28 June 2004
State Department Noon Briefing, June 28
Supreme Court decision on detainees, Iraq, North Korea, Armitage/Japan's Vice Foreign Minister Takeuchi and Australian Secretary Calvert meeting, Serbia, Sudan, Libya, Israel/Palestinians, Mexico, Albania
Deputy State Department Spokesman Adam Ereli briefed the media June 28.
Following is the transcript of the State Department briefing:
(begin transcript)
U.S. Department of State
Daily Press Briefing Index
Monday, June 28, 2004
12:55 p.m. EDT
BRIEFER: Adam Ereli, Deputy Spokesman
Miscellaneous
-- Supreme Court Decision on Detainees
IRAQ
-- Status of Paul Bremer/Ambassador John Negroponte
-- U.S. Role Under Iraqi Sovereignty
-- Deputy Secretary's Armitage Interview on NPR/Role of U.S. State Department
-- Query on Custody of Saddam Hussein
-- Timing in Early Transfer of Sovereignty/Iraqi Participation in Confronting Terrorism
-- Ability to Assume Full Responsibility for Security
-- Read-out of Secretary Powell's Phone Calls
-- NATO Summit Statement
-- Iraq's Relationship with Neighboring Countries
NORTH KOREA
-- Conclusion of Third Round of Six-Party Talks
-- Discussions on Issues in Proposal/Clarification of Issues
-- Chinese Delegation
DEPARTMENT
-- Upcoming Meeting of Deputy Secretary Armitage with Japan's Vice Foreign Minister Takeuchi and Australian Secretary Calvert
SERBIA
-- U.S. Response to Serbian Election
-- Query on International Court of Justice
SUDAN
-- Message to Government of Sudan
-- Delivery of Humanitarian Supplies
LIBYA
-- Assistant Secretary Burns and Ambassador Black's Meeting with Muammar Qadhafi
-- Issue of U.S. Liaison Office
ISRAEL/PALESTINIANS
-- Issue of Arms Smuggling in Gaza
-- Egyptian Support in Consolidation of Palestinian Security Forces
-- Query on Targeted Killings
MEXICO
-- U.S. Reaction to Massive Protests in Mexico on the Issue of Crime
ALBANIA
-- Query on Background Notes on Albania
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE
DAILY PRESS BRIEFING
MONDAY JUNE 28, 2004
(ON THE RECORD UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED)
12:55 p.m. EDT
MR. ERELI: Welcome to our visitors. Pleasure to have you with us.
I don't have any announcements and would be happy to take your questions.
QUESTION: Adam, how might the Supreme Court decision on detainees' rights affect the campaign to counter terror, do you think?
MR. ERELI: The decision was issued by the Supreme Court only a few hours ago. It's being reviewed by the State Department and other agencies of the U.S. Government to get a fuller understanding of it.
I don't have any reaction to or comments on the decision for now, and based on our interpretation, based on our analysis, I may or may not in the future. So I wouldn't want to promise you anything. Let me just say for the moment that we're studying it.
Yes.
QUESTION: Where's Paul Bremer these days?
MR. ERELI: He's not in Iraq. He's left Iraq. I think he will be coming back to the United States, I believe, I'm not sure about that, for some well-earned rest and vacation. And as far as his future plans, I'd refer you to him.
QUESTION: And a second question. Where is John Negroponte?
MR. ERELI: John Negroponte should be arriving in Iraq soon to take over his duties as ambassador and the President's representative to the government of Iraq. I don't have a specific time for his arrival for you, but you can be assured that the U.S. embassy and the U.S. Government are -- have hit the ground running.
QUESTION: (Inaudible) sooner than today, as in time of a flight.
MR. ERELI: I don't have specific timing for you.
QUESTION: In terms of the day.
MR. ERELI: Exactly.
QUESTION: Okay.
MR. ERELI: Yes, ma'am.
QUESTION: (Inaudible) aren't they, because wasn't the notion that the U.S. would -- (laughter) -- "hit the ground running" sounds like George Allen or Lombardi.
MR. ERELI: Whatever winning team you choose.
QUESTION: Exactly. But it sounds a little bit aggressive. I thought the U.S. role now will be to kind of lower its profile and let the Iraqis have center stage. It's their country, and, in fact, the U.S. has a supporting role, although I noticed Mr. Armitage called the U.S. a partner, which is sort of a 50/50 deal, I guess.
MR. ERELI: The way to look at this is, the way we see it is as follows. Iraq is now fully sovereign. The Coalition Provisional Authority no longer exists. The government of Iraq has authority for what goes on in that country and that country's relations with the rest of the world. This is what the Iraqi people have been waiting for for these many months.
We congratulate them on this historic moment. It is now our job to support this government and the democratic aspirations of the Iraqi people as they work to secure their country against those who seek to turn the clock back, and as they work to establish a functioning democracy and a fully representative government that is chosen by all of the people through free and fair elections.
QUESTION: Can I try one other? We don't all have access to Mr. Armitage. He gave an interview to NPR. It's a question I would put to him, but as I say, he limits access. So when he says to NPR, he's asked, in a very solid interview, the Pentagon has been in pretty much the lead. And what's going to happen now? And he says the State Department will now play the dominant role. And there's no elaboration really. He says, "We'll take the lead. We'll play the dominant role." And off they are in this rather short interview to another issue.
Do you know what he means? He means in U.S. -- including U.S. policy. How does the State Department -- what does he mean, "play a dominant role," do you know?
MR. ERELI: As I said, Ambassador Negroponte is the President's representative to the government of Iraq. Our bilateral relations with Iraq will be handled by the ambassador reporting to the President through the Secretary of State. Obviously, the Department of Defense is going to be very heavily involved in Iraq, as there are 138,000 troops reporting to the National Command Authority through the combatant commander General John Abizaid.
Ambassador Negroponte and the commanding general in Iraq, as Ambassador Negroponte, I think, very eloquently put it in his swearing-in ceremony, will have the closest of relationships in order to ensure that our very critical mission of supporting Iraqi efforts to get the security under -- situation under control succeed.
Yes, Tammy.
QUESTION: Adam, could you walk us through what's going to happen with the transfer of Saddam Hussein to the Iraqi government? Has there been a formal request? I know there is a difference between legal custody and physical custody. Can you walk us through what you know at this point?
MR. ERELI: It's a little bit premature to give you a lot of details, because, frankly, they haven't been worked out. This will obviously be a subject of discussion between the government of Iraq and the United States. And it's a good example of how things are different in the new Iraq, that Prime Minister Allawi is in the driver's seat here. He, on the behalf of the government, are going to express their desires, and we are going to work to accommodate them.
I think it's always been the intent to transfer high-value detainees to Iraqi custody. Let's see what the Iraqis are looking for and what we can do. I think there will be discussions over the next couple of days about the legal procedures for transferring legal authority over high-value detainees from the multinational force to the government of Iraq, and how those procedures will work, under what authorities, through what mechanisms.
QUESTION: Are you expecting at least a court appearance in the next several days, or week, as has been suggested?
MR. ERELI: It has been suggested, but as I said, this is now an Iraqi-led process. They are standing up their ministry -- their Ministry of Justice and Prime Minister are, I think, working through how they want to go forward, and rather than get ahead of them, let me defer to the Iraqi government first before mapping out for you what will be a, really an Iraqi initiated program.
Yes, sir
QUESTION: Could you tell us about the process that led to handing power 48 hours earlier, and why -- and is it really to preempt the insurgents from waging attacks?
MR. ERELI: It's --
QUESTION: Did you guys know --
MR. ERELI: There are two reasons why sovereignty was transferred two days ahead of June 30th. Number one, the Iraqi government was ready to take over. And I think as Prime Minister Allawi noted, the Iraqi government felt that it was symbolically important that Iraqis take charge as soon as possible. Second of all, there was a security consideration. If they can take over and they can move to intercept and otherwise disrupt those who are bent on disrupting, or those who are bent on attacking the transfer of sovereignty, they that's one more blow against the terrorists.
So when you combine the two -- when you combine those two considerations, the important symbolism of the Iraqis taking over sovereignty of their country as soon as possible, the fact that they are ready, that they're ahead of schedule, a sign of progress and efficiency and accomplishment, and an aggressive preemptive move against the terrorists. It made perfect sense.
I would also, in terms of timing or -- how should I -- the run up to this decision, as I think it's been briefed to some of your colleagues in Istanbul, this has been an idea that was being knocked around for a couple of days. It originated, my understanding is, with Prime Minister Allawi and it was his proposal, discussed it with Ambassador Bremer, communicated to the Administration.
It was decided yesterday that -- let me just make sure that's right -- yeah, the final decision was made last night to go ahead with it today. And the Secretary called his -- a number of his colleagues early this morning, Istanbul time, ahead of the transfer of sovereignty, to inform them that this arrangement had been worked out. They were all uniformly praiseworthy of the move and the press was notified early this morning.
QUESTION: Adam, reportedly, there are some edicts that were handed by Ambassador Bremer to the -- to Prime Minister Allawi. Could you explain to us what these edicts -- apparently, they are restricting some sort of -- the relationship with the United States, and so on.
MR. ERELI: I don't know what edicts you're referring to. I would challenge a characterization of edicts as in any way restricting the relationship with the United States.
QUESTION: Also in Deputy Secretary's interview, he suggested that the Iraqi forces may be more willing to fight now under Iraqi command than they had been under coalition command. Is that some sort of -- I don't know -- some sort of derision of the effort they have been putting in?
It sounds a bit like it, that they haven't been giving full effort now. And that's another reason the U.S. wanted to handover.
MR. ERELI: I wouldn't look at it that way. I mean, in fact, to the contrary, for several months now the forces opposed to stability and democracy and independence in Iraq have been waging -- have been conducting attacks against not only the coalition, but importantly, Iraqis. And one of the targets of those attacks, as you'll all recall, have been recruiting stations, have been police stations.
And in spite of those attacks, Iraqis have continued to step forward and volunteer to be a part of the new Iraq, to sacrifice their lives and their futures for the benefit of their citizens. So we have seen, really, over the last several months growing numbers of Iraqis coming forward to defend their country.
At the same time, it's important to note that there's a difference between defending your country that is not fully sovereign, and defending your country that is your country. And I think that's what Secretary Armitage was referring to, that -- and he also, I think, put it very eloquently in his testimony last Friday, where he said that there is a buy-in, a sense of patriotism, a sense of belonging to family when you are part of a national army under national command in a country that is ruled by your own people.
That is in no sense a derision of what the Iraqis have done up till now, and in fact, I think if you look at some of the successes we've had, in terms of the situation in Najaf, many instances where we've had successful operations against terrorists, that has been largely because of Iraqi intelligence, Iraqi involvement, and Iraqi participation. At the same time, there have been other cases where the security forces, or the cooperation with the security forces, wasn't everything we would like it to be.
And I think that as we move to a fully sovereign Iraq, we can work on improving those kinds of coordinated efforts.
The other point I would make, in looking back at what Iraqis have done so far is, remember, one of the first things that the prime minister-designate did -- or actually, even before that, one of the first -- when we were transferring ministries over to Iraqi control, one of the first ministries transferred over was the Ministry of Defense. There was a National Security Council created, which was an interagency of interministerial group of defense, of intelligence, among the Iraqis in order to coordinate their interaction with the multinational force. And now that -- when Prime Minister Allawi took over, he continued that group and made it a very pivotal part of his government.
So in a nutshell, what we've seen are successful Iraqi participation in confronting terror with a multinational force. And what we are ready, and what we're looking forward to, is, I think, enhanced cooperation, enhanced engagement, that only a fully sovereign Iraq can bring.
QUESTION: Can I follow up on that?
MR. ERELI: Yes.
QUESTION: So, Adam, still despite that the Iraqis' ability to secure themselves is still a matter of concern to you and to the Iraqi government itself? And on the other hand, the American now handling everything still in terms of security, that's a matter of concern back here at home also.
MR. ERELI: I'm sorry. Americans handling everything in terms of security?
QUESTION: In terms of security in Iraq right now.
MR. ERELI: That's not true.
QUESTION: And my question now, when do you think the Iraqi will be able to secure themselves fully and then we will see the American troop like pulling back a little bit from Iraqi cities?
MR. ERELI: I can't give you a time or date by which the Iraqi government will be able to assume full responsibility for security in that country. Our expectation is that it will be a while. The other part of your question is, when will you see, sort of, American pullback from certain cities?
I think you see that -- that's a changing situation. You see that all the time, as Iraqis can stand up units and mount operations that successfully counter insurgence and anti-regime elements, then we respond accordingly. A good example is Fallujah, where you had the Fallujah brigade come in, take over positions held by Americans, we pulled back. There has been a, I guess, stabilization of the situation in Fallujah, although it's certainly fair from finished, far from taken care of. But in any given conflict or any given situation, as the Iraqis prove themselves capable to take charge of the situation, we'll move back.
Yes, ma'am.
QUESTION: You said Secretary Powell called his counterparts before the transfer of the sovereignty? Did it include Chinese Foreign Minister Li? Or do you have the readout?
MR. ERELI: Yeah. He spoke to, this morning, he spoke to Foreign Minister Lavrov, Foreign Minister Li, Foreign Minister Ban of South Korea, and Foreign Minister Kawaguchi, and one more -- I can't even read my writing.
QUESTION: Has anyone else called others (inaudible)?
QUESTION: Armitage has him calling the defense minister, too. I wonder if he was up all night. Armitage has him talking to all the foreign ministers, all defense ministers. I think that's beyond anybody's capability.
MR. ERELI: Downer, Foreign Minister Downer. Sorry.
QUESTION: Did they inform any of the Arab foreign ministers?
MR. ERELI: I don't have any calls to Arab foreign ministers.
QUESTION: And you don't know if anyone else made calls like that?
MR. ERELI: I can speak for Secretary Powell.
QUESTION: Besides -- so, basically, it's to inform the possible early transfer?
MR. ERELI: It was to give them -- yes, it was to tell them that the transfer was taking place, to explain what was behind the timing of the transfer, and really to, I think, reinforce our common endeavor with respect to Iraq's future.
QUESTION: Well, I guess it's a little after the fact now, but, I mean, this was a coalition of many countries. So how come the decision wasn't taken in concert with some of these other countries, and it was just taken between the U.S. and the Iraqis?
MR. ERELI: Well, first of all, it was done between Allawi and the Coalition Provisional Authority. Second of all, it was done in the last few days. Third of all, I'm sure, as the British were involved, and you saw the British -- Ambassador Bremer's British counterpart who was at the ceremony.
Finally, this was done, I think, quickly and in a way to, I think, minimize the planning for those who want to disrupt it.
Yes, ma'am.
QUESTION: Do you have anything on the result of the six-party talks?
MR. ERELI: Let's finish with Iraq first.
Teri.
QUESTION: Can you talk about NATO at all? I mean, I know there are people over there.
QUESTION: Traveling.
QUESTION: Yeah, the traveling -- without referring us to the traveling party, Chirac is saying that he isn't necessarily in favor of a larger NATO role, even though they have said they are willing to do some training. What can you tell us about the talks that have taken place so far?
MR. ERELI: I will give you a brief summary of what your colleagues could get in much more detail from the party in Istanbul. At the NATO Summit, the leaders decided a number of things, all of which, I think, point to allied consensus on Iraq, and certainly are strong and positive indicators for future international cooperation in support of Iraq.
The alliance leaders issued a statement that, among other things, decided to offer assistance to the Iraqi government in the training of its security forces, instructed the North Atlantic Council to develop the means for implementing this decision on an urgent basis, and also asked the council to report to the NATO Secretary General on further proposals to support Iraqi security institutions. And this in response to the requests of the Iraqi interim government.
The other noteworthy points in the NATO statement was an expression of full support for the implementation of UN Security Council Resolution 1546, full support for the multinational force and its mission to help restore and maintain security, and finally NATO's support for Poland and its leadership of the multinational division in south central Iraq.
So really unanimous and consensual statement of political support for Iraq and a positive response to Iraq's calls for NATO assistance.
QUESTION: But this is less than what you were hoping for when you said assistance.
MR. ERELI: Not at all. In fact, this is very much in line with our hopes and our expectations.
QUESTION: You wanted a NATO presence in Iraq, more than just troops, right?
MR. ERELI: Well, first of all, it's not clear that there won't be a NATO presence in Iraq. This is something that NATO's going to talk about.
Second of all, we did not go into this saying we want NATO in Iraq. We went into this saying we think it's important that NATO have a role in supporting Iraq as it seeks to establish security and move toward democracy, and that's precisely what came out of it.
QUESTION: Adam, the Jerusalem Post today reported that the Israeli Defense Ministry offered NATO to assist in the security of Iraq as part of a larger force. Was that something that you would --
MR. ERELI: I have not seen that report and I have not heard of such offers.
Sir.
QUESTION: Adam, difficulties remain in Iraq with trying to get all this infrastructure set up. Now, we've been from a Western standpoint, talking about what could be, should be set up, and everybody, of course, looking at the end of the month, it's now two and a half days early.
But nonetheless, are there any responsibilities that this new Iraqi interim government should have with other governments, which may not have been playing an active role -- we're not talking about Jordan or Egypt, which have got very good central government, but more the fringe, such as Sudan, Somalia, where a lot of the so-called militants are infiltrating. In other words, there's no actual court system set up. Are you going to be working with them in that regard, too? And you say you've been working with the police, but how do you get these people off the streets and so that this new government can function immediately?
MR. ERELI: A couple of points. Iraq's relations with its neighbors and with other countries is really Iraq's business, and it's not something that I'm going to speak to. Obviously, we share with Iraq a concern that other countries in the region as well as beyond the region, may be supporting insurgency operations or anti-regime operations. We will work with the Iraqi government to counter those efforts. We will offer them our diplomatic and materiel and operational support. And we certainly have, I think, been very vocal and very active diplomatically to try and cut off the supply of people and material into Iraq that are aimed at subverting Iraq. But, again, Iraq's sovereign. They're going to -- this is a campaign that they are going to now, I think, join with full energy.
Is that it for Iraq?
Okay. Yes, ma'am.
QUESTION: Different subject. Do you have anything on --
MR. ERELI: Oh, I'm sorry. One more on Iraq.
QUESTION: Yes, please. Combined, actually. General Casey, on Friday, in front of the Senate hearing, he indicated that there were very few militants that crossed the -- that are crossing the Iraqi borders, and that most of the resistance are -- the great majority of it is coming from the Iraqi people. And that's on one hand. He said that in front at the Senate hearing on Friday.
MR. ERELI: I didn't see the testimony. Rather than accept your characterization, I'd rather see it. We've made it clear that -- and I think Secretary Armitage made it clear in his testimony as well -- that there are a number of factors to the security situation in Iraq, both homegrown, as well as imported from the outside, that concern remains and our statements to all countries with a role in this or with an influence to play is the same.
There is no excuse for not doing everything in your power to prevent those wishing Iraq harm from using your territory or your national resources to engage in that kind of activity. That problem remains, and that -- I think -- and our statement of concern remains. And so, for any state or party involved in supporting activities or persons or groups that are fighting against the legitimate aspirations of the Iraqi people, they should cease and desist.
QUESTION: The Vice President of Syria, Mr. Abd Halim Khaddam, he, while he was receiving yesterday the plans of the Iraqi tribes, he told them that Syria's doors are widely open from the time that the new government takes place, that Syria would give all the cooperation and would open its doors for anything that would enhance Iraqi well-being and future. That's on one hand.
On the other hand, also, if I can move, I need your comment on that and --
MR. ERELI: I don't have any comment on it.
QUESTION: Okay. Concerning Mr. Mohammed ElBaradei, he said that Syria has informed him that it is welcoming him and his experts to go into Syria any time, anywhere they want. And also, he said that he is planning to go to Israel in order to try and obtain the Israeli cooperation to also inspect to try to see if he can get to convince the Israelis to inspect their nuclear programs in there.
Is that step from Mr. ElBaradei, has it been talked about here, when he visited with Secretary Powell? And is the U.S. Administration trying to encourage Israel to cooperate with Mr. ElBaradei in this respect?
MR. ERELI: That subject was not discussed. I have not seen the Director General's remarks, so I really couldn't comment on them. It is -- our position on Syria's weapons programs, I think, is familiar to you, and I really don't have anything new to add to that.
QUESTION: Well, actually, a follow up on that. There were some reports over the weekend that Syria was a client of Mr. Khan and the whole Pakistan nuclear ring. Do you have anything on that?
MR. ERELI: I don't.
Okay, on to --
QUESTION: Yes, do you have anything on resort of six-party talks in Beijing? And also, between U.S. and North Korea, anything significant?
MR. ERELI: The third round of six-party talks ended on Saturday. The discussions in this round were constructive. Several of the parties, including ourselves, South Korea and North Korea, put forward proposals on achieving our shared goal of a nuclear weapons-free Korean Peninsula. I would note that all parties came to Beijing prepared for substantive discussions. Important differences remain between the parties and we are still a long way from agreement, but we believe that the serious engagement that we saw in this third round in Beijing represents progress.
As far as the North Korean reaction to our proposals, which you've read a lot about, I would simply say that there have been various sorts of comments made by North Korea through its official media. Our expectation is that North Korea will study our proposal carefully and we look forward to continuing the discussions, the substantive discussions we have in Beijing, in a fourth round of talks. It was agreed in Beijing, as the Chinese reported, that the six parties had decided in principle to meet again by the end of September. And we would look forward to holding another working group meeting as early as possible to, as I said, continue our discussions on the proposals submitted by the parties during this last round.
Yes.
QUESTION: Adam, you said that all parties came to Beijing ready for substantive talks. Would you characterize these talks as substantive?
MR. ERELI: Substantive discussions.
QUESTION: Discussions.
MR. ERELI: Yes, yeah, in the sense that they talked about the substance of the proposals, as opposed to just sort of procedural things. I mean, they engaged in the meat of the issue.
QUESTION: Well, when you say they talked about the substance of the proposal, the North Koreas were asking the U.S. and presumably the South Koreans about -- they were asking you to flesh out more details of the proposal?
MR. ERELI: Yeah, there were --
QUESTION: Talking about how it would work?
MR. ERELI: There were sustained and -- there were sustained and engaged backs and forths on what was proposed, what it meant, what issues were covered, what issues weren't covered, those sorts of things.
QUESTION: And then, was it the same for your side and the other sides about the North Korean proposal? I mean, it sounds like the North Korean proposal was really just, you know, you pay them compensation for a freeze, which you said in the past that you won't do.
MR. ERELI: Well, I'm not going to get into detail or be able to characterize for you the North Korean ideas. What I can --
QUESTION: Well, without characterizing those ideas, can you characterize what the U.S. thinks of those ideas?
MR. ERELI: I can say that, in our discussions throughout the six-party talks, we actively tried to clarify issues, flesh out ideas, and see how we could carry forward in achieving our goal of a comprehensive denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula, and that included responding to certain North Korean ideas.
Yes, Teri.
QUESTION: The Indonesian hosts of ASEAN are saying that they would expect a six-party foreign ministers, rather informal, get-together on the edges of the meeting. I know we've asked about this before. But can you tell us whether that -- whether that plan has gone forward any further?
MR. ERELI: I'm not aware that anything has been definitively scheduled at this point.
QUESTION: But there were (inaudible)?
MR. ERELI: I couldn't tell you. I'm just not -- since I'm not with the party, I don't know what the latest is on their scheduling and their consideration of possibilities.
QUESTION: You wouldn't be surprised to see them?
(Laughter.)
How's that?
MR. ERELI: I wouldn't be surprised to see it. I wouldn't be surprised not to see it. I'm just not up -- not going to predict.
Ma'am.
QUESTION: A senior Chinese military delegation is visiting North Korea right now, and the two sides are expected to sign an agreement to promote military exchange and cooperation on the border patrol. What's the U.S. views on this move right after the six-party talks?
MR. ERELI: I don't see them as linked. South Korea has been -- and North Korea have been undertaking a number of steps to -- with regard to their bilateral relationship, and that is as it should be. I don't have any specific comment on this specific initiative.
QUESTION: Can we go back to Iraq?
MR. ERELI: I'm sorry.
QUESTION: Sudan, if we can move to.
MR. ERELI: Are we done with North Korea?
QUESTION: On Japan, actually.
MR. ERELI: Japan, okay.
QUESTION: Secretary Armitage met with the Japanese Vice Foreign Minister this morning on U.S.-Japan (inaudible) dialogue. Could you brief us on that?
MR. ERELI: Sure. Deputy Secretary Armitage today is holding policy discussions with his Japanese counterpart Vice Foreign Minister Yukio Takeuchi. They will be joined by, for part of the meeting this afternoon by Australian Secretary of Foreign Affairs Ashton Calvert for a trilateral discussion. These discussions are part of our periodic strategic policy dialogue with our close allies, Japan and Australia.
The dialogue concerns issues of common interest. Today, the topics that they'll be talking about will be, among others, North Korea, Iraq, and other issues of regional and global concern. I would note that we had similar meetings to this in February in Tokyo.
Cyprus.
QUESTION: Yes. Mr. Ereli, any comment on the British Government (inaudible) invitation to the Turkish Cypriot leader Mehmet Ali Talat to meet in London, the British Foreign Minister Jack Straw, for which the Cypriot government strongly protested today as illegal?
MR. ERELI: No, I don't have any comment.
QUESTION: Why?
MR. ERELI: Because it's a meeting between the British Government and --
QUESTION: I'm asking you --
MR. ERELI: -- someone from northern Cyprus.
QUESTION: I'm asking you because your government, it was stated many, many times from this podium, that you are working very hard to the end, to the assimilation of the Turkish Cypriot, and this British initiative contradicts your policy, vis-à-vis, to the isolation (inaudible).
MR. ERELI: I don't see -- I don't really have a comment, sir.
Yes, David.
QUESTION: Can I get your reaction to the election in Serbia yesterday? Have we reached out to the winner in any way, politically?
MR. ERELI: I'm not sure what communications we've had with the winner at this point. Let me say that -- let me say publicly and for the record that the United States congratulates Boris Tadic on his victory in the presidential elections in Serbia, and we applaud the Serbian people on their participation in the democratic process. The United States Government looks forward to working with President Tadic, as well as with Prime Minister Kostunica, and the other democratic leaders of Serbia. This election, in our view, represents another step in the democratic reforms the Serbian people started in October 2000.
On Sudan?
QUESTION: Yes, Serbia.
MR. ERELI: Serbia.
QUESTION: Do you expect more cooperation on the issues related to the International Court of Justice with the new president?
MR. ERELI: I won't get into --
QUESTION: (Inaudible.)
MR. ERELI: Yeah, I won't get into predicting what the new president may or may not do. As you know, it's been -- it's long been our position, and that hasn't changed, that Serbia needs to cooperate fully with the International Criminal Tribunal for Yugoslavia and facilitate the transfer of all persons wanted by that tribunal to custody of the tribunal.
On Sudan?
QUESTION: Yes. What Secretary Powell is going to tell Sudanese Government regarding Darfur? Will he going to discuss the normalization with the Khartoum government, as the government overseeing right now?
MR. ERELI: Our message to the Government of Sudan will be very clear and direct: Stop the Jingaweit violence, remove all obstacles to humanitarian access, cooperate fully with international monitoring, and agree to engage in political talks with the Darfur armed opposition.
Normal relations with Sudan, the Secretary has also made clear on numerous occasions, are not possible unless and until there is a final north-south peace agreement and an end to the violence in Darfur.
QUESTION: Can we go back to Iraq?
QUESTION: No, can we stay on Sudan? Condoleezza Rice said over the weekend that you were working with the Libyans to try and get a third route for aid into Darfur. Can you expand on that?
MR. ERELI: This is something, I think, that we've been talking about for some time. It's a land route through Libya for the delivery of humanitarian supplies. I don't know what the latest is in terms of the logistical arrangements for delivering aid through that route but, as the National Security Advisor said, it is an issue under active discussion.
QUESTION: Can you talk about the kind of diplomatic channels that have secured this route? I mean, who's been the interlocutor with the Libyans? Is it the liaison office on the ground or has it been a higher level, Bill Burns, or --
MR. ERELI: Let me see what I can get for you on it.
Tammy.
QUESTION: Speaking of Libya, can you update us on Bill Burns' travels there and --
MR. ERELI: Are we done with Sudan?
Okay.
QUESTION: Assistant Secretary Burns and Ambassador Cofer Black, our Coordinator for Counterterrorism, met with Libyan leader Muammar Qadhafi today -- and I'll continue as soon as I can find it -- met with Muammar Qadhafi today. As you know, Assistant Secretary Burns was last in Libya in March. He has had an ongoing series of meetings with senior Libyan officials. This meeting was the latest in that series. The subject of their conversation was the ongoing dialogue on political and economic relations.
Ambassador Black discussed with the Libyans our outstanding concerns over Libya's past support for terrorism and our engagement with Libya on its support for the global war on terrorism.
QUESTION: Following on to that, about Ambassador Black's discussion. Did he discuss the Saudi plot?
MR. ERELI: That issue, I believe, did come up. I think we've made clear our concerns about the story. Libya -- as well as, you know, reminding Libya of its assurances not to use violence for political objectives.
QUESTION: Did you -- what did he hear back from Qadhafi?
MR. ERELI: I don't have that level of detail.
QUESTION: But Adam, this has been going on for quite a while, and this Department said at the time that if it were true, and if it were discovered that the knowledge of such a plot went up as high as Qadhafi, that it would call into question continued development of relations.
So if Burns and Black were over there chatting with Qadhafi, you must have had some answer that made you decide that you could continue discussions with them on furthering relations.
MR. ERELI: Or we haven't had an answer. Let me put it this way. There is -- as we said before, the reports are a matter of concern to us --
QUESTION: The reports or the issue in the reports?
MR. ERELI: The reports are a matter of concern to us. The possibility that there is that degree of connivance with terrorists is of concern, and I think that is the message that is being delivered.
QUESTION: But when you say that you're concerned about the reports, are you just concerned about press reports of the (inaudible) or do you have indications that this could be true? I mean, do you have information that leads you to believe that there's some there there?
MR. ERELI: I don't have anything new to share with you on that, from what we last said, which is that we're trying to gather the information. We don't have anything -- have enough to make a conclusive judgment, I think, one way or the other.
QUESTION: Is this holding up the actual standing up of the U.S. liaison office?
MR. ERELI: I'll check. I don't believe so, but I'm not positively sure. I think the issue with the U.S. liaison office is more tied to the agreements we made, or not agreements, the understandings we had with Libya dating from December of last year and moving forward on the process of helping Libya fulfill its commitments on disarming and ending its weapons of mass destruction programs, and that the issue of diplomatic representation is more a function of that.
QUESTION: Sorry to belabor this, but it would appear that you are moving ahead despite not having gotten an answer from Libya on this.
MR. ERELI: No. I don't know why you say that.
QUESTION: Because you said that you're not -- that the establishment of the liaison office is still based on earlier agreements before these reports came out, and that it hasn't been affected by it.
MR. ERELI: I'll put it this way. I'm not aware that, and I don't believe, the issue of the liaison office is going to be decided on by whether or not -- or is going to be held up until we can verify, one way or the other, these reports. We are looking into these reports we are trying to establish their veracity or not. That veracity has not yet been fully established. I will not speculate on what may or may not happen if they were, because that's speculation. We can deal with the here and now. The here and now is that we've got a process underway with Libya, that Libya is -- that that process is moving forward satisfactorily, and that we will act accordingly.
Yes.
QUESTION: A question, over the weekend, there have been more attacks, both tit-for-tat between -- in Gaza --
MR. ERELI: I'm sorry, anything -- are we done with Libya?
QUESTION: Back to Iraq.
MR. ERELI: We're done with Libya? Okay, let's -- we'll go to Gaza and then Iraq.
QUESTION: Okay -- tit-for-tat with Gaza and also a killing of a member of another militant group up in Nablus. The Egyptians were asked to help with the security in Iraq, and also undoubtedly in Gaza. There was a plan of building a moat, literally 2.5 kilometers in length, to separate Gaza from Egyptian territory. And recently, the, I guess, Mubarak Government has asked, or given an ultimatum to Chairman Arafat to either help with the security matters or -- now, has that been the center of the talks that are going on in Taba with Bill Burns and also Cofer Black as well?
MR. ERELI: Cofer Black is the Special Coordinator for Counterterrorism. Ambassador Black was not in the discussions in Taba. Ambassador Burns was representing the United States.
The issue of arms smuggling through the tunnels to Gaza was very much an issue at Taba, as was the very welcome and important and positive Egyptian support for consolidating and enabling Palestinian security forces.
There has been -- there have been a number of violent incidents in Gaza over the weekend. The important point to make here is that, you know, as we've said many times, it's up to the Palestinians to act to show that they can assume responsibility for security in Gaza once the Israelis withdraw. That's absolutely critical. The events of this weekend underscore the necessity for that kind of capability.
The Egyptians are working, I think, very hard, and so far, very successfully, to help the Palestinians get there, but we still need to see the Palestinians take immediate steps to consolidate their security forces under a single, responsible and accountable leadership that is fully committed to taking steps to end the terror and violence. And that remains a top priority.
I'm sorry, we're going to go to Iraq.
QUESTION: Well, can we stay on that?
MR. ERELI: One more on this?
QUESTION: Yeah. At least some -- a few of those attacks were precipitated by Israel doing a targeted assassination of the leader of the Al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigades. Do you think that these sensitive -- at this time of these sensitive talks in Taba and, you know, all the things that they're trying to do with the Palestinians, that this makes it more difficult or a more tenuous situation?
MR. ERELI: I don't think there's an -- I don't think there's an excuse accept -- that's acceptable for the Palestinians not acting against terror, and that means consolidating the security forces and taking steps against the kinds of groups, Al-Aqsa and others, that practice terrorism, that accept terrorism as a legitimate tool to achieve political ends. I mean, that is just -- there is no place for that in our -- in the modern world.
QUESTION: I'm not suggesting that, I mean, of course, they do. But at the same time, I mean, do they need this added burden of having to prevent attacks that wouldn't -- that perhaps wouldn't have happened had the Israelis not done this targeted -- I mean, you've spoken out against targeted killings in the past, I mean, especially now when these sensitive negotiations are going on. I mean, was this a prudent step?
MR. ERELI: Obviously, Israel -- we recognize Israel's right to take actions in defense, in self-defense. Our focus, and we think the party's focus, should be on moving with all due haste in preparing to take advantage of a changed dynamic, and that changed dynamic is the Israelis' plan to withdraw all settlements from Gaza and turn it over to the Palestinians and distractions from that, attempts to find other issues to deal with, are not helpful.
On Iraq.
QUESTION: Do you have anything new on the status of the U.S. Marine that has been kidnapped?
MR. ERELI: I do not.
QUESTION: On Iraq?
MR. ERELI: On Iraq.
QUESTION: There are now reports crossing the wires that Ambassador Negroponte has actually landed in Baghdad. Can you confirm now that the timing you were talking about was today?
MR. ERELI: I can't confirm that. I haven't talked to anybody in Baghdad since starting the briefing, so I couldn't tell you.
QUESTION: Did you know that he was planning to travel today?
MR. ERELI: I don't have anything more I can say on it than I said earlier today.
QUESTION: Yes, on Mexico. There were massive protests against crime and impunity in ten cities yesterday. And I was wondering if the U.S. Government is in any way concerned with an increasing level of insecurity in Mexico, and particularly in Tijuana, where a co-editor of a magazine, Zeta, was brutally assassinated last week.
MR. ERELI: Obviously, we condemn these kinds of senseless acts. But I don't have any specific comment on the events that you described. I think that, you know, obviously, we work, the United States, works closely with Mexico. Certainly, we, in the State Department, have excellent relations with our Mexican counterparts in the areas of cooperation and law enforcement. And those relationships, I think, are -- served both of our countries well.
QUESTION: You're not discussing right now changing the Travel Warning towards Mex -- to Mexico?
MR. ERELI: Not that I'm aware of.
Yes, sir.
QUESTION: On Albania. As far for the Greek minority in Albania, we discussed the other day with Mr. Boucher, Ambassador Richard told me before yesterday that the entire Greek minority immigrated to Greece. Three questions: One, could you please confirm this? Number two --
MR. ERELI: I'm sorry. Confirm what, that the Albanian minority?
QUESTION: If the Greek minority is totally immigrated from Albania to Greece?
MR. ERELI: No, I cannot confirm that.
QUESTION: But why?
MR. ERELI: Because I don't know.
QUESTION: You know, the point is that -- excuse me. You said (inaudible) from the Bureau of European Affairs regarding as background Albania note? And you are dealing with this issue, including in the new report human rights? So I was wondering if you confirm this is true, yes or no?
MR. ERELI: I would talk to the Albanians, if I were you, ask the Government of Albania.
QUESTION: Why don't you circulate in U.S. Government with that information?
MR. ERELI: Let me see what we've circulated, but I'd refer you to the Government of Albania.
QUESTION: In the same background note on Albania, is --
MR. ERELI: Background note?
QUESTION: Yes.
QUESTION: He's referring to the background notes.
QUESTION: Yes, it was released -- several pages, the other day, is reported by Elizabeth Jones and also by Charles Ries.
MR. ERELI: Okay. I'll see if we have any comment. I'll see if we have any comment.
QUESTION: But one more question please.
MR. ERELI: Mm-hmm.
QUESTION: Okay. Why it is not saying in the same note that Albania was also member of the axis, too? And one wonders, why? Are you afraid of Albanians? It's a matter of history.
MR. ERELI: You have to repeat that. I didn't get it.
QUESTION: I'm saying, in the same background, you are not saying anything that Albania was also a member of the axis and I was wondering why.
MR. ERELI: I'll tell you what. I will consult the writers of the background note, and if there is an -- if there is an answer to that question, I'll ask that somebody call you.
QUESTION: Because there has been a lot of distortion to the truth, and I was wondering why --
MR. ERELI: I don't think there are distortions, but I will endeavor, if there is an answer that we have to share with you to have someone call you.
QUESTION: Thank you.
(end transcript)
(Distributed by the Bureau of International Information Programs, U.S. Department of State. Web site: http://usinfo.state.gov)
|
NEWSLETTER
|
| Join the GlobalSecurity.org mailing list |
|
|
|
