UNITED24 - Make a charitable donation in support of Ukraine!

Military

28 November 2001

Transcript: State Department Noon Briefing, November 28, 2001

(North Korea, Iraq, Bangladesh, Powell/Annan meeting, Nepal,
Afghanistan, Russia, department, Israel/Palestinian Authority) (4780)
State Department Spokesman Richard Boucher briefed.
Following is the State Department transcript:
(begin transcript)
U.S. Department of State
Daily Press Briefing Index
Wednesday, November 28, 2001 - 12:42 P.M.
BRIEFER:  Richard Boucher, Spokesman
NORTH KOREA
-- Humanitarian Assistance
-- TCOG Meeting
IRAQ
-- Response to President's comments/Change in U.S. Policy/Sanctions
BANGLADESH
-- Processing of Student Visas/Visa Issuance in General
DEPARTMENT
-- Secretary to meet with Kofi Annan
NEPAL
-- Maoist Violence
AFGHANISTAN
-- Meetings in Bonn/UN Peacekeeping Force/Future Government
-- Humanitarian Aid
RUSSIA
-- Troop Movements in Abkhazia/Russian activities in Georgia
-- Russian activities in Kabul
DEPARTMENT
-- Embassy in Kabul
-- Money laundering/Abusing Countries
-- Tax Havens/New concerns after September 11
TERRORISM
-- Guam as possible site for the trial of terrorists
ISRAEL/PALESTINIAN AUTHORITY
-- Assistant Secretary Burns and General Zinni's meetings and travel
plans
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE
DAILY PRESS BRIEFING
WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 28, 2001 - 12:40 P.M. EST
(ON THE RECORD UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED)
MR. BOUCHER: Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen. It's a pleasure to
be here. I don't have any statements or announcements. I'd be glad to
take your questions. Mr. Gedda?
QUESTION: The World Food Program has asked for -- is issuing an appeal
for emergency food aid to North Korea. I'm just wondering whether you
have a response yet.
MR. BOUCHER: I don't have a final response on this. We have always
said that we would continue to support assistance in response to
international appeals and the demonstrated humanitarian needs that
might exist in North Korea. So we will examine this appeal and we'll
look at it, consistent with our humanitarian considerations.
QUESTION: Despite the fact that everyone -- Washington officialdom
seems to be saying that President Bush's comments about Iraq on Monday
didn't constitute any change in policy, certainly it seems that people
in the Middle East and in Europe think that -- are worried that it
did. What, if anything, are you guys doing to allay these concerns?
MR. BOUCHER: I don't know that we've been asked to allay concerns.
I've seen various public statements about things. The President
himself has said quite clearly, first things first. We're going after
al-Qaida and that network, and we continue to keep our eye on Iraq and
watch them very, very closely. So that's what we're doing. If anybody
wants to know what we're doing, that's what we tell them.
QUESTION: Is that what you expect -- you expect to bring up this
subject with the Egyptian Foreign Minister? Or does the Secretary -- I
mean, in general, the whole war on terrorism, and the fact that it --
MR. BOUCHER: We'll certainly talk about the war on terrorism. I don't
know that, one way or the other at this point whether the Secretary
and he will end up discussing Iraq. Certainly, concerns about Iraq's
threats to its neighbors have been quite clearly stated by the
President and others, and those need to be kept in mind by everybody
even as we pursue the war on terrorism.
QUESTION: Well, I guess what I'm asking, what about the concerns of
the other countries, mainly in the Arab-Muslim world, about an
expansion of the war? Do those --
MR. BOUCHER: If people want to raise issues, I'm sure we'll be glad to
tell them what U.S. policy is.
QUESTION: And you -- and that will be the -- it hasn't changed that
there's --
MR. BOUCHER:  It will be what the President said the other day.
QUESTION: All right. Can I go to another Iraq question? The deal that
you have reached with Russia at the UN on the sanctions; can you say
when you expect that -- is that expected to go today, tomorrow?
MR. BOUCHER: We're working with the other members of the council
still. I'm trying to think of a more formal way to say we don't want
to count our chickens before they hatch. But why don't we say it that
way? We are continuing to work at the United Nations, and the issue is
really bringing the council together on a resolution that can
implement a new system of controls on goods flowing to Iraq. Iraq, as
we all know, has never complied with its obligations, except when
confronted by unanimity among members of the council, and that's what
we're working towards. So there are drafts under discussion in New
York today. When exactly they might come to a vote, I don't know. But
what we are looking for is council agreement on the principle of a
goods review list. We plan to finalize the list details over the next
six months. And when implemented, this arrangement would allow purely
civilian goods to go to the Iraqi people without review by the
Sanctions Committee.
The United States will continue to work with the council to refocus
controls on items that are needed to produce weapons of mass
destruction, missiles and conventional weapons. So that work is going
on in New York. And, as I said, there are drafts that are being
circulated and discussed by all the members of the council and we look
forward to seeing council agreement before the deadline expires.
QUESTION:  On Friday at midnight.
MR. BOUCHER:  On Friday.
QUESTION: But you do expect that it will go before the current program
expires?
MR. BOUCHER: We think we can reach agreement on this. It seems to be
an approach that everybody has supported in the past, and where
everybody but one has supported it in the past and it looks like an
approach now that everybody will support.
QUESTION: Just three quick questions on the sanctions. One, how does
the statement about the goods review list differ from previous UN
Security Council statements? Two, have you -- could you just sort of
inform us, I don't know if you would know, how the Syrians have taken
to this? And, three, the last time there was similar diplomacy in the
UN on these sanctions, the United States lifted holds on a number of
civilian goods to Iraq. Is anything like that being considered at this
point?
MR. BOUCHER: The United States has tried to make sure that whenever we
had good information, whenever we had the ability to make decisions,
we would make the decisions on goods that might be on hold. A lot of
the applications are on hold because the sales are not clear, the
contracts are not clear, things like that.
But certainly, we are happy to process those goods that are on hold,
consistent with the understandings that the council can reach. I think
we all look forward to a more precise, clearer list of goods and
that's what this resolution is designed to produce.
The council, if I remember correctly, in June decided on the general
approach. And then in July, by the beginning of July, was unable to
reach agreement on this list and the implementation of this mechanism.
So if we can get council agreement now to implement a goods review
list and to reach agreement on that list and implement it in six
months, that would be a step forward in terms of moving towards a more
predictable situation, one where we can clearly control -- with the
unanimous support of the Security Council and the Perm 5 -- clearly
control the goods that matter when it comes to weapons and making
weapons, and allow other things to go without review by the Sanctions
Committee so that the flow of civilian goods to civilian uses would be
much easier.
So it would put in place the mechanism that we have been looking for
since the original intention was declared in June.
QUESTION: I'm not sure I understand, because you're saying this like
it's a good thing and a success --
MR. BOUCHER:  Yes, it is.
QUESTION:  -- but actually, isn't this putting a step --
MR. BOUCHER:  If we get it.
QUESTION: Isn't this putting in a step that you wouldn't have even had
in there had you been able to convince Russia to agree with you? This
is less than what you wanted to achieve by Friday, so why is it such a
good thing?
MR. BOUCHER: It's no secret that we were trying to implement this new
system in June, and that we have been looking since then to try to get
everybody, including the Russians, on board to implement a new system
that was based on a clear list of goods that needed to be reviewed.
So a commitment, we had a step to do that, a unanimous decision by the
council on the mechanism to do that is a step forward. And we'll see
if we can get that.
QUESTION:  Can you answer the Syria question?
MR. BOUCHER:  No.  I can't speak for Syria.
QUESTION: Thank you, Richard. This is Arshad with the Daily Inquilab,
Bangladesh. A question on Bangladesh. Since the tragic September 11
tragedy, at the U.S. Embassy in Dakar the student visa processing has
been drastically reduced, and that has been reported in a section of
the press in Bangladesh. Does the State Department have any comment to
that?
MR. BOUCHER: I don't know the exact numbers in different places. As
you know, there are sort of more careful controls that involve some
delay in some places around the world. We've talked about those a
couple of weeks ago. This is an interim measure so that we can do all
the appropriate checks through our various databases, and until we get
everything meshed up, we'll have to impose some delay on some of the
applicants. But we hope to be through that interim period in a number
of months, and to be able to process people, to be able to welcome
people to the United States, to come to the United States in a manner
that is consistent with our need to maintain security of our borders.
QUESTION: Just a follow-up question to that. Is there any specific
instruction for the State Department to take those visas and go
through this screening process rigorously before September 11th, a
status quo was there or something like that? Is there any specific
instruction?
MR. BOUCHER: We have always had steps in place to screen applicants
for visas. There is a whole series of ineligibilities. Consular
officers make the judgments, and consular officers need to have the
best information tools at their disposal to make those judgments. And
we have always had a check in a lookout system for information that we
might have about individual applicants. What we're trying to do is
make sure that check is made as thorough as possible, and until we
merge our various databases, we have to take some of the information
here and do some checks here, and that requires a further delay.
But that process will hopefully -- will be temporary, and the consular
officers will be able to have complete information at hand when they
make the judgment on the individual applicant's case.
QUESTION:  Thank  you.
QUESTION: Richard, could you preview the Secretary's meeting this
afternoon with Kofi Annan and tell us what subjects you expect to be
discussed?
MR. BOUCHER: A couple hours from now, they will be walking out
together and you can ask them what subjects they did discuss. Clearly,
they are going to discuss the situation in Afghanistan, and probably
the situation in the Middle East. I don't know what else might come
up.
QUESTION: On South Asia for a second, the situation in Nepal is
deteriorating pretty badly or has deteriorated. Last night, you guys
put out a notice saying you were restricting your diplomats' travel
severely, and said that basically the entire country was unsafe.
On Monday, the embassy in Katmandu said it supported the government's
efforts to reign in this Maoist violence from the Maoist rebels and
called them terrorists. I was wondering, is the U.S. prepared to do
anything like the Indians have offered to do in assisting, other than
in words and in moral support, the Nepalese as they try to crush this
insurgency?
MR. BOUCHER: As you say, we have clearly condemned these attacks. We
have called on the Maoists to pursue any goals they might have
peacefully within the Nepalese constitution and we have said we
clearly support the Nepali Government efforts to protect its citizens
and officials.
We are in close touch with the Nepalese Government about this. At this
point, I don't have any specific steps of support to talk about. But
we have an ongoing relationship with Nepal and Nepal's military, and
I'm sure that we will continue to work with them.
QUESTION: Back on Afghanistan, the reports from Bonn today suggest the
Northern Alliance is not interested in having an international force
or UN peacekeepers or any such thing. Do you have a view on that?
MR. BOUCHER: I think that is not a new view. I think they have said
that before.
Clearly, the point of getting people together in Bonn is that there
are different groups with different interests and different views. And
the international community is working with all of them and
encouraging all of them to come to agreement on Afghanistan's interim
arrangements as well as its political future.
So the talks are ongoing. They continue, in our view, to go well. They
are starting to tackle some of the tough issues, but displaying what
we consider to be a spirit of cooperation and willingness to get down
and do the work. We're all aware that this is part of a very difficult
process of reaching agreement on political arrangements for the future
of Afghanistan. There seems to be general agreement already that the
former King Zahir Shah could have a role, and that's an indication of
the commitment that they have to finding a political resolution that's
broad based. Clearly they need to define what that role is, and that's
where there is more debate and discussion.
At this point, the talks have just begun, though. Our team of
observers, led by our representative to the Afghan opposition, Jim
Dobbins, continues to meet with Afghans at the conference, with United
Nations officials, with members of the other observer group countries.
And, as I said, we are continuing to urge the Afghans and outside
parties to work together for a broad-based government.
QUESTION: I was going to ask a question from the opposite premise of
George. Obviously, we have different reports coming out of Bonn, but
my understanding was that the Northern Alliance actually said that
while they didn't think there was a need for a multinational force,
they would be willing to consider it and that they had somewhat
softened their position. Is this your understanding?
MR. BOUCHER: I am not trying to speak for the Northern Alliance, nor
to try to characterize an individual group's views. There are, indeed,
various views out there. And the point of the conference is to have
people come together and try to work them out. So we will see how that
process proceeds.
QUESTION:  What does the United States think should be done?
MR. BOUCHER: The United States thinks the Afghans should come up with
an interim arrangement and a goal, a path, to get a broad-based
government. We have said the last several days, including yesterday,
that there are obviously several options for security arrangements.
Those options still exist. But we will continue to look to what the
Afghans do in terms of reaching agreement on political arrangements
and be prepared to discuss with them what appropriate security
arrangements have to be to go with that.
QUESTION: But you can't say or don't want to say if you've seen -- if
your delegation headed by Ambassador Dobbins -- has seen a softening
in the Northern Alliance position?
MR. BOUCHER: I am not going to try to characterize various factions'
positions at this point. I don't think that is for us to do.
QUESTION: But Richard, does the U.S. have a preference over what
security arrangements -- I mean, obviously, you are saying that the
Afghans should decide. But what is your advice to the --
MR. BOUCHER: Our advice to the Afghans is what I've said. You guys
reach agreement on broad-based political arrangements and we will talk
to you about what security arrangements -- the international community
will talk to you about what the security arrangements can be to help
maintain that.
QUESTION: But if we're being told in this building that the U.S. feels
that having a single security force, for example, in Kabul is not
viable, not sustainable, are you also telling that to the Northern
Alliance?
MR. BOUCHER:  I don't know what you're talking about.
QUESTION: Officials in this building say that, very quickly, the
Afghans need to spread out security, the provision of security amongst
more than one party. Is that something that at least the United States
is pressing at these meetings?
MR. BOUCHER: That fits with the concept of a broad-based arrangement
of having whatever security arrangements there are need to support the
idea of a broad-based arrangement.
QUESTION: Well, do you see the Northern Alliance welcoming that, if
not any other force from outside?
MR. BOUCHER: I am not speaking for the Northern Alliance. So I am not
going to try to characterize their view from 5,000 miles away.
QUESTION: Have you told the Northern Alliance that they can't be an
interim government's army, they can't be the security force alone?
MR. BOUCHER: We have told all the parties that we look to them to
reach agreement on broad-based arrangements for Afghanistan's
political future, that we've discussed the security arrangements with
various parties out there. But as the Afghan parties begin to reach
understandings about how they want to organize the political future of
Afghanistan, we will also be discussing with them in more detail which
of these various possibilities for security arrangements might or
might not be helpful.
QUESTION: Humanitarian aid. The President acknowledged today that it
was a very difficult job trying to get humanitarian aid in. Can you
tell us the status of the Friendship Bridge that -- when is it going
to open? That is a major --
MR. BOUCHER: I don't think I have an exact date on the Friendship
Bridge. This is obviously a subject of continuing discussion. We
understand that there is movement towards opening the bridge. But what
sort of physical repairs need to be made, what security conditions
need to be obtained for that to happen, with all those factors in
play, I can't give you a precise date. That would be up to the Uzbek
Government in any case.
What I would say is that, as the President said, as I think the
Secretary General said, that we have been moving a lot of food into
Afghanistan. The difficulties arise mostly when you get to the
detailed distribution, because you have continuing security problems
in some parts of the country. You have continued interference by the
Taliban or remnants of the Taliban in various places. And you have the
drought, the harsh winter that have already created very, very
difficult conditions for many people in Afghanistan.
We have taken steps, such as flying food in in bulk, and you had the
first flights in a day or two ago to areas of Afghanistan, directly
into areas of the country. In November, the World Food Program has
been able to move almost 50,000 metric tons of food into Afghanistan.
The monthly goal is about 52,000 metric tons, and if you start
counting sort of mid-October to mid-November, they actually exceeded
that goal.
There is food in central Asian region, approximate 88,523 metric tons
in Central Asia, including in Afghanistan. So there is a need in
central Afghanistan for about 51,000 tons of food for the next three
months, and at present, we have been able to distribute about 33,000
metric tons in that region. So there is distribution going on. There
is a lot of food in the region, and more food getting into the region.
The problem has been that detailed retail level sort of distribution,
because of security situations and the harsh conditions.
Clearly, we know that Afghanistan was facing an awful tough time this
winter. We have been working for many months on trying to bring food
in, even while the Taliban was running the place, and have worked very
hard to try to provision, make sure that the supplies are there. But
this continued interference by the Taliban, the continued insecurity
in some places and the continued harsh conditions mean that that final
distribution to people who need it is still hard.
The other things going on, there is food going down to Termez. There
are 20,000 metric tons there. There's wheat being offloaded at the
port -- U.S. wheat being offloaded at the port of Bandar Abbas in
Iran, 65,000 metric tons have arrived there, and I guess 25,000 of
that has been offloaded already. That will be sent by road and rail up
more directly towards these places in Afghanistan, Turkmenistan, Iran,
surrounding areas.
The World Food Program is feeding something like 360,000 people living
in six camps in and around Herat City. There are 18,000 mothers and
children who continue to receive a hot meal of corn-soya porridge
every day. And as I said, some 33,000 metric tons have been
distributed in the Kabul area. So it is a mixed picture, depending on
parts of the country and the difficulty of doing that final
distribution.
QUESTION: Do you have any comment on reported Russian moves in
Abkhazia? Troop movements?
MR. BOUCHER: Troop movements in Abkhazia? I will have to see about
that.
QUESTION:  Anything on Georgia?
MR. BOUCHER: On Georgia, what we know of is that we have some
confirmation that there were helicopters that entered Georgian air
space from Russian territory, subsequently attacked areas on the
Georgian side of the border in what's known as, I think, the Pankisi
Valley, Pankisi Gorge. There are unconfirmed reports now of two deaths
on the ground in the course of these attacks. We have consistently
supported the sovereignty and the territorial integrity of Georgia. We
are deeply concerned about these intrusions which undermine stability
in this region, and we've raised the situation at senior levels with
the Russian government in the past and will do so again in the near
future.
QUESTION:  Will you raise it on the trip?
MR. BOUCHER: Meaning in Moscow or before. We'll see. We don't have an
exact time and location for raising it at this point.
QUESTION: Speaking of strange Russian behavior, have you managed to
find out any more about what they're doing in Kabul?
MR. BOUCHER: No, I don't have any more details on that for you. We
have, as you know, coordinated with Russia on a variety of efforts in
Afghanistan, support for the Northern Alliance, humanitarian efforts,
overall objectives. We continue to talk to the Russians about things
that are going on, what they are doing.
As I said, I think yesterday we have seen flights that go in that are
supporting humanitarian objectives and we support that.
QUESTION:  What about the U.S. Embassy in Kabul, any movement there?
MR. BOUCHER:  Nothing new at this point.
QUESTION: This is on countries that are traditionally money-laundering
havens. I can't really read my esteemed colleague's writing, but how
many countries does the State Department traditionally consider
money-laundering havens that they're looking at right now, in terms of
the war against terrorism? And do you expect any kind of re-jiggering
of tax treaties concerning the war against terrorism? I think they
were alerted to this. I'm not really quite --
MR. BOUCHER: There is abundant literature on money-laundering and the
issues involved in money-laundering. As you know, we work very closely
with international organizations, with other governments. The
Financial Action Task Force has been working on this around the world
in the case of drugs and, recently, through the G-8 meetings and
elsewhere took on the task of looking at money-laundering and
terrorist financing in general.
There are a lot of international reports on the question of
money-laundering. There are OECD reports where they focus quite
specifically on money-laundering and tax questions. I am sure the
Treasury has things available on its web sites and there is a section
on money-laundering that goes into our annual narcotics report as
well. So without having all that information in my hands, either
scribbled or otherwise, I am not going to try to give you a list. But
there is plenty of information that we do put out on a regular basis
that you can find.
QUESTION: Do you expect any changes, for instance, to the Cayman
Treaty to change, in terms of kind of these tax havens, given the new
war against terrorism and the financial component?
MR. BOUCHER: This is something that we have been working
internationally through the United Nations. We worked specifically
with the OECD on the issue of tax havens and primarily the issue of
information sharing. We have had some positive developments in the
last few months in terms of the way we have dealt with this and worked
with many of the governments involved. But I would really refer you
back to the OECD process, which is where we've handled that.
QUESTION: Have you enjoyed a lot of cooperation with the Swiss
Government on this?
MR. BOUCHER:  A longstanding area of cooperation with the Swiss.
QUESTION: Speaking of cooperation, are the Saudis still cooperating,
or have they stopped since yesterday? (Laughter.)
MR. BOUCHER:  Yes.
QUESTION: Can you comment on press reports that Guam may be a place
where some of the terrorists arrested abroad may stop over and
possibly a site for the military tribunals?
MR. BOUCHER:  No.
QUESTION:  You can't comment on that?
MR. BOUCHER: No. It wouldn't be something -- Guam, as we all know, is
U.S. territory and therefore is not under my jurisdiction.
QUESTION: But extradition agreements are also a State Department sort
of thing.
MR. BOUCHER:  I don't know, sorry.
QUESTION: Richard, another one on North Korea. I understand that at
the TCOG meeting yesterday, there was concern expressed among the
three participants about the level of North Korean cooperation with
the coalition. Do you have a view as to what the North Koreans might
do to have a more robust policy on that issue?
MR. BOUCHER: I will have to look at that, I'll have to see. I hate to
admit that I never even caught up with the statement that the meeting
was going to issue. So I'm behind you on this one, but I'll catch up.
QUESTION: Can you tell us anything about the meeting today between Mr.
Arafat and the special envoys, General Zinni and Mr. Burns?
MR. BOUCHER: I think I can just tell you that it occurred. Ambassador
Burns and General Zinni spent yesterday in a lot of meetings with the
Israeli side. They saw Prime Minister Sharon, saw Foreign Minister
Peres and had various other discussions and briefings. Today, they had
a meeting with Chairman Arafat. They will continue to work out there.
Ambassador Burns is heading on to Cairo tomorrow and then he will be
on to Riyadh. But General Zinni will remain in place and keep working
with the two sides to try to achieve what we set out, which is to help
them work towards a cease-fire.
QUESTION: I apologize if this is common knowledge; it's not to me. Did
the Palestinians inform your mediators who their security committee
chief would be?
MR. BOUCHER: I'm not sure. The meeting just ended a short while ago. I
don't have a readout really.
QUESTION: On very logistical things, Burns to Cairo tomorrow, and then
he goes to Saudi?
MR. BOUCHER:  Yes.
QUESTION:  Do you know what day?
MR. BOUCHER:  I don't know what day.
QUESTION: When Burns goes to Saudi, will he also have a bunch of
Treasury experts with him? Are they there?
MR. BOUCHER:  No.  Said so yesterday.
QUESTION:  I'm sorry.
MR. BOUCHER: No. Burns is going to go to Saudi, talk about everything,
including financing of terrorism -- I said that yesterday -- but no
separate delegation.
QUESTION:  Thank you.
MR. BOUCHER:  Thank you.
(The briefing was concluded at 1:10 p.m.)
(end State Department transcript)
(Distributed by the Office of International Information Programs, U.S.
Department of State. Web site: http://usinfo.state.gov)



NEWSLETTER
Join the GlobalSecurity.org mailing list