10 October 2001

Overland Food Shipments Arrive in Afghanistan

Department of State Spokesman Richard Boucher, briefing reporters on October 10 at the State Department, said that convoys of trucks delivered over 1,000 tons of wheat in Kabul, Herat, and northwestern Afghanistan October 10. Other convoys heading to Afghanistan from Turkmenistan and Pakistan will deliver an additional 2,110 tons of wheat in the next few days, he added.

"All this food will raise the total food stocks inside Afghanistan to 12,000 tons. That's enough to feed 3.4 million people for one week," Boucher said. He added that 50,000 tons of wheat are already inside Afghanistan, and that the United States has another 165,000 tons of wheat on the way to Afghanistan.

In response to questions about the Organization of Islamic Conference statements, Boucher said, "We welcome the repudiation by the Islamic Conference of attempts by bin Laden to link his terrorism to Islam and Islamic values. As recognized by the Conference, ending the threat of international terrorism is in the interest of all nations, and clearly that view is shared by the vast majority in the Arab and Islamic worlds."

Boucher also confirmed that the Pakistani lawyer representing the American detainees had arrived in Kabul, and had met with the detainees.

Following are excerpts from Boucher's October 10 briefing:

Question: New subject? What do we think about the UN workers getting beat up in Afghanistan by the Taliban?

Mr. Boucher: It doesn't sound good. But I'm not sure I have anything on it.

Question: They were Afghan, but there are numerous reports that the Taliban has gone in and beat up UN workers in a de-mining program, for example. And also, if you can add in about reports that they are burning our airdrop food.

Mr. Boucher: I don't know anything particularly about these reports. But I think it's been quite clear all along that we, the UN, the UN workers, the Afghans who have been working with the UN, the non-governmental organizations who have been working with the UN and the World Food Program have been the major source of support for the food of Afghanistan, to feed the people of Afghanistan. We have an update for you on that, if you want it.

But I think overall the issue is that we have been trying to help people who have suffered under the Taliban, who have suffered drought, who have suffered from conflict and civil disruption and who now are facing a tough winter. And this program should be allowed to go forward. These people need our help. We have been gearing up for this effort, even without the events of September 11th, and we want to make sure they get fed.

There have been three years of drought, years of civil conflict and repressive Taliban rule. And the people need our help, and we're trying to give it to them.

If I can just go through the numbers, since we're on the topic. There have been three days of airdrops now, nearly 111,000 humanitarian daily rations. Since September 11th, the World Food Program has distributed 14,000 tons of food, feeding 1.7 million people inside Afghanistan. The World Food Program has moved more than 6,000 tons of food into the country since September 11th.

Furthermore, the three convoys of the World Food Program trucks that have carried 1,000 tons of wheat -- they left from Pakistan and Turkmenistan on Sunday -- two of those convoys have arrived in the northwest and in Kabul. The third is expected to arrive in Herat by the end of the week.

Five trucks loaded with 100 tons of wheat left Iran yesterday and arrived today in Herat. Trucks loaded with an additional 110 tons of wheat left from Mashad, Iran today en route to the Iranian-Afghan border. Also today, the World Food Program moved 40 trucks loaded with 1,000 tons of wheat from Pakistan. They are headed towards Kabul, and the trucks are expected to arrive tomorrow morning. There are another 30 trucks with 1,000 tons of food that left Turkmenistan today. They are expected to arrive in Northern Afghanistan early next week.

All this food will raise the total food stocks inside Afghanistan to 12,000 tons. That's enough to feed 3.4 million people for one week, and additionally 50,000 tons of wheat is already in the region. As I told you yesterday, we've got 165,000 tons on the way from the United States.

The United States remains the largest contributor of food aid to Afghanistan. In fiscal year 2001, the US sent 300,000 tons of food to Afghanistan. And the President has recently announced an upgraded and intensified program.

....

Question: Didn't the Organization of Islamic Conference today say it could not support the US strikes? You seem to suggest that they did somehow give us some sort of backing.

Mr. Boucher: I think what I said was that they talked about the willingness of member-states to contribute effectively to the international collective effort.

Question: Right.

Mr. Boucher: They certainly did.

Question: (Inaudible) against Arab or Muslim countries.

Mr. Boucher: We take the good with the bad.

Question: Your more specific, I think, is probably more operative in this case, isn't it?

Question: What is your reaction to the fact that they can't support what the United States is doing?

Mr. Boucher: Once again, let me get back to the answer. First of all, as I said before, we are pleased that they strongly condemned the terrorist attacks of September 11th. We are pleased that they underscored that terrorism is inconsistent with the tenets of Islam. We also welcome the repudiation by the Islamic Conference of attempts by bin Laden to link his terrorism to Islam and Islamic values. As recognized by the Conference, ending the threat of international terrorism is in the interest of all nations, and clearly that view is shared by the vast majority in the Arab and Islamic worlds.

They welcomed, I think, the stance that the United States had taken and others in terms of trying to avoid civilian casualties. We do share their concerns about civilian casualties. And as we have said, we are taking every possible step to avoid them. In addition, we are providing an extraordinary amount of humanitarian support for the Afghan people that I have just talked about.

As far as specific comments on military action, frankly, I am sort of looking to what you are pointing to. They express concern about possible consequences of the fight against terrorism, including the death of innocent civilians in Afghanistan, as a result of military operations there. And that is something that I just said. We have expressed our concern about it as well. We will do everything possible to avoid any innocent deaths.

Question: Richard, as I saw it, point two of the statement says we reject attacks on Islamic and Muslim countries. You seem to -- and the problem with what you have just said about everything that you like about what they said is that they had already said that. Back after September 11th they had condemned the attacks. They had said that Islam does not support terrorism. They had already done that.

And so the operative part of what their statement is today is what has happened since Sunday, since the attacks started.

Mr. Boucher: Maybe I read this too quickly, but point two does not contain the language you are saying it contains.

Question: At the top -- in the top couple of --

Mr. Boucher: All right, so let's all do our more complete analysis. The fact that they said something again that they've said before I think is welcome. The fact is this group has a lot of standing in the Islamic world. And the fact that they repeat this message is most welcome. And that's from somebody who tries to repeat a message to you every day.

Question: But, Richard, these people are telling you they're against what you're doing now. So how are you answering that?

Mr. Boucher: I don't read that into their statement, Jonathan. I read support for the overall campaign and some issues that they raise with regard to military action. But we all know that many of the Islamic governments, many governments in the Arab world, are cooperating with us and are working with us in a whole variety of ways on the campaign and we welcome that.

Question: Are we setting the bar a little lower for the OIC than we would other regional groups, who have gone so far as to have begun proceedings to actually change their legislation and whatnot? Is there a double standard in effect here?

Mr. Boucher: I don't think there is. The same standard applies all over the world. We expect countries to make the choice. We expect them to reject terrorism, we expect them to work with us. How they do this, how they express it in public in many cases is up to them. But there is no separate standard.

....

Question: Richard, can you comment on the story from The Financial Times today that says that the Saudis sent the US a letter before the September 11 bombing, saying that the US position vis-��vis the Palestinians, you know, against the Israelis in that situation was becoming untenable and they protested US attitudes towards the Palestinians? And then there was the leak of the speech that the Secretary was supposed to give, saying that the US was going to endorse giving the Palestinians a state, and they believe that this was in response to this letter. Can you comment on that?

Mr. Boucher: I don't think I can go into the specifics of discussions and exchanges that we have had with the Saudi Government. But I would say that we talk to them all the time about these issues. We know of their deep interest in the situation in the Middle East, particularly between Israelis and Palestinians. We have remained in close touch with them. We have an ongoing dialogue and expect to continue that dialogue. We believe it's useful for both of our parties, and we think that they do know how much we've worked on these issues to try to end the violence and get back to a political process.

Question: What about the report this morning in the Boston Globe about how you were going to start pressuring Sharon more to accept a Palestinian state? There is a draft State Department document about a shared Jerusalem. Have you seen the story?

Mr. Boucher: I haven't read this at all. But I would have to say that Prime Minister Sharon has already said he sees the outcome as involving a Palestinian state.

Question: Did he say he sees sharing Jerusalem?

Mr. Boucher: I don't think so.

Question: I don't think so either. That is the gist of the Boston Globe article.

Mr. Boucher: Well, I'm sorry, I didn't read the article. I am not going to get into hypothetical issues.

Question: Well, I wasn't going to ask you, but -- get deeply into these things, we know. But since the subject is up, is there a draft floating around, a draft of what the Middle East should look like?

Mr. Boucher: I think, Barry, it is important to remember where we are and when we are at this point, that we're trying to get the violence stopped, we're trying to get the parties to do things, the Palestinians to continue to take steps, the Israelis to avoid provocation, the parties to cooperate on security so that we can get into this process of rebuilding confidence and getting back to negotiation.

You know, we are not at a moment when somebody is going to plunk down a map of Jerusalem.

Question: Well, that has been the US position through this Administration -- you know, stop the violence, get them started down the road. These leaked stories go considerably further, or as the Chinese might say, it doesn't seem to be an accident that your interest in giving up -- having Israel give ground would surface when you are trying to solicit Arab support.

Mr. Boucher: As the Chinese might say, just because you can connect the dots, doesn't mean there's a picture there. No, they don't actually.

No, I have not read this article. I can't give you any analysis of it.

Question: Okay.

Mr. Boucher: We're not putting down maps of Jerusalem. That's all I can say at this point.

....

Question: Have you heard back today - unless someone has more on that - have you heard back today from the Pakistani lawyer who was supposed to go to Kabul?

Mr. Boucher: Yes, we have heard a little bit from him. The lawyer representing the detainees arrived in Kabul today, but he spoke with our Consul General in Islamabad by phone. He has met with all eight detainees today. He delivered to them personal items, clothing, blankets and letters to the Americans that had been sent there by their parents.

Despite media reports about hunger strikes, Mr. Kahn, Mr. Ali Kahn assured us that the detainees appeared well and were extremely happy to see him. He further stated that he will present his response to the indictment tomorrow at the Taliban supreme court before it recesses for the weekend. The detainees' parents remain in Islamabad and they are in close contact with our Embassy.

Question: Well, is it your understanding that the trial -- well, when he goes to court tomorrow, does he know whether he -- I mean, is this just -- he is presenting their defense and then that's basically it, and then the court deliberates?

Mr. Boucher: I don't have any more details for you on legal procedures. Clearly our first and foremost view is that these people should be released immediately, as the President said. Our understanding is that he will present his response to the indictment tomorrow. There will be a recess over the weekend. I frankly don't know what happens after that.

Question: Is he staying or is he returning to --

Mr. Boucher: I don't know for sure.

Question: I mean, I'm just trying to get -- I mean, are you expecting -- is he expecting a decision soon or is --

Mr. Boucher: I don't think we have any particular indication of that one way or the other.

Question: Can you go over what the indictment is? Because I know that in the past you didn't know.

Mr. Boucher: No. As far as I know, as of a day or two ago, we were still trying to translate and analyze it, and I don't think we have a good analysis for you at this point.

Question: Thank you.