Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD)
State Department Noon Briefing
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE
DAILY PRESS BRIEFING
TUESDAY, APRIL 10, 2001 12:35 P.M.
(ON THE RECORD UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED)
Q: Can you tell us exactly what is going on with Jesse Jackson and if
he spoke to the Secretary, as he says that he has? Or is he rabbiting
on about nothing?
MR. BOUCHER: He spoke to the Secretary this morning. The Secretary
called him back, I think about 9 o'clock or so, maybe 9:30. The
Secretary expressed his thanks for Mr. Jackson's concern, told him
about the intensive diplomacy that's going on, and said we would
continue to use that channel.
We certainly appreciate the interest of Mr. Jackson and other
Americans about the welfare of the air crew and their desire to help
out if that becomes appropriate at some time, but we are clearly using
the diplomatic channels at this point, trying to work this out and see
the return home of our air crew.
Q: Well, he says he's going no matter what. He's just waiting for a
visa from the Chinese. You don't think that it's appropriate for him
to go at this time?
MR. BOUCHER: No, I wouldn't say that. I guess the only question is
sort of, at this point, do we intend to use him as some kind of
special envoy or something. And the answer is no, we're going to
pursue this in diplomatic channels.
Certainly Americans who might decide to go - you know, private visits
-- I mean, we don't really have any issue with that. We do - people
who are interested in knowing what we're saying and what we consider
about this - happy to tell them where things stand and what we're
doing.
Q: So, Richard, you're not ruling out his intervention at some point
if need be?
MR. BOUCHER: I'm not ruling it in.
Q: Well, you're not saying to him, "Don't go, we discourage this sort
of tact"?
MR. BOUCHER: I'm saying that we're not expecting - there is no
present plan - there is no plan to use Mr. Jackson as a mediator or a
special envoy on this issue. We are pursuing this through diplomatic
channels. That applies to others as well. There is a lot of interest
in the United States about this. There is a lot of interest by former
officials or people in the private sector about the welfare of our air
crew. I am sure all Americans are concerned and interested and are
willing to do things should that be necessary. At this point, the path
that we are pursuing is intensive diplomatic discussions through our
embassy.
Q: So, on my taken question yesterday, then, about what the
congressional delegations may have heard from the State Department --
MR. BOUCHER: We have had conversations with various congressional
delegations that were interested in - that were planning at some
point to go to China. Frankly, most of them have decided - I think on
their own, without our advice - not to go. We certainly clearly
understand their reasons not to go. At this point, I think all that we
knew about have decided to postpone their travel, so it doesn't arise
again.
Q: On your advice or --
MR. BOUCHER: Our advice has generally been to leave it up to them to
decide, certainly tell them about the situation and tell them about
our serious concerns about the situation.
Q: So no one was asked not to go by this building --
MR. BOUCHER: We haven't been making that - we haven't been telling
people not to go. People have been asking us what's our advice and
recommendation, and I think in most cases we've said it's up to you.
But clearly we understand concerns that people have and the reasons
they might have not to go. I think in some cases we may have said we
agree with those.
Q: Richard, we're hearing the folks in this building have been told
it's not really appropriate to engage in sort of - go to parties at
the Chinese Embassy, to engage in other social activities, and we also
hear that sort of the same is true in Beijing.
Can you shed any light on that?
MR. BOUCHER: The issue of social activities, I think, is really - it
comes down to a case-by-case situation. We had the instance yesterday
of a large reception at the Chinese Embassy for the outgoing
ambassador and the incoming ambassador, and the Secretary made quite
clear that he considered it inappropriate for US officials to be
attending that reception.
Certainly our primary concern, our priority in all our activities, is
our concern about the air crew and the need for them to return home.
The Secretary made clear he thought it inappropriate for us to attend
that reception, and we passed that word to other US Government
agencies as well so that other people would know that.
Whether there are similar circumstances that arise in Beijing, I don't
know, but I think clearly that's our view of these sorts of events.
Q: But just on a case-by-case, party-by-party basis?
MR. BOUCHER: Yes, it would come up on a case-by-case basis. I'm sure
if there were social contacts that we might be able to use to advance
the prospect of return of our air crew, that we would probably do
that.
Q: Can you tell us the latest in these intensive diplomatic efforts?
Have there been any new breakthroughs or setbacks?
MR. BOUCHER: At this point, Ambassador Prueher hasn't had any new
meetings in Beijing during the course of the day on Tuesday. We have
continued to have discussions with the Chinese. At other levels and in
all our discussions, we have made quite clear that the priority for us
is the return of our aircrew.
As the President said yesterday, it is now time for the people to come
home so that we can avoid damage to the bilateral relationship. We are
at a sensitive moment in our discussions. We are ready to talk to the
Chinese whenever they are ready.
In other news, though, General Sealock has met again - General
Sealock and our Consular Section Chief Ted Gong have met again with
the aircrew in Hainan Island. They had a meeting of about 40 minutes
without Chinese officials present. They report again that our crew are
in very good health, very good spirits. They are being treated well,
their morale is high, and we have been able to pass to them personal
messages, news from home. They have been able to provide us with
messages for their families that we are going to send back. They are
getting them sports news, local news from Washington State. We don't
have another meeting scheduled, but we are pushing to see them again
tomorrow as well.
Q: When you say that there is no new meeting scheduled, is the Chinese
Ambassador perhaps coming back here? And secondly, when you say you
meet with the 24 Americans without Chinese present, are you assuming
that the room is or is not bugged?
MR. BOUCHER: That's not something I could address at this podium, I'm
afraid.
Q: And what about the Chinese Ambassador question?
MR. BOUCHER: I'm not aware of any meetings set with him. We have had
contacts here at other levels with the Chinese Embassy. We have had
contacts at other levels in Beijing. And as I said, in all our
meetings on this issue, we make quite clear the importance of the
return of our aircrew and what the President said yesterday: It's time
for them to come home so as to avoid damage to the relationship.
Q: Did Admiral Prueher request any meetings over the past 24 hours?
And is the US generally satisfied with the level of contact, the
frequency of contact it's had with Chinese officials?
MR. BOUCHER: I think generally we have found it a useful and positive
way to conduct the negotiations and discussions with the Chinese. As
we have said several times during the course of this process, we have
been able to move forward in these discussions. But as the President
made quite clear yesterday, it is time for our people to come home,
and that remains our position. Admiral Prueher has made quite clear
that he is ready to see the Chinese again any time, any day, 24 hours
a day, whenever they are ready to continue these discussions.
Q: Just to pick up from that, is it a case of the US waiting at the
moment for some acknowledgement from the Chinese that a meeting is
possible, or are they granting meetings as often as the US wants them?
MR. BOUCHER: At this point, I think we have made clear that Admiral
Prueher is ready to meet with them any time, and whenever they are
ready we'll have further discussions.
Q: When Sealock met with the crew this past time, was it all 24
members or was he just allowed to see selective members?
MR. BOUCHER: No, it was all 24 members.
Q: And when you say that there is not a new meeting scheduled,
Secretary Powell said the other day that he expects you'll be able to
have regular access to the crew for the duration of the standoff. Is
this not the case any more? Are you asking for another meeting and the
Chinese have not granted it?
MR. BOUCHER: I think generally, if you look at the record of the past
few days, when we've finished one meeting we happened to have
immediately had another one scheduled. Sometimes that's been the case,
sometimes it hasn't. But we at least have yesterday and today when
we've managed to have two, one meeting each day, with the air crew,
with the full air crew in the evening in Hainan. That comes around
again in 12, 16 hours from now. So we are continuing to press for
regular meetings and for full, free and unfettered access. Certainly
we would like to see more than one meeting a day, but these meetings
that we do have are important to us to look after the welfare of our
crew members.
Q: Last week, Secretary Powell said that there was movement and he was
encouraged, but we're not really hearing encouragement or encouraged
being used any more. Has the momentum shifted at all? There were not
meetings on Tuesday in Beijing and there are no meetings scheduled
today.
MR. BOUCHER: Today is Tuesday. Well, it's now Wednesday, just barely,
in China.
Q: Are we still encouraged?
MR. BOUCHER: I would say that we have moved forward throughout this
process. We are at a sensitive moment now. We look to hear from the
Chinese when they're ready to continue these discussions. I don't
think I can do a daily thermometer on this. We have said on one or two
occasions that we were moving forward. I think that's true of the
process. But I think it's equally true what the President said
yesterday: It's time for them to come home.
Q: Richard, these contacts at other levels, both here and in Beijing,
could you describe what those levels are? And from the context of the
way you mentioned it last, are these meetings specifically devoted to
this issue, or are they devoted to regular, more routine issues at
which the US side is bringing up the crew members?
MR. BOUCHER: I think I would have to put it a little different than
either one of those choices; that our priority in all our meetings
remains the return of our air crew. Our priority remains to see them
return home, to see this issue resolved, to avoid damage to the
overall relationship by seeing it resolved early. And so we make that
point in every meeting.
We have also raised other issues like the human rights situation, the
various people that are being held in China. We told you, I think
yesterday, we were going to inquire about one of the cases that we had
seen press reports about. We have used meetings today at other levels
to do that. So we are raising other things, but I would say that the
real concentration in meetings that we have, whether they are in
Beijing or here, has been on the air crew and stressing the importance
of bringing them home.
Now, where do those - what level do those meetings take place? Sort
of the deputies, the political counselors. You know, the other
diplomats that are involved in working with the Chinese on a regular
basis.
Q: Richard, I am just a little unclear on your earlier answer to the
Jesse Jackson and other kind of non-official people. You don't seem to
be discouraging anyone from going over to China, but is there no
concern in this building at all that if you get somehow a flood of
kind of citizen envoys flying over to Beijing that they are going to
hector the Chinese into - that they might eventually - it may be
unhelpful to the process, the diplomatic process that is under way?
MR. BOUCHER: Well, I don't - I guess you guys have seen Jesse Jackson
say he was going to China. I don't think that actually came up in the
phone call, whether he was going or not. The issue, when discussed
with the Secretary, was that he made clear he was available for sort
of carrying a message or intervening if we thought that was
appropriate at this time. We appreciate the offer, but the Secretary
made clear we are pursuing the diplomacy in a different way right now.
As far as people traveling to China, it is really a matter for
individuals to decide whether they want to do that or not. We would
certainly hope that any Americans who were meeting with Chinese would
make clear that it is time for our air crew to return home. But I will
leave it at that. As far as a negotiating mission, we are negotiating
through the diplomatic channel.
Q: First it was, "We regret," then it turned into, "We're sorry," plus
condolences. Are the events as they are happening conducive to a
full-fledged apology?
MR. BOUCHER: Our position on that has not changed in any way. We don't
think an apology is appropriate or necessary.
Q: Richard, yesterday evening, the reports were that we were waiting
for the Chinese, kind of like today, waiting for a response to the
Chinese in our latest attempts to formulate language that they would
accept. Speaking from the road, a spokesman for Jiang Zemin - for
President Jiang - said it was unacceptable.
Is that not a message that has been conveyed back in Beijing to our
officials as well, or is that something that is just a public
statement and you are not hearing that privately?
MR. BOUCHER: There have been no meetings with the Chinese since we
heard the reports of that statement. Remember, when we brief here at
noon, it's actually the beginning of - when we briefed here yesterday
at noon, it was the beginning of Tuesday in China. We didn't have any
meetings with the Chinese during the course of the day Tuesday. So we
have not had any further official communication with them. We have
certainly seen a variety of statements by the Chinese. We have seen
statements today by the Foreign Ministry. There are some more
statements in Hainan Island today. So there is a variety of things
been said by the Chinese.
Certainly our position has been clear and consistent. We have
expressed our regret over the Chinese loss. We have made quite clear
we are sorry to see the loss of life and the loss of an airplane on
the Chinese side, but we have made quite clear that we don't think
that an apology is appropriate.
Q: But has it been the case that when President Jiang or his
spokespeople say things from this trip that they are on, is that
always followed up? Has it always been followed up so far with a
meeting in which exactly that is conveyed?
MR. BOUCHER: I don't think so.
Q: Can you say that you are concerned that you did not have meetings
there today, given that those were the last - that Jiang Zemin's
words were the last thing you heard from their government?
MR. BOUCHER: I don't think - first of all, I don't think they are the
last thing we have heard from the Chinese Government. There have been
statements by Foreign Ministry spokesmen today about working towards a
resolution. Certainly the Chinese position has been restated many
times in public. It is not new to us.
What I would say is that we have made quite clear, as the President
made clear yesterday, that it is now time for our people to come home
so that we can - so that our bilateral relationship does not become
damaged. That is what we have been saying and consistently saying at
this point.
Q: There are a number of Americans who are saying that it is now --
that this has not been resolved, that it is now time to get tough,
bring home our Ambassador, fiddle with WTO, and just generally get
tough. Do you think those are reasonable responses?
MR. BOUCHER: I would say that the President has been very consistent,
very clear, right from the start in this situation. The Secretary has
been very consistent and very clear right from the start about our
understanding, our feelings and our willingness to express our
concerns and our regrets about the loss on the Chinese side, but
equally clear about how far we would go. And they have been quite
clear that our priority remains the return of our aircrew.
So we have been very, I think, clear in the US viewpoint on this. And
I would add that our Ambassador is the primary channel we have been
using to negotiate these matters. So what further steps need to be
considered and when they need to be considered, I leave to the
President and the Secretary and their other cabinet colleagues. But I
think the facts of our position and the way we have pursued our
position have been very straight and very clear all along.
Q: When you say our position is very clear in that Ambassador Prueher
is available for more meetings, does that mean that at this moment the
ball is in the court of the Chinese; it's in their court to make the
next step?
MR. BOUCHER: I don't think I'm able to do an inning-by-inning account
of the diplomacy in this matter. We have tried to keep you updated on
the meetings --
Q: Or set-by-set?
MR. BOUCHER: Or set-by-set, or whatever sports analogy one would use
here. I think we have made clear what our position is. The President
was quite clear yesterday, saying it's time for our crew to come home.
That remains our position. And whenever the Chinese are ready to talk
to us again about that, we are available.
Q: Richard, you keep saying - and the President and the Secretary
have said - that you don't want the relationship to be damaged. Can
you not say that the relationship has already been damaged? Would you
say that other areas of cooperation that we have with the Chinese in
the whole bilateral relationship have gone consistently throughout
this - at a consistent level throughout this crisis?
MR. BOUCHER: I don't think I would be able to say that. This came up
to some extent in the Secretary's discussions on television on Sunday
where he made clear that there were areas where already saw people
canceling trips, already saw concerns being raised in the business
community. So we already saw some indicators of damage to the overall
relationship, which he said could be reversed if this thing were
resolved. And so the President has talked about the potential for real
damage and the potential for long-term damage to the relationship that
is clearly there in terms of the attitudes in the United States in
particular, and we think throughout the world, about the way things
are unfolding. And certainly an earlier return of our air crew will go
a considerable ways to preventing that kind of serious damage from
occurring.
In terms of the way we are dealing with issues with the Chinese, this
is clearly our priority issue in all our discussions. It is clearly
our priority in our diplomacy. Does this mean we don't do anything
else? No, we've raised some human rights cases. We've raised some
other issues of concern to the United States. But you might think
about it as such a priority that maybe we're dealing with priorities
one, two and three and not four, five and six these days. It is a
broad relationship that has a lot going on at any given moment, and
this is clearly the primary issue that we've all been concentrating on
and the primary issue because it's just a serious concern to us and to
the rest of the United States.
Q: Do you see it hampering cooperation from the Chinese side in other
areas that you would normally expect more cooperation?
MR. BOUCHER: I don't think I have any particular areas to cite for you
right now.
Q: Seven hours to wheels up, I guess, for the trip to Paris. At this
point, is there any consideration that Secretary Powell would stay,
given the fact that this crisis hasn't been resolved?
MR. BOUCHER: No. The Secretary is clearly in very close communications
with everybody in Washington while he travels, whether it's from the
airplane or on the ground. He has secure communications everywhere he
goes. He will be able to continue, as he has done over the last few
days, to keep in close touch with Dr. Rice, with the President, and
especially with Deputy Secretary Armitage, who will be here, who has
been here working these issues in great detail for the last few days.
So in some ways, yes, we can do the communicating. The Secretary can
be plugged in and in touch from the road almost as he is when he is in
Washington. So he will continue to keep in touch. Deputy Secretary
Armitage will continue to organize our effort, work our effort on
this, and will continue to coordinate with the President and with the
National Security Council, even while we're on the road.
Q: Richard, a week ago yesterday, President Bush called on China for a
prompt return for these Americans. Is that still possible - a prompt
return? Are we beyond the point where prompt return applies? I mean,
you talk about an early return now. He said prompt.
MR. BOUCHER: We wanted them to come home Sunday. We wanted them to
come home Monday. We wanted them to come home Tuesday, Wednesday,
Thursday, Friday, Saturday, Sunday, Monday, and we will continue to
work for their early, immediate and prompt return to the United
States. That remains our goal and that's what we're still working on.
Q: Richard, in your contacts at either the ambassadorial level or the
lower level, have the Chinese brought up ancillary - well, unrelated
-- issues when you have been trying to talk about the plane? For
instance, have they mentioned specifically the condemnatory resolution
that you guys are sponsoring in Geneva?
MR. BOUCHER: Not that I'm aware of.
Q: Or Taiwan, the arms sales?
MR. BOUCHER: Again, not that I'm aware of. I can't account for every
single conversation. I've said that in some of these other
conversations we have raised other issues. I'm not certain whether the
Chinese have or not, but I don't think - I'm not aware that this has
been linked to other issues.
Q: No, no, I'm not suggesting a link. I'm just saying --
MR. BOUCHER: They may have raised other issues in some of these
meetings as well. I can't say for certain. But I'm not aware of any
linkage, shall we say.
Q: Are there any plans for any other lower-level Chinese diplomatic
meetings today here?
MR. BOUCHER: There have been one or two here today. I am sure they are
still having - that they do have contacts in Beijing that people that
have meetings, opportunities for us to raise these issues with other
people, that they go ahead and do that. I'm not aware of anything
additional that scheduled, but I just don't want to rule it out
because we do have other meetings with the Chinese from time to time,
and obviously we would use those to press this case as well.
Q: A change of subject?
MR. BOUCHER: Change of subjects? No, not quite yet. One, two, three
more.
Q: There is some reporting that the Chinese side might release those
air crews before Easter Sunday. Is that something that the US
officials asked for?
MR. BOUCHER: Again, we asked them for Saturday, Sunday, Monday,
Tuesday, Wednesday. We're looking to have our people home as soon as
possible. We don't think that there is any artificial date that should
be attached to that.
Q: Chinese News Agency Xinhua reportedly reported that Secretary of
State said sorry about the entire incident. What would you say to
that? Will you make it clear that he didn't - he simply said sorry
about the loss of life?
MR. BOUCHER: What the Secretary stated is clear. There are transcripts
on the public record. You can look at everything he said Sunday on the
TV shows. So rather than reading a report of a report, I would tend to
read what the Secretary of State actually said, and leave it at that.
Q: Is there any consideration for the two Presidents to talk direct to
give an end to this problem?
MR. BOUCHER: That's a question you would have to ask at the White
House. Certainly Admiral Prueher, in his discussions in China, is
acting with the authority, with the instructions, with the direction
of the President of the United States, and he remains our
authoritative channel for this. So that has been the principal focus
of our discussions, but if something else happens, I'm sure you can
ask the White House.
Q: Just one question about Admiral Prueher's status. Was he one of the
ambassadors that was asked to stay on kind of indefinitely, not just
this three or six months that some others were asked to stay on?
MR. BOUCHER: Yes. The ones that weren't asked to stay on have already
gone. March - was it March 1st or March 31st? I can't remember. March
1st, I think it was, when the people who were not asked to continue
departed.
Q: Moved on.
MR. BOUCHER: Moved on, went off to pursue independent careers.
Q: You mentioned, I think, that you asked the Chinese about this new
scholar who was detained, the reports yesterday. Could you tell us
what you found out?
MR. BOUCHER: Yes. Nothing back yet. No response back yet. We have
raised it with them and talked about that and other human rights cases
that are of concern right now.
|
NEWSLETTER
|
|
Join the GlobalSecurity.org mailing list
|
|
|
