: There is a senior Indian diplomat coming here. Is that correct? It's kind of a reciprocal visit from Armitage? The -- not, I guess Foreign Secretary they call him -- I don't know. It's not -- MR. BOUCHER: Haven't heard that one. Q: It's not Singh. MR. BOUCHER: Haven't heard that one. Q: Following up on the India-Pakistan question. Because Pakistan has not been consulted on these missile defense talks, is it fair to assume at this point that they would not be included in eventually potential global defense shield, or -- MR. BOUCHER: I don't think it is fair to conclude anything about the technology, the shield, the kind of technologies that might be developed because, as you know, we haven't finished the look at that, and the Defense Department is conducting that review, and we will look at everything. It's also not fair to conclude that governments haven't been consulted. We didn't send this team out to Pakistan, but we are discussing missile defense with them through our embassy. If we should have a visit by a senior Pakistani official, obviously we would use that occasion to discuss this, among other subjects. So there are plenty of opportunities to talk to governments, and we are talking to governments, even those that weren't on the itinerary of these teams. Q: Then what -- can I just follow up -- I mean, can you kind of just quantify what the difference between a country that gets a special delegation after the speech and then a country that maybe is consulted later on? Are they just not as important to us? MR. BOUCHER: I don't think we divide the world into important countries and unimportant countries. We have interests everywhere, and we find ways to talk to friends, allies, partners, people affected. Some of those we may do with delegations from Washington, and some of those we may do with our embassies. But it is important to us to be able to talk to a great number of countries about these things. Q: Well, can I try to take another bite at the apple? MR. BOUCHER: I'll give you the same answer, if you like, again. Q: Well, all right. But what is the criteria for determining those countries that were consulted after the speech, as opposed to those countries that we eventually will talk to about this? MR. BOUCHER: I don't know. Q: Did you see the comments that General Musharaff made about NMD? And if you did, what do you think of them? And do you put any -- do you note that he made them while a senior Chinese official was visiting? You didn't even see them, did you? MR. BOUCHER: No. Q: Did you see them? MR. BOUCHER: I think I did, but I don't remember them, frankly. Q: He said they were against it. MR. BOUCHER: I'm sure we will be talking to them over time. Q: Taiwan and China. This building is apparently confirming the visa for President Chen? MR. BOUCHER: The transit. Q: The transit visa. MR. BOUCHER: It's not exactly a visa. No, it's not exactly a visa either. I think it's a transit without visa. Q: Okay. Could you go into that a little bit, let us know when the decision was made. And then on China, the Secretary also said that they expect the plane to be resolved within a very few days. Expand on that, please. MR. BOUCHER: The Secretary decided on Friday afternoon that we would permit the transit by President Chen en route to and from Latin America. President Chen will transit New York, arriving May 21st, departing May 23rd. Upon his return leg to Taipei, he will transit through Houston on June 2nd and depart the following day, June 3rd. Transits are approved for Taiwan senior leaders on the basis of the safety, comfort and convenience of the traveler. Q: Was a decision made on whether he will be allowed to meet Congress people? And also he has announced he would like to go to a baseball game, visit Wall Street, et cetera. MR. BOUCHER: The understanding on these things is that the activities would be private and unofficial, that they would be consistent with the purposes of a transit. The schedule obviously you can get from the Taiwan authorities. He will be greeted in both New York and Houston by Richard Bush, the Chairman of the American Institute in Taiwan. That is a private organization that carries out our relations with the people on Taiwan. There will be no public or media events, as far as we understand. We do believe that private meetings between Members of Congress and foreign leaders advance our national interests, so he may have meetings with members of Congress. Q: So are you saying there will not be any restrictions on his meetings with Members of Congress? MR. BOUCHER: As I said, we believe that meetings between members of Congress and foreign leaders have a positive benefit of advancing our national interest. So we assume that some of those will take place. Q: Have you specifically approved his activities, like visiting Wall Street and going to a museum and attending this baseball game? MR. BOUCHER: We made clear that we expect that any activity should be private and should be unofficial, should be consistent with the purposes of the transit. Q: I mean, have they actually come to you and say, "Do you mind if we do these various things?" MR. BOUCHER: Don't know. Q: Why the change in policy regarding meeting Members of Congress? Didn't the State Department last year, with the last visit of the President of Taiwan, discourage Members from meeting -- Q: With no success. MR. BOUCHER: I think, first and foremost, we believe that meetings between Members of Congress and foreign leaders are a good thing, and that applies around the world in many, many places. So consistent with that policy, we would think that meetings between Members of Congress and this foreign leader would be a good thing. Saw no reason to make a particular exception. Q: Richard, do you know, is he coming here from Europe, via Europe? I'm not sure I understand the convenience part of this whole thing. Flying from Taiwan to New York does not exactly -- I mean, it's not exactly the most direct way to get to the Latin American countries that he's going to. MR. BOUCHER: I don't know how he planned his itinerary. You can check with -- Q: I will, but I mean -- MR. BOUCHER: You can check with the Taiwan authorities. It may be it would have to do with not where he's coming from but where he's going the next day. Q: Richard, is there any protest from China so far? MR. BOUCHER: Not that I've heard of. I think they have in the past made their views known publicly, as well as privately, so we'll see. Q: Could you go back to the plane, please? MR. BOUCHER: Go back to the plane? No real news on the airplane. We would certainly hope that it could be resolved quickly, and we've been working on that. We've been continuing to discuss this matter with the Chinese. We had some meetings--or a meeting--in Beijing over the weekend between our Embassy and the Foreign Ministry, and we would like to see it resolved soon. As the Secretary said, we would also believe, continue to believe, that the fastest possible return of the airplane is both in the interests of the United States and of the Chinese. Q: The Secretary said this morning, though, that he thought -- he was confident that something could happen in the next couple of days. Does that mean that you have seen some kind of sign or perhaps with Jim Kelly's visit to China that this might be brought up then, that you see some progress? MR. BOUCHER: I think Jim Kelly just got to Beijing today. I'm not sure if we have any reporting back on this issue, whether it came up or not. But I think as far as what the Secretary said, I'll just leave it with what he said. Q: So there's no -- you don't have any -- he just pulled that out of thin air? You don't have any indication that it's going to happen in the next couple days? MR. BOUCHER: I have the same indications he does; therefore, I have nothing else to say than what he said. Q: The US position -- does the US have an official view now? Can the plane be flown out? Is that still an unanswered question? And is the Chinese indications that it should be cut up and carted out, is that sort of regarded as kind of a -- more of a diplomatic gesture of disrespect than a real method of getting this piece of equipment out of the country? MR. BOUCHER: I am sure there are various methods for getting the airplane out. We are in touch with our assessment team. We are in touch with the people, the experts on these issues, to know what the different options are. It's in both of our interests to resolve this quickly and to resolve this as soon as possible, so we think that's true of us and of the Chinese, but we're continuing the discussion. I don't have any final scenario at this point. But that's the main interest is getting this resolved. Q: The EU has opened diplomatic ties with North Korea and with the government beyond that. Does it contribute to the stability of the region? MR. BOUCHER: As the Secretary said this morning, the matter of relations with the European Commission are for the Europeans to decide. We do consider increased North Korean engagement with the international community to be positive, and we have said repeatedly when people did this that it was positive. We think the European Union has played a constructive role on the Korean Peninsula. We will work together with them to promote common goals. We are in frequent touch with the Europeans on this subject, as well as others. We have discussed it with the Swedish presidency, with the Commission, with the EU member states, and our consultations with them will continue. Now where are we going? Middle East. Q: Middle East, if we're finished with North Korea. Yes, can you confirm that Abu Mazen will get an appointment with the Secretary? MR. BOUCHER: Expect to see a meeting between them tomorrow afternoon. Q: And this morning the Secretary said he still didn't have details and there was confusion about the killing of the five policemen. Have you since managed to clear up some of that confusion, and do you have a US position on it? MR. BOUCHER: I would say, really along the lines of what we've said before. The Secretary has said we're very concerned about the escalation in the cycle of violence. We think it's essential for the parties to get the cycle going in the opposite direction, to lower the violence. There continue to be attacks from Palestinian-controlled areas, including mortar attacks. We believe those attacks must come to an end. At the same time, we have commented also on the emerging pattern of regular Israeli incursions into Palestinian-controlled areas. As I have said from here before, we see these as a serious escalation that can only worsen a volatile situation. Q: On the Mazen visit, was this a visit that was requested by PA or did the Secretary request this visit? How did this come about? MR. BOUCHER: I think he is in the United States for other reasons, and that during this trip they suggested that he come by and see the Secretary, and the Secretary thought it was good to see him. So they will see each other tomorrow afternoon. Q: Obviously the question is going to come up whether Arafat is welcome to the White House and to Washington. What is the viewpoint on that? MR. BOUCHER: Nothing new. Q: Richard, can you say whether there have been any recent security meetings, the US-sponsored security meetings? MR. BOUCHER: I would have to double-check on the last one. As you know, we have been working on different levels. There have been security meetings that we have hosted. I think the parties have had some discussions among themselves. Our ambassador, Ambassador Indyk, and Consul General Ron Schlicher have met jointly with senior Palestinian and Israeli leaders. So you have, as the Secretary has said, a number of levels of contacts that have been ongoing, and as far as I know, all those continue. Q: Because there really seems to be an escalation of the violence, and I was wondering if those kinds of talks are continuing, or whether there has been a total breakdown. MR. BOUCHER: I will double-check to make sure, but as far as I know, we continue to work on a number of levels and that people continue to meet on a number of levels. Q: Your answer to Jonathan's question conveniently neglected to mention anything about the killing of the five policemen. What is the US reaction to that? MR. BOUCHER: As I think the -- Q: No, you didn't even mention it. I mean, you just said -- MR. BOUCHER: No, I didn't mention the killing of the five policemen. We have reacted to acts of violence on a regular basis. Obviously this is a particularly difficult one and involves more sadness and tragedy for families of people. What I did comment on is the source of how these things get started and the way that they have happened. So I think we are commenting on the situation. Q: Right. But in the past, certain events, incidents have warranted special attention -- phone calls from the Secretary to either/or. Is this situation deserving of such special attention, this incident? MR. BOUCHER: I don't -- we don't always differentiate between deaths. I mean, obviously many of us have been horrified at the killings of children or teenagers. We have seen many too many of those. The point here is that the parties need to lead, the parties need to take steps to decrease the violence. And on this occasion, as on others, I think it is important to point that out; otherwise, we are just going to end up commenting every day on somebody else's death. Q: Have there been any phone calls in the last few days? MR. BOUCHER: I am not aware of any phone calls. Q: Can I ask a question about incursions? Since your April "excessive force and disproportioned force," there have been 15 incursions, according to the Palestinians. The Israelis admit to 10. Are you at all discouraged by the fact that there seem to be an escalation of the violence, despite what you say from that podium? MR. BOUCHER: I think we are very concerned about the escalation of violence, about the fact that violence has continued and, as you say, escalated in new directions. We think it is vital and imperative that the leaders lead, that the people who need to make the decisions make the decisions to stop the violence. But that just means that we will continue our efforts. As far as incursions, I think I just expressed our view of incursions again. Q: Will the Secretary take any new initiative to try and tamp down the violence out there, or bring the President into it at all? MR. BOUCHER: As I said, we will continue our efforts. Q: Richard, along with the violence, the settlements seem to be looming as an obstacle to getting the negotiations going again. I'm just wondering if this Administration has talked to the Israelis about curbing the settlements or plans to use considerable American leverage to try and get the Sharon government to stop. MR. BOUCHER: The settlements have been an issue for the parties all along. In our discussions with the different parties, we hear from them on settlements and we talk to them on the issue of settlements. We have expressed our view that continued settlement activity is disruptive and can harm the process. So we have continued to express that view. We have had a lot of discussions with the parties. Q: Do you buy the natural growth argument that the government, Sharon Government makes, without starting new settlements -- MR. BOUCHER: We have heard and seen what their policy is. Obviously we are interested in how that policy would manifest itself. Q: Can you say who requested tomorrow's meeting with Abu Mazen? MR. BOUCHER: I will have to double-check. I am pretty sure that the Palestinians did, but I will have to double-check on it. Q: Richard, the Secretary said this morning that he was sending a very strong message to the leaders. But from what you say, it doesn't look like - - I mean, what you say is pretty much what you have been saying for the last two weeks, and the Secretary doesn't make -- wherein lies the strength of this message? MR. BOUCHER: It's a lot stronger when it comes from the Secretary of State, I can assure you. Q: Oh, yes. MR. BOUCHER: I think the message is quite clear from the United States. The message is quite clear, both in public and in private. We have expressed our view quite clearly and quite forcefully that the time to act is now, that the elements of what people need to do are clear to all of us, and that they need to take action. I think that's where the emphasis is, is that the people involved, the leaders involved need to take the steps necessary to stop the cycle. Q: To I guess follow up on this, but the two behavior -- two different types of behavior from the Israelis, the settlements, the expansion of settlements and incursions into the Gaza -- can you say any kind of other leverage, besides strong statements from this podium, from the Secretary of State, that you are using to try to change Israeli behavior? MR. BOUCHER: We are looking for both of the parties to make decisions on these kind of elements, on elements that inflame the situations, whether they are attacks from the occupied areas, from the areas under control of the Palestinians, or whether it's the incursions into these areas. We think that all the parties, both of the parties, have things that they need to do. We have been quite forceful and quite clear with the parties in making clear that there are these steps that are necessary. They need to start dealing with each other. We have worked to try to get them to deal with each other on security grounds. We have continued these higher-level efforts to look for engagement on steps to reduce the violence and restore trust and find a path forward. So I think we have been active on different levels in different ways, and we will continue to do so. Q: Has either side requested an envoy? MR. BOUCHER: I don't know. You can ask them. I think we have expressed our views of envoys before. Q: Richard, could I ask about Mitchell report versus the Egyptian- Jordanian -- they don't seem to be very much in contradiction with each other, but they have been accepted by the Palestinians, but not by the Israelis. What activity is going on in the two tracks? MR. BOUCHER: As we have mentioned before on both of these topics, with the Mitchell report, we think it is a very fine report. We are looking forward to the replies of the parties with their commentary, and then we will put out any more detailed commentary that we wish to make. As far as the Egyptian and the Jordanian efforts, we support those. We have found their involvement to be positive and commendable, and obviously we will keep talking to them, including at the meeting with the Jordanian Foreign Minister this afternoon. Q: I was wondering whether you had any comment on the apparent victory of the central-right coalition led by Mr. Berlusconi; and, second, if you expect any change for the possible Berlusconi government in foreign politics? MR. BOUCHER: Let me go back a little bit. We would, first of all, congratulate Mr. Berlusconi and his coalition on the apparent victory Sunday in the Italian parliamentary elections. We are confident that the United States will continue to enjoy a cooperative and fruitful relationship with the next Italian government. Our understanding is that the government may not be formed until sometime in June, so I think we will wait until a new Italian Prime Minister is named to start speculating on the future policies of the government. Q: Start speculating? When is the last time you have ever speculated on anything, Richard? MR. BOUCHER: It was a euphemism for not commenting. Q: On Japan. When Deputy Secretary Armitage had his trip to Japan and there was a meeting between the new Japanese Foreign Minister Makiko Tanaka and Mr. Armitage, the meeting was scheduled beforehand, and when Mr. Armitage was in Japan the new Foreign Minister canceled the meeting at the last minute and which, according to the Japanese press, which angered Mr. Armitage. And also, the media told us the new Foreign Minister is not qualified for the position; she doesn't understand foreign policy and she doesn't understand the meaning of the meeting. What I want to ask you is what is the view of the US Government on the new Foreign Minister on the cancellation of the meeting? MR. BOUCHER: I don't think we do commentary on other people's foreign ministers. It's up to them to decide who they are. As far as the meetings that the Deputy Secretary had in Japan, I'll have to double-check on meetings that were held and meetings that might have been canceled. Q: Also, if you could tell us any reaction from Mr. Armitage on the cancellation that was made last-minute. MR. BOUCHER: I'll see if there is any. I will try to, first of all, see what happened and, second of all, see if there is any reaction. Q: There is a lot of news about that some American firms involved blue stream energy project between Turkey and Russia, so do you have any comment on that? MR. BOUCHER: On what project? Q: Blue stream energy project between Russia and Turkey. MR. BOUCHER: I don't think so, but I'll have to double-check and see if we do. Q: Can you confirm that the State Department filed a statement of interest in the court case involving the comfort women and what is the basis for the State Department's objections to this law suit? MR. BOUCHER: The US Government filed a brief in the case April 26th. It's actually done by the Justice Department and not directly by State, although, as you know, we are heavily involved in the preparation for it. I think first we need to say that we recognize and sympathize deeply with the terrible suffering that was endured by those were forced into sexual slavery by the Japanese Imperial Army during World War II. Nonetheless, the US Government position, as reflected in this statement of interest that we proposed, is that the court does not have jurisdiction and thus may not hear the case. The reasons for the government's case are explained in the brief, and those speak for themselves. Q: Can we stay on legal matters of that ilk -- well, somewhat of compensation ilk? That would be the Judge Kram’s decision. You put out a statement about it last week once she made it, but since then the Germans seem to have objected to some of what came out in her written decision regarding immunity. And the Germans say that this could be a problem. The appeal, the actual appeal of these, is going to be tomorrow, I think. Are you planning -- or is it a plan to intervene with a statement of interest in -- MR. BOUCHER: I'm trying to find something I can tell you that you haven't told me already. Let's go back through it once more. We did issue a statement last week, last Thursday, that said we welcomed the decision of the judge and noted that there would be a written order in the next few days, and we hoped that that would clear the way for prompt commencement of payments. Unfortunately, I don't think it does that. 1 We noted the written statement and we really think that unconditional dismissal of the claims is a key part of the effort to allow the German foundation called, "Remembrance, Responsibility and the Future," to begin to make the payments. There are more than one million victims of the Nazi era. There was an appeal that was filed in April on the District Court's decision earlier not to dismiss the cases. We filed a brief in support of those appeals already because the parties have now not withdrawn their appeals.2 That hearing will still take place. We requested and were granted permission to participate as a friend of the court, and we would expect to do so in the argument tomorrow as well. Q: So what is the problem with Judge Kram? She didn't -- I mean, didn't -- was it not -- isn't your position that you were completely straightforward and forthright in the statement that you wanted them dismissed unconditionally? I mean, what's this woman's problem? Or is this just a sign of an independent judiciary? MR. BOUCHER: Well, there is obviously the independent judiciary, and we have a role in trying to convince the independent judiciary to handle these cases in what we consider the appropriate manner. That's why we're going to be in court and we're going to be arguing this. In this circumstance, we have made clear that we think unconditional dismissal is necessary for the payments to start. That's where our interest is. And as far as we understand the decision, it doesn't have that unconditional dismissal in it that would permit the payments to begin and for these people to get some payments that they so rightly deserve.1 Q: So when you say you participate as a friend of the court, does that mean you're actually going to have a lawyer there, or you're just submitting a brief? MR. BOUCHER: Don't know. I'll check. Q: Maybe you don't have anything on this. Do you take a position on the Spanish judge who has ordered the arrest of Mr. Hernan Julio Brady, former Chilean Defense Minister under Pinochet? It's a kind of mini-Pinochet affair. MR. BOUCHER: I'll have to go back and check. Q: It's a recent thing. It only just happened. MR. BOUCHER: No, I know it happened. I didn't ask to see if we had taken a position. I can't remember if we took a position earlier on the Pinochet cases. I think we left it to the justice systems of the country involved. Much to the despair of the press corps, is that right? Q: Yes. On Macedonia, do you have anything on this rather discouraging upturn in violence over the weekend? MR. BOUCHER: Our understanding -- well, let me go back through the whole thing, then. If I can, let me do the good news out of Macedonia first. We congratulate Macedonia's political parties on an overwhelming vote of the Macedonian parliament on Sunday to endorse the formation of a broad coalition government of national unity. This involves five major ethnic Macedonian and ethnic Albanian parties. This is a very important step forward. I think it reflects a near-unanimous consensus in the country in favor of political dialogue and against violence, and it's time, we think, for the extremists to get the message that they have no political support. As far as the situation on the ground, we understand there are no major incidents today. The government announced another cease-fire for today. We are not aware of any major incidents. As you know, the cease-fires permit civilians to get out of harm's way. Q: Slightly further north, the UN has announced that the legislative elections in Kosovo are going to be on November 17th. Is this in keeping with what the United States wanted before? MR. BOUCHER: Didn't realize there was a date, but you'll remember the United States all along has encouraged the holding of elections this year. And at the Contact Group meeting in Paris when the Secretary was there, the Contact Group as a whole came out and said we together wanted to see elections this year. Q: So you don't think there's anything particularly significant about the date, or do you want to reserve final -- MR. BOUCHER: I wasn't aware of the specific date. I'm not sure there is any particular significance to it. Q: One more. Late on Friday, this building issued another Worldwide Caution about terrorism, referring specifically to agents or affiliates of Usama bin Laden. I'm wondering if this -- is this in any way related to the fact that the trial in New York where the jury now is deliberating and a verdict is expected sometime this week in the embassy bombing case? MR. BOUCHER: Our statements, when we issue them, contained about as much information as we could provide in a public forum about the reasons for these warnings. As far as I know, having read this, it doesn't really mention the trial. Q: Well, exactly. But it's kind of odd because the day before it was released -- MR. BOUCHER: It's information from us that says that American citizens may be the target of a terrorist threat, and that's the nature of the information we have, that Americans may be the target of a terrorist threat. Q: Also, we're just supposed to say -- it happens to be coincidence that it came out the day after the jury went into deliberations? MR. BOUCHER: No. Q: Thank you. MR. BOUCHER: But that's not the reason that's given. _ This does not reflect the United States Government position, which will be set forth in the Court of Appeal on May 15. The brief in question was in fact filed prior to Judge Kram’s May 11 order.[End] Released on May 14, 2001
|
|
 |
|
 |
 |
|
All Rights Reserved.