Read the Monthly Armed Forces Magazine (Hellenic MOD Mirror on HR-Net) Read the Convention Relating to the Regime of the Straits (24 July 1923) Read the Convention Relating to the Regime of the Straits (24 July 1923)
HR-Net - Hellenic Resources Network Compact version
Today's Suggestion
Read The "Macedonian Question" (by Maria Nystazopoulou-Pelekidou)
HomeAbout HR-NetNewsWeb SitesDocumentsOnline HelpUsage InformationContact us
Thursday, 21 November 2024
 
News
  Latest News (All)
     From Greece
     From Cyprus
     From Europe
     From Balkans
     From Turkey
     From USA
  Announcements
  World Press
  News Archives
Web Sites
  Hosted
  Mirrored
  Interesting Nodes
Documents
  Special Topics
  Treaties, Conventions
  Constitutions
  U.S. Agencies
  Cyprus Problem
  Other
Services
  Personal NewsPaper
  Greek Fonts
  Tools
  F.A.Q.
 

USIA - Transcript: Secretary Of State Albright On-Board Briefing, 97-02-15

United States Information Agency: Selected Articles Directory - Previous Article - Next Article

From: The United States Information Agency (USIA) Gopher at <gopher://gopher.usia.gov>


TRANSCRIPT: SECRETARY OF STATE ALBRIGHT ON-BOARD BRIEFING

(Albright hopes to advance Charter talks in Moscow) (2350)

Washington -- Secretary of State Albright hopes to advance discussions on the proposed Russia-NATO Charter during her visit to Moscow February 19- 21.

Speaking with reporters on-board the aircraft during her first overseas trip as Secretary of State, Albright said the United States sees the Charter as "a political document primarily and a way to make sure the Russians understand that we are looking forward in terms of a more cooperative relationship. For instance, the best example now of that relationship is what is going on in Bosnia where U.S., Russian and NATO forces are operating together through a consultative mechanism."

"The charter itself, as it evolves, is a way to institutionalize the new relationship between NATO and Russia; one in which there would be a joint council in which consultations could take place where Russia would have a voice in some of the issues that are discussed at NATO -- not a veto, but a voice," Albright said.

Albright acknowledged limited goals for her upcoming stop in Moscow.

"I consider that what I am doing in Moscow is filling out some of the discussions that took place during the Gore-Chernomyrdin meetings and putting in more of the details. The purpose of my stop in Moscow is to give them further substance on this. I am not going to be asking for decisions. I am going to be presenting further details. It is basically a trip where I will have the opportunity to explain more about what we are doing. It is not a negotiation."

Following is the transcript provided by the State Department:

(begin transcript)

U.S. Department of State
Office of the Spokesman
February 15, 1997

PRESS BRIEFING BY SECRETARY ALBRIGHT

Enroute from Andrews Air Force Base to Rome February 15, 1997

ALBRIGHT: Here we are, off on our first trip. My plan is to get down to work on a common agenda. That is what I am going to be doing in Europe and then later in Asia. We will talk much more about Asia as we get closer. Let me explain why I wanted to go to both areas on the same trip. I want it to be very clear that we have vital strategic and economic interests in both areas and it is important to pay equal attention to them. Despite the fact that this is going to be a very long and arduous trip, I think it is very important to make sure that both areas are covered.

As far as Europe is concerned, the common agenda has been visible, frankly, in terms of the work we have been doing on the Trans-Atlantic relationship. Generally, I am going to be speaking to that and, more specifically, to the importance all of us attach to having a united, democratic Europe. I am going to be talking about NATO enlargement and, at the same time, working to assuage whatever Russian concerns there are about it, and talking about the NATO-Russian charter; discussing that also when I am in Brussels with the other Partnership for Peace members, so that there is generally a sense about the importance of an undivided Europe.

I am going to be also talking with Europeans about common activities that we have undertaken, such as in Bosnia, and about our common concerns about what is happening in the Aegean and Cyprus. I also want to talk with Europeans about out-of-area issues, specifically in Africa, and generally discussing with them what I consider the hallmark of our time which is a partnership with Europe in dealing with this common agenda, the kind of web of relationships that will allow us to deal with the opportunities at the end of the century.

We can now go to questions.

QUESTION: Here is an easy beginner: Yeltsin's opposition says his days are numbered. They mean politically and medically. Are you not a bit uneasy about Yeltsin's staying capacity?

ALBRIGHT: I think the issue here is that we have an excellent relationship with President Yeltsin. The relationship between President Clinton and President Yeltsin has worked very well for the last four years. President Yeltsin's health seems to be improving. He is more visible at public events. I am going to be meeting with him. President Clinton is looking forward to meeting with him in Helsinki.

There are two parts to this. Obviously he himself and the role he has played in democratizing Russia and reform is important, but there are other elements within the government, increasingly so, that are also dedicated to democracy and economic reform. We do not have concerns about the future direction of Russia and want very much to work with other leaders, but also with President Yeltsin because of the good relationship.

Q: I am sorry. My question was a little sloppy. They are speaking also of the economy.

A: I think that clearly the Russians have had serious problems in their economy. I think there are huge pockets of improvement and the necessity for economic reform. We have a new initiative that we are putting forward that I asked funding for, on behalf of the President, in my testimony which will allow us to move to a new phase with Russia and the other New Independent States in terms of locking in some of the reforms in a way that goes beyond technical assistance.

Q: Madam Secretary, could you talk to us a little about this charter? What is it going to be? Is it in any way going to be a legally binding document that would have to be approved by parliaments? Will the Russians have to take the best deal they can get? Will NATO expansion go on even if the Russians do not agree to a charter?

A: First of all, I think it is very important for the Europeans and the Russians to understand that we are into a new era. We do not need old-think in terms of how NATO is viewed. It is not an adversarial relationship with Russia. The charter itself, as it evolves, is a way to institutionalize the new relationship between NATO and Russia; one in which there would be a joint council in which consultations could take place where Russia would have a voice in some of the issues that are discussed at NATO -- not a veto, but a voice. There would be extensive consultations. We see it as a political document primarily and a way to make sure the Russians understand that we are looking forward in terms of a more cooperative relationship. For instance, the best example now of that relationship is what is going on in Bosnia where U.S., Russian and NATO forces are operating together through a consultative mechanism.

Q: But it is not something that any parliament would have to agree to?

A: It is our desire that this be a political document. The other aspect that you asked about: we obviously want the work on the NATO-Russian charter to progress as rapidly as possible. We all will be working on that. But if it is not ready by the time Madrid takes place, we will go forward with the Madrid Summit -- that is NATO enlargement -- anyway. Work is going to go on intensively and extensively between now and then.

Q: Do you have concerns about the reaction in Russia since this seems to be something that cannot really be negotiated? They really have no options since Madrid will happen whether Russia agrees to the terms of the charter or not. Do you have concerns beyond the political reaction? Do you have concerns about the public reaction or do you think the Russian people are not that concerned about it?

A: I think the issue here is that we, as well as the Russian leaders, need to make clearer that there is time for new thinking on this. As I said, the enlargement of NATO is not a move against Russia. In fact, what it is is an attempt to do everything we can to stabilize central and eastern Europe -- an area out of which two world wars started and in which the Russians lost large numbers of people, especially in the Second World War -- to have them understand that a more stable central and eastern Europe is to their advantage. I think what is going to be happening now, we hope, is greater and greater understanding about what the NATO-Russian charter is supposed to do and what NATO enlargement is not going to do. It is not an institution that is directed against Russia, that is old-think. That is how we are going to deal with it.

Q: Madam Secretary, if you could help explain: I gather there is some kind of NATO meeting taking place on Monday, some kind of NATO ambassadorial meeting or something, and then you will meet with NATO foreign ministers in Brussels. I presume, and this is what I am checking with you, so you can take an agreed package of positions with you to Moscow. Would that be reasonable to assume, and if so, could you describe how this would be different from what Mr. Solana has been doing?

A: There are discussions going on all the time about how to solidify various parts of what the NATO-Russian charter is about. I am going to be increasingly specific when I get to Moscow, but I do not yet want to discuss what will be part of that. I will be doing that with you all later. Steve, we are on a very fast track here, basically. We have a lot of work to do between now and July. My trip is a part of the work process and obviously this will be carried on by others and there will be benchmarks along the way. What is happening, and we are working very closely with Secretary-General Solana, is that we are constantly adding meat to the charter -- there is beef in this charter. That is what we will be pursuing in various places that I am going to be.

Q: Madam Secretary, could you talk a little bit about to what extent you are going to discuss Turkey with allies in Europe? You have said before that we have concerns about Turkey remaining a secular state. What do you see the United States and the allies doing to try to reinforce the fact that Turkey is a secular state? When you spoke about this to Erbekan, what did he say to you when you told him how important that was?

A: I will be generally, obviously, talking to the allies about Turkey, and to the EU ministers also. As I said, we are concerned about increased tension in the Aegean and we want to make sure it is understood how important it is for Turkey not only to remain secular but also to have a tie to the West. We will just be generally talking about the developments in Turkey. When I spoke with Prime Minister Erbekan, which is now several months ago, and I made that statement, he took it on board. We did not argue about it. I made the statement and said it was the basis of American policy.

Q: Madam Secretary, President Chirac has proposed a five-nation summit to talk about NATO enlargement. I gather the United States is skeptical about this idea. Could you explain your position and why you do not think it is such a great idea.

A: Let me say that we have, as I said earlier, a lot of business to be done on the issues of NATO enlargement as well as the NATO-Russian charter. We are now concerned with substance more than process. There will be the Clinton-Yeltsin Summit and there will be the Madrid Summit. We will determine various interim aspects of the procedures later. What we are concerned about most of all now, Michael, is the substance of this. That is what I am going to be working on on my trip and obviously there will be others that will be pursuing that. But the process is not where we are focused right now.

Q: Madam Secretary, what do you hope to achieve in Moscow in the talks with Primakov? What do you need to take away from there? How far do you need to get on this leg?

A: I am not setting it up in that particular way. I consider that what I am doing in Moscow is filling out some of the discussions that took place during the Gore-Chernomyrdin meetings and putting in more of the details. The purpose of my stop in Moscow is to give them further substance on this. I am not going to be asking for decisions. I am going to be presenting further details. It is basically a trip where I will have the opportunity to explain more about what we are doing. It is not a negotiation.

Q: I know you want to end this, but this is on a different topic, this is about Zaire and Rwanda. Maybe it is unfair to ask you, but is there now a new concern that things are spinning badly and that perhaps it was a mistake to have short-circuited the idea of some kind of foreign intervention force when we did?

A: I read what Kofi Annan had to say about it. What I read about Zaire is troublesome. I will be discussing Zaire with most of my interlocutors, clearly I will be doing that in Rome and Paris. I would like to reserve on that question, but obviously we are concerned. The truth is that as we talked about the international force at the time, it did a lot to release the refugees. I do not think it was a failure. I think that it accomplished quite a lot.

Thank you.

(end transcript)


From the United States Information Agency (USIA) Gopher at gopher://gopher.usia.gov


United States Information Agency: Selected Articles Directory - Previous Article - Next Article
Back to Top
Copyright © 1995-2023 HR-Net (Hellenic Resources Network). An HRI Project.
All Rights Reserved.

HTML by the HR-Net Group / Hellenic Resources Institute, Inc.
usia2html v1.01 run on Tuesday, 18 February 1997 - 22:11:13 UTC