10 January 2002

Transcript of State Department Noon Briefing

State Department Spokesman Richard Boucher briefed.

Following is the State Department transcript:

MEXICO -- Secretary Powell's Meeting with Mexican Foreign Secretary Castaneda

INDIA/PAKISTAN -- Update on Current Situation -- Secretary Powell's Visit to India and Pakistan Next Week

ISRAEL/PALESTINIAN AUTHORITY -- Israeli Seizure of Vessel Containing Weapons; Palestinian Involvement -- Evidence of Iran and Hezbollah Involvement in Provision of Weapons/Delivery -- Continuing Violence

ISRAEL/INDIA -- Report of Israel Planning to Sell Aircraft to India

SAUDI ARABIA -- Reported Destruction of Historical Tower in Mecca

TURKEY -- Upcoming Visit to U.S. by Turkish Prime Minister Ecevit

COLOMBIA -- Peace Process Efforts/U.S. Support

AFGHANISTAN/IRAN -- Report of Iranian Efforts to Undermine New Government in Afghanistan -- Secretary Powell's Attendance at the Afghan Reconstruction Conference in Tokyo

AFGHANISTAN -- Status of Senior Taliban Officials in Custody

RUSSIA -- Russian Operations in Chechnya

CHINA -- U.S.-China Relationship

Mr. Boucher: Good afternoon, everyone. It's a pleasure to be here. I don't have any statements or announcements, so I would be glad to take your questions. Mr. Gedda.

Question: I'm sure it was totally involuntary, but the Secretary didn't have much to say about his conversations with Foreign Secretary Castaneda today.

Mr. Boucher: Well, some reporters from some news agencies wanted to talk about something else.

Question: Do you want to name names?

(Laughter.)

Mr. Boucher: No.

Question: Seriously, do you have anything more about the discussions with Mr. Castaneda, especially on bilateral issues and, in particular, migration?

Mr. Boucher: The discussions with the Foreign Minister of Mexico were deep and wide-ranging, both at the same time. They covered a large number of topics, as you mentioned. And I think, as Foreign Secretary Castaneda said in Spanish, which I didn't fully understand -- (laughter) -- but I'm prepared to quote him anyway -- (laughter). No, they did talk about migration issues for some time and how to continue to move forward on migration issues in an atmosphere that provides a sense of security that people on both sides of the border want, particularly after the September 11th attacks.

So they did talk about border security steps. They talked about the overall effort against terrorism, things that the two countries are doing, as well as things we're doing in the hemisphere, for example, with the OAS to improve hemispheric security more broadly. They talked a little bit about Security Council issues and UN issues, because Mexico is now on the Security Council. And the Secretary said basically, "Welcome to the Security Council. There's a lot of things we can work together on."

They talked about the hemisphere in general; the situations in Argentina, Venezuela and Colombia specifically; the problems with human rights and other things regarding Cuba. They talked about water, extradition issues, drugs, as I said, quite a number of things that involve our two countries, but also the hemisphere and the things that we're doing together in the world. So it was a very good and useful meeting.

They talk frequently on the telephone, and I'm sure we will continue to work this new year as much with our Mexican friends and neighbors as we have in the past year, because it has been a very important thing for this administration, is to be able to cooperate, work with Mexico. And we appreciate the support they have given us, especially since September 11th.

Question: Did they not get into detail on issues such as regularization, as you like to call it, of Mexican undocumented aliens?

Mr. Boucher: They didn't go into detail to that today. We heard from Assistant Secretary Mary Ryan on where some of the discussions are in terms of the consular discussions. They talked about the security aspects that need to be dealt with; the sense that I think Americans need to have, that people need to have, that security is one of the foremost concerns, whether it's existing immigration programs or programs that we might be thinking about for the future.

And then they just talked about how to continue the discussions that we've had in the past on migration issues and continue to work on some of these things, even as we attend to the security questions -- border security, knowing who's going back and forth -- and coordinating between the two countries about third country nationals, how do you check trucks, how do you check people, all that stuff.

Question: Okay. Not related to the personal security of people who are undocumented now that might --

Mr. Boucher: No, no, not related to that. I should point out that many of these issues of coordination between the two countries on immigration, on security border crossing issues, that will be the subject of a lot of the discussions with Governor Ridge when the Mexicans meet with him, I think tomorrow.

Question: I don't want to really add to your long laundry list of topics that they discussed, but did they talk about Haiti at all?

Mr. Boucher: I don't think so. Let me think. I think that was one of the few things that didn't come up.

Question: Can I go to India and Pakistan?

Mr. Boucher: Please.

Question: Yesterday when the --

Mr. Boucher: That's not a seat on the airplane, though.

(Laughter.)

Question: I'm sorry?

Mr. Boucher: Never mind.

Question: That's not a guarantee. I understand.

On the Secretary's meeting yesterday with the Indian Home Minister, did he make any progress in swinging or bringing the Indians around to the U.S. view that Musharraf is making significant efforts against terrorism?

Mr. Boucher: I think you've heard directly from the Indians. You heard directly from the Minister on his view of what's going on yesterday. I think what I would say is that both India and Pakistan have said they want to see this solved by political and diplomatic means.

In our discussions, we expressed, first of all, our encouragement of that course and our willingness to help out with that kind of course. And the fact that the Indians are indeed pursuing that course, I think represents some recognition that there is an effort on both sides.

We have seen -- and made the point again that we have seen President Musharraf take very significant steps against terrorists, cited the arrests of the leaders of some of the organizations, closing the offices, freezing the assets. We're looking forward to the speech that President Musharraf intends to make, and I think the Indians also noted that he was going to do that. And we're all looking forward to the kind of further steps that we expect President Musharraf to take.

So I don't know if it's a matter of one convincing the other or us convincing them; it's really a matter of are people willing to go forward in pursuing this political and diplomatic solution. And by virtue of the fact that the Indians do seem willing to move forward, to look for a political and diplomatic solution to these problems, I think we take that as a positive evaluation of the efforts that we're making.

Question: So does that mean, in a sense, that the crisis is easing somewhat?

Mr. Boucher: That may go a little bit too far. We think it continues to be a dangerous situation. You still have military forces deployed. Over the past few weeks, you all know we have seen reports of missile deployments, of troop deployments, military movements. These kind of things heighten tensions. We do think it's very important for each country to avoid actions that can raise tensions. We think that it's important to avoid anything that could help this spiral out of control.

So, yes, there have been some efforts underway and a desire to move in a political and diplomatic direction. But, as long as the military situation remains what it is, we have to say it's still dangerous, and I think I wouldn't quite say it has eased at this point in that regard.

Question: You've been saying a lot about what Musharraf has done, but the Secretary said yesterday that, even beyond the speech, he needed to do more. The Indians are saying they want him to dismantle all these organizations. Is that the same thing you want him to do?

Mr. Boucher: We have made clear that we believe the steps he has taken against them to end the violence, to end the extremism, are very important, and I think we will look forward to hearing from him on what more he intends to do. So, at this point, I think I will leave it at that. We look forward to hearing his intentions, and we are confident that he will back up his statements with action. And that, as we all know, remains the most important thing.

Question: Middle East? The Secretary mentioned outside that now the United States has evidence that the Palestinian Authority was -- there were some linkages between the incident last week with the ship. I know you can't talk about the evidence. Can you at least say what kind or kinds of evidence the Israelis presented yesterday, and how directly it at least goes -- or how far it goes in linking Mr. Arafat himself?

Mr. Boucher: I think because the information that we discussed yesterday with the Israelis was Israeli information, I have to give some respect to the fact that they acquired it. They own it. They have to discuss it themselves.

In terms of our conclusions, after hearing their briefing, after continuing to look at what we know and can acquire, I would say we think that there is a compelling and extensive case regarding the involvement of senior Palestinian Authority and Fatah figures. The evidence the Israelis presented also indicates that the armed shipment was intended for delivery to Palestinian interests.

We believe that the weight of this evidence at this point requires a clear explanation from Chairman Arafat, as well as immediate follow-up action against those responsible, and that is what the Secretary spoke about outside. I think the Secretary mentioned our Consul General was meeting with Chairman Arafat. We have now gotten a report on that; he has done so and made those points directly to Chairman Arafat.

Question: Any response?

Mr. Boucher: I don't have a full report on the meeting at this point. I will leave it to Chairman Arafat to talk.

Question: Have you drawn the conclusion that President Arafat must at least have known about this shipment or that he was involved in it?

Mr. Boucher: I don't think I could do that at this point. As the Secretary mentioned outside, we don't have direct evidence linking him to it. But we do know -- we think there is a compelling case to say -- that there were very senior -- there were senior Palestinian Authority and Fatah figures involved. And that, in itself, is a very troubling and serious matter.

Question: The Secretary also said outside that -- he talked about the information we were receiving and we were developing. Well, what does that mean? Are you developing the information about the incident?

Mr. Boucher: That is precisely the kind of question about intelligence information that we never answer -- where do we get it and how do we acquire it. I'm never going to answer one of those.

Question: But either --

Mr. Boucher: We have information from people, we have information from friends, we have information from Israelis, we have information we get on our own. And, actually, we read the newspapers, too.

Question: Richard, you have spoken to the implication of linkages between senior Palestinian figures -- not Arafat -- but what about the other Israeli claims that they were presumably giving you information about the Iranian connection and the connection or support role in this smuggling operation that the Israelis say was played by Hezbollah?

Mr. Boucher: Yes, that is very compelling evidence as well. We think the weight of the evidence is compelling with respect to Iranian and Hezbollah involvement in this arms smuggling operation, including in the provision of the weapons and the planning for their delivery.

Question: Can you be a little bit more specific? Some of us were listening to a senior Israeli official yesterday evening, who talked about Hezbollah planning and training for at least one member of the crew in diving and how to pick up the submerged Iranian containers --

Mr. Boucher: As I mentioned before, I'm not going to be able to brief you on Israeli intelligence information.

Question: No, no, I'm not asking you to do that. I'm asking you --

Mr. Boucher: To the extent that they can disclose pieces of that, I would leave it to them to deal with --

Question: No, but -- okay, well, I'm just trying to figure -- compelling evidence that -- never mind, I'll go back and look at the transcript.

Mr. Boucher: Compelling evidence that Iran and Hezbollah were involved in the operation, both in the provision of the weapons and in planning for the deliveries.

Question: Okay.

Question: Do you think China is involved? After all, this weapons are concerned behind the doors --

Mr. Boucher: I haven't seen anybody say that at this point.

Question: And as far as the latest ongoing violence on the ground, do you have any comment on or any statement on the latest Israeli response to the four Jewish soldiers who were killed yesterday when they razed refugee homes in Gaza?

Mr. Boucher: Well, I would say, first and foremost, it is important to remember the responsibility of Chairman Arafat at this point to take action against violence, against the sources of violence, against anyone involved in smuggling weapons or trying to escalate the tensions. At the same time, we have always said that we don't think demolitions contribute to restoration of calm or an end to violence, and that remains our position on this particular situation.

Question: Do you have anything on the aircraft that Israel is planning to sell to India, because there were some -- I haven't seen --

Mr. Boucher: You did that a while ago, Phil? Is that the one that you had answered already? Around New Year's, when we were gone. It's basically saying you're going to have to talk to Israel about it. The sale is still under review. When it comes to arms transfers to foreign nations, we look at it based on regional stability, especially when considering transfers involving power projection capability or introduction of a system which could foster increased tensions.

So that's our standard, but until the sale would be reviewed and concluded by the Israelis, we wouldn't have a real evaluation of this particular sale.

Question: On the previous one, there were 120 families whose houses were destroyed. Has the Department of State made apparent to the Israelis that this is not only not contributing to peace, but is also a violation of Geneva conventions and --

Mr. Boucher: I just gave our position on demolitions. That's the position that we always convey.

Question: But have you made that apparent to the Israelis after this --

Mr. Boucher: The Israelis are quite aware of our position on demolitions, and I am sure in any conversations that we had about the matter we would state that position.

Question: A new subject. The Indian Home Minister was here yesterday and met with the Secretary and they made statements. And now the administration is saying that Pakistan's General Musharraf is taking action against terrorism. But yesterday, the Home Minister said that they have not seen enough evidence or satisfactory --

Mr. Boucher: Did you just walk in?

Question: Yes.

Mr. Boucher: We just did this same question five minutes ago.

Question: I'm sorry.

Mr. Boucher: A few minute ago.

Question: So, but now yesterday -- last night he said that he is not satisfied. He is satisfied with the talks and meeting with the Secretary and the administration, but as far as Musharraf is concerned, he has not seen -- India has not seen any results yet. So, one, if the Secretary is pushing General Musharraf to take action?

And, number two, he is visiting India next week. Do you have any comments?

Mr. Boucher: We just answered a fairly similar question ten minutes ago, so look back at the transcript for that.

Question: About his visit to India?

Mr. Boucher: We are in very close touch with the Indians and with the Pakistanis. We have welcomed a lot of the steps that President Musharraf has taken. We have said we look forward to the speech he is going to give and the actions he may take to carry out whatever he has to say in his speech. And we will continue to work with both the parties.

And as far as the Secretary's visit next week, he is going out to continue to work with both the parties, not only on the tensions that have arisen between India and Pakistan, but also on the fight against terrorism generally and the cooperation, the excellent cooperation, we have with both those nations in the broader fight against terrorism.

Question: This visit was planned in advance, or something changed now because of this attack in India or attack in the US?

Mr. Boucher: I think we have been talking for two or three weeks about the so-called visit of a senior U.S. official to South Asia, and that is what this is.

Question: He's going next week?

Mr. Boucher: He is going next week.

Question: (Inaudible.)

Mr. Boucher: No, he's not. He is the Secretary of State.

Question: I only have two questions on this. The Saudi Arabia Government has already destroyed an Ottoman historical tower in Mecca, like the Taliban regimes did the same thing to Buddha in Afghanistan. So do you have any reaction about that?

Mr. Boucher: I'm not aware of it. I'll have to check into it for you.

Question: Okay. And secondly, Turkish Prime Minister Ecevit is coming to town next week and he's going to meet with Secretary Powell next Wednesday. What is the agenda on that meeting?

Mr. Boucher: I don't have a full and detailed agenda at this stage because it is a whole week away. But, as you know, the Secretary's discussions in Turkey when he was there were quite extensive -- about regional issues, about Afghanistan in particular -- and I am sure he will want to take those subjects up again and continue those discussions in the visit next week.

Question: Cyprus and Iraq will be --

Mr. Boucher: Cyprus, Iraq, Balkans, NATO matters, European security and defense, Afghanistan, Middle East, whatever there is time for. We have a lot of things, a lot of work we're doing with the Turkish Government these days in any number of areas; and coordinating our policy, working together, remains very, very important to us.

Question: The Secretary spoke outside about it, but can you expand the comments on the breakage of the peace process in Colombia? Who is to blame? And what can Colombia expect from the US, now that it enters this new phase of a conflict that is more likely to increase in the couple of months ahead?

Mr. Boucher: I'm not sure I can expand that much because I think the Secretary was quite clear in our belief that the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia, the FARC, have not responded in good faith to President Pastrana's peace efforts. We have called on them to end all abuses, such as attacks on civilians, murder and kidnapping, and we have made quite clear that we think the management of this process is in the hands of President Pastrana and the Colombian Government. And we have repeatedly stated our support for President Pastrana's efforts, including, as the Secretary just did outside, saying these are matters for him to decide.

What can the Colombian Government expect from us? They can expect our continued support, our continued respect and our continued assistance.

Question: What kind of support can the U.S. provide to Colombia, more than the moral support, because obviously they are going to need more help than before, now that most likely the violence is going to increase?

Mr. Boucher: Well, let's see how this current period plays itself out first. I believe there was some sort of 48-hour period that President Pastrana gave them to decide. So let's first see ultimately, at the end of that, what decisions President Pastrana makes in terms of how he wants to go forward from this circumstance where you have the FARC not cooperating, not acting in good faith.

We give -- you know, I think we have given something like $2 billion to help Colombia defend its democracy, and that has gone into any number of areas in counter-narcotics and strengthening the ability of the military to protect counter-narcotics operations, judicial systems, social and economic development. So we have continued to work with Colombia in any number of areas, and I imagine we would in the future.

Question: How troublesome is it for the United States what is going on in Colombia?

Mr. Boucher: We have followed it very closely. We have tried to keep in very close touch with the Colombian Government because we are committed together to try to make a success of Plan Colombia and to try to make a success of the counter-narcotics strategy that has been adopted by the government there. So we watch it very closely.

What has been troublesome to us for these many months -- and I think I have spoken about it numerous times from the podium -- is the fact that the FARC has not entered into these discussions in good faith. We have had this repeated sort of crisis with the FARC because the attempts by President Pastrana to open up peace talks or open up discussions about how to resolve the situation have really led nowhere and, in the meantime, the FARC has continued to carry out its activities. So I think that is what has been troubling to us over these many months, and obviously troubling to President Pastrana as well.

Question: So clearly, the FARC is to blame for this situation right now after three years of the government of Colombia giving warranties to the negotiations?

Mr. Boucher: If I haven't made that clear yet, let me say, "Yes."

Question: I just wanted to hear the yes.

Mr. Boucher: Okay.

Question: I was wondering if you shared the view described in a front-page article in the New York Times and attributed to Pentagon and intelligence officials that Iran is actively trying to undermine the new government in Afghanistan and giving haven to al-Qaida fighters, and if you're doing anything about it.

Mr. Boucher: Let me see what I can say on the subject of Iran. I think the most important thing is probably to quote the President. I'm not sure I have much to add on it, but let me double-check.

Yes, I think I would really stay with what the President said. We saw some positive signals, have some concerns. We want to be able to work with the Iranians, but they are going to have to work -- they need to be an active part of the coalition, is the way the President put it.

I would note that we have worked with the Iranians, at the Bonn meetings, for example. We have worked with the Iranians in the Six Plus Two process, such as the meetings the Secretary had in New York. The Iranians have committed themselves, and indeed in Bonn worked to try to bring about a broad-based government for Afghanistan. We want to see that kind of support continue.

And, actually, we are trying to continue to use the Six Plus Two mechanism to work with the Iranians to support a broad-based government for Afghanistan. We are currently discussing with other governments the possibility of having Six Plus Two kind of meetings in Kabul, to have our embassies there coordinate in support of the new interim authority and the broad-based government that we all work to achieve.

Question: When are you thinking of having this --

Mr. Boucher: Kabul.

Question: When?

Mr. Boucher: Oh, when? In the coming weeks.

Question: On the same subject, the Secretary is not going to be the only foreign minister attending the Afghan Reconstruction Conference in Tokyo. I believe the Iranian Foreign Minister is as well. And since they have had at least one previous semi-cordial meeting at the UN, is this something -- these concerns that have been expressed -- it might be something that could be raised in some kind of a forum, maybe a kind of Musharraf-Vajpayee handshake and a small amount of words in Tokyo?

Mr. Boucher: I don't know. I don't know. We'll take the suggestion, but there's no plan at this point that I know of.

Question: Can you take the question that I asked about this problem with the Iranians?

Mr. Boucher: I think that's as much as I'm able to say about it at this point.

Question: On Afghanistan, do you have anything more today on the incident with the two or three Taliban former senior officials that were let go yesterday?

Mr. Boucher: I think we have seen some statements from President Karzai on the subject. Let me check what we've got. Yes, we saw him on Larry King Live last night.

Question: Yes, and the audio went out just at the right moment.

Mr. Boucher: But he said, "Those that the U.S. wants will be turned over to the US." That's a pretty clear statement. As we have said, we think the senior Taliban officials belong in custody. And the head of the interim authority, Hamid Karzai, in addition to that, has said that Taliban members who committed crimes will be brought to justice. So we appreciate the statements that he has made.

Question: It may depend how senior they were in the Taliban government or administration back then, and he was not exactly clear what they are going to do with those particular individuals who were arrested yesterday.

Mr. Boucher: As I said, he said, "Those that the U.S. wants will be turned over to the US." That's a fairly decent standard for us.

Question: Does the UN -- the U.S. want (inaudible)?

Mr. Boucher: I think that's a question that I would leave to the military and others involved in picking people up.

Question: Have you made any requests along how many of them the U.S. wants, or if he is complying with the U.S. request? Because not many people are really happy with him the way he is handling the detainees or the al-Qaida or Taliban --

Mr. Boucher: Who are you talking about, us or him?

Question: Him I'm talking about. Not many people are happy.

Mr. Boucher: Well, I haven't seen any indication of that, first of all. I have seen a lot of people in Afghanistan. They are very, very, very happy to have a new government. But in any case, I just said I would leave the questions on specific detainees to the military, since that's their job right now. That is one of the things they are doing right now.

Question: I have two on Russia, which are not entirely related. First of all, do you have anything to say about the situation in Chechnya right now? Because you didn't say at the beginning.

Mr. Boucher: (Laughter.) I don't make a statement about Chechnya if you don't ask it.

Question: Well, I'll ask the question. Richard, what does the U.S. think of the current situation in Chechnya?

Mr. Boucher: That's what she asked.

Question: Yes, I know, but you make it just sound sort of a little too contrived.

Mr. Boucher: The latest information on Russian operations in Chechnya indicates a continuation of human rights violations and the use of overwhelming force against civilian targets. Let me make clear, as we have said, that it is clear that there are terrorist factions in Chechnya with ties to al-Qaida and the international terrorism networks. And as part of the war on terrorism, we are cooperating with the Russians on cutting off those kinds of ties.

At the same time, we have continued to make clear that only a political solution can end the domestic conflict, and the President and the Secretary have raised this issue with President Putin and Foreign Minister Ivanov. Unfortunately, the Russians have not pursued the initial and encouraging contacts with Chechen separatists.

So the lack of a political solution and the number of credible reports of massive human rights violations, we believe, contribute to an environment that is favorable towards terrorism. So we will continue to urge both sides to seek a political solution to the war, and we continue to urge accountability for human rights violations.

Mr. Boucher: You had two, also on Russia. Let's do number two.

Question: The Foreign Ministry in Moscow has issued a statement expressing concern about your plans not to destroy nuclear weapons, but just to store them. Do you have anything in response?

Mr. Boucher: No, I don't really. I think the briefings on that have been done at the Pentagon in terms of the nuclear posture. So I'll have to see if there's more to say on the political aspects of this.

But I'll just remind you that when the Secretary was out in Moscow, and then subsequently when the President announced our withdrawal from the ABM Treaty, both the United States and the Russians reaffirmed our intention to cut nuclear weapons. And I believe that's a very important step forward.

Question: You said that Iran was of the -- you had compelling evidence that Iran was involved in provision and planning. Could we take it to mean that the Iranian Government was involved?

Mr. Boucher: I think I will leave it -- well, yes, I'll leave it with what I said. Iranian and Hezbollah involvement.

Question: Can we take China? You may have seen the report that future threat China could be to the United States as far as nuclear weapons are concerned aiming -- will be aimed at the United States. When General Musharraf got $1 billion from the United States, the U.S. was fighting in Afghanistan and he was in China shopping for his country's military. He bought 46 -- 8 fighter planes.

What do you think of where China-US relations are concerned in the future, as far as arms race or a threat to the United States, because you cannot --

Mr. Boucher: That's really one of those enormous answers to any question that I could give you a three-hour answer on, but I won't. (Laughter.)

Let me try to give you the short version of this, and remember, the President was in China in October. We know China's position in the region. We know China's ties. We also know that we have opportunities to cooperate with China. We have been working with China in many spheres as China moves in to adopt world standards and practices. Some of those areas involve economics and trade; some of those involve human rights, nonproliferation. Missile sales to Pakistan has been one of our concerns, for example.

But we think there is a real opportunity here. There is the opportunity for the U.S. and China to work together, to help China as it moves forward, to work together, particularly since September 11th. We have had excellent cooperation on an issue of security that is important to the whole world and that is very important to the United States and China.

Question: Thank you.

Mr. Boucher: Thank you.

(The briefing was concluded at 1:25 p.m. EST.)