EXCERPTS: 11/15 APEC JOINT MINISTERIAL PRESS CONFERENCE
(U.S. pleased with evolution of APEC)Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia -- The United States is pleased with the evolution of the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) forum, Secretary of State Albright said at a November 15 APEC Joint Ministerial Press Conference.
"I believe that APEC is functioning exactly as it should be. It is supposed to be a catalyst for growth and liberalization, and I think that it is serving its purpose very well," she said.
In response to reporters' questions, Albright said that "all options remain on the table" with regard to U.S. policy toward Iraq.
"We are very carefully assessing more recent statements of some significance" from the Iraqi government, she said. "No new decisions have been made. All options remain on the table."
Albright also said that the United States is concerned about the case of former Malaysian Deputy Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim.
"The U.S. has made clear a number of times that Anwar Ibrahim is a highly respected leader," she said. "The reporting on the trial of Anwar Ibrahim gives us great concern, and ... we hope very much that he will have due process and a fair trial."
U.S. Trade Representative Charlene Barshefsky, who also spoke at the press conference, said the U.S. goal at the APEC meeting had been to build on the successful initiative on tariff cuts in the nine sectors within APEC, "and to move the nine sectors intact to the WTO."
All 16 participating APEC economies, "including Japan, have agreed that all nine sectors -- including the tariff-cutting elements in each -- are to be moved intact to the WTO," she said.
Following are State Department excerpts of the press conference:
(begin excerpts)
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE
Office of the Spokesman
For Immediate Release
November 16, 1998EXCERPTS FROM THE APEC JOINT MINISTERIAL PRESS CONFERENCE
Palace of the Golden Horses
Kuala Lumpur, MalaysiaNovember 15, 1998
Secretary of State Madeleine K. Albright and
U.S. Trade Representative Charlene BarshefskyQ: Will the United States implement tariff cuts in all the nine sectors?
AMB. BARSHEFSKY: Thank you very much.
First of all, let me say that this is a very significant outcome, and Minister Rafidah in particular is to be complimented for the extraordinary job that she did.
The main goal from the point of view of the United States, as it was in the Information Technology Agreement, was to move to build the initiative on tariff cuts in the nine sectors within APEC and to move the nine sectors intact to the WTO, and all 16 participating economies, including Japan, have agreed that all nine sectors -- including the tariff-cutting elements in each -- are to be moved intact to the WTO so that we can achieve and work toward a critical mass of countries joining in the initiative for a hopeful implementation in 1999. This is precisely, precisely the way in which the Information Technology Agreement came into being.
From the point of view of the United States, we will not and have never unilaterally cut tariffs where we face the problem of free riders on our tariff cuts. In the case of ITA, European participation was necessary in addition to APEC in order to avoid the free rider problem. In the context of these nine sectors, there would also be a free rider problem were we to implement unilaterally. And, for that reason and for the reasons stated by Minister Rafidah, the initiative will now be moved immediately to the WTO to achieve that critical mass of countries and then implementation.
* * *
Q: (Question asked in Russian.)
SECRETARY ALBRIGHT: Yes, thank you.
Let me say that, as you know, we considered the first letter or response from Iraq unacceptable. Since then, there have been some additional statements and some discussion of significance. We are evaluating all aspects of this, considering them, and assessing their import. All options remain on the table, and we are, as I said, very carefully assessing more recent statements of some significance. No new decisions have been made. All options remain on the table.
* * *
Q: I would like to address this question first to Charlene Barshefsky because I'm a little bit baffled by your answer to the first question. If it was always the case that this had to go to the World Trade Organization, and since Japan always said that it was prepared to discuss these sectors in the WTO, then what was all the fuss about?
AMB. BARSHEFSKY: The significant elements are these: It was very important for the United States that all nine sectors remain intact as a package, including the tariff cutting and tariff elimination elements in each. Had fish and forest products been taken out of the mix, the entire initiative would have collapsed.
Point one, therefore, is that all nine sectors, including the tariff cutting elements, remain intact.
Point two: There is agreement, including by Japan, to work within the WTO to build a critical mass in 1999 toward reaching an agreement with respect to all nine sectors, including the tariff cutting elements in all nine sectors. I would say that one year ago we had nothing in any of these sectors. Two days ago, we had the real possibility of having nothing in any of these sectors because the initiative would have collapsed. And now we will have APEC once again, as with ITA, act as a catalyst in the multilateral process to reach a critical mass agreement covering $1.5 trillion in global trade. That, I believe, is a significant achievement.
* * *
Q: I have a question for Secretary Albright. The U.S. has taken a very, very tough and suspicious line in response to the Iraqi announcement that it will let the UNSCOM inspectors back. Are you concerned about an erosion of the consensus in favor of using military action that appears to have been the result of this? Your Russian colleague just warned against unilateral action, and other UN Security Council members are saying that this is a good step forward and it is a way out of the crisis. Are you concerned about that? And secondly, what is your response to Malaysian Government criticism of your planned meeting with Anwar Ibrahim's wife as interference in this country's internal affairs?
SECRETARY ALBRIGHT: First of all on your first question, let me say that we have all along been trying to figure out a way to make sure that Iraq is not able to maintain its weapons of mass destruction and have sanctions lifted. They have wanted to have both at the same time, and we have said that those two desires are incompatible. When this whole crisis, as it was coming to a head, we kept making that point and made very clear that all options were on the table, obviously including the military option.
As I said earlier, the initial response by the Iraqi Government was unacceptable. There has been some additional discussion, and we are very carefully evaluating that. If it is necessary for us to use force, as I've said, that option is on the table. And it is my belief that we have the authority to use it and that there would be support for it. But at this stage, we think that the international community has remained united in its firm determination to make Saddam Hussein reverse his decision not to cooperate with UNSCOM, and it is the unity of the international community that has helped move him in some direction here.
But this story is not yet over. We are assessing and evaluating the further statements and discussions. And, to repeat, all options are on the table.
As far as my visit with Wan Azizah, I would like to say that the U.S. has made clear a number of times that Anwar Ibrahim is a highly respected leader. We believe that he is entitled to due process and a fair trial. I believe that it is important for the United States to maintain its consistent principles on this, and I am sure that Malaysia will be a good host and accept what I am doing.
MALAYSIAN MINISTER FOR INTERNATIONAL TRADE AND INDUSTRY RAFIDAH AZIZ: Well, actually we don't really interfere who wants to visit with what with whom, and I can assure the international community that whoever's on trial in this country -- whether they be Anwar or any other person, any other Malaysian or otherwise -- does indeed and will indeed get a fair trial. So nobody need to worry about that. Maybe perhaps when I go to the States, I like to meet Ken Starr -- and other personalities too. SECRETARY ALBRIGHT: He is not in prison.
MINISTER RAFIDAH: No, but to find out what's happening. You know, curious.
* * *
Q: My first question is directed at Secretary Albright. I'd like to know what exactly the U.S. hopes to achieve by holding a meeting with Dr. Wan Azizah. Is this an indication that the U.S. doubts that Anwar Ibrahim will get a fair trial?
SECRETARY ALBRIGHT: Yes, I think that as you know, the United States is consistently concerned about the rule of law and due process for individuals in many countries. The reporting on the trial of Anwar Ibrahim gives us great concern, and, as I said earlier, we hope very much that he will have due process and a fair trial. I believe it is perfectly appropriate to meet with his wife.
MINISTER RAFIDAH: Well, I would like to assure Secretary Albright so that she can sleep tight tonight that Anwar will certainly get a fair trial. And, in fact, in the newspapers in Malaysia, they do verbatim reports of the trial. Actually verbatim. Very, very long reading every day. With 52, I don't know how many witnesses are coming on the stand now.
* * *
Q: Can I address this question to Ms. Barshefsky. APEC Ministers wanted the EVSL to be the centerpiece of this conference, of this effort that they've been making over the past few days. Would you say that this effort is now going to be a WTO centerpiece rather than an APEC centerpiece? And, secondly, would you say that Japan gave away nothing at this conference?
AMB. BARSHEFSKY: As Minister Rafidah indicated, there is an APEC portion of the EVSL nine sectors which will continue, and that is for those countries that wish to voluntarily implement unilaterally their tariff cuts. We would urge them all to do so. We would be delighted. And they will do that.
The movement to the WTO for the United States is the most critical element, as it was in the Information Technology Agreement because, under our law, we cannot unilaterally implement tariff cuts without having on board with those cuts a critical mass of countries. That is to say, a high percentage of countries that trade in or produce the products in question. It was on that very basis that the ITA moved forward coming out of APEC. In ITA we had eight participating economies -- not 16, as today. Only eight. Took it to the WTO initially; the eight became 23. One year later, the 23 are now 45. And in that process, a critical mass was achieved and the United States has implemented and is in the process of implementing fully -- as are the other countries -- all of the tariff cuts and tariff elimination.
We have sought in the APEC forum precisely the same format for these sectors, and we are extremely pleased with that outcome. The reason that the nine sectors is relevant is that when the APEC economies last year in Canada chose those sectors out of over 40 that had been considered, the basis for the choice was balance. Every APEC economy gained something, every APEC economy would have to give something, but overall those nine sectors provided APEC as a whole, significant balance. And for that reason, moving all nine sectors to the WTO -- not stripping out certain sectors, which would have eliminated the balance and, hence, the viability of the initiative -- was so critical.
With respect to Japan, obviously the United States would have wished that Japan, as all of the other countries, had agreed to cut tariffs now on fish and forestry. Certainly we urged Japan in the APEC context to do so, and we will continue to urge Japan to do so. The significance of this outcome is that, along with 15 other of the member economies, Japan has agreed that the initiative of all nine sectors, including tariff cuts and elimination in all nine sectors, go to the WTO, that a critical mass be developed in the WTO, looking for agreement and implementation in 1999. I believe that's a significant step forward for APEC, and I believe it is a very important step forward for Japan.
* * *
Q: (In Chinese.)
SECRETARY ALBRIGHT: I believe that APEC is functioning exactly as it should be. It is supposed to be a catalyst for growth and liberalization, and I think that it is serving its purpose very well. The United States is particularly pleased with the evolution of APEC, and we are very pleased to be active participants.
(end transcript)
Return to The United States and APEC.Return to IIP Home Page.