22 January 2002

Transcript of State Department Briefing

Department spokesman Richard Boucher briefed.

Following is the State Department transcript of the briefing:

ISRAEL/PALESTINIANS -- General Zinni's reported resignation / Situation Update / -- Assistant Secretary Nick Burns' Whereabouts -- Current U.S. engagement -- Visit of former Prime Minister Barak

INDIA -- Attack in Calcutta / Status of Embassy security -- General Singh's phone call with Secretary Powell

PAKISTAN -- Secretary Powell's talk with President Musharraf -- Pakistani/Indian relations

SOMALIA -- Arrest of suspected terrorists

RUSSIA -- Closure of TV-6

TERRORISM -- Treatment of foreign detainees -- Trial of Abdel Basset Al-Megrahi

VENEZUELA -- Supporters of President Chavez / National Day March

CHINA -- Chinese detainees at Guantanamo Bay -- Xinjiang separatists / al-Qaida connections

ZIMBABWE -- Situation update / Status of sanctions / Media freedom

COLOMBIA -- Peace Talks

AFGHANISTAN -- Donors conference

CUBA -- Aid to the U.S. for care of the detainees

PERU -- Lori Berenson case

CONGO -- Aid to person displaced by volcano

TURKEY -- Lifting of travel ban / Visit of Prime Minister

DEPARTMENT -- Clark Bowers -- The hunt for bin Laden -- U/S Bolton's trip to Israel / Russian sale of PHALCON to India

BURMA -- Sale of nuclear reactor

IRAN -- Involvement in Afghanistan

U.S. Department Of State Daily Press Briefing January 22, 2002 (on The Record Unless Otherwise Noted)

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

Question: Okay. Do you have any comment on the situation in the Middle East? And I would also like to tag on to that question your response to a report by Al-Jazeera that General Zinni has been apparently threatening to resign because he can no longer trust Chairman Arafat.

Mr. Boucher: Let me deal with that second one, the reports about any -- all these are -- well, it's not all these reports. I think it's really only one report, then picked up by others. But reports that Zinni was resigning are wrong. They are absolutely unfounded.

On the situation today, as you know, there have been shootings in Jerusalem this morning. We absolutely condemn this terrorist attack. There is no justification for these kinds of attacks. They only kill innocent people.

Once again, we call upon Chairman Arafat to take immediate and effective steps to end attacks such as these and bring those responsible to justice. Once again, the point is that he needs to dismantle the organizations that do these things. It's not a matter of whether they decide they will or they won't carry out attacks; it's making sure that they can't.

Question: Are you also calling on the Israelis to stop other kind of actions such as the destruction of the Palestinian TV or reoccupation of Tulkarm yesterday?

Mr. Boucher: I'm sorry, are we --

Question: Also calling on the Israeli side to --

Mr. Boucher: We have, I think, made clear our views on several of these things. Certainly our views on incursions are well known, and we are pleased that the Israelis have withdrawn from Tulkarm. We welcome that step. But I think the Israelis are quite aware of our views on some of these kinds of actions.

Question: What does Mr. Zinni hope to accomplish?

Mr. Boucher: I'm sorry?

Question: What does Mr. Zinni hope to accomplish on his trip?

Mr. Boucher: What trip?

Question: Is he going to the region?

Mr. Boucher: No.

Question: Oh, sorry.

Mr. Boucher: I missed it, too. But, no, for the moment he is back here. I am sure he will be talking to the Secretary, either by phone or in person, and he'll be going back when they decide it's appropriate and useful for him to do that.

Question: Has Mr. Burns reported to him on his trip?

Mr. Boucher: I think Mr. Burns has talked to him somewhat. He is back, got back just -- where are my details on Burns? All right, Burns is back from wherever he was and has talked to the Secretary somewhat. I'm not sure if he has given him a complete report, but they have been in close touch, even while Ambassador Burns was traveling.

Question: Is there anything you can say about his trip and what he found?

Mr. Boucher: Well, no, because I can't find it. He returned to Washington this weekend. There are no new travel plans to announce at this time. That's all we have. No, I don't have a summary at this point of his trip.

Question: On another traveler, do you have any -- do you know if Mr. Bolton succeeded in talking the Israelis out of providing PHALCON radar to India?

Mr. Boucher: As I think Mr. Reeker --

Question: Which you call proliferation.

Mr. Boucher: First of all, that's not a correct characterization of what Mr. Reeker told you last week.

Question: I didn't say he did tell us last week. There are other ways of getting information here. But take it as you wish. If you want to change his mission now, I'll be happy to hear about it.

Mr. Boucher: Barry, the insinuation that we're changing his mission is just plain wrong.

Question: No, you're telling me what Mr. Reeker said. I know what Mr. Reeker said, but we do other reporting and we find out otherwise.

Mr. Boucher: That's fine. I do not accept your characterization --

Question: I'm not contradicting Mr. Reeker.

Mr. Boucher: I do not accept your characterization of our position on the PHALCON sale. Our position on the PHALCON sale is as stated by Mr. Reeker last week, and any other characterization of your position, meaning the US Government's position, by whatever officials or wire services is not correct. That is what I'm asserting. Okay?

Our position on the PHALCON sale is exactly that which Mr. Reeker expressed to you last week, which is we are supportive of the sale. We wanted to discuss the timing and the capabilities of the equipment with the Israeli Government. Under Secretary Bolton was out there to do that, and I'm not sure if we'll be able to give you any details on those conversations, but I'll check into it and see if we can provide that.

Question: Basically, if the timing has been changed as a result of his visit.

Mr. Boucher: That's your question? I'll find your answer.

Question: Well, that was the issue.

Mr. Boucher: Okay. Well, that's not the question I was asked five minutes ago.

Question: Was this discussed during Mr. George Fernandes', the Defense Minister of India's visit here?

Mr. Boucher: You would have to ask that question at the Pentagon.

Question: No, no, here. He met with the Deputy Secretary.

Mr. Boucher: I'll double-check and see. I don't know. Do you remember, did you give a readout of that meeting? Okay, well --

Question: Or discussed with -- in India by the Secretary while you were on the trip?

Mr. Boucher: It wasn't discussed during our trip to India. I wasn't in every single meeting, but certainly not in any of the meetings that I was in.

Question: Could I ask, what are the -- I don't know, but what are the criteria to sell this to India and not to China?

Mr. Boucher: The criteria for any sale that we make or any advice we give to other governments about their sales have to do with regional stability, with the effect on regional balances, our view of the situation and the use of the equipment. So those are always the factors that come into consideration, but we don't necessarily compare one instance to another. We look at each one on its own merits and decide what we think is appropriate.

Question: So the agency, to assess that, is the Pentagon or State Department?

Mr. Boucher: It's a combination.

Question: Can you go through just other things that were discussed between the Israelis and Mr. Bolton's party?

Mr. Boucher: No, I can't.

Question: There were other topics than the PHALCON?

Mr. Boucher: I'm sure there were. Let me get you a rundown of Bolton's meetings. I don't really have anything that's been prepared at this point, and I haven't had a chance to check, to catch up with him personally.

Question: Can we change the subject to India and what happened at the US information center today?

Mr. Boucher: In Calcutta, yes.

Question: In Calcutta, and whether there was a threat that existed there beyond the normal threats.

Mr. Boucher: I'm not aware of any particular threat beyond normal threats that existed there. Obviously we recognize that there is a certain threat against all our installations around the world, and I think it's fair to say that all of our places have been on a fairly high state of alert.

The situation with regard to the attack, let me give you the facts and details as much as I can. Our Embassy in New Delhi reports that at 6:35 this morning in Calcutta, the police officers who were protecting the American Center were attacked with automatic rifles in a drive-by shooting. Police have confirmed that four Calcutta armed police were killed. Twelve other armed police, one security guard employed by the US Consulate and one civilian were injured. No US staff were at the Center at the time of the incident, and no American citizens were injured in the shooting.

The Consulate and the American Center in Calcutta were closed today, but plan to open for regular business tomorrow. Other posts in India have remained open. Posts in India have issued a warden message to the local American community, recommending that they follow closely the news reports and check in with the consulates for updated information.

We have seen reports that a phone caller to police and newspaper claims the attack targeted the West Bengal Police in retaliation for police actions against a group that is active on the Indian-Bangladesh border, but we are unable to verify that claim. We are working closely with Indian authorities to ensure the safety of all our posts in India and cooperate fully with their investigation of this incident.

Police support following the attack has been outstanding. Shortly after the attack, the authorities took steps to enhance security at all US facilities in India.

I would note that Secretary Powell telephoned Foreign Minister Jaswant Singh this morning. He wanted to express, first of all, our sincere condolences to the families of those who were killed, and to the Governments of India and the State of West Bengal. He also expressed our hope for the speedy recovery of the injured, and furthermore our thanks to the Indian Government for the efforts that they had made to protect our facilities there and for the actions of their police in this matter.

Question: Richard, just one more on this. Is US Embassy and other consulates are on high alert due to this incident? And also, the chief of police in Calcutta said that terrorists are behind this attack, and there may be more like this.

Mr. Boucher: I would say that, first of all, all our facilities around the world have been taking every possible precaution, and that applies to our posts in India as well.

Second of all, as far as who exactly was responsible for this, we don't know at this point. I don't think the Indians know -- knew -- know. Certainly in the Secretary's discussion with Foreign Minister Singh this morning, he was not at that point able to say that they had the details yet, and that we will continue to work with them as they try to determine more accurately who was responsible for this.

Question: And you said you are working with India on this connection now because this is as recent as on December 13th because people have not overcome from the major one in Delhi, and now this is in Calcutta. So in what sense how the US is working with Indian authorities?

Mr. Boucher: Obviously this attack involves one of our facilities. We get directly involved with them in trying to make sure that they have all the information they need from us and any possible assistance they need from us in their investigation. We are more directly involved when one of our facilities is attacked.

To the intrepid traveler, who seems to be the only one who made it back.

Question: The youngest.

Question: I think I was the youngest on the trip. That's true.

Question: That counts.

Question: That counts. Did the Secretary and General Singh discuss other issues in this phone call as well? Was it a longer phone call, and did he reaffirm with the Foreign Minister -- some of the commitments that the Secretary got when we were there, like being patient on the border since fighting flared up again after he left?

Mr. Boucher: It was not an exceptionally long phone call and the principal topic was this attack this morning, and as I said, expressing condolences and thanking the Indians for the police response and for the fact that they were there protecting us and that they did a successful job at that at some loss of life to themselves.

I think there was some follow-up in terms of the discussions that the Secretary had during his trip. He has talked to President Musharraf this morning as well. And so they are continuing to work on the issues that he worked on during his trip. And I think as you know from the travel, he did that from the road and is continuing to do that now that we're back here.

Question: You said he called Musharraf or did Musharraf call him, do you know?

Mr. Boucher: He called Musharraf.

Question: Did he discuss with President Musharraf the possibility that this attack could have been carried out by a group connected to the ISI?

Mr. Boucher: I don't know that he discussed this particular attack with Musharraf. I just don't -- I don't think so, but I don't know for sure.

Question: Richard, did you say that some of these groups that claimed credit or might have been held responsible operated on the India-Bangladeshi border?

Mr. Boucher: That's something we're not able to confirm, even that the phone calls that were reported were actually made. So I think at this point we look to see what the Indian police come up with. They are doing a careful investigation, I am sure.

Question: And is there any possibility -- do you feel any concern that these could be linked with events in Bangladesh? In Bangladesh there is a couple or two Islamic parties that have joined the government and there has been reports of an upsurge of Islamic activity.

Mr. Boucher: I think, you know, speculating to the third degree is just not appropriate at this point until we have some better information about who might have done this.

Question: Okay, and one final question. You said before that your trip was a success to the region, and I have just one question about the success. Is there any evidence that the infiltration has stopped into India from Pakistan, which is the quid pro quo for India, which apparently continues to build up its forces?

Mr. Boucher: We have seen press reports. I think some of them we saw while we were there were in the Indian press. We've seen them in the international wire services and various other reports that would indicate that there is less activity across the line of control, and that certainly would be something that we would welcome.

Question: But you're not saying that you have your own independent information, that this is --

Mr. Boucher: I don't really talk that much about our own independent information, but I would say we have seen various kinds of reports that would indicate that there is a lessening of activity across the line of control.

Question: But aren't there other things you're hoping to see, like the resumption of air traffic and all sorts of things?

Mr. Boucher: As the Secretary said, there is a variety of measures that the parties can take in the political sphere and the diplomatic sphere and the military sphere that would help ease the tensions, and we continue to work with them to see how to get that process -- the kinds of steps they might take, the kinds of steps they might like to see, and to try to see some of those things happen.

Question: On the attack, if I may go back to your reference to the US generically being under threat, you are not suggesting, are you, that this attack was an attack against the US? Because on this occasion it seems to be an anti-police action.

Mr. Boucher: Well, that was what some of these reports said is that, in fact, they were just finding a place where there were a clump of policemen together.

Question: And it was the time when police changed guard.

Mr. Boucher: But I think until we know for sure who did it and why, I can't say one way or the other. But having our embassies on high alert applies not only to things that might be specifically directed against them, but things that might happen very close to their vicinity.

Question: Were Secretary Powell's calls this morning to both sides as a result of the attack, kind of trying to cool tensions, or was it something that was planned? I know he said on the trip that he would --

Mr. Boucher: No, I would say that his calls -- well, he has been making phone calls. He has talked to both Foreign Minister Singh and President Musharraf from the road while we were traveling. I better double-check my recollection. I know he talked to President Musharraf after we left India, but I had better double check to make sure he called Foreign Minister Singh during the last couple days of the road.

No, he didn't. So he talked to President Musharraf from the road while we were traveling. He said himself that he intended to follow up on his discussions with both sides. So, yes, the phone calls today to Foreign Minister Singh and President Musharraf, in a broader context, were part of his continuing to work on the issues that he worked on during his trip. But obviously the phone call to Foreign Minister Singh today was devoted a little more to the issue of the attack today and our condolences and our thanks to the Indian police for protecting our facility.

Question: Richard, as far as this attack is concerned on America and India, Home Minister of India Mr. Advani was here last week, and he said at the press conference that due to US pressure on General Musharraf, ISI is now moving in India against India in terrorist activities, other than in Kashmir. So they are moving from the Kashmir border to other parts of India. So your comments on this?

Mr. Boucher: No, I'm not quite sure I understand what you're saying.

Question: Okay, what he said, that due to US pressure on General Musharraf not to take any terrorist activities against India across the border in Kashmir, now the ISI, the Pakistan Intelligence Service, now they are moving in India, spreading terrorism in the rest of India, in other parts of India, rather than on the border.

Mr. Boucher: I didn't see --

Question: So this attack speaks by itself.

Mr. Boucher: I didn't see any remarks like that. Certainly he didn't say anything like that in his meetings with us, and so I'm not going to jump in and comment on your version.

Question: I'd like to change the subject, if I may.

Mr. Boucher: Did you want to change the subject first?

Question: Yes. Could I? Over the weekend, the Somalis arrested about 20 or so terror groups. Do you have any comment on this? Or terrorists, not groups. Sorry.

Mr. Boucher: Here's what we can tell you about that. We are in touch with the transitional national government of Somalia about these arrests. We have seen the reports. We are aware of the arrests. We continue to encourage all Somali factions, including the transitional national government and other groups to continue to investigate the presence of terrorists on their soil.

Question: Have we asked for access to these people who were arrested so we might be able to question them, or rather US --

Mr. Boucher: I don't know, and if we had we probably wouldn't say.

Question: Why is that so sensitive?

Mr. Boucher: Because in no case around the world -- go right back to September 11th -- have we been saying what we have asked of other governments. We have left it to them to describe what they were doing if they wish to.

Question: Can we stay on Somalia for a second? Can you just be clear about whether -- does the US Government recognize this transitional authority as the governing body of Somalia, or are there various kind of authorities in various parts of the country?

Mr. Boucher: Well, no, we don't recognize them as the government of Somalia at this point. I would describe them as one of the groups in Somalia that we obviously work with and that we try to keep in close touch with.

Question: I have a feeling you'll have nothing nice to say about the closure of TV-6. What do you have to say about it?

Mr. Boucher: Well, as we had not much nice to say about it when it was happening, it shouldn't surprise you that we don't have much nice to say about it now that it appears to have happened. The legal action and the closure of TV-6 are extremely difficult to understand in any business or any financial context.

For some time there has been a very strong appearance of political pressure in the judicial process against Russia's independent media, including in this case. There have been very unusual and rapid developments in this TV-6 liquidation case. It took place at high judicial levels, where things normally take several months. Moreover, the law under which TV-6 is being prosecuted has only been applied in two cases, both of them against independent media, and the law in question in fact lapsed on January 1st of 2002.

So we would continue to believe that development and protection of an independent media are essential for Russia's political and economic development. The freedom of the press and promotion of the rule of law are best served by allowing TV-6 to remain on the air. And that continues to be our position, despite the new developments.

Question: Have you been in contact with Russian authorities since this happened?

Mr. Boucher: We have been in regular contact with Russian authorities throughout the process to make clear our views, not only publicly, but privately as well. I'm not sure if we've had any meetings since this particular judicial decision, but it is certainly true that the Russian authorities are very well aware of our views.

Question: Can I ask one last one? Is it this administration's view that President Putin could have stopped this happening if he had wanted to?

Mr. Boucher: I would say that given the appearance of political pressure on the judicial process, the political authorities could have withdrawn that pressure, yes.

Question: Another subject, please? Several Saudis, now back home from detention, are complaining about the way they were treated. The Egyptians also complained to us on several occasions. I'm talking about people that were detained --

Mr. Boucher: -- domestically inside the United States.

Question: I can't even finish the sentence because no charges were placed against many of them. They were not told of why they were being detained. They were just sort of scooped up and thrown and detained.

Are you hearing any diplomatic fallout from this? Are countries like Saudi Arabia and Egypt telling the US that maybe their citizens are not being treated the way they should be?

Mr. Boucher: I'll have to check and see if there is anything new. As you know, as far as the conditions for detention, the reasons for detention, that was purely a matter for the Justice Department to explain. As far as any diplomatic fallout, you know there have been some statements by foreign governments before about this situation. And at that time they were looking for the release of people, so the fact that these people were allowed to return to their home countries, one would assume that that basic fact would be welcome.

Question: This morning, apparently there were 70, I guess, detainees that sewed their mouths shut, women and children, and these are some of the Afghan refugees. Is it time to move them back toward Afghanistan?

Mr. Boucher: I don't know who you're talking about. Where are they in custody?

Question: They are -- well, they're in the mix. They are, I believe, in Australia. Is it time to move them back?

Mr. Boucher: I don't know. I think those are the refugees that were trying to get into places?

Question: Right.

Mr. Boucher: I don't have anything on that. I'm sorry.

Question: There were some reports, including kind of on-the-record comments made by the former president of Venezuela, that President Chavez is in the process of, or is going to very shortly arm his supporters in advance of a march on National Day, which would in effect allow him to put in effect a martial law because there is so much opposition in the country. Is that something that you have been following?

Mr. Boucher: I'll have to check on that. I hadn't seen those reports and didn't have a chance to ask on that. Certainly we have been concerned about the activities of some of these people with regard to the opposition and the opposition media -- well, the independent media, I should say.

Question: Can I ask a separate question on China? First, nothing new on the spy plane any more?

Mr. Boucher: What?

Question: The new spy plane.

(Laughter.)

Mr. Boucher: What? I don't have any comment on any reports or allegations whatsoever.

Question: Okay. Secondly, if there were Chinese detainees on Guantanamo Bay, will the Chinese Government contact the State Department or the Pentagon?

Mr. Boucher: You can ask the Chinese Government, but we have informed other governments who have detainees there.

Question: Are you reading a list of names of the countries being held there?

Mr. Boucher: No, we're not releasing a list. I know you asked Secretary Rumsfeld that question and he didn't answer, so I'm not going to do it either. (Laughter.)

Question: New topic?

Question: One more on China?

Mr. Boucher: One more on China.

Question: Okay. The government issued a statement linking the East Turkestan to terrorism activities in China. Does the US agree with the view?

Mr. Boucher: What did you call it? East Turkestan?

Question: East Turkestan.

Mr. Boucher: Who uses that name? The Xinjiang separatists?

Question: The Xinjiang separatists.

Mr. Boucher: Okay. Let me try to tell you what we know about it. We know that some Uighors have been found fighting with al-Qaida in Afghanistan. We are aware of some reports of reports that some Uighors who were trained by al-Qaida have returned to China.

As the Secretary has said, China and the United States have both been victims of terrorist violence and face a threat from international terrorism. We certainly value our counter-terrorism cooperation with China. We oppose terrorist violence in Xinjiang or anywhere else in China.

At the same time, I would make clear that we have made clear to Beijing that combating international terrorism is not an excuse to suppress legitimate political expression. Effective counter-terrorism requires a respect for fundamental human rights.

Question: Different subject. There was a possibility that the appeal, that Mr. Al-Megrahi's appeal in the Netherlands, was going to begin today.

Mr. Boucher: I think it's tomorrow.

Question: Is it tomorrow?

Mr. Boucher: Here's what I have from the lawyers, that beginning on January 23rd the appeal of convicted Libyan intelligence service member Abdel Basset Al-Megrahi will be heard before a Scottish court. Megrahi was convicted of murder in January 2001 in connection with the Pan Am 103 Lockerbie bombing. As with the original trial, the proceedings will take place in the Netherlands before a Scottish court.

Question: Can you say how long you think this process will take?

Mr. Boucher: No, I can't. It would be for judicial people to try to estimate.

Question: Another question, another area? Zimbabwe. When last we left the question on Zimbabwe and Mr. Mugabe -- you all were on the road -- the US was consulting with other countries about sanctions. That was four or five days ago. Is there any conclusion as to whether you're going to do something punitive by yourself or in concert with others?

Mr. Boucher: I don't have anything new on that for you at this point. We have -- there is, I guess, US legislation that is being either proposed or considered -- various legislations passed and the question is what we do about it. But, no, we are still consulting with various governments and there are no final decisions made on timing at this point.

But we remain concerned. There is still this bill within Zimbabwe's parliament that would give government control over independent media. The bill has not come up for formal -- did not come up for formal debate today, as some had expected. But as you know, this could allow the government to ban foreign journalists, require local journalists to register or face up to two years in jail.

We think it's another tragic example of President Mugabe's increasingly authoritarian rule, his government's apparent determination to repress freedom of speech and dissent in the face of the March 9th and 10th presidential elections. So that only raises our concerns about the situation.

Question: I imagine you're saying that you're still talking to other countries. It's not a dead letter, punitive-wise?

Mr. Boucher: We're still talking to other countries, we're still considering what we can do, and we're still watching very closely developments in Zimbabwe. And as I said, some of those developments continue to cause great concern.

Question: Over on Colombia, do you have anything new to say about the status of peace talks there? And does the administration plan to get more actively involved in mediating? I mean, it appears that the UN guy played a fairly prominent role in getting them back to the negotiating table.

Mr. Boucher: Yes, he did, and that is a role that we welcome and that we support. The UN Special Envoy James Lemoyne, a group of facilitating countries, and the Apostolic Nuncio, Archbishop Stella, played an important role in facilitating the timetable talks, and that is a role that we have supported in the past. We also continue to give our full support to President Pastrana in his continuing peace efforts, and we look to the FARC to fulfill its pledges in good faith and to cease its attacks.

Question: How will you offer the support to -- does that mean you will not be playing the kind of role the UN and these other countries have been playing? Mr. Boucher: I think we have expressed our support for that role, expressed our support for President Pastrana. I don't have anything further on any additional US role that we might play.

Question: Do you want to make any comments about how the donors conference turned out in Tokyo? Lots more money than when we left. And also whether you can give us any update on Under Secretary Larsen's talks on the demobilization issue? They were, I think, sticking around to do some of that.

Mr. Boucher: Let me give you the rundown.

We are quite pleased the way the donors conference turned out in Tokyo. As many of you know, the first-year target that the UN and other agencies had set was about $1.7 billion. In fact, there were at least $1.8 billion worth of pledges against that target. People focusing on the real needs and the ability to absorb, deliver, and accurately account for the needs of Afghanistan also met to set up an implementation group that can monitor and coordinate the flows, make sure that everybody knows what everybody else is doing, and that the money is properly applied.

We heard a lot when the Secretary was in Kabul, as well as at the conference, from the Afghan Interim Authority about how the money -- they, too, recognized the importance of proper accounting and accountability for that money, and very strong pledges from Chairman Karzai against any sort of corruption or lack of transparency.

And in addition, at the donors conference there was, I think, something like $4.5 billion of additional funds that were pledged. We all recognize that different governments with different legislative procedures can't necessarily announce figures for the out years, as they are called. But like the United States, a number of governments who couldn't give specific numbers were able to give a very firm commitment to supporting this process, the reconstruction process, not only in the near future, but over the long term. And so that was most welcome as well.

As you noted, there were a number of side meetings that were held, and I'm not sure I have an entire list of them. But one of them was on security issues and disarmament issues. I believe that Jim Dobbins went to that for us. Ambassador Dobbins and others from our delegation attended that. And that continues to be an important part of the situation, to try to make sure that this reconstruction process can proceed with some security.

Question: You don't have anything on any substance that they have discussed or --

Mr. Boucher: No, I don't have a specific rundown of how that process will proceed at this point.

Question: One more on that. Do you know if these are groups that were being set up that will continue to meet, or will they just be ad hoc at conferences like this?

Mr. Boucher: There will be subgroups under the implementation group. There will be subgroups that might look at a particular sector, like education, to coordinate their health, to coordinate their -- I don't know if the specific groups that met in Tokyo will meet in that forum in the future in Afghanistan, but in addition to the implementation group as a whole, there will be subgroups that coordinate with the government and between donors in specific sectors.

Question: Different subject? Cuba's Fidel Castro is offering medical and other support to the US to help care for the detainees in Guantanamo. Is the Bush Administration planning to ease relations with Cuba?

Mr. Boucher: No. The overall question I think needs to be addressed, that the detainees in Guantanamo are being treated humanely. I would invite Fidel Castro to watch Secretary Rumsfeld's press conference, where he spoke for an hour or more about how these people are being treated. And I think Secretary Rumsfeld is quite able to deal with the matter and to make sure that every appropriate consideration is given to this matter, and so I don't think we need any further advice or assistance.

Question: We need to talk about Colombia. I have two questions. I wanted to know what is your opinion about the agreement between the Colombian Government and the FARC when you know they are still kidnapping civilians, killing civilians? So what is the US opinion about that?

And my second question is, do you have any information about Colin Powell travel to Colombia and the meeting between President Bush and Colombian President in New York, I think?

Mr. Boucher: As far as the second, we haven't announced any travel by the Secretary to Colombia, although we made clear at the time of the September 11th bombings, or attacks, that we were not able to go to Colombia at that time and looked forward to the opportunity to do that again in the future. But at this point there have been no announcements.

As far as any meetings the President might have, I'm afraid that's a White House matter. You will have to check with them.

And on the first part of your question, I think I tried to make very clear before that we continue to support President Pastrana's efforts at peace here, and we continue to look to the FARC to carry out its pledges responsibly. And that means not only participating in these talks in good faith, but stopping the attacks, stopping the murders, stopping the kidnapping, stopping the drug trafficking that they have been involved with.

Question: Back to the Middle East for one second? The situation appears to be getting out of control, or really intensifying. Does the United States have any plan to mediate or to try to improve the situation?

Mr. Boucher: As we have tried to make clear, as the Secretary made clear over the weekend, the United States does intend to remain engaged with the parties, but we look very much to the parties to carry out actions to restrain the violence, to stop the violence; and that, at this juncture, applies primarily to Chairman Arafat. We continue to look for him to take steps to stop the violence, to curb the activities of groups, to dismantle the ability of these groups to carry out violence, to arrest people who are responsible for violence, to arrest and account for people for the arms smuggling operation. So there are a great many things we are looking for him to do in this situation that we believe are essential to ending the violence.

Question: Can you give any instances of current engagement? I mean, diplomats on the scene, the Consul General, or somebody? Are talks going on with Arafat or his people?

Mr. Boucher: Our diplomats in the region keep in touch with both sides. I'm not aware of any specific meetings with Arafat. But I would just say we keep in touch with them.

Question: But whether Arafat was involved in the smuggling? That was an open question about more than a week ago, so I'm waiting for the -- hoping at some point you will -- you know, either say he was or he wasn't.

Mr. Boucher: Well, I don't think we have anything more definitive at this point to say.

Question: Do you think you're going to -- you're still pushing --

Mr. Boucher: We think that he bears responsibility for the situation. There are people at senior levels in the Palestinian Authority who were involved in this, and we think he bears responsibility for accounting for what happened and arresting people who are responsible and taking other action to make sure that arms smuggling doesn't continue.

Question: He's already done some of this, but do you mean futurely? You're looking for more, right?

Mr. Boucher: We're looking for effective action that will prevent this from happening, and I don't think we've seen an accounting of what happened at this time.

Question: Anything on the Berenson case? I think there's another appeal, and I can't remember whether you usually comment on her or not.

Mr. Boucher: Well, we haven't said a lot. Our understanding at this point is the Peruvian Supreme Court will hear the appeal today. It's a pending judicial matter in Peru, so I don't have anything further to say about it. I think we welcome the fact that a while ago her case was turned over to civilian courts to be looked at again. Our interest has been in seeing that her welfare was attended to and that she get a fair hearing, a fair trial.

Embassy officials are not attending today's hearing because supreme court rules declare that appeals are closed. So they are not there, but this case is being looked at, and at this point it's a matter -- a pending judicial matter in Peru.

Question: Different subject. Do you have anything on US aid to the people of Goma or in the surrounding area?

Mr. Boucher: Yes, I think I can give you a rundown of what we've been able to get in there already. As you know, as you can tell from the pictures and the various reports coming in, there's a very dire situation with regard to these volcanic eruptions near Goma in Congo. We have already sent in one flight of relief supplies. We intend to send in a second flight today. The cost -- the value of the supplies that we're sending in is about half a million dollars. The two -- I think that's total.

Together, the two flights contain 40,000 wool blankets, 35,200 five-gallon water jugs, 20 10-liter water bladders, 5,000 dust masks, 3,000 rolls of plastic sheeting, which is used for temporary shelters. The US Agency for International Development has mobilized a six-person team to the affected area. The team of USAID disaster specialists includes a water expert, and they are on the ground conducting assessments, coordinating US -- our emergency response. We will continue to work with other donors, with nongovernmental partners, with UN agencies, to assess and respond to the situation.

I would point out that we have been working all along on the humanitarian needs of this part of the Congo. We have tried to address Congo's ongoing humanitarian crisis. In the year 2001, fiscal year 2001, we provided $88 million in assistance to the ongoing emergency in the Democratic Republic of the Congo. That was for emergency programs, health services, food security. We provided emergency food commodities during that time. We have run programs on rural health and infrastructure and child support for refugees and for the population there.

So there's a great deal that we already were doing in the Congo, and obviously this disaster only adds to the needs, and therefore we have been able to provide some emergency response as well.

Question: Do you have any kind of travel ban and the warning against Turkey, before the President lifted the last week?

Mr. Boucher: Is that a trick question?

Question: This is on the record. The President announced it. He lifted the travel ban against Turkey.

Mr. Boucher: I'll look back at the White House briefings on that, and I'll see if there's anything to add from here.

Question: I am asking as a State Department, as the consular section, do you have right now, or before, any warning and any travel ban against Turkey?

Mr. Boucher: I don't know and I will have to check. But you can check for yourself, either with the White House or on our website, or on our previous briefings.

Question: Also, is the Turkish Prime Minister, when he visit the United States, you announced establishing a new kind of economic partnership committee. If I'm correct, I remember we have in the last five years in the (inaudible) kind of same committee. What is the newest one? Is the difference than the other two -- of the other two committees?

Mr. Boucher: I'll be glad to check for you.

Question: Back to the Afghanistan aid in Tokyo. Can you say what account the US pledge is coming from? Is there a pot of money it's coming from?

Mr. Boucher: We put out a fact sheet on that, which I'm sure I can get for you. It comes from various accounts because it's various kinds of money. Some of it is international programs, like for child health, where we're applying the money available for child health to the specific needs in Afghanistan. Some of it is food assistance that we can now redirect towards food-for-work programs to begin the process of reconstruction of roads or sanitation facilities or things like that. And some of it's other various accounts. So it comes from different parts of the US Government from the current budget.

Question: To follow up, does that constrain the ability to work in any other parts of the world? I mean, even that it's coming from certain accounts, will certain money not be there for other ongoing projects?

Mr. Boucher: I don't think so, no.

Question: Okay.

Question: Follow-up on that? Mr. Karzai's representative here yesterday said in Washington that the money should go through him in order to empower his government, to prop him up. Do you intend to give the money directly to NGOs and, you know, foreign administrative -- or are you going to give the money to the interim government?

Mr. Boucher: I think the first thing to say is that these projects, these activities, will all be closely coordinated with the Afghan Interim Authority, and then the government that is put in place five or six months from now. So we are going to work very closely with them. They will work with us and with the implementation group as we go forward. I can't tell you the exact channeling of all the different funds. Some of the money is indeed going into UN trust funds for the government. Other money spent on projects might be channeled through NGOs. But all of it is being closely coordinated with the Afghan Interim Authority and with the other donors.

Question: Since it's been four days since we last had a chance to ask you what you knew about Clark Bowers, the American who was being held in Afghanistan but has now been released in Pakistan, are you able to tell us any more about the nature of his detention and release?

Mr. Boucher: The short answer is no. The long answer is not much longer. The long answer is Mr. Bowers met with State Department officials on Saturday, January 19th. At his request, and because he has not signed a waiver of his rights under the Privacy Act, we can't comment further.

Question: Here?

Mr. Boucher: No.

Question: Where? Where did he meet them?

Mr. Boucher: Is that further? In Pakistan. I'm able to say that.

Question: At his request, you say, Richard? I'm sorry, did you say that he met with these officials at his request?

Mr. Boucher: No, I said we met with him. State Department officials met with him in Pakistan on January 19th, a Saturday, period.

Next paragraph. At his request, and because he hasn't signed a Privacy Act, we can't give you more information.

Good catch.

Question: This probably isn't the last time someone will ask, but you will be asked with less frequency, I'm sure. Usama bin Laden. If I remember right, the Secretary in two television interviews -- so he said it twice. He, I guess, wanted to make a point. He was asked about, you know, whether Usama bin Laden ought to be captured, is he dead, where is he. And he said he preferred looking ahead, rather than back, there are things to do, and he was prospective-minding, instead of looking backward.

Does that mean, or there are other reasons to believe that the US has pretty much given up any reasonable expectations of finding Usama bin Laden, dead or alive?

Mr. Boucher: No.

Question: Then what is that -- why is he -- he sort of was not encouraging these questions. He was sort of saying, that's old news, let's deal with today. And I found that interesting because he was the guy that, you know, dead or alive, we'll get him, and by God. You know, and I'm not hearing that anymore.

Mr. Boucher: Barry, I'd say don't --

Question: John Wayne has gone away.

Mr. Boucher: Barry, I would say not to read anything into the persistence or the lack thereof of questioning from your fellow journalists; and the fact that we deal with the questions every day, once we've said every day we don't know where the guy is, we don't really have that much more to say. The President said right from the start, we're going to smoke him out, we're going to get him on the run, and we done that. And we're going to find him. And that's the part we haven't quite accomplished yet, but I'm confident that what the President said we would do is what we are going to do.

As you know -- and you can get from the Pentagon whatever information they can provide -- the US troops remain active. And I would go a little farther on this and say the Afghan authorities made quite clear when we were in Kabul that they viewed the continuation -- the continued existence of remnants of the Taliban, remnants of al-Qaida within the borders of Afghanistan, was an ongoing threat that had to be eliminated if we were going to be able to proceed with the rebuilding of Afghanistan as a stable country. And they were certainly fully supportive of whatever efforts the American forces can continue to make to capture, track down or otherwise eliminate the threat from al-Qaida.

Question: Well, to follow up, they must have made a distinction then between senior Taliban leaders and remnants of people that at one time were loyal to the Taliban?

Mr. Boucher: What they were talking about was groups of Taliban or groups of al-Qaida people who were still trying to operate in remote areas of Afghanistan that presented a continuing threat.

Question: Right after the Secretary's visit to Pakistan, General Musharraf announced that Usama bin Laden is dead from kidney disease. Now, also he said that the machines, kidney disease machines, were imported from Pakistan. That means we're talking about -- if the machines were imported by Usama bin Laden, it must be a year ago. So why he's making these claims now, after one year, that he's dead from kidney disease?

Mr. Boucher: Well, first of all, I think I have to refer you to President Musharraf to talk about that; and furthermore, I think he has talked about that further. So just look at what he says. I'm not going to -- unfortunately I'm not the spokesman for President Musharraf.

Question: But do you agree with him that he is dead?

Mr. Boucher: After we have answered the question three times that we don't know, I think I'll just refer you back to what we --

Question: But I'm asking you, do you agree with his statement, yes or no?

Mr. Boucher: I don't know.

Question: Can I ask a question about Burma, please? The generals today confirmed reports that they were seeking a nuclear reactor, and it's coming from Russia. Do you have a position on that? And is it something, given your concerns on proliferation of this kind of technology, that you have raised with the Russians?

Mr. Boucher: I'll have to check and see.

Question: Do you have anything to say on the New York Times story today that seems to indicate that Iran is meddling in Afghan affairs in the western part of the country?

Mr. Boucher: I didn't realize there was a new story about it. I would refer you to the remarks that our Special Presidential Envoy made in Kabul not too long ago. I think it was over the weekend. Zal Khalilzad had some words to say about that, and that's our position.

Question: Two quick questions. Are you concerned about the fact that the people that are being arrested by Israel will face only a military court, and their civil and human rights will be pretty largely not viewed in public?

And secondly, are you concerned about that, and who asked for the interview or the meeting -- I'm sorry -- between Barak and Secretary Armitage, Deputy Secretary Armitage, today? Was it our initiative or theirs?

Mr. Boucher: I think it was former Prime Minister Barak's initiative, that he is traveling in the United States and asked to come and see us. So he is having meetings today.

As far as the situation with regards to Israeli trials, I don't have anything new to say on that.

Question: Can you confirm he's seeing Secretary Powell as well as --

Mr. Boucher: I think that's right. I think he'll have an informal drop-by or chat with the Secretary at the end of the day.