*EPF502 03/14/2003
Transcript: State Department Noon Briefing, March 14
(Iraq, Iraq/United Nations, Israel/Palestinians, Turkey, Venezuela, Mexico, Cuba, China, Niger/Iraq, East Africa/travel warning, Thailand) (10880)

State Department Spokesman Richard Boucher briefed.

Following is the State Department transcript:

(begin transcript)

U.S. Department of State
Daily Press Briefing Index
Friday, March 14, 2003
1:15 p.m. EST

BRIEFER: Richard Boucher, Spokesman

IRAQ
-- Statement on the 15th Anniversary of the Attack on Halabja in Iraq
-- True Responsibility of the Victims of the Halabja Attack/"Chemical Ali"
-- Expulsion of Iraqi Diplomats from Various Nations
-- Expectations on Israel's Reaction to Potential for Conflict
-- Possible Nuclear Program and Communication with the IAEA

IRAQ/UNITED NATIONS
-- Twelve Years of Inspections and Resolutions/Chilean Proposal
-- Unknown Quantity of Weapons of Mass Destruction
-- Sec. Powell Continues Diplomatic Efforts and Telephone Calls/France
-- Final Stages of the Diplomatic Process and Final Chance for Peace
-- U.S., UK and Spain will Discuss Diplomatic Efforts in the Azores
-- Use of Military Bases in Turkey, Jordan and Israel

ISRAEL/PALESTINIANS
-- Sec. Powell's Diplomatic Efforts also Include the Road Map Towards Peace
-- Conditions that Constitute Progress on Settlements/Mitchell Report
-- A So-Called "Heads Up" on the Presidential Rose Garden Announcement
-- Authority of the New Palestinian Prime Minister and Official Duties
-- Working on the Transformation of New Leadership and Quartet Meetings
-- Contact with the Palestinian Legislative Council
-- U.S. Consul General in Jerusalem
-- Resolution of the Beirut Summit

TURKEY
-- Use of Military Bases and Continuing Negotiations for a Northern Option
-- Sanctioning of Turkish Troops and the Kurdish Issue/Mtg. At State
-- Communication with the New Foreign Secretary and Government

VENEZUELA
-- Standing by and Supporting the OAS Sec. General's Friends of Venezuela

MEXICO
-- Major Drug Bust Capturing Osiel Cardenas - Leader of the Gulf Cartel

CUBA
-- Protest Note Concerning Restrictions on Cuban Prisoners

CHINA
-- Arrest of Charles Lee and Update on his Trial

NIGER/IRAQ
-- Sale of Uranium in Iraq/Forgery of Documentation to the IAEA

EAST AFRICA/TRAVEL WARNINGS
-- Possible Terrorist Activity/UK and Australian Warnings

THAILAND
-- Torture of Elephants

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE
DAILY PRESS BRIEFING

1:15 P.M. EST -- FRIDAY, MARCH 14, 2003
(ON THE RECORD UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED)

MR. BOUCHER: Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen. If I can, what I would like to do today is make a statement because Sunday marks the 15th anniversary of Saddam Hussein's chemical weapons attack on Halabja. We have a statement today. We have a fact sheet for people describing what happened there and in the campaign that was occurring at the time.

On March 16, 1988, the Iraqi military attacked the people of Halabja with mustard gases and other poisonous gases killing roughly 5,000 civilians and injuring another 10,000. Fifteen years later, the lingering effects of this attack include an abnormally high incidence of neurological disorders, birth defects, miscarriages, serious disease and cancer.

The attack was not an isolated incident. It was part of a systematic campaign against Iraqi Kurdish civilians in the region ordered by Saddam Hussein and executed by his lieutenant, Ali Hassan al-Majid, best know by his nickname, "Chemical Ali."

During the 1988 campaign, international observers estimate the Iraqi forces killed 50,000 to 100,000 people. The Iraqis called this campaign "the Anfal," which means "the spoils." The Iraqi regime also used chemical weapons to kill and maim thousands of Iranians during the Iran-Iraq War from 1981 to 1988.

It was actions such as these and the regime's long-established practice of torture and persecution to which President Bush referred in his most recent State of the Union address. As the President said when he was referring to the Iraqi regime's utter contempt for human rights and international conventions and to its willingness to use weapons of mass destruction on international civilians, "If this is not evil, then evil has no meaning."

The United States wishes to take this opportunity to remember the uncounted thousands of ordinary people -- mostly innocent civilians -- who have died and suffered under the brutal regime, the brutal reign of the current Iraqi regime, and to reaffirm our commitment to ensuring that Saddam Hussein and his henchmen can never again use weapons such as these against the international community, against his neighbors and against his own people.

Now, with that statement, I would be glad to take your questions on this or other matters.

QUESTION: Sort of related to that, the Secretary, in two appearances before the UN Security Council was fairly detailed in what the U.S. believes or says or has evidence that --

MR. BOUCHER: "Knows." We call it "knows."

QUESTION: Well, what Iraq has in the way of illicit weapons. But we're being asked -- it's hard to put it, but how will you know that they've complied? In other words, has there been or is there some public list that's going to be put out as to what they must get rid of to be in compliance?

MR. BOUCHER: First, it is not directly related to this, but let me try to answer your question. There are 12 years of resolutions. There are 12 years of UN inspectors' reports. There is a 173-page document with the outstanding questions that was issued, just like Friday, by the UN inspectors that lists the unknowns, that lists the anthrax, that lists the VX, that lists the chemical weapons shells, the R-400 bombs, the Al-Samood missiles, all the other missiles, the RPVs, the UAVs, and all the other abbreviated things, all these horrible weapons and the means to deliver them. Iraq has to account for those. Iraq has to say what happened to them and where they are.

I've mentioned, we are disturbed by the fact that the inspectors are in the position, as I think Dr. Blix said last Friday, where he may have a chance to verify how much VX was destroyed at a particular spot, or how much anthrax was destroyed at a particular spot. That is what they are talking about today. Or how many Al-Samood missiles he can destroy. But as he noted in his report last Friday, he doesn't know how many they have; nobody has accounted for those. Nobody has told him what happened between all the shells, all the munitions, all the anthrax, all the capability he had five years ago and before, documented by UN inspectors, Iraq has not accounted for what happened to all those weapons, nor for what happened to those capabilities.

QUESTION: That's kind of the point of the question --

MR. BOUCHER: Iraq has to account for that.

QUESTION: That's the problem, and that's also I guess the point of the question. If they did everything that's on those lists, took care of everything on the lists, you still wouldn't know for sure they don't have a very sizeable arsenal.

MR. BOUCHER: That is why you need documents, you need people, you need interviews, you need them to account for things that may not be on those lists of previous questions. You know, Dr. Blix talked about the paucity of information for what has happened since 1998. Well, the Secretary presented a lot of information.

So in addition to all those 12 years of outstanding questions, there are all the new questions. Iraq has made no effort to account for those.

A real effort to account for those would have Iraq bringing information to the inspectors, turning over the keys to the biological weapons truck, bringing forth the scientists, taking real blindingly obvious answers, as Ambassador Greenstock said last week, taking real steps to show the UN where the stuff was; and unless Iraq cooperates in that fashion, determining how much VX was destroyed at a particular spot, or watching another few missiles get destroyed is not going to make anybody confident that Iraq is not capable of carrying out these kind of horrible attacks again.

QUESTION: Can I risk everybody's patience asking a quick one? Have you had a chance to see -- has the State Department had a chance to see the Chilean proposal?

MR. BOUCHER: All right. Let's get it back to the diplomacy, later. Matt, you wanted to ask about the --

QUESTION: Halabja.

MR. BOUCHER: -- Halabja questions, yes.

QUESTION: Yeah. Just, this was addressed a couple months ago, or weeks ago, when this -- I can't even remember who it was now, but someone published an article saying that it was, in fact, there was evidence that in fact it was Iran that did it. I remember you said that wasn't true at the time. Can you just, for my --

MR. BOUCHER: Be glad to say it again.

QUESTION: Yes.

MR. BOUCHER: We find any suggestions that Iraq may have not -- may not have been responsible for the use of chemical weapons against the Kurdish civilian population in Halabja absurd. Kurdish victims, international human rights groups, and organizations dedicated to the pursuit of war crimes prosecutions agree that this despicable act was perpetrated by Saddam Hussein's Baghdad regime; and I think I can -- I think I can add that we know the "Chemical Ali," the general involved, stated on an audiotape that was captured by Kurdish forces in 1998, that he told Kurdish village leaders, quote, "I cannot let your village stay because I will attack it with chemical weapons, then you and your family will die. I will kill them all with chemical weapons. Who is going to say anything?" Unquote.

I think we have testimony of the man himself who did it that he was the one who did it.

QUESTION: Okay. Is this something -- considering the convergence of dates, Sunday is also the day that the President and the Prime Ministers are going to be meeting in the Azores, and Monday is the deadline that's in the draft resolution, which may or may not be presented, but considering this convergence, is this something, this fax sheet, this -- the memory of the anniversary something that you guys are going to be using with, or are using, have already used, directly with other members of the Security Council to try and sway them?

MR. BOUCHER: I -- the first thing I would say is, if you look back, we do this every -- we do something every year on this date, because it is an important thing to remember, that Iraq is, I think, the only country since World War I to have used chemical weapons, certainly against its own people.

The -- so this is something we do every year. We think it is important. We also think it is important for members of the Council and other nations to consider the facts and to remember the facts, not to pretend that what we are currently engaged in is a new -- suddenly rediscovering the possibility that Iraq might have something and that we might have inspectors go look around for it.

As we've said before, Resolution 1441 and all the previous resolutions found him guilty, found that he was already in material breach. We're not engaged in an investigation or even a trial at this point. We're dealing with a parole hearing.

QUESTION: I'm sorry, with a what?

MR. BOUCHER: That is an analogy that may take more to explain than it's worth.

QUESTION: The Secretary said yesterday he'd be working, you know, trying to support for the resolution yesterday, today, this weekend. Is he going to the Azores or will he be -- and/or will he be, you know, working the phones, doing something to supplement what's going on there?

MR. BOUCHER: I don't think foreign ministers are going to the Azores. At least that's the current read on the situation. But the Secretary is continuing to work for the resolution, work for passage, work to bring the process in the United Nations to a close, work to get support.

He's been in touch, obviously, with Foreign Secretary Straw and Foreign Minister Palacio throughout the day. He has also talked to Mexican Foreign Secretary Derbez this morning. He has also been in touch with a number of people since last night to talk about Iraq, but also to tell them about the President's announcement on the roadmap and on continuing for the process of peace in the Middle East.

So last night he talked to Foreign -- to Under -- UN Secretary General Annan. He's talked to Foreign Minister Kawaguchi, Foreign Minister Ivanov, Foreign Minister Papandreou. I mentioned Straw and Palacio; European High Representative Solana, as well, in a series of phone calls to tell people about the upcoming announcement by the President.

QUESTION: On this Chilean proposal that's just unveiling -- just being unfurled, is it too early to ask if the U.S. thinks this might be helpful?

MR. BOUCHER: Well, I'm not particularly sure it's being unfurled, frankly.

QUESTION: Well, the AP's unfurling it anyhow.

MR. BOUCHER: Well, I know. But that's not the same as the government or a representative in New York unfurling it --

QUESTION: No, that's true. It's not --

MR. BOUCHER: -- or us agreeing. Good. And we're glad for that I want to say.

QUESTION: Okay.

MR. BOUCHER: There has been some talk in New York. Some people talked about a new resolution proposed by the so-called undecided six. There's no joint resolution or proposal that we have seen. They have talked about one or two who may have some ideas of creating an amalgam of the various ideas that are floating around.

I think we have made quite clear it is important at this moment to increase the pressure on Iraq because Iraq has not complied with the previous requirements. It is important to make clear to Iraq that diplomacy is in its final stages and the resolution that is on the table is the one that we and the British have proposed that makes that very, very clear. And that is where we think the focus needs to be. The focus needs to be on making Iraq understand it is having its -- it is watching its final chance for peace expire. It is watching its final chance to disarm peacefully expire.

Any resolution that doesn't achieve that goal, that doesn't stand up for Resolution 1441 is not going to be something that we can support, so some of these descriptions of resolutions with 30, 45-day timelines, whatever, continuation of inspections, let's get together in three weeks and make sure we are in the same place we are already, these are not things that appeal to us, because we think they actually run counter to the interests of the international community in trying to keep Iraq focused on disarming peacefully.

QUESTION: There has been talk about a possible vote in the UN on Monday on something, on either the resolution that's tabled or a modified resolution. Do you know if that would happen, or --

MR. BOUCHER: I don't think we have called for a vote at this point. The leaders will be getting together over the weekend, some of the leaders of this effort in the United Nations, the UK, the Spanish and the American -- U.S. leaders. And they will discuss, you might say, the final stages of the efforts, the final stages of diplomacy, final stages of the effort to get Saddam Hussein to disarm peacefully. That will be a subject, I'm sure the resolution will be a subject of discussion as part of that.

QUESTION: When was the last time the Secretary spoke with de Villepin or the Germans?

MR. BOUCHER: A couple days ago. Two, three days ago.

QUESTION: Wednesday or -- I don't think we had a briefing, so --

MR. BOUCHER: You're going to have to give me a second here. (Pause.) This makes fascinating television, by the way. (Laughter.)

Wednesday, he spoke with the French Foreign Minister and Foreign Minister Fischer. And note that we are -- we are working in, I think, a concerted effort with the Spanish Foreign Minister and the British Foreign Secretary, as well as the leaders. And so some days one of them may talk to the French and the Germans. We are, I think, generally keeping touch with most of the members of the Security Council, either directly or along with the others involved.

QUESTION: And what do you think is the use of holding a summit with the people that already agree with you, rather than perhaps inviting or doing face-to-face diplomacy at such a high level with the countries that don't support the United States?

MR. BOUCHER: The point is that these leaders are leading an effort -- leading an effort to try to get Iraq to disarm peacefully. These leaders get together, talk from time to time, get together in this opportunity to try to continue that effort and make that effort effective.

Our goal is to get Iraq to disarm peacefully. The best way to do that is to increase the pressure on Iraq and make absolutely clear to Iraq that this diplomacy is backed by the threat of military action. The leaders will talk about how to pursue that effort, including how to pursue it through the United Nations. But the goal is to say, we are standing up for 1441, we are standing up for the requirements, and we are giving every opportunity, going the extra mile, as we say, to try to get peaceful disarmament by Iraq.

QUESTION: Can I change the topic just slightly? There is an article in the newspaper, The Forward, and then the one today, I believe, in the Los Angeles Times that said that the State Department had sent out a memo to Capitol Hill saying that the domino effect of democracy in the Middle East would not be likely in the event of a regime change in Iraq. Can you comment on these stories?

MR. BOUCHER: Well, I could first of all tell you that -- no. But in order not to comment, I have to correct your question. The stories say that there was an intelligence analysis that was circulated within the agency, not that we had sent some kind of memo to Capitol Hill. Maybe you are telling me something else from other sources, but -- and because the article purports to convey what is in our intelligence analysis, you will understand why I am not in a position to comment on that particular story.

I would say that we do look at all aspects of situations and we -- when the Secretary speaks on this subject, or the President speaks on this subject, I think they are all well informed and quite careful in the way that they put things.

QUESTION: Let me just follow up. The President said at the American Enterprise Institute about two weeks ago that he believed that there would be -- this could potentially have a kind of catalyzing effect in the Middle East, and it was part of a kind of regional idea to have freer governments there.

I mean, does the State Department in any way differ with that analysis?

MR. BOUCHER: No, we do not. The Secretary said just about the same thing yesterday when -- I forget which Congressman it was -- showed him the Arab Development Report and said, "Yes, that is exactly what we think we can support, we can help move forward, catalyze" -- I don't know if he used the word; the President did -- in terms of removing the instability in the region that comes from Iraq, making Iraq less -- a positive contribution to the region and not a source of instability and worry for everybody else, and that the basic fundamental task that is in the Arab Development Report, of moving nations, including Iraq, frankly, moving nations in the region forward towards more open, more productive, more modern business practices and those sorts of things, that that basic work will be able to go ahead more smoothly and better once Iraq, as a source of instability and worry, is removed.

QUESTION: I'm sorry if you've talked about this before, but this morning the President said, "As progress is made towards peace, settlement activity in the occupied territories must end."

What are these conditions that constitute progress, that would lead to settlement activity?

MR. BOUCHER: That is basically the English language substitute for the more formal way it has been stated in the past, in accordance with the recommendations of the Mitchell Report, I think, is the clause that we sometimes use here.

The roadmap itself tries to deal with all these various issues and put them in a sequence that is performance based, but also schedule based on -- also scheduled. So the idea of the roadmap, as many of you know, since even though it has not been formally released, I think many people have read it on the Internet -- but the idea of the roadmap is that both sides need to take steps to move this process forward.

Among these steps are ending the violence, but also, as this process proceeds, ending settlement activity.

QUESTION: Just to try to get into the Middle East in another way, can you give us an update on what you're hearing from the Turks in terms of your request for overflight rights, et cetera?

And also, in light of whatever the Turks may have told you, have you approached the Jordanians and the Israelis for similar permission?

MR. BOUCHER: I think, first of all, that I'm not going to be able to answer "what you are hearing from questions." These are questions about what a foreign government is saying. What I would tell you is that we have been in continuing discussions with the Turkish Government. Our Ambassador in Turkey has been active in meeting with Turkish authorities and discussing the situation, and our needs, all of our requests with the Turkish authorities.

In addition, we have been hearing from them their analysis and what they intend to do about the political situation. But those discussions have continued. At this point I think I'd have to say that we continue to hope to have the northern option through Turkey, but we all know time has nearly run out and we must operate on the assumption that hostilities may begin without an agreement between the United States and Turkey.

But the President, I think, has made very clear his determination and his commitment to moving forward in the very near future to disarm Saddam Hussein if he doesn't disarm peacefully.

QUESTION: And for -- and --

QUESTION: Did you say that his time has run out?

MR. BOUCHER: No. I said time has nearly run out.

QUESTION: Nearly run out.

QUESTION: And the second part of my question, which was the -- have you guys approached the Jordanians and the Israelis yet?

MR. BOUCHER: That's not something I would be able to talk about. We have not, in most cases, been able to talk about our specific requests of foreign governments throughout this process.

QUESTION: -- what you were asking the Turks for.

MR. BOUCHER: Well, it's a different situation there. They had, once they were going into parliament with a request it was a public matter for both of us.

QUESTION: A Kurd leader spoke to some -- a couple of us here, at least, this morning at breakfast and some other reporters, who's here for talks and he objects adamantly to Turkish troops being positioned in northern Iraq during the war. I understand that the, you know, the package and everything else is on hold and maybe time is getting late for it, but is the U.S. still -- is that still a live possibility that the U.S. would sanction Turkish troops that are taking positions up in northern Iraq, because it's alarmed the Kurds quite a bit.

MR. BOUCHER: We understand their point of view. I would just say that we've been in close touch with Turkish authorities about the situation. We've been discussing northern Iraq intensively with Turkish authorities as well as with the Iraqi opposition and these consultations continue with all the parties in the area.

We have made very, very clear we remain strongly opposed to any unilateral action by any party in northern Iraq, and that's a position the Turks understand clearly, as well.

QUESTION: By the way, I suspect this official, if that's the right word -- will probably be meeting with people in the White House hierarchy, but will he be seeing anybody at the State Department? Is anyone receiving Mr. Salih that you know of?

MR. BOUCHER: I don't know. I would have to check.

QUESTION: Okay.

QUESTION: Can I follow up on Barry's question really quick?

MR. BOUCHER: Sure.

QUESTION: There have been a number of public statements from Turkish officials that have also been in response to what you've said about unilateral action, where they've said that they need to take any actions in their own national security interests. Given the history, or rather, given not the history, but I would say given the fact that in "Operation Enduring Freedom," I understand that there were instructions given to the Northern Alliance not to go directly to Kabul and they did it anyway. Are you at all concerned when you see these statements from the Turks that they may, frankly, you know, disregard your advice?

MR. BOUCHER: I don't know where the analogy came from. I think the Turkish Government and the Northern Alliance are quite different beasts. I mean that is not just apples and oranges, that is -- well --

QUESTION: Let's just stick to the fact that there have been a number of Turkish --

MR. BOUCHER: Stick to the fact. We have been in very close touch with the Turkish Government. We work very closely with Turkish authorities. Let's remember as well that we and the Turks and the Turkish Government share a common interest, a common vision of a unified Iraq, in which all the people of Iraq have a chance to be represented in the government. We have common goals in terms of what we would like to see of a peaceful, representative, open, democratic state in this region, and that we've cooperated and worked very closely on how we can achieve that. But in that -- in that regard and as part of those consultations, we have also made clear that we would oppose any unilateral action by any party in northern Iraq, and that is a position I think the Turks understand.

QUESTION: Yesterday, President Bush sent a letter to Mr. Recep Tayyip Erdogan congratulations. In the same letter, he said that he is asking to permission about air corridor. Is it means you give up to basing some soldiers in Turkey to now you change your request to that air corridor?

MR. BOUCHER: I would say that we have a variety of requests that we have put to Turkish authorities. We continue to be interested in all those requests.

QUESTION: Did Secretary talk lately with Erdogan or the new Cabinet Foreign Minister?

MR. BOUCHER: Not at this point, I think is the only way I can put it. I don't know if he will be calling the new Foreign Minister or not.

But let me take the opportunity to say that President Sezer accepted the Cabinet list that was submitted by Mr. Erdogan. And Mr. Erdogan, we understand, is now Prime Minister. So we would like to congratulate him. We look forward to working with him in addressing the challenges to peace and security in the region, and all aspects of this important bilateral relationship. We would also like to congratulate the new Foreign Minister, Abdullah Gul, and the Secretary personally looks forward to continuing to work with him, as we have worked with him in his former capacity.

QUESTION: I want to go back to this question -- you say you are strongly opposed to any unilateral action in northern Iraq. But this still leaves open the crucial question of whether the United States has approved or will approve any coordinated Turkish military operation in northern Iraq in the event of a war. What is your position?

MR. BOUCHER: Well, the position of the spokesman for the State Department is not to talk about any military operations. And that is a question you are asking about military operations.

As far as the policy goes, I think I can tell you that we have continued to put various requests for operations from Turkey, the northern option, in front of the Turkish Government and it is up to them to decide the politics of that. Whether there is some action from there or not by U.S. forces in coordination with other countries or members of the coalition obviously depends on approval of those requests. So I can't, at this point, predict how those requests will be dealt with.

QUESTION: Might I go to the Middle East for a second? I noticed that in the list of phone calls that you went through that the Secretary had there were no Israelis or Palestinians on that list. Can you tell us if they were given a heads-up on the President's announcement and if so, how did they get that? And two, when the President made his announcement this morning, he implied strongly that the position that Abu Mazen is expected to take up in the next, well -- soon, is, in fact, empowered enough for -- are you guys really convinced that that is the case?

MR. BOUCHER: On how the Israelis and Palestinians were given a heads-up, I have to apologize. I forgot to check. I'm sure they were,but I will check on it and get that information for you.

QUESTION: But it wasn't the Secretary?

MR. BOUCHER: No. The Secretary didn't phone them directly.

On the question of empowerment as I think we've made clear before, the rights and responsibilities discussion has been taking place in the Palestinian legislature. I think the step that they are looking at for Monday or early next week is to kind of confirm those understandings.

We, at the same time, made clear that the unfolding of this, the exercise of those rights and authorities is an important part of this package and so I guess all I could say is we -- the empowerment is not just the legal authority, but it's the exercise of that authority and we look forward to working with the new prime minister as that starts to move forward.

QUESTION: Well, okay. But that seems to -- you seem to suggest then that you're not yet sure whether he will be as empowered or whether the position will have the authority that you and the Israelis have been demanding that it have.

MR. BOUCHER: I think we think that in principle the position has the authority that's necessary to run the Palestinian Government, to take the steps that are necessary to build institutions, to build security, to control finances in a transparent fashion, to transform the Palestinian Authority along the lines of what the President talked about last June and in subsequent statements.

In the end, the exercise of those authorities is very important to all of us, but as we move forward in this process of releasing the roadmap to the parties and working on these things, as I said, in the end, whatever happens is performance-based, that people have to start doing things and make things happen for this process to really engage.

QUESTION: But you were obviously confident enough that you were prepared and the President was prepared to drop the, well, we'll wait and see, that had been coming out of the White House and this building, that attitude about the prime minister's job and go ahead to say, that immediately upon confirmation, the roadmap is going to be proposed.

MR. BOUCHER: I don't think I was standing around here saying wait and see, I mean I've always said it's important to see those things exercised. But yes, the Secretary, the President said we expect the Palestinian Prime Minister will be confirmed soon. Immediately upon confirmation, the roadmap for peace will be given to Palestinians and Israelis. It's historic.

QUESTION: Richard, I have several questions on that.

MR. BOUCHER: Let's, a few people in the back or --

QUESTION: Well, we switched off Iraq and I just wanted to --

MR. BOUCHER: Okay, we'll do the front row. You guys go out to lunch, come back and we'll -- (laughter).

QUESTION: On Iraq, could you just update us. The U.S. request that Iraqis who've led, you know, are posing as diplomats but aren't really diplomats, ought to be expelled from various countries. You touched on that the other day and said some countries have followed through, others hadn't.

Have you got an update on whether we're getting the impression --

MR. BOUCHER: Barry, I will give you the same answer I gave the other day.

QUESTION: Well, we're hearing it's largely being ignored by other countries.

MR. BOUCHER: I would not say that.

QUESTION: No? Okay.

MR. BOUCHER: No. I would say some countries have even talked about this in public, but many countries may take actions to protect the security of foreign missions without making public announcements.

But I think we are satisfied this process of taking steps that may be necessary to protect American missions overseas is moving forward, although we continue to work on it and encourage everybody to take the proper steps.

Can we go to somewhere beyond the front row? Emergency, what?

QUESTION: Richard, last June, President Bush said that the Palestinians had to have a new leadership -- new and different leadership. Thank you.

Abu Mazen, of course, has been Number 2 in the PLO for a good 20 years or so. Does he qualify as new and different leadership by your standards?

MR. BOUCHER: I'm not going to start trying to evaluate individuals, but I would ask you to look up exactly what it was the President says, and I think what you understand what he said, you will know the answer to your question.

QUESTION: Richard, can I actually just get it straight?

You've made it clear that the position, as -- the authority of the position as it stands now is acceptable to you. Are you saying the same for the personality who is proposed to fill this position?

MR. BOUCHER: I am not saying anything about the personality at this point.

QUESTION: Richard, I'm sure you'd agree the timing of the President's announcement and Prime Minister Blair's announcement on the roadmap is worthy of note.

Can you say whether or not the British Government asked President Bush, asked this Administration to roll this out and make this announcement today? Did that factor at all into the timing?

MR. BOUCHER: The timing -- I hate to do this to you, but you should have listened to what I have been telling you.

For months now, we have been saying that, ever since the President's speech, we were looking for the transformation to new leadership of the Palestinian Authority, and we told you we were working on it, along with others. For several months now, since December 20th, when we had the Quartet meeting here, we said when the Israelis had a new government, we would be in a position to move forward.

The timing -- and for all these many months, going back some time, we have been working very closely with the British Government, the British Government that has sponsored conferences in London recently on Palestinian reform, because we told you we were continuing to move this process forward.

Now, I know some, in newspapers or wire services or television, have written it is on hold for this, on hold for that, and every time there was one of those stories, I came down and said, "No, we are still working on it."

So what do we have now? We have the conjunction of all the factors that we have been identifying. We have a new Israeli Government, we have the empowerment of a Palestinian Prime Minister coming up in a few days, we have the work that the Quartet has been doing; and we have this coming together at a point when we are now in a position to talk more publicly.

The Secretary, I think, on the Hill, in his various hearings has been saying the President intended to go forward aggressively, I think was the word he used, in pursuing the peace process.

So at this point, we have the confluence of these factors and we are in a position to do more steps.

QUESTION: But I mean, the confluence actually happened a number of days ago, and there's -- it's certainly in the air, the fact that the vote at the UN now being in question, that Prime Minister Blair has asked this administration to roll it out now, as a way to give him some political --

MR. BOUCHER: I don't think I would say the confluence happened a number of days ago. I think we are now at the point where the expectations for next week, the expectations for the Palestinian Prime Minister are quite a bit clearer than they might have been a couple days ago when this was still a matter of debate and discussion in the Palestinian legislature. It is no secret that we and the other members of the Quartet and friends like the British Government have been interested in taking this step, moving forward with publication of the roadmap. And certainly, we look to do that at an early date along with -- as many others have, including the British Government. This was the date where we felt we could do that with some confidence if the steps we have been looking for were actually being taken.

QUESTION: Also on Israel, and we've talked about this before but not that recently. What if anything, what kind of discussions are going on between the U.S. and Israeli Governments about what their actions would be in the case of an attack on Iraq? I know they have said they will not -- they will not hold back this time. But what is the U.S. position on what can be expected of Israel?

MR. BOUCHER: I will have to double check and see if I can say anything about that. Obviously, we --

QUESTION: Can I get back to the --

QUESTION: Could you let him, please, answer, maybe?

MR. BOUCHER: That's what I was going to say.

QUESTION: Would you, please, then?

QUESTION: Richard, on the same --

MR. BOUCHER: Terry --

QUESTION: Thank you.

MR. BOUCHER: -- in answer to your question, let me say this -- and I'll tell you when the end of the sentence comes, so that everybody can jump up then.

Terry, in answer to your question, we certainly have discussions with governments in the region about potential for conflict, our shared interest in their security including, especially, interest in the security of Israel. You could consider that those discussions are ongoing. But I don't know that I am in a position to say much more about what our various views might be. I will have to check and see. Thank you.

Let's keep going. In the back and then --

QUESTION: After the Palestinians defined the role of the Prime Minister, I believe members of the Quartet were quoted in some of the news accounts as saying they were disappointed that it was not -- that the Prime Minister was not going to be given as much control over security and finances. Is there anything you can --

MR. BOUCHER: I don't remember other members of the Quartet saying that, nor did I ever say that. I think when those questions came up earlier this week, we made clear that security and finance were indeed key areas. They were key areas for any government. And given that the authorities of the new Prime Minister are supposed to be that he controls his government, he controls all the ministries. We would expect him to be empowered and those ministries be empowered to take full control of these areas.

But that was one of the areas, I think, that we flagged that this very important question of how the powers were implemented and exercised was going to be vital, because we all recognize that progress on the roadmap, progress towards achieving the vision of two states is made impossible by the continuation of the kind of violence that we have seen. And we have also recognized the transparency in finance is one of the key areas. It is, in fact, an area where much progress has already been achieved, in terms of having the kind of transparency that, for example, satisfies the Israelis that the tax revenue that they turn over and are turning over now, will be spent for the proper purposes. But it is also an area where more remains to be done.

There was a report -- not too long ago, I think we posted an answer to your question about it. Standard and Poor's and I forget who else put together a report on the need for further improvements in the transparency of the financial system. So those are two key areas, two key areas that we would expect any government to want to address and we would look for them to do that.

QUESTION: What sort of contact have we had with the new prime minister that we've been able to make the judgment that he's now going to be empowered?

MR. BOUCHER: He is not quite the new prime minister yet, but we have kept in touch with a variety of people and Palestinians from all walks of life. We have certainly watched closely through our consulate in Jerusalem. The developments there, the debate in the Palestinian Legislative Council and so these are matters that we follow very closely.

QUESTION: Richard, already a senior administration official in the Foreign Press Center made it quite clear that if the Palestinian or the PLC, the Palestinian Legislative Council did not move on empowering the prime minister, the roadmap would not be published or would not be given to the Israeli and Palestinian. Is that your understanding, also?

MR. BOUCHER: The President said quite clearly that upon confirmation of the new government of the new Prime Minister the roadmap would be published. If that doesn't happen, then the following -- the publication doesn't happen either.

QUESTION: So if I count, perhaps, on your condition about empowering the prime minister, financially, security and negotiation, these three condition have to be presented, right?

MR. BOUCHER: That's not what I said.

QUESTION: No. Not today, anyhow.

MR. BOUCHER: I said these are very important things. We will certainly want to see the prime minister able exercise his authorities in all those areas, to be able to exercise control over the government. The issue of publication is particularly related to confirmation of the government. That's a process that's unfolding and that will unfold in the next week or so we expect, based on all the reports we're getting.

Okay, let's do one or two more in the back and then we'll start coming back around.

QUESTION: Follow-up on --

MR. BOUCHER: Everybody's following up on everything and moving all around the world. Let's just -- let's just fly around the world. I don't care.

QUESTION: There are growing indications that things are getting very dicey down on the Colombian-Venezuelan border and the foreign minister of Venezuela was in Bogotá and directly accused Otto Reich of having sponsored a plot to assassinate Hugo Chavez, the Venezuelan President.

MR. BOUCHER: Well, that's ridiculous, but -- what's the question?

QUESTION: Well, the rest of it is as things are going from bad to worse down there, is the United States sticking by the Gaviria -- I mean, you keep repeating that's you policy, but Chavez is thumbing his nose at that and --

MR. BOUCHER: All right. Without doing the big political commentary, I'm happy to answer your question the United States is sticking by the Friends Group. We're participating actively in the Friends Group, supporting the Secretary General of the OAS.

We think that domestic reconciliation, political settlement in Venezuela is still on the agenda. It's still important to us, still important to Venezuelans and very important to people in the hemisphere. And that's why we will continue to press forward on that process.

Okay. Back to the whatever.

QUESTION: Back to the Palestinian issue. I've lost track. I believe Consul General Schlicker is now former Consul General Schlicker? Is there a new one in Jerusalem?

MR. BOUCHER: I've lost track, too. I will check. (Laughter.)

QUESTION: Can I ask about the contacts that are being held with Arafat? Are there any at all?

MR. BOUCHER: No.

QUESTION: And will there be any after the prime minister is --

MR. BOUCHER: Not expecting any.

QUESTION: Not expecting. So you're going to freeze him out?

MR. BOUCHER: Not with Arafat. No.

QUESTION: So you're going to freeze him out?

MR. BOUCHER: We haven't talked to him for some time and we have no plans to do so right now.

QUESTION: And the fact that Tony Blair called him with the good news, it will not -- I was trying to follow that up, Andrea's question about whether this is being done at the behest of Britain because what was said today flips what's been said, frankly, on several fronts for several days.

MR. BOUCHER: No. It follows directly from what we've been saying for months.

QUESTION: Including the Secretary said yesterday that, but I don't want to get into that; I'll write it, you don't have to attest to it.

MR. BOUCHER: Please don't, because it would be wrong.

QUESTION: It isn't wrong. The Secretary states it yesterday on the Hill. We can't move ahead as long as the Palestinians continue with their terrorism against Israel and don't come forward with propositions of their own.

A few days ago, you expressed great skepticism, or at least, "Let's wait and see, show me" -- a Missouri "show me" attitude -- about whether Mazen has any authority. Our bureau in Jerusalem says Arafat's still running things, and Tony Blair just called Arafat and told him, you know, hooray, hip, hip, hooray, we're moving along. Finally, we're going to move on, you know, the roadmap. Okay?

So you're being asked if -- how much influence -- how much are you doing this for the sake of Tony Blair, and the Europeans and the Arabs who want you to move?

MR. BOUCHER: All right. Other than the fact that several of the propositions in your question are wrong, I would say that we have been doing this with the British, we have been doing this with the Quartet, we have been doing this for months with the British and with the Quartet.

We all agree that we are now at a point where we can move to publication -- we are almost at the point where we can move to publication. We all agree that these are now, these are important steps that deserve to be recognized. These are, in fact, the very important steps that we have been looking for.

Over the longer term, how does this work? Whether we can actually get the kind of progress on the roadmap we're looking for, one of the key factors is the authorities and the ability to exercise the authority.

But we agree that these, in itself, are important steps, as the President said this morning, and we intend to move forward.

As far as what the Secretary said, it is what I just said. We do not think you can really make progress down this road as long as the violence continues, and the first task in any effort to move forward on a roadmap or any other process to achieve the President's vision has to be ending the violence, and that, I would say, has always been priority number one for us -- was yesterday, is today, and I am sure it will be tomorrow.

QUESTION: But if Blair -- last question -- if Blair calls Arafat, doesn't that at least implicitly mean that the British recognize Arafat as still being in charge; and if you were working with the British, do you agree with that type of -- what's the word -- type of --

MR. BOUCHER: Same question you've asked ever since last June when we said we had no interest ourselves in talking to Arafat anymore. We recognize that others do. But the issue of creating an empowered Palestinian Prime Minister who can run his government, who can take care of these matters, and hopefully who can move down the path towards the vision of two states, that is an important development that we want to recognize. Okay?

QUESTION: A couple of questions. The Palestinians' immediate reaction was to say, "We want to know whether this roadmap is being submitted for implementation or merely for further discussion." First of all, can you say -- can you answer that, the --

MR. BOUCHER: I can tell you what the President; said. He said, "Once this roadmap is delivered, we will expect and welcome contributions from Israel and the Palestinians to this document that will advance true peace, and we urge them to discuss the roadmap with one another. Time has come to move beyond transpositions and take concrete actions to achieve peace."

We will be presenting the roadmap to the two sides. We will be presenting the roadmap to the two sides. We will be discussing it with two sides. We will be discussing how they implement it, and we will be encouraging them to talk to each other to implement it.

QUESTION: Okay. Can I just follow up, then? How much leeway do you think that they should have to modify the roadmap as submitted by you and the Quartet?

MR. BOUCHER: That is the -- I cannot give an answer to a question like that. There is no numerical way of calculating it or describing it.

The point is to move forward with implementation of these steps. If they talk to each other and decide to implement them in a certain fashion, that would be a good thing, but the point is to talk to them and for them to talk to each other about how to implement these steps.

QUESTION: Okay. Another question. Yesterday, the Secretary, as my colleague Barry said, said that the primary problem was Palestinian violence. Now, this has come up repeatedly in the whole peace process, which is to what extent does violence by extremist groups, possibly outside the control of the future Prime Minister, affect the commitment to implement the steps in the roadmap, and how will you handle that? Will you just buy the Israeli argument that any attack immediately causes a suspension of any steps by them for another month or so?

MR. BOUCHER: We have always made clear that both sides have obligations, both sides need to be taking steps.

The issue of violence is one where both sides need to work together. Palestinian Authorities need to exercise authority to stop the violence. The two sides need to work together to stop the violence. So that is an area where we think progress needs to be made.

QUESTION: -- on the Security Council and Iraq. In other words, is it completely separate from --

MR. BOUCHER: This is a process that we wanted to continue. We have established what the -- what we needed to see in order to continue, and we are at a point now where we can. This is going together, going forward on its own merits.

QUESTION: One other question. Wasn't Halabja really, according to a lot of scholars, an unintended consequence of the United States' technological help to Iraq during the Iran-Iraq war in --

MR. BOUCHER: That is absurd and insulting. No, it is not.

QUESTION: Change of topic?

MR. BOUCHER: Let's let this gentleman here, and then --

QUESTION: -- higher level of coordination between the Arab states, the Jordanians, Egyptians, and Saudis working toward a two-state solution, as publication becomes more imminent?

MR. BOUCHER: The President, in his speech last June, and I think in the statement today, talked about the various responsibilities that people have -- the Government of Israel, the Palestinians, and he said, "and the Arab states must oppose terrorism, support the emergence of a peaceful, democratic Palestine, and state clearly they will live in peace with Israel."

So we have certainly worked this process carefully with Arab states, not only in the process of consulting on the roadmap. You know, several of the Quarter meetings have been accompanied by meetings with Arab leaders.

The Secretary of State discusses Israeli-Palestinian issues every time he meets with Arab representatives. Last Friday in New York he met with the Arab League representatives who were there. They talked about Iraq, obviously, and the situation with the United Nations, but they also talked quite a bit about Middle East peace issues, Israeli-Palestinian issues.

So it is a matter of ongoing coordination and cooperation with various Arab Governments who are interested in peace, who are interested in moving forward.

Okay, let's -- is this, or can we change? Okay, and then we will change.

QUESTION: As you recall, the Beirut Summit last year pretty much said exactly that. In what sense did the resolution of the Beirut Summit fall short of meeting that condition on stating clearly that they will live in peace with Israel --

MR. BOUCHER: I do not --

QUESTION: -- which seems to be exactly what they said, right?

MR. BOUCHER: Well, I do not think it is a matter of one statement, but these -- opposing terrorism, supporting peaceful and democratic Palestine, these are ongoing efforts that we are making, that they are making.

They have been involved in the task forces --

QUESTION: -- about stating clearly that they will live in peace with Israel --

MR. BOUCHER: There are many things that need to be done as we move forward, and I am sure all those things, whether it is the statements or the efforts, can be and will be expanded.

QUESTION: Can I change the topic, please?

MR. BOUCHER: Yes.

QUESTION: There's been a huge anti-drug operation in Mexico in the past few hours. They ended up capturing Osiel Cardenas, which is the leader for the Gulf Cartel. As you know, the Gulf Cartel is one of the most violent and bloody in the world.

Could I please have the US reaction on this?

MR. BOUCHER: I will have to check into it. I don't have anything right now.

QUESTION: Nearby, Cuba -- which is only about 45 miles from Mexico. The Cubans -- the Cubans sent a protest note complaining that their spies are being held in solitary confinement, and this complicates the appeal process, which is supposed to culminate next month. Do you have any comment?

MR. BOUCHER: We understand that some restrictions have been placed on these Cuban prisoners, at the direction of the Justice Department, for national security reasons. We have received the Cuban note, and we are studying it. That is as much as I can say.

Okay, the lady in the way back had a question.

QUESTION: Yeah. The US citizen, Charles Lee, Beijing has picked up a trial date for him, which is March 21st. Since we know in China the lawyers are ordered by the Chinese Bureau of Justice to keep in strict accordance of the Central Government policy any case related to Falun Gong, and that China's Central Government is known for its brutal persecution of Falun Gong in the past over three years, the question is, how can the US Government, how can we make sure that our citizen will face a fair trial in this case?

MR. BOUCHER: Well, that gets to a lot of broader issues which we address on an annual basis in our human rights report. The Chinese judicial system is not one where we can guarantee that American citizens would get a fair trial.

On the other hand, we do try to help American citizens in these kind of circumstances. We have been working with Mr. Lee. We have been talking to him and keeping in touch, monitoring the circumstances very closely. We do provide regularly a list of Chinese lawyers, a list of lawyers in China that are available to represent him if he chooses to retain one of those lawyers. And we've also provided him with information about the Chinese legal system so he can understand what he faces.

He is charged with damaging radio and television equipment. The Chinese Government has authorized him to have legal representation in accordance with Chinese law. We have had numerous contacts with the Chinese authorities regarding his welfare and the progress of the legal proceedings, and we'll continue to do that, as well.

QUESTION: A follow-up?

MR. BOUCHER: Yes, ma'am.

QUESTION: Yeah. Do you think he is held, as, actually as a hostage at this time because our government is so busy with the war and the Chinese Government is rush him through this show trial in a sense?

MR. BOUCHER: I don't want to make judgments like that. The -- an American citizen is being held. We've made quite clear our interest in his welfare. We have tried to do everything possible with him, expressed our concerns very directly to the Chinese Government about him; and our interest is in his welfare and his wellbeing.

QUESTION: Yes, we all know that actually, that Jiang Zemin, China's President, is behind all this persecution brutally. It is him should be sent to the trial, not our citizen.

MR. BOUCHER: Well, let's not-- this is not the place for political statements. If we have questions, I will be glad to answer them.

QUESTION: Yeah. Unless Eli has a question on this.

QUESTION: It's related.

QUESTION: Okay, then let me, if I can --

QUESTION: All right. Go ahead now.

MR. BOUCHER: Everything's related -- has to be less than three degrees of separation, though.

QUESTION: Did the Bush administration send anyone to Niger and/or ask the embassy to investigate whether Niger had discussed the sale of uranium in Iraq and if so, what were the conclusions?

MR. BOUCHER: I will have to check on that and see. I don't know off the top of my head.

QUESTION: Okay. Can I -- just one more question, maybe you also don't know -- I'm -- but did the State Department or any part of it conclude that the documents were likely forgeries prior to their being sent to the IAEA?

MR. BOUCHER: I don't know. I will check on the question. I don't think it's the key question. The question is when allegations like this arise, it would be irresponsible not to forward them to the appropriate authorities to check them out, and in this case, when you have IAEA inspectors -- we're asked all the time, every time we put out a piece of information -- have you given that to the inspectors?

And so the inspectors, along with other authorities, the proper places to check out information and allegations such as these. I think we have noted from time to time the fact that these allegations existed but always said they needed to be checked out.

Our concerns about Iraq's nuclear program are based on a much broader pattern of procurement. We have talked about the aluminum tubes. We have talked about purchases of magnets. We've talked about all the things that they were able to do in the past without the inspectors finding out until a much later date. So there are certainly concerns on, about Iraq's potential nuclear programs.

The Secretary said recently, "It's not time to close the book on that." But as far as this particular allegation, the responsible thing is for everybody who has the wherewithal to do so to check it out. And that's what your first question relates to, and I will have to check on that.

QUESTION: I -- just one final question. Did the State Department, to your knowledge, recommend not sending these documents to the IAEA?

MR. BOUCHER: I don't know, I don't know anything about when and how they were sent so I would have to check and see if I can tell you any of that story.

Okay. Eli.

QUESTION: On the Charles Lee case, somewhat related. Does the US plan to submit a China resolution this year at the Geneva talks?

MR. BOUCHER: I don't have anything at this point. I think the session opens in a week or two.

QUESTION: Are you --

MR. BOUCHER: Tuesday, I think, but anyway --

QUESTION: Yeah, Tuesday.

MR. BOUCHER: And we'll tell you when we decide what to do.

Okay. Matt.

QUESTION: Richard, within the last 36 hours, the governments of Australia, Britain and this government have all put out dire warnings about the new threats and heightened threats, terrorist threats in east Africa. The Brits were the first to do it and they named -- well, the difference between all these warnings is that yours was regional, confined to east Africa and mentions only one country by name as a place, Kenya, as a place where attacks had happened in the past, in November.

The British warning and the Australian warning, well, the British warning is for specifically Kenya, Ethiopia and Djibouti and the Australian warning is only for Djibouti. And knowing that you guys all share intelligence, and knowing that these are the three countries with the most troops right now in preparing for a possible war in Iraq, I've got two questions. One, is the United States -- was your warning based on information about the three countries or the one country, Djibouti, which seems to be central to the other two warnings? And two, does it have anything todo -- does the threat have anything to do with war or is it just generally al-Qaida and al-Qaida-related threats that would be around anyway?

MR. BOUCHER: I think the first thing to note is we each have -- do have slightly different systems. The fact that we mentioned Kenya in our warning is not to say that the threat does not exist throughout East Africa, and I think if you look at the other warnings that we have put out for countries in this region, you will find that we have various warnings already for all these areas, and therefore, Americans who might be going to one or the other are well advised to take precautions.

So it is not -- it is sort of all-inclusive in that way, in that we are covering basically the same territory, perhaps in slightly different ways.

As far as the threat, I think we made clear in some of our statements we do think that the possibility of military conflict does raise the possibility of terrorist or other attacks, but these are threats that we think exist already and that require vigilance and caution from Americans on a regular basis whether or not there are -- whether or not there is military conflict.

QUESTION: Okay. One more thing, on Djibouti specifically. The United States, back last year in December, had included Djibouti as a place where it might be -- where there might be a heightened threat, and then in January or December, dropped it -- dropped Djibouti from the announcement.

And now that it's included in both the British and Australian warnings, I'm wondering why you guys didn't add -- why you didn't add --

MR. BOUCHER: I will have to double check at this point, and see how these various -- we have a number of these things out, and I don't have them all in my head as for what is covered where, but I think I will try to get you the answer on how they fit together. Okay?

QUESTION: Richard, with respect to what has occurred this last week, and of course the statement that you made earlier in this press conference on the anniversary of the chemical killings by Saddam Hussein, is diplomacy dead right now at the United Nations and are you willing or examining other directives short of a resolution?

There are some people saying that it would never fly, others saying that there should be some type of resolution to work in increments, much like the roadmap. Is there any thing that can be done -- all right.

MR. BOUCHER: No. Diplomacy is not dead at the UN. There is a resolution on the table, co-sponsored by the US, Britain, and Spain. We are still working with the parties at the United Nations and capitals through phone calls and elsewhere to try to get people to focus on that and focus on the need to seek a peaceful solution, to increase the pressure on Saddam Hussein peacefully disarm, and the Presidents, over the weekend, will discuss how to bring that diplomatic process to a conclusion.

QUESTION: Just one more. Do you have a response to a letter that was sent yesterday from the People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals to Maura Hardy asking for the State Department to warn human tourists about the torture of elephants in Thailand?

MR. BOUCHER: I will respond to the letter as appropriate.

QUESTION: Do you have anything to say about that?

MR. BOUCHER: Not now.

(end transcript)

(Distributed by the Office of International Information Programs, U.S. Department of State. Web site: http://usinfo.state.gov)

Return to Public File Main Page

Return to Public Table of Contents