05 January 2005
State Department Noon Briefing, January 5
Asia/Department, Sri Lanka, Iran, Indonesia, Syria, Iraq, Israel/Palestinian Authority, China/Taiwan, North Korea
State Department deputy spokesman Adam Ereli briefed the press January 5.
Following is the transcript of the State Department briefing:
(begin transcript)
U.S. Department of State
Daily Press Briefing Index
Wednesday, January 5, 2005
1:00 p.m. EST
Briefer: Adam Ereli, Deputy Spokesman
ASIA/DEPARTMENT
-- Welfare and Whereabouts of American Citizens in Region
-- Inquiries Regarding American Citizens/Progress in Efforts to Resolve Cases
-- Number of American Citizens Confirmed Dead & Presumed Dead
-- Procedures of Countries to Account for and Track Citizens
-- Future Coordination of Assistance/Upcoming ASEAN Conference
-- Human Trafficking and Sexual Exploitation in Region/Efforts to Combat
-- International Adoption of Orphaned Children/Measures to Prevent Abuse
-- US Requests for Immigration Records
SRI LANKA
-- Efforts to Respond to Humanitarian Disaster/Access & Cooperation
IRAN
-- US Response to Humanitarian Crisis Following Bam Earthquake
INDONESIA
-- Indonesian Request for C-130 Transport Aircraft Spare Parts
SYRIA
-- Syria Accountability Act/Authority for Enacting Sanctions
-- Deputy Secretary Armitage's Meeting with President Assad
-- Syria's Response to the Activities of Foreign Regime Elements
-- US-Syria Bilateral Relationship
IRAQ
-- Authority for Postponement of Elections
ISRAEL/PALESTINIAN AUTHORITY
-- US Assistance for Election Facilitation and International Monitoring
-- US Observer Delegation/Activities
-- US View of Abu Mazen's Comments on Israel
CHINA/TAIWAN
-- Deputy Secretary Armitage's Meeting with Minister Chen Yunlin
-- Ongoing Dialogue to Resolve Cross-Strait Differences Peacefully
NORTH KOREA
-- Congressman Weldon's Congressional Delegation to North Korea
DEPARTMENT OF STATE
DAILY PRESS BRIEFING
WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 5, 2005
(ON THE RECORD UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED)
1:00 p.m. EST
MR. ERELI: Good afternoon, everybody. We'd like to begin today with an update on the State Department's response to the thousands of calls we have received from people who are concerned about loved ones and acquaintances they believe may have been in areas affected by the -- by last week's tsunami and earthquakes.
We are continuing to grind down the number of requests and inquiries we have received. We're making good progress in that effort. As you know, since the disaster occurred we have received 26,000 inquiries at our call center and task force. At the beginning of this week we had responded to and I think satisfactorily closed about 14 -- actually 18,000 of those cases, leaving us with 6,000 inquiries that we were actively working on.
Today, we have almost halved that number to about 3,500 inquiries about the welfare and whereabouts of American citizens. We have done that by either identifying where people were, people getting in touch with their loved ones, eliminating as much duplication as we can from those lists. So right now we are working with about 3,500 welfare and whereabouts inquiries that we still have not been able to resolve.
One of the important points to note here is that we are now actually eliminating more inquiries than we are getting so that the balance is moving in favor of a more constant and consistent downward trend in terms of the numbers of cases we are working on.
For those 3,500 whereabouts and welfare inquiries that we are doing, that we are working on, we're moving on them in a number of ways. We are, first of all, calling back those who initially inquired, often to try to get more detailed information about the individual, where they were, where they were traveling, contact information for the individuals concerned.
We are checking passport records for personal contact information so we can perhaps track them down. We are checking the phone numbers and e-mails of the people in question that have been provided by people who have called in. We are, as I said earlier, we are working with Thai and Sri Lankan immigration officials to try and determine -- on some individuals in question -- whether they, in fact, entered or exited the country.
We are working with travel and tourism service providers, hotels, travel agencies, tour organizers, airlines, to try to determine whether people in question were actually in the areas that people might be concerned about. We are in contact with other embassies and missions in the areas affected to see if they have information about people that we're concerned with. And we are also working with local government, nongovernmental organizations and other individuals on the ground to collate what information they have.
That is what we are doing to narrow down or whittle down that 3,500 number. As a result of these efforts, as I said yesterday, we have been able to confirm 16 Americans that died tragically in this natural disaster.
We have also been able to -- based on information we've gotten from eyewitnesses and other people on the scene -- come to the conclusion that there are another 20 American citizens who we now are classifying as presumed dead. Of these 20 Americans, 19 were in Thailand and 1 was in Sri Lanka. In each of these cases, there is a specific reason to believe that the individual was in harm's way at the time of the tsunamis. In some cases, as I said, family members have found photos on the Thai Government website. In all of these cases, the family members or companions are working with embassy officials on the ground and here in Washington to find additional corroborating evidence.
I should add that in all the cases -- in the cases of both the confirmed dead and presumed dead, every individual gets or is assigned - a family is assigned a case officer from the Bureau of Consular Affairs who works with the family to help resolve and deal with the tragedy of what occurred.
Obviously, this is a process that's going to continue over the next days and weeks. We, at the State Department, will spare no effort and leave no stone unturned to answer the questions that we are receiving from Americans about the welfare and whereabouts of their loved ones and friends. It is an arduous task to find the facts and present to you, present to the American public, with certainty, answers about where people may be and the condition they may be in. And we are committed to doing that; and, when we have the facts, to reporting the facts. That's where we are today. We are working on about 3,500 cases, or 3,500 inquiries, and we know that there are 16 Americans that have died and we have reason to presume that 20 additional Americans are dead.
QUESTION: Adam, if you can't provide names, can you provide any sort of -- if there is a way -- a description; the categories, for instance? Many of these, presumably, in Thailand, were vacationers. Can you do anything in the way of identifying the victims and the presumed dead a little more distinctly?
MR. ERELI: Out of deference to the families, that is the kind of information and the type of information that should remain, at this point, private and held with those concerned.
QUESTION: One other question, then. Are any of these known dead, presumed dead, U.S. officials?
MR. ERELI: No.
QUESTION: Can I ask you a question about your initial figures? You said 26,000 inquiries, and you closed 18,000 of them. Is that right?
MR. ERELI: I might have done the math wrong. I was doing -- as I said, as of the beginning of this week, we had closed 18,000, to bring us to 6,000. Does that add up?
QUESTION: No. (Laughter.)
MR. ERELI: What is 24,000 --
QUESTION: That would be eight.
QUESTION: Eighteen from twenty-six is eight, so I'm just wondering.
MR. ERELI: Eighteen from twenty-four is six. Did I say --
QUESTION: Twenty-six.
QUESTION: You said 26,000.
MR. ERELI: I apologize. We had 24,000 inquiries.
QUESTION: Twenty-four?
MR. ERELI: Yes. Since December 26th.
QUESTION: Okay. Thanks.
QUESTION: Are they all vacationers that you know of?
MR. ERELI: No, no, that would -- again, as we have tried to make clear, Americans move around a lot and they are a very independent-minded bunch. So these include dual-nationals; they include people who have been resident abroad; they include people who have been out of touch with their families for quite a long time. These include, obviously, vacationers. These include people who were in the region. It's as diverse a group as America is a population.
Yes, ma'am.
QUESTION: Elizabeth Beck with The New York Times.
I know that yesterday you said that the United States is at the same place as other countries -- the Nordics -- in having difficulty discovering who is missing, et cetera. But it seems, looking at the other governments, they have been able to provide these data much earlier than you are now, today.
Is there anything specific that you're missing that, say, the Norwegians or the Swedes or the Finns have in order to track this?
MR. ERELI: I don't know if I suggested we are at the same place. What I was trying to communicate is that, as far as I understand the situation, nobody has 100 percent degree of clarity on exactly where all of their citizens are, including these other countries. Now, they might have a clearer picture than we do, but there are still doubts, there are still gray areas, there are still unanswered questions.
I would add, however, that different countries -- and, again, this is something we mentioned earlier -- different countries have different procedures for accounting for and tracking their citizens. For example, some countries, citizens of that country have to -- are registered upon -- or accounted for when leaving the country so that you know whether a national -- the national authorities of that country know whether one of their own has left the country, and they know whether the national of that country has returned. We don't have similar tracking of Americans.
In other cases, people traveling to the areas, as a general rule, go in packaged tours. And so, working with the travel industry, it is much easier to account for a much larger percentage of the citizens in question. So you've got, I think, relatively more to work with than we do, or you have -- again, as I've said -- people who go out on their own for a long time and never touch base. And then all of a sudden, somebody asks about them and you've got to work to track them down.
So I think it's really a function of, number one, national immigration or exit and entry requirements, as well as travel patterns and traveling and how the travel industry works.
QUESTION: On the aid side, how long do you expect the core group to be coordinating aid? And is there a point at which you're going to hand things back to the United Nations?
MR. ERELI: There is a point at which that step will probably be reached. I would note that there is -- as you well know, there is a meeting tomorrow in Jakarta where ASEAN members will be looking at next steps in terms of coordination and cooperation in meeting the needs of the affected populations; and I expect that that will be an issue for discussion.
QUESTION: And you know enough to know that were no U.S. officials among the presumed victims?
MR. ERELI: I should say not that I'm aware of.
QUESTION: Not that you're aware of, right.
MR. ERELI: I have not been told about U.S. officials. The only officials I was aware of were some DOD officials and State Department officials that we've accounted for.
QUESTION: Right.
MR. ERELI: Among the 3,500, there aren't any officials that I'm aware of.
QUESTION: Well, among those who are believed to be dead, do you know whether a certain percentage could be categorized as vacationers? Were they people who lived abroad? Can you narrow it down at all?
MR. ERELI: As I said, out of deference to the members of the family --
QUESTION: You're not identifying anybody. You're just giving categories.
MR. ERELI: It's personal information that, frankly, I'm just not comfortable putting out.
QUESTION: On the issue of trafficking in children, have you yet -- has the State Department yet found any evidence to support the reports that this is happening there?
MR. ERELI: I have something on it, if I can just -- we have seen, as have you, reports of rape, sexual abuse, kidnapping and trafficking in persons in the countries devastated by the tsunami. We are appalled by these reports and are horrified that thousands of children orphaned by this disaster are vulnerable to exploitation by criminal elements who seek to profit from their misery.
I would note and commend actions taken by governments in the tsunami-affected countries to alert the public about the danger of human trafficking and to work with police and community officials to detect and deter trafficking cases and to protect the victims. In particular, we are thankful to the Government of Indonesia for moving swiftly to halt international adoptions in the face of potential abuse.
For our part, we are coordinating with U.S. Government-funded NGOs in the region to assist in the return and repatriation of children. We are also engaging organizations with expertise in family reunification. We have also sent out an alert to all of our NGO partners that are in South and Southeast Asia, warning of the potential for human trafficking and asking them to spread the word among relief workers in Asia. And we are offering guidelines to officials and volunteers in the region designed to minimize the risk of human trafficking in and around camps where displaced and homeless are gathering.
Some of those guidelines include: Registering people who come to camps and ensuring security during their stays; ensuring proper security for the residents of the camp, especially women and children; and increasing the general awareness of camp workers about the potential and dangers of human trafficking and making them aware that the conditions that we're in now make trafficking a particular concern.
QUESTION: Are there -- I'm sorry. Can I just follow up? Are there actual confirmed cases of this happening now?
MR. ERELI: I don't have a specific number to share with you. I think that there are enough sufficient, credible reports for us to conclude that this is a real danger and that decisive action must be taken now to prevent abuse. And I would also note that -- well, I'll leave it at that.
QUESTION: Adam, are you pursuing this more vigorously with certain governments versus others; for instance, Thailand? It has in the past -- or there are reports that it has, in the past, looked the other way, on, you know, the profession of child prostitution and so on and on. And part of a decisive action, shouldn't there be some sort of a conference, an emergency conference, to make sure that they do abide by certain regulations on this thing? Are you suggesting anything like this?
MR. ERELI: I'm suggesting that we see a danger and we believe that it is important to -- that everyone in a position to stop this, act quickly to take the necessary action.
With regard to the situation of trafficking in persons in the countries affected before this disaster, as I said yesterday, this is a regular and important subject in our bilateral dialogue. As you know, we, every year, prepare a Trafficking in Persons Report that reviews what the situation is in the country and what -- more importantly -- what steps the country is taking to address these horrors. And I refer you to the individual country reports for our assessment of the specific countries you might be interested in.
Yes, Saul.
QUESTION: Just on the issue of any more countries stopping the international adoptions, can you explain why you think that's a good idea? Because, on the one hand, you might think this is the time to be speeding up international adoptions because there are going to be more people who -- more children who need that kind of help.
MR. ERELI: Yes, I --
QUESTION: Is it that you need to put something -- a system in place to stop the criminals coming --
MR. ERELI: Well, the concern is that, at this particular moment, in the immediate aftermath of the disaster, when there is a lot of confusion that it is important to put in place measures that prevent potential abuse and potential exploitation of a confused and relatively unregulated situation. I'm not speaking for, as a general policy or for further in the future, but right now it's -- we are concerned that circumstances lend themselves to abuse, and proper action should be taken to prevent that.
Yes, Christophe.
QUESTION: I have a specific question about Sri Lanka. What is your policy concerning the possible or potential cooperation with the rebels of the LTTE to provide relief to -- on the areas under their control?
MR. ERELI: We have addressed this -- I think the party has addressed that in the field, where there is a humanitarian disaster that we are all trying to solve and that we are trying to respond to a need -- we are trying to respond to people in need, and it is incumbent upon all parties to provide the access and cooperation necessary to provide humanitarian relief; and, that perhaps in that process there are opportunities to -- that will present themselves for resolving longer-term conflicts.
QUESTION: But would you -- I mean, would you agree? I mean, is the U.S. ready to cooperate with the rebels in the specific case of the LTTE?
MR. ERELI: We are working with the Government of Sri Lanka.
QUESTION: Can I change the subject?
QUESTION: Can I have just one more?
QUESTION: Go ahead.
QUESTION: When you talk about opportunities -- there may be opportunities -- are you talking about -- are you actually encouraging the government to work with the rebels, and here it shows that they can work together so they can also, in the future, work closer on looking for peace?
MR. ERELI: We are -- it's not a question of us encouraging anybody. The fact is, the Government of Sri Lanka is seized with this issue because they care about and have responsibility that they recognize and are acquitting themselves well of to take care of people in need. And we are providing every possible assistance we can -- to include the provision of heavy lift and other engineering support in affected areas by our military, provision of needs assessments and humanitarian relief supplies -- to people, regardless of political affiliation. If people are in need, we're going to help them; and we're going to work with the Government of Sri Lanka to do that.
QUESTION: Do you have any concern that the disaster in South Asia may ease the terrorism over there?
MR. ERELI: I'm sorry. I don't see how it follows.
QUESTION: Do you have any concerns that the disaster might ease terrorism in the area?
MR. ERELI: I think our focus is, as I've said before, twofold: One is providing immediate relief to those in need; second, to work to develop a plan and work in the medium and long term on rehabilitation and reconstruction and recovery. That process is going to take a long time.
I think the Secretary answered the question well when he said we're doing this not just because we are a country that cares and wants to help -- which is, I think, our primary motivation and why you see the Secretary out there with Governor Bush at the request of the President -- but also because it is in our interest to do it in the sense that you want to provide people with a future, with a livelihood, with hope, with opportunity, so that they don't experience the kind of the frustration, privation and anger that leads them to uncivil acts.
QUESTION: Just one quickly. I'm wondering, has there been a change in the U.S. arms restrictions on Indonesia to help them out at this time, such as -- I think I saw something about military sales or parts to go in there to help them out. And a second one, not totally related, but is there any reaction to these groups that have been saying that the U.S. didn't come through with all the aid it promised in the Iranian earthquake, and they site the MCA, too, and kind of question whether the U.S. can be counted on to come up with the full amounts it's pledging now, in light of the past history?
MR. ERELI: I'm sorry. What was the second question?
QUESTION: Well, it was did the U.S. come up with the aid it promised in Iran for the earthquake? And if not, why not? And will -- does that in any way reflect on what we can expect to happen here?
MR. ERELI: In terms of the second question, the United States fulfilled all of its -- the United States responded quickly and meaningfully in response to the humanitarian crisis precipitated by the Bam earthquake about this time last year, and that the conclusion that should be drawn from that case, as well as the present case, is that America is there first. America is there fast. And America is there with what is needed. And that's certainly the case in Iran. It certainly is the case here.
In terms of the reports you've seen about provision of equipment to Indonesia, we have received a list of requested spare parts for a C-130 transport aircraft from the Government of Indonesia, and we are working to facilitate the commercial sale of those parts to Indonesia.
QUESTION: Is that -- wouldn't that be a sale that's currently banned? Would that be currently restricted?
MR. ERELI: No, that is not affected by -- the commercial sale of C-130 parts is not affected by that. And I would also note that the President issued a provision for emergency disaster relief assistance to the 12 countries affected by the Asian tsunami, including drawdown under section --under the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, yesterday. And I'd refer you to that in terms of authority for other assistance that's being provided.
QUESTION: Just one on Sri Lanka. Can you update on the immigration records that you are trying to get, and arrival versus departure records? And I spoke with someone at the airport in Colombo last night and he said they had all the departure records in their computers and in paper form. So I don't really -- I didn't understand yesterday why you and other people are saying that the departure records may not be available.
MR. ERELI: My understanding is that there were certain departure records that were not available. I wouldn't want to speak for the Government of Sri Lanka on this matter. As a broad answer to your question, we have asked Thailand and Sri Lanka for immigration records for Americans who entered those countries prior to the tsunamis. The Thai authorities have already provided us records for American citizens known to have entered Thailand during the 90-day period prior to December 26, 200[4], and we expect Sri Lankan authorities to provide the information they have available as soon as they are able. So what we're taking about as information about Americans who entered the country in the 90-day period prior to December 26th.
QUESTION: Do you know why they haven't done so yet in Sri Lanka?
MR. ERELI: I don't.
QUESTION: Thanks.
MR. ERELI: Yes.
QUESTION: Can I change the subject now? Can you talk about reports that the U.S. is now considering further sanctions on Syria in -- primarily out of the Treasury Department -- for its lack of action on the border, primarily, and on insurgents?
MR. ERELI: Well, obviously, the Syria Accountability Act provides for -- provides authority to impose sanctions in response to Syrian inaction or -- in a number of areas. That authority remains. It's always an option on the table.
The Deputy Secretary of State was in Damascus and met with Syrian President Bashar Assad on January 2nd. The purpose of his trip was to review the full range of issues, the bilateral issues that we have with Syria, including its support for terror, including the importance of withdrawing all foreign forces from Lebanon, and the importance of working to support a stable and secure Iraq and to help ensure as broad a participation in the upcoming elections as possible.
The Deputy Secretary made clear a number of things: Number one, that while Syria has taken some action to control its border with Iraq that more needed to be done; and, number two, that action with respect to stopping activity by former regime elements in Syria had so far been inadequate, and that this remained a very critical concern of ours and it was something that we were looking to Syria for action on. And that's where we are.
QUESTION: That's all old guidance, Adam.
MR. ERELI: I know, but there's no -- there's nothing new to report.
QUESTION: So that -- so that's the answer, that there is -- the Treasury Department is not considering new financial -- new sanctions on Syria?
MR. ERELI: I'm not going to speak for the Treasury Department.
QUESTION: Well, it's normally done in conjunction with the State Department on recommendations from here.
MR. ERELI: I'm not going to speak for the Treasury Department.
QUESTION: Okay. Speak for State.
MR. ERELI: What I would tell you is that today, as yesterday, sanctions as provided for under the Syrian Accountability Act remain an option --
QUESTION: I know, I know, I know.
MR. ERELI: -- remain an option on the table, remain a policy tool at our disposal. But I don't have anything new to report in terms of plans to use that tool.
QUESTION: A follow-up. Is there anything specific that you are -- that you can tell us about that you are asking the Syrians to do? For instance, certain names like Izzat Ibrahim, the second man, you know, under Saddam, or in dollars? I mean, very specific things. And on the issue of the central bank, I mean, obviously, it's been -- all the accusation of allegations that they are getting involved in money laundering. Could you tell us a little more about that?
MR. ERELI: I don't have much for you on the question of money laundering. What I can tell you about the former regime element issue is this, two points: One is, I think we are very clear with the Syrians about what we think they can do and where we think they need to go on this.
But we also make a second point, which is that Syria knows the lay of its land a lot better than we do. They have capabilities and knowledge and assets to control what goes on in their territory and that they are in the best position to detect what is going on and to act on what is going on. And we look for them to be aggressive and proactive and if -- in moving against these elements that we have every indication are on their territory and that we have every indication that are active on their territory, and if you say you're supporting Iraq, and if you say you're supporting an independent and free and stable Iraq, then it is inconsistent with such a pledge of support to sit back and do nothing while there are -- in the face of very good indications -- that stuff is going on in your country that is contrary to what you have said your own interests and desires are.
QUESTION: Today in its editorial, the Washington Times was suggesting that Deputy Secretary Armitage and his boss, Secretary Powell, may be appeasing the Syrians.
MR. ERELI: Appeasing the Syrians?
QUESTION: I mean, that's the suggestion.
MR. ERELI: That's -- I'm just trying to think of how -- how, most emphatically, to rebut such a charge.
Secretary Powell and Deputy Secretary Armitage reflect the policy and carry out the policy of the President and the policy of this Administration, which is: Number one, to help support and bring about a free and democratic and prosperous Iraq; and, number two, which is to work with countries throughout the world, and especially in the region, to enlist their help and their support in achieving that goal.
And the visit to Syria was firmly a part of that effort and, I think, very directly and very emphatically and very strongly addressed the issue of the presence of former regime elements in Syria, the activities of former regime elements in Syria and the need for Syria to take aggressive and proactive action against those elements to stop those activities consistent with their stated pledge to support Iraq, Iraqi sovereignty, to support Iraqi stability and to support Iraqi security.
QUESTION: Can I do a follow-up? Very quickly, would you say the relationship with Syria today is better than before the visit or worse?
MR. ERELI: Today? Which visit?
QUESTION: I mean, this last visit. Mr. Armitage's visit.
MR. ERELI: I wouldn't measure it in those terms. I wouldn't measure it in those terms. I would say that our relationship with Syria is directly affected by actions that the Government of Syria chooses to take or not to take. And that -- that was a clear message from Mr. Armitage.
QUESTION: A follow-up to that, please? When you said that you were very clear with the Syrians as to what we think they can do, I'm unclear as to what our government is telling the Syrians. Being proactive doesn't tell me very much. What, specifically, do we want the Syrians to do?
MR. ERELI: Take action to prevent former regime elements from using Syrian territory to support the insurgency in Iraq.
QUESTION: What kind of action?
MR. ERELI: We're not being prescriptive in this area. I don't have a laundry list to give you. And, again, it's not up to us -- frankly, it's not up to us to tell the Syrians -- to spell out for the Syrians what they have to do. If the Syrians, as I said before, are in a position -- having dealt with subversives to -- if they, in our view, if they want to crack down on these guys, they are fully capable of doing so. And that's the message that we'd send to them.
QUESTION: Well, as one more follow-up to this. When we have the lives of American military on the line, why shouldn't the United States be prescriptive when it comes to saying what we want, what we don't want?
MR. ERELI: We want them to stop their activity. I think the best way to put it is we have indications, we have information, we don't have the full picture. We have pieces of the picture. The point we are making to the Syrians is, you, Government of Syria, are in a position to help fill out and give a fuller understanding, not only to what's going on, but also about how to get at it. And that's your responsibility. That's -- to do so would be consistent with your public pledges for -- of support for Iraq. And as a start, you can be more proactive. You can be more aggressive. And you can be more determined in addressing this problem, as opposed to just sitting back and asking us to give you specific information and to give you specific requirements that you choose or choose not to fulfill.
That's not the issue, you see. The issue is, this is something that you need to take care of. And -- because it's not a question of, oh, Syria, doing what the United States -- you know, the United States telling Syria do, a, b, c and d on Monday, Wednesday, and Tuesday. It is the United States saying, Syria, you've got -- we all have a problem, and the problem is in your territory. And you can either be part of the problem or you can part of the solution. And you said you wanted to be part of the solution, so take actions that demonstrate fidelity to that statement and that commitment.
QUESTION: Adam, just to follow up on this. I believe we're going around too much. But you've put the onus on them, clearly, or you've tried to put the onus on them, but are you telling us that the Deputy Secretary did not ask them to take any specific actions?
MR. ERELI: The Deputy Secretary made clear our concern that foreign regime activity continues to be a problem in Syria and that they need to move against it. And, you know, we made the point that there are certain individuals you can move against and whose activity you can stop, but that that's not the whole story -- that there's more to it than that, number one; and, number two, that just taking those actions is not the end of the -- does not close the chapter on this problem.
But yes, we have been discussing, you know, various -- some specific cases, some specific steps that I'm not in a position to go into. But the point I want to get across is that that's not the be all and end all of this issue, that it goes beyond that and that what we're looking for and what we believe Syria needs to do is not just, you know, resolve Case X or Case Y, but to act systematically with all the capabilities at its disposal -- which are considerable -- and to respond to this destabilization that is emanating from territory under its control, and which, to date, they have not done.
QUESTION: Change in subject?
MR. ERELI: No, I don't think so.
QUESTION: On Iraq.
MR. ERELI: Oh, same subject?
QUESTION: Did the Deputy Secretary give them a "what if," a carrot or stick or what he'll do if not?
MR. ERELI: Again, there are a whole range of policy options. There are a whole range of options that we have at our disposal. I won't begin to handicap for you at this point what, you know, what we may or may not do. The Deputy Secretary was just there. He just delivered a firm, blunt message and I'll leave it at that.
QUESTION: Is it the Administration's contention that Syria is giving hospitality to these people or officially facilitating their presence?
MR. ERELI: It is the State Department's contention that these elements are operating under -- are operating on Syrian territory in ways that are harmful to Iraq and inconsistent with Syria's stated policy, and that Syria has the capability and responsibility to act to stop this activity.
QUESTION: Adam, one more if you don't mind. Now, if you don't give them anything specific, a measuring stick, so to speak, how could they prove that they are coming clean on this thing or that they are cooperating according to what you want them to do?
MR. ERELI: I think we all know what commitment to fight supporters of insurgency looks like. I think you're asking a theoretical question that, while maybe rhetorically interesting is practically irrelevant.
QUESTION: On Iraq, Adam, as we discussed on Monday, I think, and then yesterday, the White House confirmed that, indeed, the Election Commission in Iraq has the authority and only it has the authority to postpone the election.
MR. ERELI: Who confirmed that?
QUESTION: I think it came up at the briefing in the White House yesterday.
MR. ERELI: My understanding is that the law does not provide for the postponement of the election, and so that that -- since there is no provision for the postponement in the law that discussion of how it might be postponed is purely hypothetical.
QUESTION: Because we need a legislature to actually change the law, and there isn't one until the election?
MR. ERELI: There is a law governing the election, which is the Transitional Administrative Law. That law provides for elections by January 30th or 31st and does not provide provisions for or authority for postponing that election. So questions about, well, if there was going to be a postponement, who would be responsible, are hypothetical.
QUESTION: And the law couldn't be changed?
MR. ERELI: I'm not aware of any way that the TAL can be changed.
QUESTION: Adam, on the Palestinian election. Do you have any update on the practical or financial assistance that the U.S. said it will be ready to provide for this effort?
MR. ERELI: Well, we've -- as you know, Assistant Secretary Burns announced a program of American assistance in Oslo on December 8th that amounts to -- you'll want to check the transcript of what he said, but I think it was $2 million for facilitative assistance and $1 million to support international monitors of the election.
As far as preparations now for the elections go, you'll note we put out a statement yesterday saying that we are sending an official delegation, an official U.S. observer delegation, to the presidential election. That delegation will be led by Senators John Sununu of New Hampshire and Senator Joseph Biden of Delaware, both on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. It will also include four congressional staff members, prominent Palestinian-Americans, and our Consul General in Jerusalem, Mr. David Pearce, will join the delegation when it arrives. That delegation will meet with senior Israeli and Palestinian officials. It will visit polling sites; and prior to departing, it will make an assessment of the election process.
QUESTION: There are two Palestinian-Americans listed there without any identification. Do you happen to have it?
MR. ERELI: Yes, George Salem and Ziad Asali.
QUESTION: What do they do?
MR. ERELI: I'll see if I can get you more background.
QUESTION: No, I just meant I couldn't use their names because I have no idea who they are.
MR. ERELI: I'll see if I can get you more information on them.
QUESTION: Okay.
MR. ERELI: Yes, sir.
QUESTION: You asked the question yesterday about Abu Mazen, referring to "the Zionist enemy," and then you said you couldn't answer it. Could you react to that?
MR. ERELI: I didn't say I couldn't answer it. I said I hadn't seen the report.
QUESTION: You hadn't seen it.
MR. ERELI: Since then I have seen the report.
QUESTION: Well, what kind of response do you have?
MR. ERELI: And my reaction would be that the United States Government obviously finds such language disturbing, and it is our view that such rhetoric has no place in the process of resuming dialogue and rebuilding trust and confidence between Israelis and Palestinians.
QUESTION: Do you find what Abu Mazen said to be consistent with your report on global anti-Semitism? Would what he said be considered anti-Semitic in any way?
MR. ERELI: I won't go beyond the way I've characterized it. It's disturbing. It's certainly not helpful, and it's, I think, inappropriate when working to improve relations with -- between Palestinians and Israelis.
As far as the question of the anti-Semitism report that you raised, as you all know, we're having a briefing later this afternoon by the authors of that report. And I'll leave it to them to comment on what they are -- what their findings are.
Yes, ma'am.
QUESTION: Thank you. On China. The Minister of Taiwan Affairs Office of China's State Council would meet with Deputy Secretary Armitage later this afternoon. Can you just tell us in general what concerns or topics the U.S. may raise in the meeting?
MR. ERELI: Yes, Minister Chen Yunlin will meet with Deputy Secretary Armitage today at 2. Their discussion will cover a variety of Cross-Straits issues, including the People's Republic of China's proposed anti-secession law. We will obviously make clear our long-held and well-known view that the People's Republic of China and Taiwan should engage in dialogue to peacefully resolve their differences, and we will urge both sides to avoid doing anything that unilaterally changes the status quo or complicates management of this sensitive issue.
QUESTION: And beside this -- sorry. Beside this official, China also send its Vice Foreign Minister to Washington last month to exchange views with the U.S. on the sensitive Taiwan issue.
MR. ERELI: Yes.
QUESTION: Are those gesture or initial efforts of the Chinese Government welcome or appreciated by the United States?
MR. ERELI: What gestures are you talking about?
QUESTION: You mean -- I mean, they send their high-level diplomats here to bring up the topics the U.S. concerned.
MR. ERELI: I would put it this way. We have very -- we have a regular exchange of views and a regular exchange of high-level diplomats between Chinese coming here and Americans going there. So this is part of a regular dialogue, an ongoing process, and with one goal in mind, and that is to resolve Cross-straits differences peacefully. And it's obviously important, and useful, and helpful and welcome when high-level Chinese officials come to the United States to exchange their views directly with their U.S. counterparts. Likewise, it's important and something we believe strongly in is engaging directly with our Chinese friends in China as part of that process.
QUESTION: Sorry. The last question on North Korea. Congressman Weldon lead a delegation to North Korea and the neighboring countries next week and he said he will be reinforcing the position of this Administration. So I'm just wondering if they have brief you about their plan or if you would characterize their efforts as helpful.
MR. ERELI: Congressman Weldon has been in contact with the Administration on his plans to lead a congressional delegation to North Korea. I think it is important to point out here that Congressman Weldon and the members of his delegation are traveling as -- are in their capacities as members of Congress and they are not traveling as representatives of the Administration or acting on behalf of the Administration.
QUESTION: In relation to that, on what ground does your government allow them to be in North Korea after a long period of consideration or giving -- not giving them any permission for the visit?
MR. ERELI: We're not in the position of giving permission for members of Congress to travel. So that's, I guess the congressmen are free to travel as they wish. So it's, again, it's not a question of us giving permission or not giving permission.
QUESTION: Changing the subject, sir. Is there any conference today in Dubai, an initiative (inaudible) and participation of U.S. officials regarding U.S.-Iran relation?
MR. ERELI: I'm not aware of that initiative.
QUESTION: The news comes by an Iranian news agency.
MR. ERELI: I haven't seen that report.
QUESTION: Okay, thank you.
MR. ERELI: Thank you.
(The briefing was concluded at 1:52 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 |
|
|
|
