26 May 2000
Transcript: Pickering Press Conference in New Delhi on S. Asia Visit
(Focus of trip will be full range of bilateral, regional issues) (3520) Thomas R. Pickering, Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs, briefed reporters in New Delhi May 25 on his visit to South Asia. He characterized his conversations that day with officials in New Delhi as "very full and very friendly." Pickering said his visit to India was a follow up to President Clinton's visit to the region earlier this year and the upcoming visit of India's Prime Minister Vajpayee to the United States in the fall. His discussions with the Indian officials covered a wide range of bilateral issues, including trade and U.S.-Indian cooperation. Regional discussions included Sri Lanka, Pakistan, Kashmir and relationships throughout the South Asian region. They also discussed China, Japan, Korea, the Gulf and South East Asia, Pickering said. Pickering said his agenda in Pakistan will be to discuss the full range of issues that the United States and Pakistan have been discussing over a long period of time: democracy, non-proliferation, Pakistan's economic situation, instability along the line-of-control, terrorism, Afghanistan and Osama Bin Laden. Concerning reports of nuclear testing in the region, Pickering said the United States believes that the commitment that both Pakistan and India have made against future testing "should remain in place and should be continued. We talked about encouraging both of them to sign the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty," he said. Pickering said "there is deep concern" about a possible bloodbath in Sri Lanka and that he has expressed both publicly and privately, as did his Indian colleagues, "the hope that it could be avoided. ... I know that Norway is continuing its contacts in an effort to try to avoid that and to also try to get some kind of process started that could lead to a peaceful resolution," he said. The Undersecretary also answered reporters' questions on Chechnya and Fiji. Following his visit to India, Pakistan and Sri Lanka, Pickering will go to Tokyo to discuss preparations for the G-8 Summit in Okinawa in July, according to the State Department Spokesman. Following is the transcript of the press conference: (begin transcript) PRESS CONFERENCE BY AMB. PICKERING AT ROOSEVELT HOUSE MAY 25, 2000 New Delhi, India Ambassador Pickering: Thank you very much Dick and thank you all for coming. I thought just to put in perspective what I have been doing I'd go over a little bit of our conversation and where we have been in those conversations. First I would say, as an overall characterization, we have had very full and very friendly discussions. And in every sense of the word, I mean that. I believe that is indeed a very fair characterization of what we have been doing. You should know that I came in the context of the President's trip to do what I can to carry out the design which he and Prime Minister Vajpayee reached of the architecture of our follow-on discussions with the direct purpose of trying to put some substantive action in place behind and to follow-up the President's visit and the coming visit of Prime Minister Vajpayee to the United States in the autumn. And my particular charge, my particular responsibility was to conduct two sets of conversations with the Ministry of External Affairs and the Government of India, one having to do with our bilateral relations and the other having to do with the South Asian region and the Asian region in general, and I will be finishing up shortly with the final call I have on the National Security Advisor Mr. Brajesh Mishra. The conversations on the bilateral issues covered everything from trade and U.S.-Indian cooperation and in that area, through what would be expected to be the normal range of bilateral discussions that any government would have. In the regional discussions, of course, we had an opportunity to discuss Sri Lanka, discussions of Pakistan and of Kashmir, of the Indian view and our views, and of relationships throughout the South Asian region. In the Asian discussions, we focused very heavily on China, Japan, Korea, the Gulf and South East Asia, so we had a very broad opportunity to do a full review. I have been engaged in these types of discussions before and I would say that this particular discussion represents a serious step forward in the depth of discussions and analysis that each side presented and indeed in the discussion of where both of our views overlap and where our views diverge. We had, of course, non-proliferation on the discussion menu although, as you know, Deputy Secretary Talbott and Foreign Minister Jaswant Singh will be discussing probably next month this issue again. Secretary Albright expects to meet Foreign Minister Singh in the Conference on Democracies in Warsaw later on in June. So we have a very full agenda and we have had discussions of economics, discussions on science and technology are forthcoming and discussions of commercial cooperation have taken place. So this is one of a number of steps, as I said to work on building on some serious action to follow up the President's visit. Q: Mr. Pickering, you are going to Pakistan next. Are you going to be repeating the United States' warning about a new nuclear test or do you think another warning is necessary? How serious is that? A: It goes without saying that we are always disturbed by any reports that testing may occur throughout the region, and we usually follow up those pieces of information, however soundly based or non-soundly based they may be, but to make sure that everybody knows that the United States believes that the commitment that both Pakistan and India have made against future testing should remain in place and should be continued. We talked about encouraging both of them to sign the Comprehensive Testing Ban Treaty. My agenda in Pakistan will be to discuss the full range of issues that the United States and Pakistan have been discussing over a long period of time: democracy, non-proliferation, the economic situation in Pakistan, the instability that exists along the line-of-control, in particular in efforts to try to find a way to reduce that instability as rapidly as possible. Issues of terrorism, Afghanistan and Osama Bin Laden, they are on the agenda and none of those are hidden from your eyes and all of them have been very prominent in our past discussions. Q: Is the South Asian region still one of the most volatile regions in the world, a few years after the last nuclear testing? A. I think the President's judgment when he talked about that was soundly based on the fact that the 1998 nuclear test did not contribute to this stability to the region, nor did they contribute to the notion that if there were any instability and any insecurity, one could not eliminate the possibility that, God forbid, nuclear use as a result of such. So any conflict, any disturbance in the region, I think, raises for us that potential and clearly, as a result, the President's judgment on that case. I don't believe have changed even after his visit. Although he came hoping that we would make serious progress, he believes that we have and he believes the reason why I am out here is that we must continue. Q: Russian (inaudible) today as yesterday has said that if (inaudible) consignment of arms for Chechnya from Afghanistan -- they will not hesitate to bomb Afghanistan? How do you feel United States -- is this an issue that will be discussed in Pakistan? A: Well certainly all kinds of questions having to do with Afghanistan are open for our discussion and are a part of our menu. We have in our discussions with the Russians on the issue of Chechnya, said that we recognize that states have a responsibility to deal with problems of terror in their own country, and this was of course in the aftermath of five apartment bombings in Russia which took a very serious toll of human life. At the same time we have made clear to the Russians in their prosecution of the conflict in Chechnya, that we believe that their serious divergence from law of war and from human treatment in particular of civilians in that conflict and that allegations and charges of misconduct on the part of the Russian military should be thoroughly investigated against full international standard. We have also said and continue to say that the humanitarian needs of that population need to be met. And that we would hope that they would continue to cooperate and improve their cooperation with international organizations. The ICRC is one, the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe is another. Finally we have said in connection with the Chechnya conflict, that we would hope they would rapidly undertake the political context with the idea in mind of arriving at a solution to the conflict, we do not believe that there is a military solution to that conflict. Certainly it hasn't been achieved, and we believe in fact that the political process could be extremely helpful in finding an answer to the difficulty. Q: You said that the Indian Prime Minister is going to visit the U.S. Have the dates been finalized? A: The dates have not been finalized. September would be a good date for autumn. Yes. September is a good example. Q: Mr. Pickering, during your discussion in Pakistan, is there a view in Washington after the visit of the President that there is some forward movement in curbing cross-border terrorism? A: We would hope there is, but I haven't seen here in India a universal support for that conclusion yet. Indian officials have expressed concern that they don't believe that there has yet been detectable change in the level of infiltration, and the level of activity that goes on -- military activity -- goes on inside Kashmir. So that is something that obviously has not yet, in the eyes of the Indian interlocutors I have spoken with, been achieved. It is our hope that can be and obviously we want to encourage it. Q: As far as the information you have received, is there going to be a bloodbath in Sri Lanka? A: No one that I know of has an answer to that question. There is deep concern about it and I have expressed both publicly and privately as did my Indian colleagues a deep sense of concern and the hope that it could be avoided and I know that Norway is continuing its contacts in an effort to try to avoid that and to also try to get some kind of process started that could lead to a peaceful resolution. Q: inaudible (About U.S. role in Sri Lanka) A: I see a supportive role for the United State here. In large measure because we respect the leadership that Norway has shown and the serious work that they have done over the months to develop good contacts with both sides, to appreciate the situation. Q: They have developed contact but they haven't been able to find what is happening, they have not been able to say that the Norwegians have been successful? A: I think that we have made it very clear that we are prepared to support a Norwegian initiative as has India. I believe that initiative needs to have a chance to work, the situation is changing rapidly on the ground. No one has made, in my view, any conclusive judgments as to whether this situation as it's evolving on the ground will work in favor of or against institutional contacts between the parties. Those will be things that obviously need to be explored in the coming days to see whether that can happen. I would think however that it is important that we not have a race of mediators but rather that we should all work together to a common purpose and reason why since in the context of the Norwegian ideas have been more rapidly and more fully developed than others, and that India has made its own statements of support for the Norwegian initiative that it seems reasonable that the United States after studying those particular initiatives should also commit itself to try to support those initiatives and in no way does that in my mind reduce the importance of those initiatives. Q: inaudible (About whether India and Pakistan would resume their dialogue.) A: You certainly have, and it's been a centerpiece of our discussion. Their reaction is that they in simple terms as we would like to see real progress on the ground as a basis to have confidence that if the dialogue is resumed it can move toward a successful conclusion. I said that we too would like to see it, that the President has made clear when he was in Pakistan, that he felt it was time for Pakistan to make its move to contribute to the process and that we would all hope that that could be done. We were not requiring a lot of public comment but were much more interested in steps on the ground. Q: (inaudible) come up for review in the United States, the United States supports the Norwegian peace initiative, would any change of, big changes by the United Support (inaudible) A: The position of LTTE as a designated -- as a foreign terrorist organization -- in the United States under U.S. law is arrived at after careful considerations of factors that are delineated by law and therefore is not a political decision. It is a legal decision on the basis of the assessments of objective circumstances. And as a result, obviously, anytime this issue comes up for review, it must come up for review in the context of the legal prescriptions and not in the context of a commitment or our contribution to a diplomatic process. We would hope that the LTTE would act in ways that would eliminate the requirement that they're found as a foreign terrorist organization but that is up to the LTTE. They know the law; they know what the factors are. We have been, over the years, disappointed that it has adopted assassination as a weapon of its struggle, and we are very much against that, and it has postured itself in a fashion to be found as a terrorist organization. We believe that these practices should be immediately eliminated. I believe that the LTTE knows our views very clearly. Q: Even though the United States doesn't support a separate Tamil homeland, if the Tamil rebels are able to take Jaffna would they not be able to come to peace talks with a very strong hand (inaudible) of the homeland. A: I think that it is not for me in public to analyze the positions of each party to a negotiation that doesn't exist. I think that is a little bit presumptuous and a little bit perhaps asking me to make statements that might in some way or the other prejudice the chance to succeed in a negotiation that I think is very important to everybody concerned. To the government of Sri Lanka, to the opposition parties in Sri Lanka and the LTTE therefore, I don't believe that that is an appropriate role for me to play at this time. The situation is evolving and I think, clearly, the best time to begin negotiations on discussion is when both sides believe the time is ready to do so. We would hope that they would reach that conclusion very quickly and we would encourage them to do it. Q: inaudible A: I would not but I would say this: that we would hope that Pakistan would return to democracy as soon as that can be done. The Supreme Court in Pakistan has made a decision on that subject, and it is not for us to question or quibble with that decision. It is a decision which now sets a time and our hope is that in its return to democracy in Pakistan the Chief Executive Officer General Musharraf could be able to tell his own people following his speech on March 23 and the international community by what steps and stages, by what process, by what road map, he would return. And clearly that is our hope and I hope that Pakistan will consider that positively and react positively to that process. I am not an expert on constitutional law in Pakistan but I would hope that the Supreme Court decision would be considered an important benchmark in the roadmap, if I could put it that way and that other benchmarks could be filled in. Q: inaudible A: I think it's a very important question for the government of India and the government of India might believe that it has said it is prepared to work on this particular question but only when it has the support of, the approbation, or the permission of both sides. Now that is the Government of India's decision which I don't question in light of the history, of Indian associations, if I could put it that way, with this problem in the past. We would hope that offer can be well received by both parties. We believe it was made in good faith and with a clear sense of humanitarian interest and should be received that way. Q: Inaudible A: My view is that it is an important step that my government has welcomed the release of the Hurriyat leaders and more importantly, if I could put it this way, the possibility of opening conversations with them and we believe that this is significant. We would hope that India would consider talking with others from Kashmir as well who might as well be able to contribute to a process of resolving the conflict and particularly beginning to understand and find ways to deal with the wishes of the people of Kashmir themselves. When I go to Pakistan, obviously I want to discuss the whole problem. This is an important contribution from the Indian side and as I said we also hope that we think we have reason to be positive about this but I will have to confirm it that Pakistan too understands this situation and is prepared to make its own positive contribution. Q: One more question -- inaudible A.: We have, we have both compared notes on the situation in Fiji and I think it goes without saying, as I have said publicly in previous conversations to the Press, and that we had hoped that the situation can be resolved rapidly. We support continuing the elected democratic government in Fiji and not the removal of the government by force of arms. We have been particularly struck by the very positive role that President Mara of Fiji has taken with respect to the difficulty as well as think the Grand Council of Chiefs have been positive in their support for the return of the democratically elected government. Q: inaudible A: I understood, and I may be wrong as I am not an expert on Fiji politics, that the first request was obviously to releasing and to permitting the government to resume its role. And I am not sure how that fits with their second request. Obviously, what Prime Minister Chaudhry does when he can make up his mind free of compulsion and free of the armed presence of others holding the hostages is for him to decide and I can't even say that. But I do think that it is important that this crisis be ended. If the people want to change the government of Fiji, that the use of arms not prevail in this situation, and that Prime Minister Chaudhry and his government be returned to their full powers. Q: inaudible A: I think that it is very clear in our discussions that both India and the United States share broad interest in the future of Asia and that we believe that Asia should be a stable, prosperous, secure and peaceful region for all. And that the liberty of the United States and India to compare notes and consult about the region about its future and about our respective policies, analyses, interest is important to our mutual understanding between India and the United States, both of Asia problems, of how to resolve those, and how to work together in the broad reach of the continent. From the Gulf to Korea, each of us has interests here, some of those are economic and some of those are existential but they are nevertheless important and the ability to compare notes from this particular set of issues represents a deepening of diplomatic contact between the United States and India, something that we haven't been able to realize before and now we believe as a result of the President's visit is possible and fruitful for both of us. (end transcript) (Distributed by the Office of International Information Programs, U.S. Department of State. Web site: http://usinfo.state.gov)
|
NEWSLETTER
|
| Join the GlobalSecurity.org mailing list |
|
|
|
