12 August 2004
State Department Noon Briefing, August 12
Iraq, Russia, Georgia, Japan, Greece, Cyprus, Libya, Iran, Sri Lanka, Bahrain, Sudan
State Department Deputy Spokesman Adam Ereli briefed reporters August 12.
Following is the transcript of the State Department briefing:
(begin transcript)
U.S. Department of State
Daily Press Briefing Index
Thursday, August 12, 2004
1:00 p.m. EDT
BRIEFER: Adam Ereli, Deputy Spokesman
IRAQ
-- National Conference
-- United Nations Role
-- Muqtada Sadr
-- Impact on Insurgents on Reconstruction Activities
-- Sovereign Government of Iraq
RUSSIA
-- Yukos
GEORGIA
-- Violence in South Ossetia
-- Consultations with Georgian Officials
JAPAN
-- Sergeant Charles Jenkins
GREECE
-- Olympic Games/Olympic Truce
CYPRUS
-- Opening of Airports in Northern Cyprus
LIBYA
-- Libyan Claims for Compensation
IRAN
-- Possible Detention of American Citizen
SRI LANKA
-- Status of Embassy Closure/White Powder Incident
BAHRAIN
-- Authorized Departure Lifted
-- Arrest of Six Suspected Terrorists/Counterterrorism Cooperation
SUDAN
-- Upcoming Talks in Abuja
-- Status of Negotiations
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE
DAILY PRESS BRIEFING
THURSDAY, AUGUST 12, 2004
(ON THE RECORD UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED)
1:00 p.m. EDT
MR. ERELI: Hello, everybody. Let's start by saying hello to a group from, I think, ABC News, I was told is here. Is that right? ABC News? Great.
QUESTION: CBS News --
MR. ERELI: That's not -- that's --
QUESTION: (Inaudible.)
MR. ERELI: All right, from -- group from a variety of news outlets are here observing, so welcome. Great to have you observe your colleagues and mentors at work. (Laughter.) So go at it, colleagues and mentors.
QUESTION: Are they observers or mentors?
MR. ERELI: I don't know. What are they going to do afterwards?
QUESTION: All right, let's get this show on the road.
MR. ERELI: Who would like to have the first question? I don't have any announcements.
QUESTION: Well, this isn't a tough one, but in Iraq, they've decided to have that delayed National Conference to select an interim national assembly. I assume that's delightful news to the State Department.
MR. ERELI: This is -- I don't think it's news. There was an announcement several weeks ago that the National Conference would take place on August 15th. And this is certainly an important and noteworthy development in Iraq's transition to representative democracy.
As you know, the National Conference was called for in the -- or the creation of -- the National Conference, the creation of the body that will come out of it, was called for in the Transitional Administrative Law. It will provide for participation by Iraq's many different groups, and, as I said, it's an important and -- important milestone on the path to a fully representative democracy in Iraq. So we're looking forward to doing what we can to support both the government of Iraq and the UN as they work together to bring together over a thousand Iraqis to debate the future of their democracy.
QUESTION: Well, you opened the door with the reference to the UN, so let me charge through it. (Laughter.) Considering all the violence, do you -- does the U.S. Government really believe at this point that the UN can play any sort of an on-the-ground role in Iraq?
MR. ERELI: It's not a question of believing whether they can or they can't. The fact is they are, you know, both with the work of Mr. Benomar, with the work of Ms. Perelli, in terms of the National Conference, in terms of preparing for elections, in terms of a number of other activities they're doing. It's something the UN is committed to doing. It's something that I think the -- that numerous Security Council resolutions have invited and called for. It's something that the Iraqis have embraced. It's a very important part of helping Iraq to rebuild and develop its political structures. So I guess it's not a question of if, it's a question of that they're doing it, that it's welcome, that it's important, and that there's support for.
Yes, ma'am.
QUESTION: Muqtada Sadr.
QUESTION: No, we can stay on Iraq? I thought somebody else --
MR. ERELI: Muqtada Sadr.
QUESTION: Muqtada Sadr is pretty much Iraq.
QUESTION: I thought she said another subject.
QUESTION: You declared him a thug and an outlaw, then the Iraqi government invited him to join the political process, and I think the political process did not object to that. Now, you're bombing his house with F-16 and you raided his house. What exactly is the U.S. policy regarding how do you do deal with him? And secondly, will you go to the -- at the moment, latest information that he's in a mosque and would you -- would the U.S. forces go as far as trying to get him in holy shrines like the mosque he's in now?
MR. ERELI: This is something that the Iraqi government has been very outspoken on. First and foremost, I would refer you to a press conference that was given today by the Minister of Defense and the Minister of Interior in which they were very clear that they view these militias as challenging the authority of the government. The government of Iraq has very strong views about the importance of asserting its authority over the entire country, including in Najaf. They are endeavoring to do that. We are, both as the United States and within the multinational force in Iraq, are in close consultations with the government of Iraq as they move forward in this.
So it's not about what the United States is going to do. It's about how the government of Iraq is handling challenges to its authority and how we, as a member of the multinational forces, as well as others, are working with the government of Iraq in support of that.
Finally, with regard to the shrine, I would point you to a statement issued, again, by the Prime Minister, in which he was very clear. He said, first of all, that the holy shrine will remain safe from attacks; and second of all, he said that the armed elements inside the shrine would be the ones held responsible for any damage coming to the shrine. So let's not make this a "What is the United States doing about al-Sadr?" issue but, rather, a "What is the government of Iraq doing about groups, armed groups, that are challenging its authority?"
QUESTION: So, it looks clearly now that the Iraqi government is going for a military solution. And if this is the case, you are agreeing with them because you are providing them with F-16 to -- trying to track him down.
MR. ERELI: I'll let the Iraqi government comment about what its solution is. What I would say is that there is a -- well, actually, I would refer -- on military questions and the use of military equipment and how that military equipment is being deployed, I would refer you to the military, i.e., the Pentagon. So let me not comment on the disposition or use of our military forces. That's not my place.
What I can tell you is that the United States, through its embassy, through the State Department, is committed to helping the government of Iraq, the interim government and subsequent governments, create an Iraq that allows for and provides an opportunity for peaceful expression of dissent, of -- respects diversity of opinion, and provides institutional and democratic structures that allow for all Iraqis to work together for the good of the country. And that, you know, obviously there are going to be situations where people don't buy into that and it's the Iraqi government that's going to have to decide how to deal with it, and that's what's going on here.
QUESTION: Considering, sir --
QUESTION: Can I follow --
QUESTION: Just one last thing. Considering the climate at the moment, do you think is any space or room for negotiation with the "Sadours," or the option is dead now, considering negotiations?
MR. ERELI: I don't want to speculate or offer commentary on how the Iraqi government can best deal with this situation. As I said, those -- that's something that the Iraqi government is going to have to work through.
QUESTION: Can I follow that, though?
MR. ERELI: Mm-hmm.
QUESTION: But the U.S. is doubling its forces in that area, and here's Egypt urging Iraq and U.S. forces to use dialogue instead of force in Najaf. Is Egypt and the United States in sync here? It sounds like -- well, I know what it sounds like, but I can't put those two things together. Could you be on divergent paths here?
MR. ERELI: Without speaking to the question about what our forces are doing -- that's an issue for the Pentagon -- with respect to commentary about what's the best way to deal with this situation, which was sort of the question I just got asked, I'm going to defer to the Iraqi government and --
QUESTION: Are you saying, Adam, that you have no -- that the United States has no suggestions or position on how the Iraqi government should deal with this?
QUESTION: Or in the deployment of its forces in dealing with this?
MR. ERELI: The way we started this was by my saying that the government of Iraq has strong views about the need to reassert its authority, and we are in close consultations with the government of Iraq about how we can support -- support it in dealing with this situation, and I'd leave it at that.
QUESTION: And in your consultations, is it not fair to assume that you're saying, "Well, here is one option, we think this one might be okay, this one might be better than another?"
MR. ERELI: I think we, in our consultations, we are doing what we can to support a resolution of this situation that is in line with what the long-term objectives of the government of Iraq are.
QUESTION: Yeah, but here is the Egyptian Government. They seem to think there are at least two forces or two groups, whatever the word would be, and two addresses for their pitch for diplomacy -- one is Iraq, and one is the United States. Egypt urged Iraqi and U.S. forces to use dialogue instead of force. You virtually said that it's Iraq's decision. They're using force and the U.S. supports Iraq. So Egypt is really on the wrong -- isn't Egypt on the wrong path in urging diplomacy at this point? They say, you know, thousands of people will be killed. They're trying to spare lives. Talk it over. What did the U.S. say to that?
MR. ERELI: Really, I would -- I think the best place to look for answers to these questions is to the Iraqi government itself. The Minister of Defense and the Minister of Interior gave a very extensive press conference today where they laid out their call to the militias in Najaf to hand over their arms and resolve this in a way that minimized damage and minimized harm.
They also made clear that the authority of the central government is important. So when you're asking what's the best way to deal with this and should you have dialogue or should you go, should you, you know, use force, the answer is, look at the what the government of Iraq is saying. I'm not, today, going to tell you that, you know, this is the right approach or this is the wrong approach.
We are going to work together with the government of Iraq to advance the long-term objectives that we all share, which is a democratic, stable, prosperous Iraq, and that is what we're trying to accomplish. That is what I would remind you Iraq's neighbors have said they are looking to accomplish. And that's, I think, what's guiding our policy and guiding our actions --
QUESTION: Can you get --
MR. ERELI: -- without getting into specifics about what tactical decisions are taken in response to a situation on a given day on the ground.
QUESTION: We know the U.S. goal. We know the stated Iraq goal. We know that there's over 900 Americans have been killed in pursuit of this goal. And the question on my mind is whether you can have democracy in Iraq without crushing the Shiite militia. Now, if you're going to say it's Iraq's decision whether to crush them or to have lunch with them, I'll let it go. But I thought the U.S. has a huge stake here, and Egypt is saying, "Talk to these guys."
QUESTION: Adam.
MR. ERELI: I'm just not in a position to say more than that.
QUESTION: Well -- can I just ask one thing?
QUESTION: Don't you think it's like a kind of a balancing act between -- I mean, you obviously want to put an end to this, you know, peacefully, but if you're forced to, if U.S. and Iraqi forces are forced to go into the shrine, I mean, aren't you concerned that it's going to provoke some kind of nationwide outrage? Or is Shiite --
MR. ERELI: I think that is -- I think that's getting way ahead of things. First of all, again, I'd refer you to what the Iraqis said, the Iraqi government said, which is that they are not going to attack the shrine. Second of all, we are not involved in any actions that I'm aware of against the shrine, and suggestions to the contrary, I think are quite inflammatory. Third, how this situation gets resolved is obviously of concern to all of us; first and foremost, the Iraqis. But let's remember, this is about a sovereign Iraqi government dealing with a problem posed by its citizens, and that's the optic through which to look at this.
QUESTION: Okay, then, I mean, you're taking all of your cues from the Iraqi government? I mean, U.S. forces are there, you've already said in the press that U.S. forces are going to do what they need to do to protect their people. You're taking your cues from the government in terms of military operations now?
MR. ERELI: Well, as partners with Iraq, with the mission -- look at the mission statement of the multinational force, look at the Security Council resolution dealing with this. Our position is to support the government of Iraq as it exercises its authority and extends its control over the country, and that's what's guiding our interaction with them in this case.
Yes, Teri.
QUESTION: Can you talk about a report that the State Department has apparently just released that goes into some detail about how the insurgency is affecting reconstruction efforts and what roads have been blocked off, what isn't being done because of security problems?
MR. ERELI: I don't know the report you're referring to. I'm certainly not in a position to get into the details of what roads may or may not have been blocked off. I think what we've said in the past, and this continues to be the case, is that, obviously, the security situation has an impact on some reconstruction activity. However, that is not to say that reconstruction activity isn't ongoing. In fact, I think we have seen to date a good pace in terms of reconstruction projects, good involvement of Iraqis. I think more, obviously a lot more, needs to be done, both in terms of moving money and getting projects underway. The security situation is a factor in that process, but I guess the short answer is it has an effect but it's not stopping it. Reconstruction activity is moving forward.
QUESTION: But, I mean, it's not stopping it altogether, but if contractors can't move around there's a lot that's not getting done.
MR. ERELI: Again, I couldn't tell you to what extent contractors aren't getting around. As I said, it is impacting it but I couldn't be more specific than that. And second of all, saying a lot's not getting done, again, I don't know how accurate that is.
Yes.
QUESTION: Adam, is -- in looking at this with -- earlier with cleric al-Sadr, you said as early as June 7th that he's a maverick, and in answer to a question that I had you said you thought that he shouldn't take any place in a new interim government or government beyond.
But in another aspect, isn't it maybe his way of undermining the government so that it would possibly force the whole southern British sector to go their separate way? And thirdly, what are you doing -- any communication with his so-called boss, Mr. Sistani, who is under medical care in London? It's not necessarily a political move but a religious-type move.
MR. ERELI: I'm just trying to think how -- where to start. Let me put it this way. I'm not going to be prescriptive and I'm not going to tell you who needs to do what. Let us simply underscore certain, I think, principles, and those principles are that there is a sovereign government of Iraq; that that sovereignty needs to be acknowledged and respected -- that's certainly what we're doing; and that the Iraqis, the government of Iraq and the people of Iraq, are working to develop democratic institutions that provide for the participation of the citizens of Iraq in the decisions affecting them; and there's room in any democracy for people to participate peacefully and play by the rules to advance their cause and their agenda, and that's what I think the National Conference is all about and that's what the work of the UN, the work of the United States, the work of all of us is all about, is trying to move Iraq in that direction. There is no place for violence, violence against the government and violence against the people of Iraq, who are just trying to put in place a better, more peaceful country. And I think by looking at the National Conference you see the positive direction that things can move in.
Yes.
QUESTION: The Iraqi government has said that the mosque will not be attacked and you say it's inflammatory to say that the U.S. troops are attacking it, but will you make the same pledge as the Iraqi government to say the mosque will not be attacked?
MR. ERELI: I think it's been very clear that the United States forces and the United States military has said that there are no U.S. military forces attacking Muslim holy sites.
QUESTION: That's in the present tense. Will you guarantee that you won't attack it?
MR. ERELI: I will stay exactly where I am. This is not about America attacking or not attacking. This is about -- and we've been very clear that there is -- that we are not going against any Muslim sites. We've said it before. I'll say it again. We're not going after Muslim sites. That's not the way -- that's not the way we do business.
QUESTION: Well, if he holes himself up in there, will you avoid going in after him?
MR. ERELI: I think I've answered the question clearly. The government of Iraq has been explicit about it. We've been explicit about it.
QUESTION: You've been explicit saying we are not going to attack sites, Muslim sites. That's fair enough, as a general policy. But have you ruled out going into this mosque, or this holy --
MR. ERELI: There are no plans that I am aware of.
QUESTION: Isn't this a military question?
MR. ERELI: And it is a military question.
QUESTION: Thank you. That's what would have ended that whole thing. May I change the subject?
QUESTION: Yes.
QUESTION: Please.
MR. ERELI: Yes.
QUESTION: Has the Secretary spoken to the Russian Foreign Minister about Yukos or does he plan to in the coming days? And if he does speak to him, will he also mention the situation with Georgia?
MR. ERELI: I don't want to predict what may or may not happen. Let me speak to what has or has not happened. The Secretary has not yet called -- or has not called, period -- his Russian counterpart. If you are asking about the -- if you want to know about the Yukos case, although there has not been a call from the Secretary, it is an issue that we have raised and continue to raise with the Government of Russia.
As you know, the Secretary raised the issue of Khodorkovsky with the Foreign Minister at the NATO Summit in Istanbul. Our Assistant Secretary for European Affairs, Ambassador Jones, raised it with her counterparts in Moscow in end of July, last month. The point that we are making, the point that we consistently make, is that all parties need to arrive at a solution that resolves this case in accordance with the rule of law and due process, without influence from political considerations and that respects those principles.
On the question of Georgia, again, this is something that we have been in contact with the Georgians about. As you know, there were three -- two Georgian soldiers killed in South Ossetia and three seriously wounded. According to the Organization of Security and Cooperation in Europe, there were 35 South Ossetians wounded.
We have been in contact with Georgian officials. We've expressed our condolences for the loss and injury of servicemen, and we are urging Georgian officials to move quickly to avoid further conflict. We're also making the point that it's -- with Russian officials -- that it's important to work with the South Ossetian authorities to end hostilities immediately. I would also note that Russia has called for an emergency meeting of the Joint Control Commission and we support that call.
QUESTION: Can you say who has been in touch or at what level, the embassy level, or what?
MR. ERELI: My understanding is it's been both through the Ambassador in Georgia, as well as Department officials in Washington at the Bureau level.
QUESTION: With the Russian Embassy or with the Georgian?
MR. ERELI: With the Russian Embassy.
QUESTION: Adam, did you ever get any clarity about this report of an American citizen who had been detained in Iran? Have the Swiss gotten in touch with you?
QUESTION: Could you stay on this?
QUESTION: Oh, I'm sorry. No, by all means, stay on Russia.
QUESTION: Yeah, actually, on Yukos. What's the U.S.'s view, at this point, on Russian handling of the Yukos case and the impact on oil prices? Is it, in fact, driving up oil prices?
MR. ERELI: I don't really have a comment on markets and prices. What I would say is that, in our view, the appearance of a lack of due process and a threat to private property rights have resulted in both the Russian and the international business communities being on their guard. The case also -- the way the case has been handled also raises questions about respect for investment rights in Russia and has led to increased capital flight and a decline in new investment that is certainly having an impact on the Russian economy.
QUESTION: Is it only an appearance? After all these weeks, the closest the State Department can come to making a declarative statement is that the appearance of lack of due process? Have you made a judgment yet that somebody's messing with the legal system?
MR. ERELI: I don't have a judgment to offer you.
QUESTION: You only referred to business questions and economic questions, but, I mean, the bigger question is certainly when this first started was -- was, as Barry referred to, whether Putin was just trying to put down a political rival. Aren't you concerned about the political questions as well as the economic questions?
MR. ERELI: Yeah, and I thought I made it clear that we are concerned that the rule of law and due process be respected without influence from political considerations, so we are definitely making that point.
QUESTION: But earlier --
MR. ERELI: But I'm not going to tell you that this is, you know, what has happened or what hasn't happened. We are just pointing out, I would say, the guidelines, the standards that we think are important to be followed in order to provide credibility to the process and confidence to the investor community.
QUESTION: Earlier in the case, you seemed to be stronger on that, saying that it looked like it was a politically motivated case. Has something happened over these many months to convince you it's not politically motivated?
MR. ERELI: No, nothing has happened to change what we've said in the past.
QUESTION: Can you talk about any concerns that you have, if you do have any, about how this might affect oil markets?
MR. ERELI: No, I don't.
QUESTION: You don't have any concerns?
MR. ERELI: I don't want to speculate about market fluctuations or impacts.
QUESTION: Well, are you -- you're concerned about how this is affecting the Russian markets and the Russian economy so, I mean, why not say how you -- if you have any concerns about how this is affecting international markets?
MR. ERELI: Because I just don't have a basis on which to make a judgment or a comment on that.
QUESTION: Because you're under strict orders from someone not to say anything that could potentially affect the mark-to-market, that could move the market, right?
(Laughter.)
MR. ERELI: Next question.
(Laughter.)
QUESTION: Come on.
QUESTION: We're just hanging onto his every word.
MR. ERELI: Yes, ma'am.
QUESTION: On Mr. Jenkins. You have been saying that the U.S. Government is going to ask for his custody from the Japanese Government at appropriate time. There are some reports that the preparation of a pretrial hearing for Mr. Jenkins on the way. I'm wondering if you -- are you going to ask for the custody some time soon?
MR. ERELI: I don't have anything new on that. And as you know, it is in the hands of military justice. So I'd refer you to those authorities for updates.
QUESTION: But the State Department isn't asking for custody?
MR. ERELI: No, it's -- he is a U.S. serviceman who has deserted and he is the subject of military justice.
Yes, Mr. Lambros.
QUESTION: Another subject, on the Olympic Games. Mr. Ereli, on the historic occasion of the beginning of the Olympic Games in Greece tomorrow, August 13, 2004, do you have anything to say, any comment?
QUESTION: Good luck.
(Laughter.)
MR. ERELI: The United States has been working closely with the Government of Greece and Greek authorities to help make this a successful and safe Olympic Games. We have had excellent cooperation and made excellent progress. Thousands of Americans, including an official delegation led by former President Bush, have traveled to Greece, and we are looking forward to a successful Olympic Games in the land of their birth.
QUESTION: Your Ambassador to Iraq, John Negroponte, Greek-American, as a UN Permanent Representative to the UN, signed the UN resolution for Olympic Truce during the Olympic Games in Athens, August 13th to 29th. Do you know if the U.S. Government is going to honor the truce, instead of those continued tragic bombardments of Iraq during the duration of the Games in the name of peace?
MR. ERELI: I don't really understand the question. But I'd reject the notion that somehow there -- we are violating any Olympic principles by what's going on in Iraq.
QUESTION: The question is that Negroponte signed the Olympic Truce, the UN resolution of the Olympic Truce with UN Secretary General. I was wondering if you are going to honor the truce during those days from August 13 to 29, starting just like Iraq.
MR. ERELI: I don't think there is a connection between the truce and what's going on in Iraq.
QUESTION: And on Cyprus, greetings to the Department of State from FAA. As you asked me yesterday, I spoke today extensively with the FAA regarding the airports in the Turkish occupied territory of Cyprus. An FAA senior official told me inter alia that change in the status of the airports from illegal to legal is not a technical matter but is a political one, and the FAA gets only statutes from the government in order to make the change, based always on a political decision. How do you respond to this?
MR. ERELI: I respond the way I responded yesterday, which is to say that, as a matter of policy, we are looking at ways to help end the isolation of Northern Cyprus, and those ways include the field of aviation, but we have not made any decisions.
Yes.
QUESTION: Adam, the Libyans have reacted, sort of, like, negatively to your reaction to the LaBelle disco bombing settlement with the Germans. They're saying that it's absurd for the United States to ask for compensation for the American victims when -- while refusing to offer compensation to the victims of -- the Libyan victims of the missile attack, the bombings, the U.S. bombings in Libya that, for one, your counterpart in the Libyan Foreign Ministry said, "It seems Mr. Ereli was born after 1986 and has no knowledge of the war launched by Reagan on Libyan towns that killed dozens of Libyan children."
What's the U.S. position on offering any kind of compensation to the Libyan victims of those air strikes? And if you could, could you also tell us if you are, in fact, older than 26?
MR. ERELI: I guess, in the interest of -- in the interest of transparency, I have to say I was born before 1986. On the question of the Libyan claims for compensation, that is a matter that's, I think, before the Libyan courts. I'll have to check. I had some guidance on it yesterday but I don't have it in front of me so I don't want to -- since it is a legal matter, I want to make sure I have all my t's crossed and i's dotted, so let me get you our position on that.
QUESTION: Adam, did you guys ever find out if, indeed, an American citizen, a Californian, was -- has been detained in Iran trying to enter there from Pakistan?
MR. ERELI: We are in the process of trying to find out, quite frankly. As you know, our protecting power in Iran is the Government of Switzerland. We have contacted the Government of Switzerland and asked them to determine if the individual who was reported to be detained is a U.S. citizen. Our understanding is that the Swiss Embassy has inquired about this detention with the Iranian authorities but we have not yet received confirmation of the identity of the individual and cannot verify at this time that he is an American citizen.
QUESTION: Okay.
MR. ERELI: The Swiss are continuing to pursue this and looking for additional information in order to confirm who is being held.
QUESTION: Any update on your Embassy in Sri Lankan? Has it reopened yet?
MR. ERELI: It is still closed.
QUESTION: And you still don't know what the white powder is?
MR. ERELI: Testing is still being done. The results we've not received.
Teri.
QUESTION: In Bahrain, you've dropped the authorized departure?
MR. ERELI: Yeah, we have -- as you know, we put out a statement, I believe, yesterday --
QUESTION: No, you didn't.
MR. ERELI: Okay. Let me announce to you -- (laughter) -- that the Department of State -- and the reason I said that is because some of you seem to know this so I thought we might have put it out.
QUESTION: Some people found out about it, but wondered why you didn't put out a statement. But, anyway.
MR. ERELI: Okay. For your benefit, let me tell you that the Department of State has decided to lift authorized departure status for Manama, Bahrain. That status had been in effect since the 3rd of July of this year. We made this decision after a careful and thorough review of the existing security situation in Bahrain, as well as the potential for future attacks on U.S. interests and facilities in the area. We will continue to review our security posture and monitor the situation and make changes in the future as circumstances warrant.
QUESTION: The Canadians decided not to let its families return. Does that cause you any concern that maybe they know something you don't?
MR. ERELI: No, I think, you know, each of us -- each of us have to make our decisions based on, really, I think, our footprint, how we're deployed in a country, how much of a target we are, how much security we can provide for ourselves, and, you know, an assessment of the threat to our facilities and our personnel based on how we're set up there and how we're working.
QUESTION: Adam, was the decision to drop the authorized departure status related to the re-arrest of the six men who have been charged with plotting to bomb or otherwise attack government and Western targets?
MR. ERELI: Let me put it this way. I think that it's important to underscore the fact that, for the United States, Bahrain is an important friend and ally in the war on terrorism. We believe that Bahrain recognizes the important stakes that are involved here. We would note that on July 14th, the Government of Bahrain did detain six individuals suspected of planning terrorist attacks against Western interests in Bahrain and that we welcomed that arrest. I would say our decision to end authorized departure, or lift authorized departure status, is based on a variety of considerations, including steps we've been able to take to protect ourselves, as well as counterterrorism cooperation and other steps host government has been able to take.
Yes, Matt.
QUESTION: Can we go to Sudan? And I don't know if you know anything about this, but the Nigerians are going to be hosting this meeting between the rebels and the government in the next week or so, but now the Libyans are also trying to get in on the act and they want to host a meeting, too. Do you have any reaction to that?
MR. ERELI: I had not heard that, frankly. The latest information I have is that things are on track for talks in Abuja on the 23rd, I believe, between the Government of Sudan and rebel groups, that this is a very, I think, very important and welcome development because, as we've long said, that, you know, this crisis requires a long-term political solution and the path to that solution goes through negotiations between the parties involved. That's what's happening in Abuja. It's an important step. But I would also take this opportunity to reiterate our call on the Government of Sudan to take decisive actions to fulfill its commitments with regard to moving or acting against the Jingaweit and acting decisively to stop violence that is ongoing in Darfur.
QUESTION: Adam, why would anybody believe in a political solution at this point when they haven't kept any of their promises so far? What good is that?
MR. ERELI: Well, I wouldn't -- I wouldn't look at it in those stark, black --
QUESTION: (Inaudible.)
MR. ERELI: I wouldn't look at it in those stark, black-and-white terms. The fact of the matter is that the Government of Sudan has taken certain actions. They have been inadequate. We have said they've been inadequate. But I would look at, you know, I would look at the north-south negotiations that ended 20 years of civil war. Negotiations arriving at political settlements can produce results and over a long term they're indispensable to providing for permanent peace. You have to address the roots of the conflict and you have to bring the parties together.
At the same time, you know, the Government of Sudan has to take steps to protect its people, and it's not doing that. It can do both. It can take steps to protect its people, and it can enter negotiations to resolve longstanding political differences. That is not an impossible task. It is a task, it is a -- it is something that has been accomplished before. And I think with determination and conviction and the support of the international community, it can be done again.
Yes, sir.
QUESTION: A bit of fallout, too, from yesterday over Darfur. The government in Khartoum is saying that westerners are after oil and gold, and also that Omar Ismail of the Darfur Peace and Development Organization, in a press conference yesterday, is rather pessimistic, feels that any type of negotiations basically won't work because there is no incentive for Khartoum to play ball, to go to those peace talks.
And as further --
MR. ERELI: Let's just stop. Let's stop there. Number one, oil and gold is not the issue here. The issue is saving people from disease, starvation, rape and murder. That's what's at stake here. That's why we're involved in Darfur. That's why the international community, I think, is speaking so clearly and consistently on the need for the Government of Sudan to take real visible, tangible, action.
On the question of negotiations, negotiations are in everybody's interest. They produce results. They are the means to a long-term solution to this problem.
QUESTION: Okay. Thank you.
(The briefing was concluded at 1:45 p.m.)
(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 |
|
|
|
