|
21 March 2001
State Department Spokesman Richard Boucher briefed.
Following is the State Department transcript:
U.S. Department of State
Daily Press Briefing
Wednesday, March 21, 2001
Briefer: Richard Boucher, Spokesman
Mr. Boucher: Good afternoon, everybody. Nice to see you. I'm going to
learn the Presidential stare for anybody with a cell phone.
I would like to start out with a brief announcement. The Trilateral
Coordination and Oversight Group will meet in Seoul, South Korea, on
March 26th. Delegations representing the United States, the Republic
of Korea and Japan will discuss a range of issues in our ongoing
coordination of policy towards North Korea. It is a part of a
continuing process.
As you know, we have made quite clear as we review our North Korea
policy that one essential element to all of us is the coordination
with Japan and Korea, and this is a continuation of that process in
Seoul, March 26th. Our side will be led by Acting Assistant Secretary
for East Asian and Pacific Affairs Tom Hubbard.
So with that, I would like to take your questions.
Question: Is this the first meeting of its kind, at least at that
level, since January 20th?
Mr. Boucher: I think this is the first trilateral meeting since
January 20th. Obviously we have had the occasion more than once to
consult with our Japanese and Korean allies separately on these issues
since then, including the President's meetings and the Secretary's
meetings.
Q: With the Bush Administration meetings coming up with Qian Qichen --
Q: Wait, whoa. Can we stay on North Korea for a second? Who used to go
to these for the U.S.?
Mr. Boucher: I think it would have been Wendy Sherman in the past.
Yes, it was Wendy Sherman that did these.
Q: And was that job on the list? I can't remember.
Mr. Boucher: No, that's a normal Under Secretary level position that
happens to be empty right now, but it's part of the normal complement.
It's not a special title. As Counselor, the job of special envoy --
whatever it was -- special coordinator was on the list. And I'd have
to check, but I think it was abolished.
But the point is that we have people doing the work. We have an Acting
Assistant Secretary for East Asian Affairs who is going out to consult
with his Japanese and Korean counterparts to plan policy.
Q: Is it just one day?
Mr. Boucher: I think the meeting in Seoul, the coordination meeting,
is just one day. He'll be in Seoul and Tokyo, though, from March 25th
to the 30th, have meetings with Japanese and South Korean
counterparts, trilateral meetings the 26th. And he'll have other
bilateral meetings obviously will continue various kinds of bilateral
and trilateral discussions with our allies. And then he is also going
to Singapore, Kuala Lumpur and Manila from March 21st to 25th. Those
are visits that are related to our relationships in that region and
not to Korea policy.
Q: I'm sorry. What were the dates of that second one?
Mr. Boucher: 21 to 25 be in Singapore, Kuala Lumpur and Manila. And
then 25 to 30 it will be Korea and Japan.
Q: Can I ask when this tripartite session was agreed -- when the
timing was? Or is this something that kind of occurs on a periodic
basis?
Mr. Boucher: It occurs on a periodic basis. I don't know exactly when
this meeting was set. The last one -- I don't even have the date of
the last one, but we've been doing this since April 1999.
Q: If everyone's finished on North Korea. With the Bush Administration
meetings coming up with Qian Qichen, I just have a broad brush
question. The Clinton Administration used to describe China as a
strategic partner; the Bush Administration has used this term,
"strategic competitor." I wondered what the difference was.
Mr. Boucher: I will leave the analysis to you. I think the Secretary
has made quite clear that we are not seeking an enemy; we are not
seeking to turn China into a foe. We are looking to cooperate where we
can, but we will discuss differences candidly. That is our description
of the intention and the policy.
Q: Richard, yesterday you said that US-China relations on the sale of
Chinese weapons and missile technology to other countries, but
according to the CIA report they are still selling missile technology
and other weapons to other countries, like Pakistan, Iraq, Iran.
Mr. Boucher: I'm not sure what you are referring to. There was one
report that the CIA put out not too long ago, but I think that related
to the first half of the year 2000, if I remember correctly. So we
would look for obviously updated information from them when they are
ready to provide it.
I would say that we had -- in November we reached some understandings
with the Chinese on missiles, where the Chinese would abide more
strictly by some of the -- let me get this precisely right -- China
committed itself not to assist other countries in developing
nuclear-capable ballistic missiles in any way, and to put in place
comprehensive missile-related export controls.
Obviously the key to this is whether China implements these
commitments over the long term, and fully and completely. In the brief
period since November, we have not seen anything that contradicts this
commitment, but it is an issue that we will continue to discuss with
the Chinese, continue to monitor, and continue to cooperate and
coordinate with them on.
Q: Any response from their Chinese leader on this issue during his
visit here? Discussions?
Mr. Boucher: Why don't you ask that after we talk to them, not before.
Q: It was reported that the Chinese Vice Premier Qian Qichen said in
New York that China would not exclude the possibility of a preemptive
attack to Taiwan if the United States sells Aegis ships to Taiwan.
Have you had a chance to clarify with the Chinese delegation what he
has actually said? Thank you.
Mr. Boucher: We haven't met with him yet. We will meet with him this
afternoon and evening so, no, I don't have anything new for you on
that. We addressed it yesterday. Clearly the United States' policy all
along has been in support of peaceful resolution of the issues across
the Strait, and we've always said that we would see a resort to
anything other than peaceful means as something of grave concern to
us.
Q: To follow up, he will meet with Secretary Powell this afternoon.
What is on Secretary Powell's mind, and what accomplishment would the
United States would like to achieve?
Mr. Boucher: I have to say, we sort of did the whole agenda yesterday.
So without repeating it for you today, I would certainly be glad to
get it for you from yesterday.
Q: But I need a sound bite.
(Laughter and applause.)
Mr. Boucher: Here I am -- purveyor of sound bites to the world.
This afternoon, Secretary Powell will have a chance for the first time
to meet with Vice Premier Qian Qichen. It gives him an opportunity at
that moment to discuss the full range of U.S.-China relationships.
There are many, many areas of importance to us, areas involving things
like economic cooperation and China's accession to the WTO, or areas
of cooperation where we can find common ground on stopping
proliferation or cooperating on Korea policy.
There are also many areas where we need to discuss some differences,
and I am sure the issues of Taiwan will come up. Clearly human rights
is an important issue to us. The Chinese have indicated they want to
discuss missile defense. We'd be happy to talk about that. And then we
have the international arena -- Iraq policy that members of the UN
Security Council, one of the Perm 5 -- so a number of issues like that
that will come up as well.
So I think you have to look for a very broad meeting that covers the
world, covers the relationship, and covers some of the differences.
Q: Richard, has the US made any formal intervention, complaint or
otherwise about the treatment of this five-year-old American child who
was apparently kept from his parents for almost a month?
Mr. Boucher: We have raised the reports of Ms. Gao's detention with
Chinese authorities. We've asked them to release her immediately. We
can't discuss circumstances of other individual Americans or residents
due to Privacy Act restrictions, but regarding some of the reports
we've seen about her son I would say that our bilateral consular
agreement calls for the Chinese Government to notify us within four
days of detaining any American in any manner. And so we insist that
the Chinese Government notify the US Government in accordance with our
bilateral consular agreement.
Q: Are you suggesting that there is still some kind of Privacy Act
waiver consideration? I mean, the husband is calling up all the press
and yakking about it all over the place, as well as this letter that
Human Rights in China released with this guy's -- you know, he's
asking for Bush to do something about it with Qian Qichen.
Mr. Boucher: I am told that we still have a Privacy Act consideration,
that we can't talk about it in any detail.
Q: Richard, can you say if it will be brought up in the meetings that
are held?
Mr. Boucher: We'll have to see where we are. I can't say that for
sure.
Q: When you say that the issue has been raised, where and with whom?
Mr. Boucher: Our Embassy in Beijing has repeatedly raised with Chinese
authorities over this last -- what is it -- month or so the issues of
the detention of Ms. Gao.
Q: And in an angry way? In a -- I mean, when you say "raised," are
they complaining about the treatment that she was given?
Mr. Boucher: As I said, we have raised reports of her detention and
we've asked them to release her immediately. That's what we've said.
Q: Richard, would you care to use somewhat stronger language talking
about the detention of the five-year-old child? I think twenty --
Mr. Boucher: I can't talk about the detention of any five-year-old
children because of the Privacy Act. That's what I just told you.
Q: Well, you don't have to talk about details of the child's life, but
I mean the kid was held for more than 20 days away from both of his
parents. Isn't that -- doesn't that deserve some kind of outrage on
the part of the United States?
Mr. Boucher: I'm sorry, but I am prevented at this point by the
Privacy Act of talking about any individual American citizen. And if a
child was detained for 20 days without access to his parents, without
the benefit of consular notification, that would be a real problem for
us. But I can't talk about it in any specific terms because of the
Privacy Act.
Q: Have the Chinese authorities offered any explanation for why she is
being detained to you?
Mr. Boucher: I am not aware that they have provided any significant
explanation to us. I would have to check on that, but we still
maintain that she should be released immediately.
Q: Is this something that Secretary Powell is going to raise with the
Vice Premier?
Mr. Boucher: I was just asked that. I don't know. I can't promise that
right now. We'll tell you afterwards.
Q: Richard, was there consular notification regarding the mother?
Mr. Boucher: The mother, I don't think, is a US citizen.
Q: But (inaudible)?
Mr. Boucher: No.
Q: Is there an Administration position on Beijing's bid for the
Olympics in 2008? It was the subject of a news conference on the Hill
today.
Mr. Boucher: The position is that we don't take a view of which city
the International Olympic Committee should choose. Obviously we share
congressional concerns that have been expressed, I think in a letter,
about China's poor human rights record. We support calls for immediate
improvements. Our objective is to see a tangible improvement in
China's human rights situation, and you'll see from our Annual Reports
on Human Rights and Religious Freedom what we think in detail about
the situation.
Q: On that, that's not specifically what they asked you to do. They
don't say say they want you to oppose, but they do say that in the
event that Beijing does get the Olympics venue, they want the
Secretary to publicly endorse the creation of the Beijing Olympic
Games human rights campaign.
Are you willing to do that?
Mr. Boucher: That is hypothetical at this point. I don't think I can
do that without trying to indicate a position on the city of choice,
and it is up to the Committee to decide. We will determine that at the
time.
Q: Okay. In presenting this resolution publicly, one of the great
defenders of this Department, Congressman Lantos, stood up next to a
giant blow-up of a 1936 New York Times story talking about how Hitler
was using the 1936 Olympics to bask in international glory, and he
said that the Chinese would do the same thing.
Does the Department share that view?
Mr. Boucher: I have not expressed a view, so I don't share anybody's
view on this.
Q: Richard, the Department has stated that you are going to seek a
condemnation of China at the human rights meeting in Geneva. Can you
say how you are coming in being able to garner support for this?
Mr. Boucher: I can't at this moment. The resolution that -- the
session lasts something like five or six weeks, and so we are just in
the beginning of the period. Clearly this is one of the issues of
importance to us. It is one of our several priorities. Our overall
goal here is to get countries to comply with the universally
recognized human rights.
On the China resolution, the goal is to encourage China to take
positive and concrete steps to meet its international obligations, to
protect the fundamental freedoms and civil liberties of the Chinese
people. We know there are many who agree with us, and I suppose, as in
previous years, there will be a certain amount of maneuvering,
however, around this resolution. So I can't predict the outcome at
this point.
Q: Richard, just to follow on human rights. Is Mary's Robinson's
intention to resign from the human rights -- from the United Nations
-- going to make a difference as far as the human rights' discussions
are going to go for the next whole month?
Mr. Boucher: I don't know. I am not in a position to make any
prediction.
Q: Richard, a couple of weeks ago, just in this room, we were talking
about China and some Chinese companies that had contracts in Iraq.
Just as a follow-up, is the US satisfied with any moves that the
Chinese have made, or with whatever moves the Chinese have made, in
doing what they said they would do?
Mr. Boucher: I believe we said at the time it is not a question of
being satisfied at any moment -- then or, in fact, now. The question
is continuing to watch this carefully, making the system work. And as
you know, we are taking steps to tighten up on the weapons side of
this, make sure civilian goods can get to the people that need them.
But I think in terms of US-China relations and how this issue comes
up, it is an ongoing issue that we will continue to monitor, continue
to discuss with the Chinese.
Q: Well, since it is an ongoing issue, has there been any follow-up on
the concerns that have been raised about fiber optics
telecommunications companies still working? Are those still concerns
of the US, or have they gone away?
Mr. Boucher: I'm not aware of any further demarches. I would have to
check and see if we have information on what the resolution of those
particular cases were. The Chinese told us they had issued some
instructions to their companies not to do that work, and I would have
to check and see if we can confirm that, that that has taken place.
You might also ask the Chinese if any companies that had been there
are no longer doing the work.
Q: Is the Secretary planning to bring it up with the Vice Premier?
Mr. Boucher: I'm sure the issue of Iraq will come up. How exactly we
discuss certain aspects of this, I don't know. Obviously the
importance of abiding by all UN resolutions will be part of the
discussion, especially for a member of the Security Council. The
Chinese have said that they intend to abide by all the resolutions. So
whether we need to go further than that would depend on what we know
about the situation.
Q: Do you have any announcement regarding the question of a meeting
between the Greek Foreign Minister and Secretary Powell?
Mr. Boucher: I can tell you, now we have a meeting now scheduled, and
somewhere in here I will find the date. Almost there. May 21st. Greek
Foreign Minister Papandreou has accepted Secretary Powell's invitation
to meet on May 21st in Washington. In addition to the meeting, they
will have a working lunch.
Q: I have a question. The designee for Under Secretary of State for
Political Affairs, Marc Grossman, made some statements yesterday
regarding the Cyprus issue, and in one of the statements left open the
possibility that the US position is that we have to have a solution of
the Cyprus problem first, and then the entrance of Cyprus in the
European Union.
Any comment on that?
Mr. Boucher: I would invite you to look at what he actually said and
not to over-interpret remarks. What he actually said was, "We ought to
be able to make sure that all people in Cyprus, whether in north or
south, have the opportunity to get into the European Union, and to do
that they are going to settle the problem."
We have said for some time that for all Cypriots to have the
advantages and opportunities associated with membership, they need to
solve the Cyprus problem.
Q: But this clearly means that in order to get access to the European
Union, all Cypriots --
Mr. Boucher: No, he didn't. That is not the way he phrased it. Again,
look at what he said and report on what he said. Don't over-interpret
it. I'll put it that way.
We have strongly supported the European Union's decision on accession.
We have supported the 1999 Helsinki Conclusions that say that a
political settlement would facilitate the accession of Cyprus to the
European Union, and they go on further. That is our policy. That is
what we support.
Q: So you're saying that you support the Helsinki decision of the
European Union?
Mr. Boucher: We always have and we still do, and Mr. Grossman's
comments are consistent with that position.
Q: Thank you.
Q: I haven't seen his comments, but what you read -- what you quoted
from sure sounds exactly like what he said. Is there some kind of
grammatical --
Mr. Boucher: There is no -- there is a policy that has been enunciated
many times. It was enunciated yesterday by Mr. Grossman. There is
nothing there.
Q: Okay, I just wanted to ask you about something else that Mr.
Grossman apparently said about meeting with Chechen rebels. Is there a
meeting scheduled here at the State Department for this week, and who
would meet them?
Mr. Boucher: As I believe you know, we have had meetings previously
with Chechens, with anybody -- many prominent individuals who can talk
to us, who can inform us of what is going on and give us their view of
what is going on. So we expect to meet with Mr. Akhmadov at the
Assistant Secretary level while he is in Washington. That will
probably take place today or tomorrow. It is another opportunity for
us to discuss the conflict in Chechnya.
As I said, we have talked about Chechnya with Russian officials,
clearly because Chechnya is part of Russia. We have also discussed it
with a wide variety of other involved individuals, including Mr.
Akhmadov.
Q: Richard, do you think the Russians are overreacting in condemning
this type of meeting?
Mr. Boucher: We have had meetings before with this gentleman. We have
meetings with a variety of people. I don't see anything unusual or
upsetting in it. We are obviously very interested in the situation in
Chechnya. We have gone to the point of raising this at very senior
levels with the Russian Government.
We have made quite clear that while we accept Chechnya as part of
Russia, that they need to take steps to bring the violence to an end,
that there is no military solution to the problem, and they need --
both sides need to find ways to begin a dialogue and reach a political
settlement.
Human rights is also a serious concern of ours. We are interested in
reports and people who can tell us things about the human rights
situation there. We believe there needs to be investigation of these
credible reports of human rights abuses, and there needs to be
accountability as well.
Q: Who is he going to meet with, and do you have his full name?
Mr. Boucher: I do not have his full name, and he'll meet with the
Acting Assistant Secretary for the Bureau of New Independent States.
Q: Who is?
Mr. Boucher: John Beyrle.
Q: Well, you just said that WTO will be a topic for Secretary Powell
and Qian Qichen to discuss this afternoon. Well, as far as you know,
has China made any progress on its entry into the WTO? Is it possible
for them to enter the WTO before the end of the year?
Mr. Boucher: I don't think I can give you a prediction at this point.
I think we need a chance to talk to him. We are interested in seeing
the process go forward. We are also interested in the state of the
economic reform process in China that makes the Chinese economy more
compatible with the WTO. So these are important issues both from the
process of developments in China and from the process of their
discussions with other governments. Where exactly they stand in
Geneva, I don't know, but I'd have to check on that for you.
Q: But has the process gone forward, as you said?
Mr. Boucher: I know there have been continuing discussions. I don't
have a way of characterizing the progress.
Q: So there are discussions, but there is no progress?
Mr. Boucher: No, I didn't say that. I don't have a way of
characterizing the progress at this moment. We'll have to see where
they are. We'll look forward to hearing from them where they think
they stand, both on these issues of compatibility and on the issues of
accession.
Q: If I could go back to the Chechen visit. In the past, you've never
said who you think the Russians should negotiate with on Chechnya.
Would you consider Akhmadov an appropriate negotiating partner for
Moscow?
Mr. Boucher: I don't think it's for us to define the particular person
in terms of the negotiating process. They need to open up
opportunities for a political settlement. They need to foster a
negotiating process and look for a chance to resolve these issues
through discussion and dialogue.
Q: It seems that the situation in Macedonia gets more (inaudible) so
do you have any new to report on the part of the United States for the
situation there?
Mr. Boucher: I don't know that there is much new to report today. We
talked yesterday about the kind of support that the United States,
through NATO, has been providing. We've been providing a lot of
support for civil society on our own. We've been working with NATO to
look at what they might need in terms of immediate assistance in the
military area.
I described yesterday the activity of the NATO forces to cut off safe
havens on the Kosovo side of the border. I think I need to make
absolutely clear Macedonia has our full support on this. They have our
full support in their efforts to respond proportionately to violent
extremism. They have our full support for their territorial integrity.
We do expect the government to take appropriate steps to avoid
civilian casualties, but it's quite clear that these extremists are
threatening innocent lives in Macedonia; they have no support from us;
they have little or no support within Macedonia; and we believe that
the political differences, any issues that anybody wants to raise
politically, need to be solved through the Macedonian political
system.
Q: Yesterday the Prime Minister of Macedonia used some rather harsh
language criticizing the US for -- NATO KFOR troops for not doing a
better job in keeping, they say, these Kosovo ethnic Albanian
extremists who are in Kosovo from crossing the border. And they're
saying that this is all a Kosovo issue.
Mr. Boucher: I didn't see any remarks yesterday. I know that issue has
been raised by him and other people before. I think you need to talk
to NATO about the specific military aspects, but I think you can see
quite clearly, first of all, that we have stepped up our patrols;
we've detained individuals; we have found arms caches on that part of
the border; NATO has put another 300 troops on the job down there.
We have been cooperating with the Macedonian Government in a variety
of ways, including information-sharing, doing observations, sharing
information across the border. NATO has planning people and
operational people working with the Macedonians in Skopje, and so this
is very closely coordinated with the Macedonian Government. We think
we are doing our part in terms of denying safe haven on the Kosovo
side of the border.
Q: But do you think you should have done more before to keep these
extremists from being able to cross the line? I mean, you've beefed up
the border now, but this has been going on and building up for weeks.
Mr. Boucher: I think you have seen that we have taken a lot of steps
over the weeks. I mean, we've gotten into firefights with people
trying to cross the border there. I think NATO has been pretty active
in the last month or so, at least.
Q: And does the fact that the ultimatum that was given to the rebels
to clear our of the Tetevo area passed without any success in any way
increase the urgency with which the United States and its NATO allies
is considering increasing military aid or getting hardware to
Macedonia?
Mr. Boucher: I'm not sure I would put it that way. I would say that we
have been looking on an ongoing and a fairly urgent basis at what we
can do to assist the Macedonian Government, both continuing the civil
programs that help them deal with the aspirations of the ethnic
Albanian community, and also looking with NATO at what we can do to
assist them. We have a very active presence working with them in
Macedonia, and that continues.
Q: You keep saying that any political differences need to be resolved
peacefully, but there has been a lot of reporting to the fact that
these people really -- these rebels -- extremists, as you call them --
are not really political in nature and they're more criminal in
nature.
Does the US share that view of some people who have been reporting on
this?
Mr. Boucher: I think it's been hard to define exactly what their goals
are and what their nature is. They seem to be wanting to control a
certain amount of territory that includes smuggling routes and other
opportunities to operate with impunity in an area where we don't think
they should be allowed to operate that way.
So I don't think I am in a position at this point to define exactly
who they are and what their aspirations are. What I do know is this
kind of armed violence doesn't have a place in an open democratic
society like Macedonia.
Q: Related -- did this come up, the whole issue -- I'm assuming it has
-- that's why I'm asking -- in the Secretary's meeting this morning
with the British Defense Secretary?
Mr. Boucher: Yes, they discussed it a bit this morning with the
British Defense Secretary, covered a number of other subjects in the
meeting. And the Secretary will have a meeting this afternoon with
Hans Haekkerup of the Special Representative to the Secretary General
at the UN Interim Administration Mission in Kosovo. So that is another
opportunity where we will be discussing and working with our allies,
and in this case UN people, on the developments in Kosovo and
Macedonia, the issues of border patrols, and then the broader issues
of local government and elections this year.
Q: Can you go into what else the Secretary and Secretary Hoon
discussed?
Mr. Boucher: They talked about Iraq; they talked about Macedonia; they
talked about European Security and Defense Policy, and a bit about the
US-UK relationship.
Q: And pretty much the standard Iraq -- there was sanctions and no-fly
zones and -- I mean, it was not -- there was nothing new in terms of
the --
Mr. Boucher: They talked about the three baskets, yes, and exchanged
views with a very close and special ally.
Q: Richard, you talked about trying to get a political settlement in
Macedonia. Well, there has been talk today now that some of the
Albanian members of parliament in Macedonia would leave government.
Does the US think that that would be the wrong move, or would you urge
them to remain in government?
Mr. Boucher: I don't think it is for us to specify anybody's coalition
or anybody's government structure. What we would encourage people to
do is to pursue their aspirations and their grievances through the
political process, and encourage the government itself to make
available in the political process the opportunity for people to get
the respect for their ethnicity and to get their opportunity to
petition for redress of grievances, as we would say.
Q: Would the situation in Macedonia have anything to do -- your
reluctance to commit more troops there or your decision that you not
or that there's no mandate. How much does that touch on this
Administration's sentiment when it came into office that we are not
going to expand the Balkans; in fact, we are going to find ways to
reduce our presence there? Is this a situation where we are seeing
that put into play?
Mr. Boucher: I don't think I would characterize it that way. NATO
itself has said we have a mandate to operate in Kosovo. We have a
certain job to do in Kosovo, and NATO is doing that job.
In terms of the situation there, NATO's job in Kosovo is to deny safe
haven to these extremists. In terms of cooperating now with countries
in the area, NATO works very closely with others who are seeking to do
the same in their portion of this area. So it is not really a question
of NATO expanding its mandate or putting new forces in; it's a
question of operating and fulfilling our mandate within Kosovo for
NATO, and then working with others who have another piece of the
puzzle.
Q: Richard, on the meeting with the Chechen representative, Mr.
Akhmadov, do you have any idea when did he get a US visa? I mean, in
which country it was issued? And do you happen to know --
Mr. Boucher: No, I don't know, and normally we are not allowed to
comment on that anyway.
Q: Do you happen to know that Russian authorities consider this person
as a terrorist, who participated in terrorist attacks in Russia? Does
it make any sense at this point?
Mr. Boucher: I don't know what the Russians think of him. You can ask
the Russians. We do think it is an individual that is worth talking to
to understand his view of the situation.
Q: I have two questions, very brief. One, tomorrow the Cubans are
holding some kind of symposium on the 40th anniversary of the Bay of
Pigs and are saying that there are some former officials, US
officials, that are going down there to participate in this. Do you
have any idea who they might be?
Mr. Boucher: No, I haven't heard about it.
Q: And is this the kind of thing that when you talk about
people-to-people exchanges and giving visas that you are really
considering -- that you are thinking about?
Mr. Boucher: I haven't heard of this, so I will withhold any caustic
comment.
Q: Okay. And then the second one is, just if there is any update to
the statement that you put out yesterday on Haiti, on the situation
down there?
Mr. Boucher: Let me check and see if there is anything new overnight.
Q: I think there was some more violence. Aristide is about to make, or
has just made, an appeal for calm, and I think that's -- it continues.
Mr. Boucher: What we have today is that we see the pro-Aristide
demonstrators have escalated violent attacks against opposition
leaders and party headquarters. We note that the government of Haiti
has appealed for calm but, at the same time, they have expressed a lot
of sympathy for the demonstrators. We have continued to urge the
government to protect its citizens and refrain from inflammatory
remarks, as we did in our statement yesterday evening. In our view,
the police response has been erratic and slow, so we urge the Aristide
Government to respond quickly and professionally to protect all of the
people of Haiti.
Q: Aristide made certain promises of reform to President Clinton in
late December. Do you have anything on that?
Mr. Boucher: I don't have anything new on that. Certainly this
Administration has said they are quite aware of the pledges about the
intentions of President Aristide, and we look to him to carry them
out. But I don't think I have any updates on where we stand in that
process.
Q: There is a report that was released -- a Pentagon Commission report
on alternatives to anti-personnel land mines by the year 2006, which
was the deadline set by the last administration. I was told that the
Secretary has met with Queen Noor on the subject, but has the
Administration taken a stance on whether or not it plans to join the
other nations in signing the Ottawa Treaty by that time, or has it
given another deadline?
Mr. Boucher: I don't think we have changed the stance that the United
States has always taken, and that is that we look to minimize the use.
We do a lot of de-mining, but we also look at certain circumstances
which we believe require us to refrain from adhering to the treaty.
Until there are technical alternatives, we wouldn't be able to do that
now. If the Pentagon has any more detail on the technical aspects of
this, you would have to go over there.
Q: Do you have an opinion on the arrest today of opposition political
figures in Pakistan?
Mr. Boucher: I just heard about it. I don't have anything at this
moment. I will have to try to get something later.
Q: Next week, the Foreign Minister and Defense Minister of India will
be here at the State Department, and at the same time this week the
Lashkar-e group based in Pakistan, supported by Usama bin Laden and
banned in the U.S. and UK, have declared war on India, in Delhi and
Kashmir, that suicidal bombs will be their target now from this week.
Now, what is his visit all about? I mean, is there a special thing to
discuss with you or Secretary Powell?
Mr. Boucher: I don't know that I can link the two things. We have a
very broad and important relationship and agenda with the Indians, and
we will look forward to discussing that with the Foreign Minister when
he comes.
Q: Along the lines of yesterday you talking about Foreign Minister
Qian coming, and today saying that Mr. Papandreou is coming, when can
we expect to see the Pakistani Foreign Minister in town?
Mr. Boucher: We are not necessarily going to be able to see everybody,
but we will tell you meetings as they are announced.
Q: Besides the fact of this meeting with Qian tonight, are there any
other parallel meetings in this building at different levels?
Mr. Boucher: I haven't had a chance to check. Not that I am aware of.
Obviously he will have other meetings in Washington during the course
of the next few days.
Q: Richard, I'm sorry, one more question. I almost forgot to ask this.
Do you have anything on -- there is a University of Pittsburgh
anthropology student who was found strangled and beaten to death this
past weekend in Seoul?
Mr. Boucher: Yes. It is a very sad situation, a young woman by the
name of Jamie Lynn Penich. She is 21 years old. She died over the
weekend of March 17 and 18 in Seoul. She was an exchange student at
Kim Young University in Taegu. This is apparently a murder. The
Koreans are investigating, and we are in close touch with Korean
authorities.
We are also working very closely with her family. The family is from
Pennsylvania, so we are working very closely with them regarding all
of these issues.
Q: Richard, just to follow a previous question on Pakistan about this
arrest of workers by the military and police now, opposition leaders,
including Benazir Bhutto, is calling on the United States to put
pressure on General Musharaff that let this rally or demonstration for
restoration -- demonstration in Pakistan should continue or should go
on without any violence and any arrests.
Mr. Boucher: Thank you. And your question is?
Q: I mean, if you are in touch with the US Embassy in Pakistan and
what the US will do?
Mr. Boucher: I will get you our views. As I said, I will get you our
views later today.
Q: Thank you.
Mr. Boucher: Thank you.
Return to the Washington File
|
