THE WHITE HOUSE
Office of the Press Secretary
________________________________________________________________________
For Immediate Release October 13, 2000
PRESS BRIEFING
BY
JAKE SIEWERT
The James S. Brady Briefing Room
1:27 P.M. EDT
The only other thing I have to tell you is that the President has
been on the phone again this morning with leaders in the Mideast. He
talked to Crown Prince Abdullah this morning and he's also been speaking
to King Mohammed of Morocco. And we're continuing to work with everyone
in the region there to do everything we can to break the cycle of
violence and try to defuse tension in that part of the world.
The President will meet with his national security team this
afternoon at 5:00 p.m. We expect the Vice President to join him for
that meeting. He'll be joined by Secretary Albright, Secretary Cohen,
National Security Advisor Sandy Berger. And he will review both what we
know about the U.S.S. Cole and the latest in the Mideast.
Q The Vice President has been spending a lot of time on the
campaign trail and hasn't been here very much. Why is it necessary for
him to be here now? Is the President trying to give him a boost by
including him?
MR. SIEWERT: I think it was his decision to come back here, but
the President appreciates -- always has appreciated his work on the
Mideast peace process. He's been to the region four times, worked very
closely on the bi-national commission we have with the Egyptians, and
has been in contact with the President from the campaign trail about
these issues over the weekend -- and was back here, obviously, again
yesterday.
He's kept abreast of what happens here by his national i security
advisor, Leon Fuerth. And the President looks forward to spending a
little more time with him today.
Q And is Bush also being briefed by --
MR. SIEWERT: I understand he's received a briefing through his
national security team. Sandy Berger spoke to Connie Rice yesterday,
who had called to get an update.
Q Jake, are there conditions holding up agreement on a summit?
Has there been any change in that dynamic?
MR. SIEWERT: We are not setting any preconditions to a meeting --
Q What about the other side?
MR. SIEWERT: -- although I think it's going to take -- both sides
have a right to expect something to come from the meeting. And I think
that they're both focused on what such a meeting might produce.
As you know, as we said this morning, President Mubarak has
suggested the idea of a summit, something that we had raised last week.
We welcome his support for such a meeting. We're working with him, and
we'll make a judgment about whether it's useful and whether it would be
productive working with the parties.
As I said this morning, we don't want to set any preconditions for
such a summit. We continue to expect, apart from that issue, that it's
important that both sides renounce violence, and recognize that
differences are best resolved at the negotiating table and not in the
streets. But we would like to get people to a point where we could have
clear lines of dialogue between the parties directly because we think
that might provide a way to defuse tension and reduce the conflict in
the region.
Q You say it's important for both sides to renounce violence.
But if they don't, and since you have no preconditions and a reluctance
to do so or a refusal to do so would not preclude a summit?
MR. SIEWERT: We'll make an overall assessment on whether a summit
-- whether some sort of meeting like that suggested by President Mubarak
would be helpful in reducing tension. And, ultimately, that decision
will be driven by what we think might be effective or what provides some
realistic chance of defusing tension.
But at the same time, we've been crystal clear that we think
everyone needs to renounce violence and that public declarations to
renounce violence would be helpful, given the level of violence we've
seen over the last two weeks.
Q Last night the Senior Official One suggested that there were
several steps that needed to happen before we could really talk about a
summit. They were sort of on the ground, backing away from violence,
some steps that the parties needed to make. But it sounds like today
the discussion really has advanced fairly quickly, that those parties,
Barak and Arafat, are, in fact, engaged in talking about the possibility
of a summit, that perhaps we've moved further than where we thought we
were.
MR. SIEWERT: I think that there was a lot of discussion about that
yesterday. That's exactly -- the President was focused both on the
process, but also on the substance that might allow us to reestablish
some lines of communication between the parties; and that's why the
President was burning up the phone lines yesterday and spent the better
part of his day in contact with leaders in the region.
Q Jake, there are enormous security concerns for such a summit.
What can they really accomplish in person, other than a photo op, that
they can't --
MR. SIEWERT: We think a meeting might be productive. We haven't
made that assessment yet, that it would be would be productive. But a
meeting could be productive. We obviously don't discuss security
matters from this podium or anywhere else, really. But we think that
there might be a scenario under which some sort of face-to-face meeting
could help defuse the tension and reduce the level of violence in the
Mideast.
Q Jake, Mrs. Clinton, Vice President Gore and a number of
Republicans have all pointed their finger at Arafat, saying he is the
one who needs to come out and make a statement renouncing violence;
they've single him out. Is the President willing to do that, or ready
to do that, to say he bears that responsibility?
MR. SIEWERT: We're playing a role here that is somewhat unique, as
the broker in these talks and we think -- we've said it's important that
public renunciation of violence is important, statements to that effect
are helpful and we're going to continue to say that. But we are doing
our best to remain in a position where we can play a useful role as
mediator in this conflict and we'll do everything we can to try to keep
the trust of both sides.
Q -- from the campaign trail that the Republican Vice
Presidential candidate said that the time for diplomacy and talk is
over, it's time for action.
MR. SIEWERT: Well, I haven't seen those reports. We're actively
engaged in talks. I'm not sure what -- I'd have to know what he was
referring to, to --
Q Do you find that suggestion helpful?
MR. SIEWERT: I'd have to hear a little bit more about the context
of that. But, frankly, we're engaged in diplomacy right now. Diplomacy
is the best way to resolve this. I'm not sure what action he refers to.
Q Jake, I thought both the Senior Officials yesterday, and you,
this morning, suggested that the talks could also be a way of defusing
the violence.
MR. SIEWERT: Yes, that's what I said.
Q So is that one of the possibilities now, for the summit? That
you could actually call a summit to stop the violence, as opposed to
having that --
MR. SIEWERT: I'm not sure I understand. I think that we believe
that we'll make a judgment about whether or not a summit, or some sort
of meeting like that suggested by President Mubarak, would be useful in
defusing tension in the region and stopping the violence.
What I said this morning simply was that it's probably a bit
unrealistic, although a desired outcome, to have absolutely no violence
in the region before we meet. But we're not going to say that we can't
meet while there's still some sort of violence. There is no acceptable
level of violence. At the same time, a meeting might be helpful in
reducing the overall level. So we'll make a judgment about that as we
continue to consult with leaders in the region.
Q Do you expect to make that judgment today?
Q -- closing of U.S. embassies in Africa?
MR. SIEWERT: I understand that the State Department has closed
roughly 37 embassies around the world, mostly in the region, in the
Mideast. But there are some outside of that region. But you'll have to
check with them on the exact closures.
Q Jake, would the President attend a summit if he felt there was
little chance that the summit would not result in a resumption of the
peace process?
MR. SIEWERT: We think that in the end, that the parties need to
get back to the table, and that that's where their differences will be
resolved. I think that -- we, again, haven't set a precondition, so
it's hard to answer that question. But we think that in the end, it
might be helpful to have a meeting, face-to-face, so that we can reduce
the level of violence. That's our most immediate objective.
Ultimately, we think the parties belong at the table, belong at the
negotiating table, and that's where they're best able to narrow their
differences. But there may be some utility to meeting in the region and
trying to find a way to reduce the overall level of tension.
Q How concerned are you to avoid a repetition of Paris last
week, which I think one of the Israelis described as a "fiasco"?
MR. SIEWERT: Yes, we would not -- I think there was good work done
at Paris. We came very close to having the parties sign an agreement.
In any case, they left with a shared sense of understanding of certain
security concerns and there has been some level of actual cooperation on
security, even in the midst of all this conflict. It may have done
something -- it may not be -- it may be hard to imagine at this point,
but it may have done something to actually keep the level of violence
from escalating.
At the same time, both parties at talks there said that they were
committed to reducing the overall level of violence and they also talked
to their security forces, to their police forces and instructed them to
do everything they can.
Q It seems to have gotten worse since then.
MR. SIEWERT: I am not disputing that the situation is very tense,
remains difficult. But we don't think that there's any -- we continue
to believe that there was some valuable work done. The Secretary of
State met face-to-face and made some progress in terms of getting their
security forces to reduce tension in what was a very volatile situation
last week.
Q Can you give us some sense of timing on the assessment for a
summit or any other meeting? I mean, given the fact -- given the
urgency of the situation on the ground and the risks --
MR. SIEWERT: The urgency of the situation is exactly why we are
embarked on the kind of diplomacy that we are embarked on. The
President canceled his schedule today, he pretty much cleared his
schedule yesterday. We are continuing to look at the schedule every
hour to determine whether we need to do some of the events that we had
scheduled or whether we cancel them, so that the President can devote
his energies. But no one should doubt that we're working every minute
that we can on defusing the tension here.
In terms of making a decision, I can't give you a realistic
deadline on when we might make a decision about a meeting. We will just
be having to look at that minute by minute.
....
Q Yesterday, former Secretary of State Larry Eagleburger
suggested that the peace process was effectively dead until sometime
next year. Isn't that a fairly realistic assessment?
MR. SIEWERT: No. I think that we are focused on what we can do to
reduce the level of violence right now and that's our immediate goal.
But both of the parties have indicated some willingness, amidst some of
the rhetoric that you've heard from both sides, indicated a willingness
to get back to the table to resolve some of these final status issues
and we're going to focus now on reducing the violence.
But we certainly would not rule out trying to push them if we're
able to accomplish that towards resolving some of their differences. It
may be difficult, but that doesn't mean that we shouldn't make the
effort.
Q Didn't the Senior Official yesterday suggest that the wounds
caused by this were so deep --
MR. SIEWERT: They are very deep.
Q -- that it would not be easy just to pick up where we left off
before?
MR. SIEWERT: No one is saying it would be easy. But there's no
point in abandoning the process. There are -- what is driving a lot of
the violence in the region are deep-seated wounds. We heard that
yesterday from this podium. At the same time, sooner or later, we are
going to have to sit down --
At the same time, sooner or later, we're going to have to sit down
with both sides and figure out a way to narrow those differences. And
that's something that in the long run, I think we said yesterday, was
eminently worthy of the effort that we've been expending here.
Q Jake, in Chicago there have been three attacks on Jewish
people and apparently the police are holding people of Palestinian
descent, American citizens who conducted the attacks. Are you bothered
by the fact that apparently this conflict is also coming home?
MR. SIEWERT: I had not seen those reports, but obviously we
deplore any violence against any American citizen, whether in the United
States or around the world.
Q Jake, who else is on the President's call list today? Is it
odd that he hasn't talked to Arafat or Barak today, yet, and will he?
MR. SIEWERT: We've been in pretty -- we, obviously, spoke to
Arafat three or four times yesterday; and spoke to Barak. I don't know,
we have a pretty extensive call list for you and we'll try to give you
updates as the day goes on.
MR. CROWLEY: Kofi Annan is also --
MR. SIEWERT: Kofi Annan we expect -- Sandy, I know has talked to
him several times today already. And he is still engaged in a lot of
diplomacy in the region.
Q -- Kofi Annan is speaking to Arafat, sort of like, is he
carrying the water with Arafat today?
MR. SIEWERT: Obviously, the President spoke directly to Arafat
four times, so it's hard to imagine that we're not -- the President is
engaged and obviously has been talking to him directly. But we've also
been working, obviously, through the Secretary General in the region, as
well.
MR. CROWLEY: The leaders on both sides, the leaders the President
is talking to are talking to both the Chairman and the Prime Minister.
MR. SIEWERT: Yes. As we said yesterday, both the King of Jordan
and the President of Egypt have been talking directly to both parties,
as well.
Q It seems like everybody is willing to have a summit, you know,
they're all eager to do this, but can't quite get an agreement to pull
it off. Why is that?
MR. SIEWERT: Well, obviously, I think, as I said to you this
morning, that people want to make sure that maybe if they're not on the
same page, they're at least in the same chapter, before we sit down and
try to work through the differences. And I think people want some
assurances, both parties want some assurances that the other side is
operating in good faith. Their level of trust has been eroded over the
last couple weeks, and we're doing everything we can to try to restore a
sense that we can work together.
Q Jake, there's a group that supposedly is claiming some credit
for the Cole?
MR. SIEWERT: We've seen those reports. We'll make our own
determination.
Q Are they even credible? Is it even possible, this group?
MR. SIEWERT: I'm not going to speculate on who's responsible and
who's claiming credit until we make our own determination.
Q Jake, if there's a meeting on the Middle East, would it have
to be in the region? Could it be somewhere else?
MR. SIEWERT: Well, that's just the option that's under
consideration. President Mubarak has indicated a willingness to host a
meeting. That's an initiative we discussed, obviously, earlier this
week and last week. And we think it might well be a worthy one, and
that's something we're pursuing right now. But we're not ruling out any
other option in the future.
Wow. Complete silence. I guess we'll wrap up. We actually don't
have a week ahead for you. (Laughter.) But we're going to do our best
to try to let you know what the President's travel plans are for
tomorrow, today. So I'll try to get that for you later today. And
we'll put a week ahead out on paper.
I think -- since I wasn't asked, but I was asked this morning --
obviously, there are plans underway for some sort of memorial service
for the sailors of the Cole. And we'll be working with the Department
of Defense, but we don't have anything to announce yet. But I think
that you can expect that the President will find some way to memorialize
the Sailors who died serving their country.
Q Jake, one quick question about the conversation that the
President had with Saudi Crown Prince Abdullah this morning. Did that
focus exclusively on the Middle East peace process, or did it also
concern oil prices?
MR. SIEWERT: I don't believe there was any discussion of oil in
this particular call, though. That's something that we're obviously in
close contact with the Saudi Arabian government with all the time.
Q So the only calls he made this morning were to Abdullah and to
Mohammed of Morocco?
MR. SIEWERT: That's correct.
Q Did Mohammed offer to host a summit?
MR. SIEWERT: Not that I'm aware of.
Q Are we likely to see the President today?
MR. SIEWERT: The radio address, I expect will -- I don't think so.
The radio address will probably focus on the events of the last day or
two.
END 1:47 P.M. EDT
|
NEWSLETTER
|
|
Join the GlobalSecurity.org mailing list
|
|
|
