State Department Briefing, May 17
17 May 2005
Zoellick travels to Jordan for World Economic Summit, Balkans, Venezuela, Cuba, Newsweek/retracts article, Department's efforts to inform U.S. Embassies/others on retraction and U.S. policy, Kuwait, Iraq, Afghanistan, Uzbekistan, Egypt, United Nations/Oil-for-Food Program, North Korea, Africa
State Department spokesman Richard Boucher briefed the media May 17.
Following is the transcript of the State Department briefing:
(begin transcript)
U.S. Department of State
Daily Press Briefing Index
Tuesday, May 17, 2005
12:50 p.m. EDT
Briefer: Richard Boucher, Spokesman
DEPARTMENT
-- Deputy Secretary Zoellick's Travel to Jordan for World Economic Summit
BALKANS
-- Under Secretary Burns' on Current Situation in Kosovo
VENEZUELA
-- Venezuelan Provisional Arrest Request for Luis Carriles Posada
CUBA
-- Demonstrations in Havana/Status of U.S. Interests Section
MISCELLANEOUS
-- Newsweek Retraction of Article on Alleged Koran Desecration
-- Department Efforts to Inform U.S. Embassies/Others on Retraction and U.S. Policy
KUWAIT
-- Kuwait Foreign Minister's Visit/Meetings/Agenda
IRAQ
-- Reported Al-Qa'ida Statement Regarding Secretary Rice's Visit to Iraq
-- Iraq's Relations with Iran
AFGHANISTAN
-- Kidnapping of CARE International Official in Kabul
UZBEKISTAN
-- U.S. Concerns About Situation in Uzbekistan
-- Concerns Regarding Repression After Unrest
EGYPT
-- Prime Minister's Visit to Washington/Meeting with Secretary Rice
UNITED NATIONS
-- Investigation of Oil for Food Program/Oil Imports and UN Sanctions
NORTH KOREA
-- Reported Invitation from North Korea to Secretary Rice to Visit Pyongyang
AFRICA
-- U.S. Assistance to Africa
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE
DAILY PRESS BRIEFING
TUESDAY, MAY 17, 2005
(ON THE RECORD UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED)
12:50 p.m. EDT
MR. BOUCHER: Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen. We'll get out a statement later today, just to tell you that Deputy Secretary of State Robert Zoellick will be attending the World Economic Forum later this week in Jordan. He'll be our representative for that meeting there and we'll get out a little more details on what he's going to do there, including the address that he will make.
And that's just worthy of note, but glad to take your questions.
QUESTION: Yes. Please tell us a little bit about evolving Kosovo strategy. I know Mr. Burns will testify tomorrow, but if you can give us a little bit of a preview.
MR. BOUCHER: Yeah, I think, "evolving Kosovo strategy" is a good way to put it, frankly. The Under Secretary for Political Affairs Nicholas Burns will discuss the current situation in Kosovo and our vision for progress and peace there in testimony before the House International Relations Committee on May 18th. And then he will give a speech on the Balkans at the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars on May 19th.
On these -- in these two speeches or statements, he will elaborate on our strategy for resolving Kosovo's future status. That has to be done consistent with the goals of promoting regional stability and protecting the rights of all of Kosovo's citizens, especially its minorities. This is a subject that we have discussed a lot with our friends and allies. As I think, some of you may remember about a month ago at the NATO meetings in Lithuania, Kosovo was a subject of discussion for the Secretary, with NATO Secretary General and with many of the members of NATO that she met there, as well as in the larger North Atlantic Council meetings. So this is something that we and our allies have been talking about how to move forward in Kosovo to have stability and peace there within a larger region.
We think we're now entering a new stage in our policy towards the Balkans, one that will accelerate the region's integration into Euro-Atlantic institutions. Burns and other U.S. officials have been in close contact with our European partners, largely through the contact group, which gets together periodically and I think had a meeting last month as well. And also in touch with the United Nations, which plays a very important and prominent role in Kosovo in terms of achieving progress on the ground and also moving the vision forward.
This summer, the United Nations will review Kosovo's progress on achieving standards for democracy and multi-ethnicity. If that review is positive, the international community will launch a diplomatic process to determine Kosovo's future status. Since that process at this point has yet to get under way, it would be inappropriate for us to announce anything about possible outcomes.
QUESTION: But you would have to acknowledge, wouldn't you, that the wheels are turning toward Kosovo independence and the U.S., which often speaks in favor of territorial integrity all over the world -- there are some stunning exceptions, of course -- but you do, aren't you -- isn't the U.S. intentionally setting in motion or helping to set in motion independence of Kosovo?
MR. BOUCHER: I wouldn't put it that way. I would -- and you'll see, I think, when Ambassador Burns speaks in more detail about this, there has been an evolving discussion about this, about standards and status, the two sides of the equation of what needs to be achieved with Kosovo. And I think there's an increasing feeling among many that we need to define these things in order to achieve -- we need to define them better in order to achieve a number of other goals and purposes. And so that is what we're moving to do. We're moving to set in motion a process that can resolve Kosovo's future status, but at this point we're not expressing an opinion on how that should come out.
Sir.
QUESTION: The Washington Post is talking about a plan. May we know some aspect of this plan? What is it about?
MR. BOUCHER: The particular steps involved in moving forward and kind of some of the more in-depth understanding about how we would like to move forward will be conveyed and announced by Ambassador Burns in his testimony, in his speech. The general outlines of what we're trying to do, I think, are known, that we are working with the Contact Group and the UN, looking forward to a review of how standards have been met this summer and, if that review is positive, then move on to a process that can decide -- resolve the issue of status. That is what we're moving forward on now. We think we've reached a stage of moving forward in that fashion, but I'll leave it to Under Secretary Burns to define in more detail how we think we can move forward.
QUESTION: Under Secretary Nicholas Burns has been a key player in engineering the administration's renewed in Kosovo due to his experience, as he says, with the American Embassy to Greece and NATO. How this experience has an impact on him about the new process which is going mathematically, Mr. Boucher, to destabilize the western Balkans with Albanians having the upper hand and the full support of the U.S., Great Britain and NATO?
MR. BOUCHER: Well, you're making presumptions about outcomes. You're making presumptions about problems with the outcome. I think it's important to remember we are all looking for a peaceful region in the Balkans that can be integrated into Europe more broadly, that can be part of a peaceful continent. And we are looking to achieve both standards and status in order to sort of solidify that progress and solidify the progress that is being made in the region by many countries in moving towards Euro-Atlantic institutions. So I think the experience that Under Secretary Burns has at NATO and in Greece means that he does understand the region, he does understand how to work with people and does understand how it can -- how we can work with this region so that it fits well into Euro-Atlantic structures and institutions.
QUESTION: Mr. Richard Holbrooke, a close friend to Nicholas Burns, stated in Washington Post, "No way U.S. troops to leave Kosovo." I'm quoting. He predicted that Kosovo will become independent, there is no way about that, there is no question about that, and Montenegro will separate from Serbia. Any comment on this multiple division of the Balkans in the early stage by the U.S. policy? What exactly you are trying to do in that area?
MR. BOUCHER: We're not making predictions. We're setting up a process where the outcomes can be decided in a way that stabilizes the region, that helps the region as a whole find its destiny in Europe and Euro-Atlantic institutions.
QUESTION: Mr. Boucher, to be honest with you, and I hate to make comparisons, my only weapon is, as I've told you many times in this room, history. And allow me to ask how the two gentlemen, Nicholas Burns and Richard Holbrooke, and besides with them, the State Department itself, ignore totally the fact that Kosovo, the so-called sarcoma-kaposis, was created by Adolf Hitler, transferred Albanians from the mainland to fight the Serbs in order to control southeast of Europe seeking an exodus via the port of Thessaloniki to the Aegean Sea.
MR. BOUCHER: I don't think either -- first of all, Nicholas Burns and Richard Holbrooke are two different people so I wouldn't lump them together in terms of their views. Second of all, I don't think either one ignores history. I will speak for Under Secretary Burns, since he works for us, and the point here is to overcome that history, is to have a future that's different from the past, and not to -- not to repeat mistakes of the past but rather to move forward where this region can find peace and stability within our Euro-Atlantic framework that makes them part of the whole and not separate chunks to create problems.
QUESTION: But since the end of the Second World War, America was trying to reverse whatever Hitler did, with only exception of Kosovo. Why?
MR. BOUCHER: I don't think I would characterize U.S. policy as that way.
QUESTION: You've referred (inaudible.)
QUESTION: No, no, no --
QUESTION: You have several times. How would you describe the situation now and does it require some wrenching change?
MR. BOUCHER: We have had --
QUESTION: I mean, things are fairly quiet.
MR. BOUCHER: Fairly quiet, compared to what? I mean, we've seen violence this year. We have seen uncertainty this year. Compared to the war, yes. But I don't think we'd characterize the situation as stabilized. I don't think we would say that Serbs are finding a future in Kosovo or are able to return to their homes. I don't think we would say that the economic future of Kosovo is on track. There's a lot of things that need to be done there and a lot of things that as we achieve the standards can be aided by proceeding forward to resolve the status issues as well.
QUESTION: I imagine a process creates some uncertainty in a nervous area -- this process that you say, you know, the end of which you're not predicting and nobody's predicting. But don't you think that this will trigger all sorts of population shifts and all sorts of -- as we've seen in the Balkans for so many, you know, what, through the last three administrations, you're rattling the cage. Why are you doing that?
MR. BOUCHER: No. I just don't accept that. The situation is not a stable one or a good one now. We and the UN and others have been working to try to create a more stable situation through the achievement of what are called standards of democracy, of good governance, of openness, of welcoming to Serbs and others to move back to their homes. But that process can only go so far without defining the status of people who are involved in that situation want to know, in the end, what they're going to be living in or what they're going to be a part of. And we think it's -- as we achieve these standards, it's time to start taking up the issues of status as well. We'll see what the review produces this summer and whether that review produces a decision to go forward on some of these status questions as well.
QUESTION: Is it your hope that the summer review does give a positive report so that you can start final status?
MR. BOUCHER: Well, we would hope that the standards -- the standards of democracy and multiethnic -- multi-ethnicity for Kosovo would be achieved as soon as possible. So -- and if that is achieved, then the outcome of the review would be positive. So I think the emphasis is on achieving democracy and good governance and multi-ethnicity for Kosovo. If that is done as we want it to be done, as we all are working to have it -- to see it done, then the outcome could be positive in terms of moving on to another stage.
Yeah.
QUESTION: Switch the topic? Luis Posada Carriles -- I'm trying -- not saying it properly.
MR. BOUCHER: Oh, better than I can.
QUESTION: Thank you. Anyway, he has given an interview to the Miami Herald. He's also held a news conference in Miami today so he's clearly making his --
MR. BOUCHER: Did he do the news conference?
MR. ERELI: (Off mike.)
MR. BOUCHER: No? Okay.
QUESTION: His presence is clearly known and he made clear in his interview that he's not particularly hiding. Is the United States -- why isn't the United States arresting him and isn't there an international obligation to do so?
MR. BOUCHER: I think the simple answer to this is there are a number of things going on with regard to Mr. Posada Carriles, but that they are really handled by other agencies of the U.S. Government. As far as his status here in the United States, it's a question you'll have to address to the Department of Homeland Security. We -- as far as possible prosecution or legal matters, that's a matter for the Department of Justice.
Now, there is one aspect I think that has been reported. We don't usually talk about extradition matters but in this case, the Venezuelan Government made an announcement so I can confirm that we have received a provisional arrest request, which we forward to the Department of Justice per normal procedure. But in terms of how to act on that provisional request for arrest, I have to leave it to the Department of Justice.
I'd merely remind you of one thing and that's what the Counselor of the Department Philip Zelikow said on May 12th, "that there is a legal determination that will have to be made by the Department of Homeland Security, it will be made on the basis of the evidence available to that Department. The Department of State is actively assisting the Department of Homeland Security in compiling the evidence so that they can make that determination." So that's the question of status and then, as I said, the Department of Justice will have to address what to do with the request for provisional arrest and how to move forward on that matter.
QUESTION: On the larger issue, though, this man is an alleged terrorist. I mean, the United States is involved in a global war on terrorism now. Isn't it -- isn't there some obligation there to, you know, I mean, within our own borders here?
MR. BOUCHER: The United States is involved in a global war on terrorism. There are many tools in that war. One of them is to use the rule of law to constrain terrorism and how that law gets applied in particular cases is the purview of the Department of Justice and that's why they're best suited to discuss this with you.
QUESTION: Are you saying, he is an accused terrorist who is on U.S. soil? What is the policy of the U.S. towards having an accused terrorist on its soil?
MR. BOUCHER: The policy of the United States is that the appropriate legal authorities will address those issues.
QUESTION: Castro led a huge demonstration today on this -- sparked by this topic, by the U.S. Interests Section. Was there ever any -- I don't know if it's over, actually -- I mean, was there any threat to the mission? Did you have to call in extra security? Did it close down? Anything like that?
MR. BOUCHER: I didn't hear of anything. Anybody? We'll have to check and see. I'm not sure it is over.
QUESTION: Hundreds of thousands of protestors --
MR. BOUCHER: No, I know. It was on TV not very long ago --
QUESTION: Yeah.
MR. BOUCHER: -- so I don't know if it's over yet or not.
QUESTION: And you don't know whether the Interests Section closed down?
MR. BOUCHER: I'm not aware of anything but I'll have to check. It's not something I specifically checked on.
Tammy.
QUESTION: Can I just go back to something that has been said previously by the Department, which is that you don't know where he is? Is that still the case today and I mean, he's --
MR. BOUCHER: Well, as you noted there are a number of reports that he is in the United States. But as far as exactly where he is, that would be a matter of law enforcement or other appropriate authorities.
QUESTION: In your discussions with other countries, particularly Venezuela, who's asked for, as you've said, for provisional arrest, but what are you telling them?
MR. BOUCHER: We're telling them that we have the requests and we've forwarded it to the appropriate judicial authorities.
QUESTION: Is he considered a fugitive by law enforcement or anything?
MR. BOUCHER: You'd have to ask law enforcement.
QUESTION: Do you know what the status of his asylum request?
MR. BOUCHER: His question of his status would be addressed by the Department of Homeland Security. I realize there's great interest in this. This person --
QUESTION: But does he make the asylum request to you?
MR. BOUCHER: This person is presumably in the United States. No, you know, people make asylum requests with the Department of Homeland Security in the U.S. For persons in the United States, questions involving his immigration status and his legal status are answered by domestic agencies. It's not a matter for the State Department to deal with, other than the fact that we do provide information, evidence and help out others who are working on these things.
Charlie?
QUESTION: Switching subjects?
MR. BOUCHER: Yeah.
QUESTION: Can you talk about the cable that was reportedly sent out last night to embassies about the Newsweek article and are you trying to address it in the region?
MR. BOUCHER: We have done a number of things, in terms of trying to address this -- this Newsweek article, which Newsweek has now retracted. So you have an article that never should have appeared to begin with involving facts that have not been substantiated and, indeed, our investigation or inquiries into this matter conducted by the Defense Department have produced no evidence to substantiate this kind of charge. Nonetheless, it has very sad and regrettable implications overseas -- shocking, to some extent, to see that an article be published so -- well, an article like this would be published and one that can involve potential violence and deaths overseas as this one did.
That said, we recognize that there is a need to inform people, inform people of what the facts are an inform people of what our policy is. And so since the article hit about a week ago -- Monday, I think it came out -- began to see violence and riots about Tuesday. So early on, we sent out a telegram to our embassies reiterating our commitment to look into the matter, to emphasize a respect that we show for religious rights and obligations of prisoners and gave them information that they could then use to inform governments and encourage them to be out on the media and elsewhere to tell people what the facts were.
On Thursday, I guess it was, Secretary of State made a very clear and definitive statement on the issue of respect for Islam and the fact that we would condemn and not tolerate in any way the kind of disrespect that had been reported. So we then sent that out to the embassies, again, encouraging embassies to be out there. A number of us, including myself, have done a series of interviews with media from the Middle East and south Asia to try to get that message out more directly.
We've sent the Secretary's message far and wide. It's gone out in, I think, seven languages on the websites. It's been translated and passed out by embassies in many more languages than that. And then yesterday we sent out another cable to our embassies, giving the text of the Newsweek retraction, explaining further that our inquiries had shown nothing like this and reiterating once more that there are policies in place, detailed policies in place among the military for the guards, in terms of the handling of the Koran, in terms of showing respect for the religious rights and practices of the detainees.
QUESTION: Have you -- we're asking the Pentagon, of course, I mean, what -- it was my understanding, perhaps I'm wrong, that among the things that the embassies were told is that the Pentagon is conducting an investigation and that if there's any, you know, wrongdoing or punishment and all.
MR. BOUCHER: That's right. That's what we've all been saying. Yeah.
QUESTION: That's still the view?
MR. BOUCHER: Yeah. That's still the view. We have done -- I think there's two aspects to this and you can get more details from the Pentagon in terms of looking into these matters. There was an inquiry that was under way because of the FBI emails that was looking into practices involved in those emails and they uncovered nothing like this. And I think the Pentagon has said that even in those emails, there was no charge like this and that's where fundamentally, the Newsweek story falls on its face as being untrue. And then, in addition to that, when the charges came out, they asked -- the Pentagon asked their people to look even more at the specific question of desecration of the Koran. And so they looked into that. And at this point, I would say they have done a lot of different research on this matter, have not found anything to substantiate it. At what point the Pentagon will think -- to feel comfortable that they have done their homework enough to say "absolutely not, it didn't happen," I'll leave to them. But we have done extensive -- they've looked into this matter thoroughly or extensively at this point and found nothing to substantiate it.
QUESTION: Richard, just to follow up on the timeline -- and excuse me if I'm wrong -- it's not a week from Monday, I think it was two weeks from Monday that the actual Newsweek thing came out, right?
QUESTION: The 9th.
QUESTION: No, the 9th.
MR. BOUCHER: It was the issue of --
QUESTION: It was the issue of the 9th, but wouldn't that have been --
QUESTION: No, no, no. It comes -- the magazine comes out on Sunday night/Monday.
QUESTION: Okay. But there was -- first, there was some demonstrations and some protests in Pakistan and it was like several days before anybody would confirm there was an investigation going on. There was really no strong statement made until the Secretary made her statement on Thursday, and that was like the space of about four or five days. Is there any attention being given to that period of time there that maybe there should have been more proactive reaction?
MR. BOUCHER: Peter, I think if you look at the timeline I've given you, I believe our first telegram went on the 11th. It might have been the 10th. I'll have to double-check that. But the 11th, I'm pretty sure. I started -- we started speaking about this here. We started doing interviews on it right away. I think we did react quickly, unlike -- well, let me not say unlike. But we are very careful when we put out information that we know it to be true, and maybe that means we're not as fast as we'd like to be. Maybe that means we can't go out right away and say there's nothing to this, it's absolutely untrue, or describe an inquiry that hasn't quite gotten under way yet. But when we do put out the information, it's solid and it's good, to the best of our ability. And so yeah, maybe that makes us a little bit slower than we'd all like to be, but I think we were pretty quick in this case.
QUESTION: Richard, on this media subject, there is a editor and publishers newspaper association which says there's a 22 percent gap between what the press and the public perceive. And also do you have any feelings on a prestigious journalism award that Dan Rather and CBS News received, including the producers for their 60 Minutes story?
MR. BOUCHER: My answer to the first question is, "Huh?" And my answer to the second is no.
QUESTION: All right.
MR. BOUCHER: Sir.
QUESTION: Could you give us a little bit of an overview of the Kuwaiti Foreign Minister's visit to Washington this week, perhaps some discussions you had hoped to see, what topics you would like to discuss? Any --
MR. BOUCHER: Well, Kuwait, as you all know, is an excellent ally and friend. Together we face many challenges. We're facing the challenge of the war on terrorism. I'm sure that we'll want to discuss Iraq to a great extent, also discuss the progress of reform in Kuwait and particularly the good news that the assembly has decided to give women political rights and the right to vote, and we think that's a very positive development and we'll continue to discuss with them the process of reform in Kuwait.
QUESTION: Can you tell us when and who you might meet with?
MR. BOUCHER: No, I don't have that at this point. I'm just going to -- well. Teri.
QUESTION: There's reported to be an al-Qa'ida statement now posted on a website about Secretary Rice's visit to Iraq and being derogatory about her calls for Sunni participation. Have you seen that and do you have any idea about its authenticity?
MR. BOUCHER: No, I don't. I think I've seen press reports on it. I'm not sure if we've seen the actual statement. I've not heard anything internally in terms of analysis at this point.
QUESTION: Is there even any interest in looking into it? It doesn't seem to be as -- well, I don't know, I haven't read the --
MR. BOUCHER: You know, I'm sure we'll look at it. There's a lot of statements that come out. What can you say? You know, these are very dangerous people and their political views don't hold much substance but, unfortunately, their violence is terrible.
QUESTION: And it seems that the Iraqi Government, as a result of the Secretary's, I guess, emphatic request or whatever, now they will not raid mosques and churches and so on and all these things. Is there -- will there be a time frame, considering that some of these fellows may be hiding in there? Is it like a time frame?
MR. BOUCHER: I --
QUESTION: Are you aware of any --
MR. BOUCHER: I'm not going to speak for the Iraqi Government on this. They'll have to explain it themselves.
QUESTION: This is not something that you have discussed with them and so on, you know?
MR. BOUCHER: I don't know to what extent particular details like this might have been discussed by people in Baghdad, but any decisions by the Iraqi Government are for them to explain.
Sir.
QUESTION: Do you have any comment on Iranian Foreign Minister Kharazii visit to Iraq today?
MR. BOUCHER: No. As the Secretary said during her trip, that we think that Iran and other neighbors should have transparent, productive relations with Iraq; they should not in any way interfere in Iraqi politics or internal affairs, but that we know that Iraq's leadership wants to have a good relationship with Iran and will do so as long as Iran is not trying to interfere.
QUESTION: Thank you.
QUESTION: I'd like to ask you if the United States is working at all on the release of the Italian aid worker that was -- who was kidnapped yesterday in Kabul and if you've been in contact with the Italian Government on it and any other comments you'd like to make about it.
MR. BOUCHER: Okay. The United States, the International Security Assistance Force and other partners are supporting the efforts of the Afghan and Italian authorities who are working to secure the release of Ms. Cantoni, the CARE International official who was kidnapped on May 16th by armed gunmen in Kabul. We all hope for the speedy release of Ms. Cantoni unharmed and for a peaceful resolution of the situation.
Peter.
QUESTION: Richard, on Uzbekistan, excuse me, I don't know if you covered this in the briefing yesterday but there have been suggestions there that the United States has actually supported President Karimov for many years and sort of turned a relative blind eye to some of the more harsh accusations of systematic use of torture there. Can you just respond to this just in the context that this might be the fruit of what is happening there?
MR. BOUCHER: We discussed this somewhat yesterday and I think there's just a fundamental misunderstanding by people who make that argument. First of all, that ignores the facts. The facts are we've been very clear in our Human Rights Reports. The facts are we've withheld aid money from the government because of the human rights situation there. We've been very consistent and clear on the human rights situation in Uzbekistan. We've been very consistently clear in pressing for progress.
Why? Well, because that's the second part of the story that needs to be understood, that the fundamental view of the United States in this situation, as it has been in Uzbekistan, is that the kind of healthy society, the kind of stable society, the kind of society that's better defended against terrorism, the only way to achieve that is through democratic reforms. And so we don't think that -- we don't countenance human rights violations in the interest of stability because we don't think stability can be achieved except through democracy and openness.
And so that is our fundamental read of the situation and I think that's the point we made yesterday and that's the point we make again today, that, you know, there have been -- I think we've talked about the reports that the authorities fired on demonstrators and we expressed our view that this was deeply disturbing. We have Embassy officers, foreign diplomats, humanitarian workers out in the region now. They're trying to get to the bottom of what occurred in Andijan. We have made clear to Uzbek authorities that stability depends on reaching out to their citizenry and instituting real democratic reform and respect for rule of law. Repression and violence will in no way lead to long-term stability but to the reverse.
And we've done this in a variety of ways. Ambassador Jon Purnell is our Ambassador in Uzbekistan. He has sought to impress our concerns on the Uzbek Government, at the Foreign Ministry and elsewhere. Ambassador Laura Kennedy, here, has raised these concerns and issues with the Uzbek Ambassador in Washington. Yesterday, our Assistant Secretary Daniel Fried called a meeting of regional neighbors of Uzbekistan, the representatives of the Organization of Security and Cooperation in Europe and of the European Union to discuss the situation in Uzbekistan. And to try to work with her governments who are concerned about the situation there. To get that coherent message across: That there needs to be transparency, there needs to be reforms and there needs to be international involvement to find out what happened and support the reform process, if Uzbekistan is ever to achieve a kind of stability and the kind of integration in the greater community that we all want.
QUESTION: Just one quick follow-up.
MR. BOUCHER: Yeah.
QUESTION: And again -- please don't answer it, if you've answered it yesterday. Have you signaled to them that they could face further cut off for aid or other sanctions if the situation doesn't improve?
MR. BOUCHER: I don't know if its -- that situation is quite a reason yet. I'd have to check on the aid situation and see if that's even in the cards.
Yeah. George.
QUESTION: I figured out the other day, not in a very scientific way, that you withheld about five percent of their assistance since the new phase in the relationship started about four years ago. Have you done anything else to hold their feet to the fire with respect to reform?
MR. BOUCHER: First of all, there's been a very consistent aspect of our meetings and our diplomacy with Uzbekistan and with the leaders there. It's something our Embassy has worked hard on, to press for reform and press for more openness, transparency and tolerance in that society.
Second of all, it is something where we have used the aid program to try to support civil society and journalism and the other aspects of civic life that build a healthy, more open and transparent society. So I think both in terms of withholding some of the money or redirecting some of the money to nongovernmental organizations and in terms of the kind of ways that we spend our money both on supporting reforms, supporting civil society, I think the United States has a very consistent and good record.
Michel.
QUESTION: Opposition groups in Egypt have said --
QUESTION: Can we stay on Uzbekistan?
MR. BOUCHER: Uzbekistan? Okay.
QUESTION: Human rights groups have said that they are concerned that after the protest there will now be a repression and they're actually expecting mass arrests. Is that something that you -- is that a concern the U.S. shares?
MR. BOUCHER: I think that's a concern that we all share, that the way forward from now is not repression. We know that Uzbekistan does have a problem with terrorists. There are terrorists that need to be fought. There are terrorists that may need to be arrested. But the kind of widespread arrests that people are fearing is certainly not the answer. The way forward is to give people, I think, as the Secretary said, sort of a political outlet to give people political avenue to express their views and to move the society forward.
Yeah. Okay. Egypt.
QUESTION: Yeah. Groups in Egypt have said today that they would be -- they will boycott a referendum on new rules for Presidential elections. Do you have anything on that?
MR. BOUCHER: I don't have anything on that. Of course, we have a visit today and tomorrow, the Prime Minister of Egypt, to Washington. The Secretary will have a meeting with him this afternoon. They will discuss a number of issues, our common cause in pursuit of Middle East peace and the way we've worked together to support Palestinians in terms of creating the institutions of the state and to support the Palestinians and the Israelis in terms of making the opportunity of Israeli withdrawal from Gaza work for the betterment of both Israelis and Palestinians. That's obviously one of the most important things on the agenda.
We're also together in the war on terrorism and a number of other issues: Democracy reform, economic and social reform in the Middle East will certainly figure on the agenda. We'll talk about that, the progress that Egypt is making, the laws that have been passed. We'll have an opportunity during the course of the next two days to understand better what the plans and intentions are of the Egyptian Government and see how they plan to meet some of these criticisms.
QUESTION: Richard, there will be an Q&A outside the Ambassador's house?
MR. BOUCHER: I don't think so. We don't plan on that at this point.
Joel.
QUESTION: Just to follow-up on that, Richard. We discussed, I guess, about a week ago, we were asking the question of whether or not the United States had any opinion on what the opposition in Egypt was saying is still very exclusionary rules. Have you made a judgment on that?
MR. BOUCHER: I don't have a judgment for you. I think this is an issue, as I said, that we'll want to discuss during the visit and we'll want to understand better what the Egyptian Government's intentions and plans are in terms of introducing these reforms and moving forward on multiparty elections, but we'll also want to understand how they intend to deal with some of these issues that have been raised by various people in Egyptian society.
QUESTION: And will this be something that the United States will be forming an opinion about and expressing, you know, at some point after they've gone through all these processes?
MR. BOUCHER: I think it's -- I don't know, is the simple answer. It's something that we'd want to continue to discuss; we want to see this process move forward; we welcome the announcement of multiparty elections. We think that's important and we think it's important to take it all the way and make it really happen.
Teri.
QUESTION: Change the subject?
QUESTION: I'd like to go just kind of where he is because this has been coming up enough for a couple of weeks and we keep sort of getting the response that you guys haven't quite been able to digest it and yet I've read that publication after publication in the last two weeks, they have digested it and they've determined that it seems to be flawed. And you have not reached this conclusion on any level?
MR. BOUCHER: We don't sit here in judgment. We sit here trying to move things forward, trying to make progress on reform, trying to make progress on democracy, trying to work with government and civil society and others in a society, and support where we can efforts at real reform. The role of the United States is not to write articles in newspapers -- no offense to those who do -- or to sit in judgment and issue reports. The role of the United States is to move this process forward. So we're going to work with everybody involved and try to keep this process moving forward. And as I said, make sure that the announcement, which we've welcomed, has a real result and an open and fair election that's available for multi-parties. We're very aware of the criticisms that have been raised by different parties. We'll want to discuss that with the Egyptian Government but I think this is an area where we can move forward. As the Secretary said, Egypt has an opportunity here, an opportunity to lead in terms of its engagement on reform, the way it's led in other things such as the Middle East peace process.
Teri.
QUESTION: Oil-for-Food. On the Hill, one of the hearings that are going on, and one of the allegations is that the U.S. knew that some of these illegal shipments were being diverted -- were being sent out to Turkey and Syria and Jordan. What does the State Department have to say about that, especially since this building was responsible for so many documents and so many positions in the investigation?
MR. BOUCHER: Well, it's no surprise, frankly, to say that, that we have -- first of all, I think we discussed many of these specific issues several months ago already.
QUESTION: Yeah.
MR. BOUCHER: Second of all, from 1991 to 2003, there were in the annual Foreign Operations Appropriation Act, restrictions on U.S. assistance to any country not in compliance with UN Security Council sanctions against Iraq.
In the case of Jordan, three successive administrations waived this restriction yearly, starting in 1991, certifying to Congress that assistance to Jordan was in the national interest as provided for in the act. Our certifications to Congress noted that Jordan continued to import oil outside of the UN Oil-for-Food program.
Since 1990, Jordan also reported its oil imports from Iraq to the UN Security Council Sanctions Committee. UN Security Council took note of those Jordanian imports, recognizing a lack of economically viable alternatives, although the Security Council did not officially approve them. Jordan was and remains a critical partner of the United States in bringing stability and lasting peace to the Middle East. Jordan's Government pursues policies of critical importance to U.S. security in the region, including the signing of a Comprehensive Peace Treaty with Israel in 1994.
The Jordanian Government made clear to the UN throughout the sanctions period that the cessation of oil imports from Iraq would deprive it of critical resources and constitute a threat to the nation's stability.
So that's why this was consistently reported. We took note of it, but it was well known at the time.
QUESTION: Well, and also Syria. I mean, Secretary Powell on his trip openly said he asked -- he asked Syria to close down pipelines and et cetera. So basically there's no defense for what -- the U.S. did know about this so there's no reason the State Department feels to defend that, now that the documents are getting so much more attention on Capitol Hill?
MR. BOUCHER: This was documented -- we documented this in our reports to Congress. We saw the documenting, you know, of the Jordanian reports as they went to the United Nations. This was an acknowledged policy of the United States that we knew that Jordan needed the oil and that Jordan was importing oil through Iraq, and we and others in the international community decided because of the importance of Jordan it was acceptable for Jordan to import that oil.
QUESTION: And the same with Syria and Turkey?
MR. BOUCHER: The issues were somewhat different in each of the cases and I think you'll remember in Syria the question was a new pipeline that they were -- or an old pipeline they were restarting, but it was new shipments of oil and we didn't think that that new shipments of oil was justified and we questioned what they called testing of the pipeline, which went on for quite a while with a fairly large volume.
QUESTION: Millions of gallons of testing?
MR. BOUCHER: So no, we were more critical of the Syrian case. Frankly, I don't remember exactly whether the Turkey thing -- whether the shipments across the border with Turkey were acknowledged and reported or not.
QUESTION: You know, (inaudible) but you're saying that because Jordan signed a peace treaty with Israel it was allowed to break the sanctions, but Syria could not do it? Is that -- I mean, what kind of -- what is the principle?
MR. BOUCHER: No, that's not what I said. Jordan had a longstanding relationship where it depended on Iraq for oil and we felt that given the importance of Jordan to stability in the region that we would have to allow Jordan to continue to get that oil. With Syria it was a matter of new shipments of oil starting up, where it was not an established need, not an established pattern of trade.
QUESTION: But, Richard, on this subject, do you feel like the allegations by, for example, George Galloway today on the Hill that the United States is hypocritical in criticizing other violations when it, you know, waived sanctions on an open violator like Jordan?
MR. BOUCHER: It was not just the United States, first of all. The international community knew full well --
QUESTION: No, but you speak for the United States.
MR. BOUCHER: I do speak for the United States. The international community knew full well that Jordan needed the oil and was getting the oil from Iraq. Second of all, there was no matter here of personal gain. I'm not accusing Mr. Galloway of anything, but this was a matter of national policy and it was not a matter -- it was an acknowledged international policy, I would have to say, and not -- you know, other questions have arisen in the Oil-for-Food case with regard to personal gain. That's a different thing.
QUESTION: Mr. Boucher, two questions on Cyprus. According to sources, two of the U.S. congressmen who are going to visit illegally Cyprus on the Memorial weekend expressed a desire to buy property in the Turkish occupied area of Cyprus. Could you please clarify the U.S. position on these illegal property transactions? Do you support them, also?
MR. BOUCHER: I'll get you the standard answer on that. I don't have it in my head.
QUESTION: One more question. During the hearings in the Congress for the U.S.-Turkish relations of May 11th, the basic argument expressed by all panelists was that that the U.S.-Turkish relationship is problematic so the U.S. must find ways for appeasement of the Turks and win back the Turkish public opinion at the political cost, however, of Cyprus. How do you respond to this argument?
MR. BOUCHER: Where was this put forward -- this theory?
QUESTION: It was on May 11th -
MR. BOUCHER: By who?
QUESTION: on May 11th,in the Congress.
MR. BOUCHER: And did --
QUESTION: And the subject was --
MR. BOUCHER: And who put forward this theory that we had to somehow --
QUESTION: Excuse me.
MR. BOUCHER: I don't understand the question in that I don't think the State Department is implicated here. Did we somehow put forward this theory? It doesn't sound like something that we have put forward.
QUESTION: No, the question -- all the panelists was giving an emphasis to the fact that the relations between the two countries are problematic and should find a way somehow, at the political expense with Cyprus, and I was wondering how do you respond because there were congressmen --
MR. BOUCHER: First of all, that doesn't sound like a panel that included us and I'll leave the views of others to themselves. But the United States has not seen --
QUESTION: But my other point --
MR. BOUCHER: The United States has not in any way tried to sacrifice Cyprus. We tried to help people in the Turkish community, the Turkish Cypriot community and the Greek Cypriot community achieve what they themselves have long, long pledged themselves to, what they themselves have long, long said they wanted, and that is a united federal Cyprus.
QUESTION: One on Negroponte, the gentleman appointed Director of the National Intelligence. He's appointed recently Thomas Fingar, the Chief of the Bureau of Intelligence and Research of the Department of State as his Deputy Director for Analysis and Chairman of the National Intelligence Council. Who is going to replace Mr. Fingar? Is this, his section of the Department of State is coming to -- under the auspice of Mr. Negroponte?
MR. BOUCHER: The Bureau of Intelligence and Research is headed by an Assistant Secretary and the White House would announce who might be a future nominee for that job, when and if that happens. And second of all, as far as who the bureau works for, the bureau, like other bureaus in the State Department, works for the Secretary of State. They also will have, under the new arrangements of the intelligence community, they'll have a relationship with the Director of National Intelligence. That will be Ambassador Negroponte.
QUESTION: The Chinese Foreign Ministry is today urging both the United States and North Korea to engage in direct talks. Have they reached out to you in that context?
MR. BOUCHER: I have not seen any new statements in that regard. I'd have to check.
David? No? Sir. Back there.
QUESTION: I'd like to go back to North Korea. Did China deliver a message to the United States stating that North Korea wanted Secretary Rice or other senior officials to come to Pyongyang?
MR. BOUCHER: No. That's just an absolute, flat no.
QUESTION: Thank you.
MR. BOUCHER: No, we've got one or two here.
QUESTION: Can you bring us up to date on the diplomacy involved in the Jonathan Pollard case?
MR. BOUCHER: No.
QUESTION: It's been reported that Sharon brought it up with the Secretary of State.
MR. BOUCHER: I think, if I remember correctly, this is something that comes up from time to time and I don't think we've ever talked about it. So I'll see if there's anything to say, but I wouldn't hold your breath.
QUESTION: When you say it comes up from time to time -- in meetings with the Secretary of State or in this press briefing?
MR. BOUCHER: In this press briefing because of reports that the Israelis were asking for clemency or something like that.
Last one.
QUESTION: Richard, Nelson Mandela is here today in Washington. He's at the White House and he's trying to put together a foundation to encompass all of Africa. Now, James Wolfensohn -- I assume the World Bank -- is lending money and other prestigious institutions. Is this considered outsourcing because USAID and other State Department groups do that type of work? Will you be assisting that --
MR. BOUCHER: I haven't seen that particular proposal but no, I would not jump to any conclusion like that. We're going to stay involved in assistance to Africa. There are many groups, including -- the United States is one of the foremost donors throughout Africa, the World Bank is involved, the IMF is involved, private foundations are involved, everybody who can help Africa should be there and try to help out.
QUESTION: Thank you.
(The briefing was concluded at 1:38 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 |
|
|
|
