20 March 2000
Berger Briefing On President's Meeting in Dhaka
(Link to Non-proliferation Issues)
National Security Advisor Sandy Berger briefed the press March 20 on
that day's meeting between President Clinton and Bangladeshi Prime
Minister Sheikh Hasina.
Sheikh Hasina raised a number of specific issues with the President,
Berger said, including: the question of the three individuals who are
implicated in the murder of her father, who are in the United States;
her commitment to increase the living standards of the people of
Bangladesh; the importance of the bilateral relationship with the
United States and the increasing trade relationship between the two
countries, and the strong commitment of Bangladesh to peace and to
being a leader for peace in the region.
Hasina also asked President Clinton to consider relief of the PL-480
(food aid) debt, Berger said, and the President indicated that the
U.S. was going to invoke for the first time a new law that would
relieve $600 million of debt to release money for use in maintaining
the tropical forests.
President Clinton thanked Bangladesh for its friendship; for its
leadership in the U.N. Security Council, in peacekeeping efforts, on
non-proliferation; for the progress it has made in child labor and the
condition of women; and on microcredit. He also discussed with the
Prime Minister water and energy issues, Berger said.
Berger said President Clinton invited Hasina to visit Washington in
October.
Berger also answered questions about President Clinton's stopover in
Geneva, Switzerland, at the end of his visit to South Asia to meet
with
Syrian President Assad about the peace process.
Following is the transcript of Berger's briefing:
The White House
Office of the Press Secretary
(Dhaka, Bangladesh)
For Immediate Release
March 20, 2000
Press Briefing by
National Security Advisor Sandy Berger
Pan-Pacific Sonargon Hotel
Dhaka, Bangladesh
5:30 P.M. (L)
MR. BERGER: Here I am, ready or not. Let me begin by giving you some
readout from the meeting between President Clinton and the Prime
Minister, Sheikh Hasina, today. The Prime Minister began the meeting
by warmly welcoming the President to Bangladesh and noting with, I
think, great pride that this was the first-ever visit by a President
of the United States to Bangladesh. She spoke quite eloquently about
their commitment to democracy and determination to resolve issues
through the ballot, and not by the bullet.
She raised a number of specific issues with the President. I think you
heard her speak later at the Embassy about the question of the three
individuals who are implicated in the murder of her father, who are in
the United States. She expressed a strong view that she would hope
that they would be deported. I'll come back -- the President later
said that he -- that we were seeking to have them removed from the
United States, that they were in the midst of judicial proceedings,
that he believed that we should seek that result. And he proposed that
the United States and Bangladesh negotiate an extradition treaty so
that matters such as this can be handled more expeditiously in the
future.
She talked, as you heard at the Embassy, a great deal about her
commitment to increase the living standards of the people of this
country. She talked about both the enormous challenges here, but also
the great achievements -- the 65-percent literacy rate that's been
achieved; food self-sufficiency; 40 percent of the budget for social
development; 1.2 million women in specific develop programs; 1 billion
disbursed by the government in microcredit.
She talked about the importance of the bilateral relationship with the
United States and how, many times in the past, going back to some of
the natural disasters, as well as our very active aid program, we have
been strong friends of Bangladesh.
She mentioned the increasing trade relationship between the United
States and Bangladesh. There was $653 million in trade in 1991; $2.2
billion in '99. The largest export of Bangladesh to the United States
is textiles. She asked the President whether he would consider a
significant increase in the textile quota. Textile exports from
Bangladesh to the United States were $1.8 billion last year. The
President noted that there is a 10-percent increase in the quota
that's built into the phase-down of the quota and said he would look
into whether anything further could be done, but that would probably
be difficult.
U.S. investment in Bangladesh over the last four years, I believe, was
$750 million.
She spoke about the strong commitment of this country to peace and to
being a leader for peace in the region; the progress they've made in
settling problems with their neighbors, ending insurgency; and, of
course, being the first country in this region to both sign and ratify
the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty.
She asked the President to consider relief of the PL-480 debt; there's
$700 million or $400 million, depending on which figures you look at.
The President indicated to her that we were going to -- while he did
not have the authority under the law to do that, we were going to
invoke for the first time a new law that the President spoke about at
the Embassy, essentially debt for nature, that enabled us to relieve
$600 million of debt to release money that can be used to maintain the
tropical forests.
She raised the issue of Bangladeshis in the United States who were out
of status and would like to remain.
The President then responded -- he said he was honored to be here as
the first United States President. He thanked Bangladesh for the
friendship that they have continually manifested toward the United
States; their leadership in the United States Security Council; their
role in peacekeeping from Haiti to Bosnia to Kosovo to Kuwait; the
leadership on non-proliferation; the progress they've made in child
labor and the condition of women; and on microcredit.
He said, where do we go from here, what else can we do. He
specifically focused, talked a bit about the problem of potable water,
drinking water, and indicated we would try to do more in that area.
Also in the rural economic development area and turned to Secretary
Daley and suggested that he perhaps try to do some more in the
investment area.
There was a rather long discussion of energy. As you know, Bangladesh
have substantial natural gas reserves. There is some uncertainty with
respect to what the quantity of those reserves are, but they're quite
substantial. The Prime Minister said they were determined to maintain
50 years of reserves for the children of Bangladesh. The President
said that that was a sensible policy, but if reserves turned out to be
greater than that, that this could be an important element of
Bangladesh's development and offered to have a U.S. geological survey
team come here and assess what the reserves are. They've been
estimated anywhere between 10 and 40 trillion feet of natural gas
reserves.
As the President invited the Prime Minister to come to Washington in
October, she accepted that invitation. And I think that's about it, so
why don't I now take your questions.
Q: Sandy, what can you tell us -- what, if anything, has President
Assad said about the meeting this Sunday? Is there any chance at all
from the Syrian position that would precipitate this meeting?
MR. BERGER: The President has been in ongoing contact with President
Assad and with Prime Minister Barak during the period since the
Shepherdstown talks in an effort to find a way to resume those
negotiations. As the President pointed out earlier today, we are very
pleased that, through the direct contact between Prime Minister Barak
and Chairman Arafat, with efforts by the President, by Secretary
Albright, by our Special Envoy, Dennis Ross, we're now seeing the
resumption of the Palestinian-Israeli talks. And, in fact, there are
teams from the Palestinians and the Israelis who are coming to
Washington this week to resume those negotiations.
The task now is to resume the Syrian negotiations. On the basis of his
conversations with the two leaders, I think the President felt the
next logical step was for him to meet directly with President Assad.
He's had many direct, face-to-face conversations with Prime Minister
Barak. And there are some things that are best discussed face-to-face,
leader to leader. So I would hope that this could contribute to a
process by which the Syrian-Israeli negotiations can be resumed. But
we have no certainty of that.
Q: Is the President taking any specific proposal to Assad, or is it
just a general pushing of him in the direction of peace and
negotiations?
MR. BERGER: I think the President will present to President Assad his
impressions of how the process of negotiations can be resumed, based
upon the extensive conversations that he's had with both Prime
Minister Barak and President Assad, but is not taking a specific
American proposal.
Q: A continuation of Shepherdstown or something different?
MR. BERGER: A resumption of direct negotiations between Syria and
Israel.
Q: And the impressions that the President is taking with him to the
meeting, do they not constitute some idea, American ideas to push the
process along?
MR. BERGER: I think I will stay exactly what I -- repeat exactly what
I said. The President's impressions about how to get the negotiations
resumed, based upon the discussions that he has had over time with
Assad and Barak.
Q: You said something, they're best discussed face-to-face,
leader-to-leader. Is it time for Barak to meet face-to-face,
leader-to-leader with Assad?
MR. BERGER: Well, I think the next step is for President Clinton to
meet with President Assad.
Q: How would you describe the events in Southern Lebanon as affecting
the process? That has unfolded since Shepherdstown.
MR. BERGER: Well, I think the violence in Southern Lebanon is not a
positive development and we've urged restraint on all parties and
compliance with previous agreements and I'm glad that things have
quieted down.
Q: Coming back from Bangladesh, do you have any ideas if there are any
commitments from the U.S. companies -- how much more investment will
be made to --
MR. BERGER: Well, American investment has increased significantly over
the past four years, as I said, by almost $1 billion -- three-quarters
of a billion dollars. I think there is tremendous potential here. This
is, I think, a country with a very promising future and I think the
President believes that. I'm sure the President will go back and
encourage American companies to focus on Bangladesh; and I think
Secretary Daley will also bring some attention to it, as well.
Q: You could look at this resumption of talks in two ways. One way
that in these phone calls between the President and Assad, that some
progress is being made, and the President will give his impressions
and that things could be wrapped up in relatively fast time. Or you
could look at it the other way and say, things have been very, very
rocky and there's a fair way to go.
MR. BERGER: Yes. (Laughter.)
Q: Which one is it?
MR. BERGER: I think it's a good thing that the President is meeting
with President Assad. I don't think that -- I think that it is a step
in a process that hopefully can lead to a resumption of negotiations.
But that is by no means assured.
Q: Sandy, can you tell us something about your upcoming trip to China?
And that was planned, I guess, before the Taiwan vote. How has that
changed things for your plans, for what you hope to accomplish?
MR. BERGER: Well, this is a trip that has been scheduled for some
time, several weeks. There has been a regular dialogue that the
National Security Advisor has had, going back to early in this
administration, with Chinese officials, once a year, to look at the
issues ahead for the year. And it's in that spirit that this meeting
was arranged.
I'm sure we'll discuss a wide range of issues, including the questions
involving, hopefully, a resumption of dialogue across the Taiwan
Straits.
Q: But what specifically are you going to tell them about what the
U.S. will do, in terms of aggression against Taiwan?
MR. BERGER: I'm going to say that we believe that the issue between
Taiwan -- the future relationship between Taiwan and China must be
resolved through peaceful means. And we would encourage a resumption
of dialogue.
I think the statements that Mr. Chen has made in the last 24 or 48
hours have been conciliatory. The statements from the Chinese side
have been, I think, measured. And I think this is a time to now seize
upon an opportunity that exists to resume a dialogue between Taipei
and Beijing.
Q: Can we go back just to the Assad thing for one second. You said
before that you're happy, you're glad that things have quieted down in
Southern Lebanon. This coupled with the President's meeting, does this
indicate that the U.S. is now pleased, or satisfied, with the steps
that Damascus took to use its influence to rein in Hezbollah?
MR. BERGER: Well, we have consistently urged the government of Syria
to exercise its influence to try to restrain the groups in southern
Lebanon from engaging in violent acts.
Q: Well, yes, but you had -- there had been complaints from many in
the administration that they weren't doing enough, very publicly
saying that they hadn't done enough, and that it made it more and more
difficult to resume the talks. So the question is, I mean, have they
now done enough that -- things have quieted down, that makes this
meeting more --
MR. BERGER: I think it always remains a volatile area. And again, we
will continue to urge the Syrian government to use its influence to
encourage restraint.
Q: The Israeli-Syrian talks are one of several parts of the world
where the President's been involved for some time in trying to bring
about peace talks or negotiations. And I wonder if you think the
President feels some urgency now to get some of them done because of
his own political calendar?
MR. BERGER: No. I think the timetable here in these things is not
driven largely by our electoral timetable. The fact is that the
timetable in the Middle East is driven by Barak, Assad and Arafat.
They each have their own, I think, imperatives.
I believe Prime Minister Barak has made it very clear that he wants to
try to achieve a comprehensive peace this year. I think President
Assad has indicated that he is determined to try to seek a peace
agreement, and Chairman Arafat has. Time is not the friend of peace in
the Middle East, and I think any sense of urgency comes from their
clock, and not our clock.
I think in Northern Ireland, for two years people have enjoyed the
benefits of the Good Friday Agreement and the people of Ireland don't
want to go back -- people of Northern Ireland don't want to go back.
And we're coming up on a second year anniversary. There are some
significant problems that have arisen in terms of keeping the process
going, but I would say even during this period there still is a
maintenance of peace.
So I think there tends to kind of over-estimate the extent to which
the people around the world are driven by our timetable. They're
driven by their own timetables. I think in the Middle East there is a
factor which is relevant. I think the fact is that all of the parties
have a particular trust in President Clinton and I think they believe
that he can be helpful in achieving the goal that they seek. But I
don't think that -- I think the impetus comes from the dynamic of the
region.
Q: The Indian Prime Minister yesterday said India will not make any
decisions on security under pressure. Looking ahead to the talks that
start tomorrow, do you have any indication at all that India is ready
to move in our direction in any way on nuclear policy, on talking to
Pakistanis, any of these security issues?
MR. BERGER: We have no intention of pressuring the Indians. I'm sure
the President will discuss with the Prime Minister a range of issues,
including the opportunity for a new partnership between India and the
United States, but also why we believe that it is not in India's
interest in the long run for there to be a nuclear arms race that
diverts resources and raises dangers. But that is a judgment
ultimately that the government and people of India will have to make.
Q: The President, just before he left, and the Secretary of State also
said that curbing India's nuclear -- is essential for the relationship
to grow. While at the same time, the U.S. has been saying that it's
going to have a broad-based relationship which is not going to be held
hostage to a single issue. But isn't this a case of holding the
nuclear -- hostage in the sense of pressing India all the time?
MR. BERGER: I think what the Secretary of State said is that progress
on the nonproliferation agenda is important for our relationship to
reach its full potential. There are certain sanctions that are
mandated by U.S. law, and we have indicated to the government of India
and the government of Pakistan certain steps, certain interim steps
that we believe would be useful in de-escalating the tension,
including the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty, including stronger export
controls. These are all things that the government and people of India
will decide ultimately to do if they believe in their judgment it is
in their self-interest. We happen to think it is in their
self-interest to have a de-escalation of tensions and de-escalation of
an arms race.
We believe we need to -- we believe there is a unique opportunity to
strengthen our partnership with India, but there are some constraints
on the full realization of that, which relate to the nonproliferation
agenda.
Q: -- extend his invitation to visit U.S. to the Prime Minister of
Bangladesh, Sheikh Hasina. Is he going to do the same for the Prime
Minister of India and General Musharraf of Pakistan?
MR. BERGER: I'm sorry, I didn't -- well, we haven't reached those
stops yet, so we'll wait and see.
Q: Sandy, is there something specific that you think President Assad
wants to hear from President Clinton?
MR. BERGER: I think that both Prime Minister Barak and President Assad
want to -- want some understanding or some sense that, in the final
analysis, if there are peace negotiations, that their needs can be
met. And I think that obviously any negotiation involves compromise
and flexibility. But I think, as I say, what the President will be
discussing is his views on how to get the process resumed.
Q: Can you tell us if the bilateral with the Prime Minister, did the
subject of the change to the President's schedule today come up at
all? And can you give us any more detailed explanation for --
MR. BERGER: It was, obviously, mentioned. It was not discussed at
length. I'm not going to go much further than the President went. We
had specific information which led us to the conclusion that traveling
to the village was inadvisable.
Q: Can you kindly tell us why President cancelled his tour to --
MR. BERGER: I think I just answered the question. But since I didn't
hear your question, I have to rely on Mr. Hammer. And if I didn't
answer your question, it's his fault.
MR. HAMMER: That's right.
Q: -- Pakistan with the recent shooting of one of the main lawyers for
Nawaz Sharif. And as you all know, the former Prime Minister was truly
forthcoming in signing the Washington accord handed out by the White
House, President Clinton. At the risk of creating domestic opposition
at home, is President Clinton planning to discuss the issue of the
probable imprisonment -- during his meeting with General Musharraf?
MR. BERGER: I'm sure the question of the ultimate disposition of
former Prime Minister Sharif will be raised.
Q: After the President give Assad his impressions of how the peace
talks can be presumed, what then? Does he want Assad to say, well,
this is a good idea, we'll go this way or what does he want?
MR. BERGER: I do not expect there to be an immediately result from
this meeting on Sunday. I expect that President Assad will go back;
we'll comeback to Washington; and we will continue the process.
THE PRESS: Thank you very much.
(Distributed by the Office of International Information Programs, U.S.
Department of State. Web site: usinfo.state.gov)
Return to the Washington File
|