24 September 2002
Resolution on Israeli Withdrawal Should Condemn Terrorists, U.S. Says
(However, U.S. still wants Israel to comply with Security Council
measure) (1200)
The U.S. abstained from voting on a United Nations Security Council
resolution demanding an end to Israel's siege of Yasser Arafat's
compound in Ramallah because the resolution did not adequately
identify and condemn Palestinian terrorist groups that are undermining
peace efforts, State Department spokesman Richard Boucher said.
"It reflected the direction we wanted to go in, but it didn't go far
enough. It didn't provide the clarity and the context that we thought
were required," said Boucher, speaking at the September 24 State
Department briefing in Washington.
However, "we do want the Israelis to comply with this resolution," he
said.
The United States, he said, has asked the Israelis "to refrain from
further action, and we continue to work with both parties to try to
resolve the situation."
"We continue to work on issues such as withdrawal. And we've urged
them to refrain from further action in and around Ramallah. And those
are things that we had, in fact, in our draft resolution; the things
that we want people to do. We also want the Palestinians to take their
responsibilities and to stop the violence, to stop the terrorist
groups and their ability to conduct actions that only kill innocent
civilians and undermine the peace process," said Boucher.
According to the spokesman, the United States had drafted its own
resolution calling for the end of Israel's military actions and for a
withdrawal from Palestinian areas.
"Our draft was much more explicit on terrorism and those who
perpetuate it, the need to combat it, strong support for the Quartet
and the political process that we have underway on the ground," said
Boucher.
Following is an excerpt from the September 24 State Department
briefing containing Boucher's comments on the situation in the Middle
East:
(begin excerpt)
MR. BOUCHER: The Middle East? We're going to shift to the Middle East.
Okay.
QUESTION: -- brought a resolution that got through the Security
Council, which the US didn't stop, although it could have with a veto;
simply abstained, obviously knowing that means it would be approved by
such countries as Syria. Why did the United States allow this to go
through? What was your thinking? That it reflected your criticism of
Ariel Sharon, or what?
MR. BOUCHER: It reflected the direction we wanted to go in, but it
didn't go far enough. It didn't provide the clarity and the context
that we thought were required. We ourselves tabled a draft resolution
late Monday afternoon. Our draft was much more explicit on terrorism,
those who perpetuate it, the need to combat it, strong support for the
Quartet and the political process that we have underway on the ground.
We felt it was important to specify that groups like Hamas and
Palestinian Islamic Jihad and the al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigade were killing
civilians, obstructing the Quartet's efforts and Palestinian reform
process prospects. So we abstained on this resolution because we
didn't think it went far enough in identifying and condemning those
groups.
QUESTION: Yeah, but that sounds like a pretty strong series of
objections, so my question really is why didn't you kill it and try to
get a resolution more to your liking?
MR. BOUCHER: As I said, we proposed a resolution ourselves when this
draft finally came forward at, whenever it was, 2 or 3 a.m. We felt it
was flawed but that we could abstain.
QUESTION: So, in other words, you were looking for a resolution that
you could support, rather than looking to defeat another resolution?
MR. BOUCHER: We had, in fact, proposed a resolution; that we could
support our own resolution, yes.
QUESTION: Well, you also didn't -- but, you know, you didn't oppose
this one, so --
MR. BOUCHER: We abstained on this because the text was modified. It
didn't go far enough in the direction we thought it should.
QUESTION: Richard, I'm sure you've seen the Israeli reaction.
Essentially, they are saying that they won't comply with the
withdrawal requirements in the resolution until the Palestinians do
things which may take some time to be sure that they are doing them.
What do you think of this Israeli response?
MR. BOUCHER: I'm not going to get into a whole back-and-forth. I think
you know that we have been proceeding along the lines that the
President laid out in his June 24 speech and that we have been working
with the Quartet and the Israelis and Palestinians and others to
accomplish those goals: real reform and transformation on the
Palestinian side and reciprocal steps on the Israeli side so that they
will withdraw back to the areas of September 2000.
Those goals remain. Those attempts remain. Those efforts to build
clean Palestinian security institutions, to stop terrorism through
cooperation, all those things remain as important and we'll continue
to pursue them.
QUESTION: Can I just follow up? You're not really answering the
question. This is a UN Security Council resolution, even if you
abstained on it, and therefore it has the authority of the UN Security
Council behind it. Are you not even asking for immediate withdrawal,
as the resolution does?
MR. BOUCHER: The resolution --
QUESTION: It does say immediate withdrawal. Read it. And it does say
-- there's the word "immediate" in there.
MR. BOUCHER: No, it says "demands that Israel immediately cease
measures in and around Ramallah, demands also the withdrawal of the
Israeli occupying forces." Those are both things that we're working
very intensely on.
QUESTION: So you are calling for that, are you?
MR. BOUCHER: We are -- as I said, we've asked the Israelis to refrain
from further action and we continue to work with both parties to try
to resolve the situation. I will just leave it at that for the moment.
QUESTION: Was this an occasion -- was this conveyed by the Secretary
to the Prime Minister, as Saturday night he, you know, made the US
request? In other words, did the Secretary get back on the telephone
and say, 'Mr. Sharon, the UN feels this way'?
MR. BOUCHER: No, he hasn't telephoned Prime Minister Sharon again, but
our Ambassador has been in touch with Prime Minister Sharon and his
office. We're in constant touch with them as well as with the
Palestinians to see what we can do.
QUESTION: Richard, how are you going answer for the double standard on
this? I mean --
MR. BOUCHER: I think the evidence that the United States working with
the parties, working with the Quartet to implement UN resolutions on
Israeli-Palestinian issues, is quite clear. We've been very active. We
remain very active.
QUESTION: Well, I'm a little confused by your answer to Jonathan's
earlier question. You do want the Israelis to comply with this
resolution, don't you?
MR. BOUCHER: We do want the Israelis to comply with this resolution.
We continue to work on issues such as withdrawal, and we've urged them
to refrain from further action in and around Ramallah. Those are
things that we had, in fact, in our draft resolution of things that we
want people to do.
We also want for the Palestinians to take their responsibilities and
to stop the violence, to stop the terrorist groups and their ability
to conduct actions that only kill innocent civilians and undermine the
peace process.
(end excerpt)
(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
|
|
|
