The White House Briefing Room
July 4, 1999
PRESS BRIEFING BY SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL ON PRESIDENT'S MEETING WITH PRIME MINISTER SHARIF OF PAKISTAN
THE WHITE HOUSE
Office of the Press Secretary
______________________________________________________________
For Immediate Release July 4, 1999
PRESS BRIEFING BY
SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL
ON PRESIDENT'S MEETING WITH
PRIME MINISTER SHARIF OF PAKISTAN
The Briefing Room
5:40 P.M. EDT
SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: We have two Senior
Administration Officials here to give you a little background on the
three-hour meeting that took place at Blair House. I'll give you a
little bit, first of all, of the back-and-forth that happened at
Blair House.
Some of you were asking earlier, why Blair House. Well,
as it proved this afternoon, where you had various meetings at
various times with small groups in different rooms, how valuable it
was to have a resource like we have across the street.
But in the three hours that the two delegations were
together, they started off with about 40 minutes in small group
delegations, three on the United States side and two on the Pakistan
side, plus the leaders. There was a point at which the two leaders,
President Clinton and Prime Minister Sharif, went into a one-on-one
with a notetaker. They then took about a one-hour break, during
which the two sides conferred on their discussions up to that point.
During that time, President Clinton did have a brief
10-minute conversation with Prime Minister Vajpayee of India to keep
him fully apprised of the discussion. And then they finished up
with, during the course of the last hour, some back-and-forth between
the President, the Prime Minister, and in various delegations and
various sizes.
Since that time, of course, Sandy Berger has now
telephoned his counterpart, Prime Minister Vajpayee's National
Security Advisor, to bring him up to date on the results of
today's activity. So, at this point, I will introduce Senior
Administration Official number one, who will go through some of
the detail of the meeting.
SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: Let me add to what
you've just heard by saying that the President and the Prime
Minister had a positive meeting. They agreed upon the joint
statement which you have. Let me just take a minute and read it
to you for the record.
President Clinton and Prime Minister Sharif share the
view that the current fighting in the Kargil region of Kashmir is
dangerous and contains the seeds of a wider conflict. They also
agreed it was vital for the peace of South Asia that the line of
control in Kashmir be respected by both parties in accordance
with the 1972 Simla Accord.
It was agreed between the President and the Prime
Minister that concrete steps will be taken for the restoration of
the line of control, in accordance with the Simla agreement. The
President urged an immediate cessation of the hostilities once
these steps are taken.
The Prime Minister agreed that the bilateral dialogue
begun in Lahore in February provides the best forum for resolving
all issues dividing India and Pakistan, including Kashmir. The
President said he would take a personal interest in encouraging
an expeditious resumption and intensification of those bilateral
efforts once the sanctity of the line of control has been fully
restored.
The President reaffirmed his intent to pay an early
visit to South Asia.
If I could take a minute just to give you some
perspective on the President's involvement in this. As you know,
a series of military clashes began in this part of Kashmir last
month. Almost from the beginning, the President recognized that
this was a very serious situation and one that had great danger
for wider escalation. He began to have a series of contacts with
both Prime Ministers.
Beginning in mid-June he first called Prime Minister
Vajpayee -- I think on the 14th of June. And then he called
Prime Minister Sharif on the 15th of June. While he was in
Europe on his trip, with regards to Kosovo, the President also
continued to have direct contact with the two, exchanging a
series of messages and letters.
National Security Advisor Berger met with his
counterpart from India in Geneva on the margins of the European
trip. I think we've briefed you in the past on the content of
those messages, but I think they amount to a clear call for
restraint on both sides, a call for the restoration of the line
of control, and in urging both parties to go back to the Lahore
process, which we have seen as a very encouraging process that
began in February, of direct dialogue between the two leaders.
On Saturday morning, Prime Minister Sharif asked to
call the President. The President took his call yesterday
morning. They spoke for a while. The Prime Minister asked the
President if he could come to Washington on an urgent basis. The
President proposed this afternoon. I think many of you know the
President is leaving on a domestic trip tomorrow, so he said,
come this afternoon. The Prime Minister agreed.
The President also called Prime Minister Vajpayee to
brief him on these developments and to make sure he was fully
informed as to what our intentions were.
The President, as my colleague has told you, met for
almost three hours with the Prime Minister this afternoon. At
one point during that process, they took a break and the
President called Prime Minister Vajpayee in New Delhi and gave
him an interim readout on where we were. Once we had reached
agreement on the statement, National Security Advisor Berger
called his counterpart again in Delhi, just a few minutes ago to
brief him on the statement and give him a recap of what has
happened here today. I expect that we will have other
communications with the Indians, probably through Deputy
Secretary Talbott, calling the Foreign Minister probably tomorrow
morning.
Q What are the concrete steps that are going to be
taken to restore this peace or dividing line, or whatever it is?
SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: Well, as I think you
know, our position has been that the forces that are across the
line of control need to be returned to the Pakistani side.
Q The statement says "will be taken." What does
that mean?
SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: That is our
understanding.
Q You mean both sides have agreed?
SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: This is a joint
statement between the United States and Pakistan, and I think it
speaks for itself. Our understanding is that there will be
withdrawal of the forces now.
Q So what the time frame?
SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: I think it is safe to
say that the President and both Prime Ministers have a great
sense of urgency here, and that we expect -- want to see positive
steps taken in a very early time.
Q Do you have any reactions from the Indian Prime
Minister when he was told this?
SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: I think I will let the
Indian Prime Minister characterize his view himself.
Q So what was the urgency for the Prime Minister of
Pakistan to come here on an emergency basis during this 4th of
July weekend, holiday, involving thousands of people who are with
families and celebrating this U.S. independence -- (laughter.)
He could have said this on the phone to the President, "Mr.
President, this is the story." And may I follow that up?
SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: We haven't answered it
yet.
Q -- I was wondering whether the cease-fire called
also applies to the militants who daily cross the Indian line of
control and commit atrocities and kill women and children and --
does the call for the restoration of the line of control mean
also that this activity must also cease?
SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: Let me -- this is a
backgrounder, so let me give you some more background. I think
that would be -- I'm Administration Official two, for purposes of
identification. If you would look at the statement for a moment,
in terms of giving you a little bit more context for each part of
this, the very first part about sharing the view that the current
fighting is dangerous -- they both agree that the current
situation is very dangerous, that it does risk wider conflict,
escalation, and that it must be defused. So that is the
beginning.
They also agree that it was vital for the peace of
South Asia that the line of control in Kashmir be respected by
both parties, in accordance with their 1972 Simla Accord. It was
that accord which established that line that has been
delineated, and it is reestablishment of that, restoration of
that which is the way to address this current problem.
It was agreed by the President and Prime Minister that
concrete steps will be taken for the restoration. This is
dealing with the immediate crisis, and I think the administration
official --
Q Have both sides agreed to withdraw?
SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: This is not, again,
between both sides. This is a U.S.-Pakistani joint press
statement.
Q Well, does it mean that only Pakistan will
withdraw?
SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: Those forces that have
been involved have crossed over to the Indian side of the line of
control. Those are the forces that are being -- at issue.
Q So is the Pakistani Prime Minister conceding that
he has the influence to get these guerrillas out of Kashmir?
SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: What I'm trying to do
now is give you a sense of the statement itself. I think you're
going to get background here, not elaboration. We want to give
you background for what has been agreed to during these three
hours at Blair House.
Again, concrete steps will be taken for the restoration
of the line of control in accordance with the Simla Accord. The
next portion, the President urged an immediate
cessation of the hostilities once these steps have been taken.
This gets to the issue of sequencing. There has been some debate
about what are the right steps to be taken, what sequence. It's
our view that the concrete steps must be taken reestablish the
line of control, and then a cessation of the hostilities, and
then a return to the Lahore process. So this goes to the
question of the sequence, once these steps have been taken.
Then we have the President and the Prime Minister
agreeing that the bilateral dialogue begun in Lahore in February
provides the best forum. You've seen a great deal of press
attention to the Lahore summit, what was agreed to, and that
summit did produce a declaration which referred to resolving all
outstanding issues, including Kashmir, on a bilateral basis. And
therefore, they reaffirmed their view that this is the best forum
for addressing these issues -- in other words, in a bilateral
context.
But the next portion of it makes it very clear that the
President is going to take a personal interest in encouraging an
expeditious resumption and intensification of these bilateral
efforts. The President wants to see this process move forward as
quickly as possible and he will be involved in trying in his
fashion to encourage that to take place, and that once the
sanctity of the line of control has been fully restored -- in
other words, the point being there that this process really can't
be resumed until that line of control is restored.
And finally, the President reaffirmed his intent to pay
an early visit to South Asia, something that Administration
Official number and I both know that the President has wanted to
do for a very long time and he -- I'm sorry?
Q Will you answer my question, which is there are
two aspects to the cease-fire -- you call for a cease-fire, there
are two aspects to it. One is -- element coming in, and the
other is the training of the militants and sending them across on
the Pakistani -- daily. And there coming to all this violence --
does your call for a cease-fire also involve stopping this kind
of activity?
SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: You notice in the very
first sentence here that the two leaders share the view that the
current fighting in the Kargil sector of Kashmir -- the purpose
of this meeting is to address the immediate crisis, which has
been unfolding over the last several weeks. That is the urgency.
And clearly once you have addressed this immediate crisis, there
will be opportunities to address all issues, again within the
context of Lahore. But this was for the purpose of dealing with
this very important situation facing the leaders right now.
Q Is there a time frame for that sequencing?
Q Since the Prime Minister basically agreed to the
statement, can we rightly understand that he believes there are
concrete steps that he can take to restore the line of control?
SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: We're not in a
position to characterize his position, but that certainly is our
understanding that there are concrete steps --
Q What is the U.S. understanding about the
restoration of the line of control in accordance with the Simla
agreement? That means the day the Simla agreement was signed, if
there had been any alteration in the line of control after 1972
by use of force -- what is the U.S. understanding about those
territories?
SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: We have read the Simla
agreement, we read the 43-page annex which delineates line of
control. But this meeting today was not about the history of
that agreement, or, indeed, the history of the Kashmir crisis.
It is about this particular situation in Kargil with those posts
that have been overtaken, and dealing with that.
Q What's the timeline for that sequencing that you
gave for the concrete steps? Is there a timeline for the
immediate situation?
SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: For the immediate
situation, we would like to see positive steps in the very near
future.
Q Can you answer my question about what was the
urgency of the Prime Minister to come here on this 4th of July
weekend, holiday?
SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: I think that's a
question that you better ask the Prime Minister's party, rather
than us. The President demonstrated his determination to do what
he could to help ease this situation by taking the step of
receiving the Prime Minister on very short notice on our national
day. But if you want to know the Prime Minister's motivations, I
think we're the wrong party to ask.
Q -- waste of time for the Pakistani Prime Minister
to come here?
Q My question is, President Clinton has promised to
take "personal interest." So there is no commitment on the part
of the United States to continue to take interest in the solving
of the Kashmir dispute. So he goes out and the personal interest
will refer him to his golf course, and say, okay, talk to him.
Is that the meaning of personal interest? Or is there a
commitment on the part of the United States to continue to be
involved in solving the Kashmir dispute?
SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: I think you're parsing
that sentence way too narrowly. The President has had an
interest in this. He has had Deputy Secretary Talbott and
Administration Officials one and two engaged in an intense
process for the last year on this . No, it does not mean
that when January 2001 comes around, he takes this issue with him
to whatever he goes on to.
Q Why does it not mean the United States --
Q When is he going to travel --
Q Is it the administration's understanding that when
the Prime Minister returns to Pakistan he will ask the army to
withdraw whatever forces have crossed the line? Is that what you
mean by withdrawal of forces?
SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: I think the Prime
Minister will have to make those decisions himself about how he
will undertake to pursue what is contained in this document. I
mean, we can't predict how he will go about that.
I do want to say one thing about the timing of a
possible presidential trip. There is an election that is
scheduled to take place in India -- elections beginning at the
end of September, run into October. It's possible that a new
government may not be formed until late October or November,
early November. We don't have the exact schedule yet. That
certainly would affect the possibility of any presidential travel
before that time.
Q Did the Prime Minister acknowledge that they had
troops in Kargil and they would withdraw them?
SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: Again, what we're
doing here is to give you an understanding of the document
itself, what was said, backgrounding. We're not going to get
into an elaboration of what was discussed at the meeting.
Q Do you have any better sense yourselves, then, of
the reasons that this action was taken by the Pakistanis a couple
months ago -- crossing the line?
SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: I think there has been
plenty of reporting that's been done speculating why certain
things have been done over the last several weeks. I don't think
we can add anything to that right now.
Q The statement emphasizes Simla agreement and the
Lahore declaration, in other words, the bilateral dialogues. Why
do -- approve Security Council resolutions? President Clinton
and every senior U.S. official criticizes and condemned Iraq for
not abiding by the approved Security Council resolutions. No one
said a single word to India -- why the double standards?
SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: Well, again, we are
very aware of the history of Kashmir. In fact, if any of you
wish, you can go back to Secretary Albright's father's book,
"Danger in Kashmir," that he wrote after being on the first U.N.
Commission. We're very aware of the history and what has been
said and what has been done.
Our focus now is on the present, and the most important
recent event dealing with this history is Lahore, where the two
Prime Ministers met and issued a joint declaration, which I think
the entire world was very encouraged to see and hopeful that it
would be pursued. What we've seen recently in the Kargil sector
is a step backward.
We're hoping that what can be done by the President and
others can get this back on track so diplomacy can be resumed.
And I think that that is why we're trying to focus on this -- not
going through the historical record, but I think that the Prime
Ministers themselves are best able to do this. And they will
have the full support in that effort by the President and the
U.S. government.
END 6:00 P.M. EDT
|
NEWSLETTER
|
| Join the GlobalSecurity.org mailing list |
|
|
|
