State Department Noon Briefing Transcript

(Narcotic Certification Process, Saudi Arabia/Cuba, Turkish-American
Economic Partnership Committee, Israel/Palestinian Authority, Saudi
Arabia/Mideast, Rome/Embassy security, Iraq, Zimbabwe, NATO/EU,
Venezuela, Colombia, Pakistan, Thailand/journalist/free press,
VOA/Caucasus language, North Korea, Taiwan, Angola/Savimbi's death)
(7170)

State Department Spokesman Richard Boucher briefed.

Following is the State Department transcript:

(begin transcript)

Daily Press Briefing Index
Monday, February 25, 2002

BRIEFER:  Richard Boucher, Spokesman
 
DEPARTMENT
-- Briefing on Narcotics Certification Process  

CUBA
-- U.S. Policy on Cuba 
 
TURKEY
-- Economic Partnership Committee Meeting

ISRAEL/PALESTINIANS
-- Saudi Proposal for Peace/Recent Violence/Need for Cooperation/EU
Proposal

ITALY
-- Hole in Tunnel Near U.S. Embassy

IRAQ
-- UN Sanctions
ZIMBABWE
-- Intimidation Against Opposition 
SPAIN
-- Secretary's Meeting with Foreign Minister/NATO Discussion

COLOMBIA/VENEZUELA
-- Security of Oil Pipelines/Kidnapping in Colombia

PAKISTAN
-- Extradition Issue of Omar Sheikh/Extradition Treaty

THAILAND
-- Journalist for Far East Economic Review

RUSSIA
-- Media Broadcasts in Caucusas Languages

NORTH KOREA
-- Periodic Meeting with U.S. Officials

TAIWAN
-- Possible U.S. Envoy

ANGOLA
-- Death of Mr. Savimbi/Angolan President's Visit

PERU
-- Lori Berenson Case  

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE
DAILY PRESS BRIEFING
MONDAY, FEBRUARY 25, 2002
(ON THE RECORD UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED)

MR. BOUCHER: Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen. Pleasure to be
here. I don't have any statements or announcements. I would like to
remind you of the 2:45 briefing this afternoon on the new and
different narcotics certification process. And you've heard from the
Secretary of State on other issues, so I'll take your questions on
whatever is left.

QUESTION: Different news services and newspapers, and some of them are
actually correct, like the Saudi proposal, but there's a piece in a
newspaper that a couple of -- well, actually, the person who runs the
Cuban affairs desk, and his deputy, are promoting or lobbying or
trying to get the administration to practice reconciliation with Cuba,
which is a thought that isn't unique to them. Is this in the offing?
Is there something germinating here you want to tell us about?

MR. BOUCHER: Well, that particular thought, while it might not be
unique, should not be ascribed to them. I think it's important to make
clear that the administration, the Bush Administration, the political
appointees such as the Secretary and Assistant Secretary Reich, have
full confidence in the competence and the professionalism of our
career diplomats who are carrying out US policy towards Cuba.

The State Department's team of Foreign and Civil Service Officers in
Washington and at our Interests Section in Havana has worked
vigorously to support President Bush's efforts to bring about rapid,
peaceful transition from dictatorship to democracy in Cuba, using the
full array of policy tools available. Assistant Secretary Reich has
worked closely with these people since his appointment in January.

I think the overall message we would make on articles like this is
it's important not to be distracted from where the locus of the
problem with Cuba lies, and that is the Cuban Government's failure to
respect the basic human rights of its own people. I'll leave it at
that.

QUESTION: Well, if you want to leave it at that, that's that. But
Cuban policy is an interesting subject, irrespective of what
individuals may think is a good idea or not. Is there any movement? I
guess we can wait for the Human Rights Report again, but is there any
movement on the Cuba front that you can tell us about?

MR. BOUCHER: I think I've spoken to this repeatedly over the last
year, particularly over the last several weeks, and made clear the
issue is movement in Cuba on human rights and democracy. And
unfortunately, very regrettably, we have not seen that kind of
movement, and in fact I think you'll see in the Human Rights Report
that the human rights situation in Cuba remains very bad.

QUESTION: Tomorrow, the Turkish-American Economic Partnership
Committee meeting will be held in Ankara. What is the US side's agenda
on this meeting? What is your expectation on this meeting?

MR. BOUCHER: I'll have to check for you. I don't have anything
specifically on that meeting. But it is important. It is a process
that has been discussed many times at senior levels. The Secretary
supported it, discussed it during his trip to Ankara. And I don't have
anything on the specific meeting, but we want it to be a full exchange
on economic cooperation and on economic matters.

QUESTION: On the Middle East, the Secretary discussed it briefly
downstairs, but I'm wondering if there is anything you can add to what
he said about the US position -- or lack of position at the moment, if
that's the case -- on the Saudi proposal, and also on the current --
if there's anything new to say about the current situation on the
ground over there. And if you could also tell us if you plan on
turning over any other diplomatic portfolios to Tom Friedman.

MR. BOUCHER: Which one of those were the serious questions?

QUESTION: The first two.

MR. BOUCHER: The first two, okay. I would note that the Saudi
proposals, while reported in many of our newspapers, or one of our
newspapers several times, were also made public by the Saudis and
their own news agency in Arabic, and have been made in other fora by
them, as well as having appeared in certain of our newspapers.

The position -- not the lack of position -- the position that we have
taken on this is the one the Secretary just took and that we expressed
to you last week. We think these proposals and the fact of their being
made is a significant and positive step. It's important to discuss
these issues, even as we work to get the whole process started by
ending the violence. The fact that we find these proposals useful,
significant, interesting and positive, and all those various words
we've used, is only a reminder of how important it is to pursue this
process, not to let it down, and to remember that the process begins
with confronting terror and violence, restoring calm, and creating an
environment in which progress on implementation of the Mitchell
Committee recommendations and the Tenet security work plan can
proceed.

QUESTION: Can I follow up on that?

MR. BOUCHER: Everybody wants to follow up.

QUESTION: Well, I just wanted to get -- the other serious question in
my three questions was about the current situation on the ground.

MR. BOUCHER: The current situation on the ground, I think the
Secretary expressed a little bit to you about that. We are deeply
troubled by the upsurge in violence that has occurred, including two
shooting incidents in the last few hours, one at a bus stop north of
Jerusalem, another on a road south of Jerusalem that left at least two
dead and a dozen injured, including a pregnant woman and a
four-year-old girl. We condemn those attacks. We call upon the
Palestinian Authority to take immediate and decisive action to halt
the terror and violence.

We are also very concerned about two incidents in which pregnant
Palestinian women were shot and wounded over the weekend, and a
Palestinian father and husband were shot and killed at an Israeli
Defense Force checkpoint.

Israel's right to defend itself is clear. At the same time, it's very
important that a way be found to allow safe and secure passage for
humanitarian purposes through Israeli checkpoints and other barriers
to Palestinian movement. So we urge the Israeli Defense Force to work
on such procedures to help ensure that no further such tragedies occur
in the future.

QUESTION: I'm sorry.  You said you "urge" or "urged"?  You have?

MR. BOUCHER: We urge, in present tense. I think we'll do it privately
as well as publicly, but that's the position we've taken.

QUESTION: Forgive me for being pedantic, but it's partly my job. You,
as far as I can recall, called the Saudi proposal a minor development,
and now you're calling it an important step. What happened to raise it
and its relevance in your eyes?

MR. BOUCHER: I would go back to the Secretary's language. I think he
used other words as well. The important thing -- this idea is
significant, it's positive. The fact that it was made is significant
and positive. We've said that before, and I'm saying it again.
Nonetheless, I would remind you, and I think this is reflected in the
Secretary's comment that you cite, the important thing right now is to
get an end to the violence, to get down that road, so that these kind
of ideas about the long-term future can be developed and negotiated.

QUESTION: (Inaudible.) I'm not sure what it is that the US would like
to see happen to it next. I mean, is there more that the Saudis might
say about it? Would you like to see -- the Egyptians seem to like it.
Would you like to measure reaction? I don't know where you go from
here. There's so little going on, maybe this is a starter.

MR. BOUCHER: Well, I would say there is not so little going on. There
is a continuing attempt on the part of the United States to work with
the parties, to work with the people in the region, to end the
violence, get back on this track of reducing the violence, restoring
some sort of calm, and getting back to a track where the Mitchell
Committee recommendations can be implemented, the Tenet work plan
steps can be carried out, and we can move towards a negotiation where
all these other issues, all these ideas, including the vision the
President laid out last fall, can be discussed and negotiated.

The activity over the weekend -- the Secretary made a whole series of
phone calls with people in the Middle East. He talked to Prime
Minister Sharon, Chairman Arafat, King Abdallah of Jordan, Foreign
Minister Maher of Egypt, Crown Prince Abdullah of Saudi Arabia. He
kept in touch with Europeans, with EU High Representative Solana.

And so this Saudi idea has been part of his discussions with others,
but the emphasis remains on the need for the Palestinians to confront
the violence and stop the violence, because that's the only way we're
going to start down this road. And you heard in our discussions with
the Spanish Foreign Minister this morning, the Spaniards are in the
Presidency of the EU, part of that discussion was about the maximum
effort needed -- the 100 percent effort, as he said -- to confront the
violence, to end the violence, so that we can start working on any
other ideas and ways down the road.

QUESTION: But if you are considering this Saudi plan as some way to
encourage stopping the violence, how does that jive with you holding
Arafat responsible for what goes on in the Palestinian territories? I
mean, how does the Saudi proposal to recognize Israel, or any Arab
proposal to recognize Israel, have anything to do with what Yasser
Arafat needs to do within his own territories? Do you think that the
violence is suddenly going to stop once Israel returns to the '67
borders?

MR. BOUCHER: That's not the way we've been pursuing it. The way we've
been pursuing it is to say it's useful to have these ideas out there;
it's significant that they were proposed; but what really needs to
happen now to get anywhere towards that discussion is now we need to
stop the violence, now we need to move down through the Mitchell and
Tenet steps, in order to get to the point where some of these things
can be discussed.

QUESTION: On the Mitchell and Tenet steps, I don't know exactly how
many months it has been since those plans were introduced, but
obviously --

MR. BOUCHER: Eleven.

QUESTION: Okay. It's a lot. Do you think it's just that new ideas that
reflect more of an understanding of the situation that's going on
right now need to be introduced, rather than saying that we need to
stop the violence in order to get back to the Mitchell and Tenet
steps? I mean, are those even applicable in the current situation?

MR. BOUCHER: Those are indeed very applicable in the current
situation. Even before the Mitchell Report came out last spring, the
issue was stopping the violence. From the very beginning, if you look
at the Secretary's earliest approaches to the issue and his
discussions with the Israelis, the issue was stopping the violence,
restoring some measure of trust, and getting on to negotiations. The
Tenet security work plan, the Mitchell recommendations, were the path,
or the elaboration of the steps along that path. It's the same basic
idea.

And why have we stuck with that basic idea? Because that's really the
only way to get back to some serious negotiation. It's useful, as
we've said, to have these ideas proposed. But to really get there, we
need to stop the violence and get on with the work of restoring some
measure of trust.

QUESTION: How big a setback is it that the second security meeting,
which seemed so promising after the one worked late last week, and was
canceled yesterday? And is it your understanding that this is going to
be rescheduled? The Secretary said so downstairs, but I didn't know --

MR. BOUCHER: Do I agree with what the Secretary just said downstairs?

QUESTION: Can you elaborate on it?

MR. BOUCHER: Let me think about that a little bit.  Yes, I do.

QUESTION: Can you elaborate on that?

MR. BOUCHER: No, I can't really elaborate. It will be for the parties
to schedule it and do it. We have always maintained security
cooperation between the parties is very important. I think it's the
best way to start achieving some reduction in the violence, as well as
the steps that we've called for.

So that's important to us. We'll keep trying to see what we can do to
help them to convene these meetings and make them useful. And as the
Secretary said, we hope that one will be rescheduled in the coming
days.

QUESTION: I was asking whether you could tell us whether it has been
rescheduled.

MR. BOUCHER: I don't think I can say that at this point.

QUESTION: Richard, maybe the Secretary spoke about this, but did he
have any comment or do you have any comment about the Israelis'
decision to let Chairman Arafat move around a little bit more within
Ramallah, while keeping him in Ramallah? Is there any --

MR. BOUCHER: I don't think he addressed it.  Am I correct?

QUESTION: Well, but the Foreign Minister did. And in answer to a
question a couple back, you said something about how they both had
called for 100 percent effort from the Palestinians. In fact, as I
recall, I think that the only time the phrase "100 percent" came up
was when the Spanish Foreign Minister said that if we are going to ask
Arafat to do 100 percent, he has to have 100 percent capacity to do
that, meaning, I presume, that he was echoing what Javier Solana said
earlier in Jerusalem, in which he said the EU wants Arafat to have
total freedom of movement. Does the United States agree with the
European position on this?

MR. BOUCHER: I will give you our position on this. That is, that in
his conversations over the weekend with Prime Minister Sharon,
Chairman Arafat and other regional leaders over the weekend the
Secretary reiterated what we have said many times. The important thing
here is for both sides to focus on ways to work together to restore
the calm. That means maximum efforts by the Palestinian Authority to
confront violence and terror and steps by the Israeli Government to
both facilitate Palestinians' efforts on security and help promote a
more positive environment on the ground. At this time, we're looking
to the parties to take positive actions that will create that
environment for moving forward. And that's where I will leave it on
the question.

QUESTION: (Inaudible) specific reaction to the Israeli approach about
Chairman Arafat's whereabouts, you're leaving that for the moment to
the Israelis?

MR. BOUCHER: I will say that the issue right now is for the parties to
take positive steps for the environment, to create an environment for
moving forward, and leave it at that.

QUESTION: Would letting Chairman Arafat move around more, in exchange
for crackdown of the violence, be a positive step?

MR. BOUCHER: I'm not going to try to specify. I will just say that's
where the issue lies right now.

QUESTION: (Inaudible) maximum effort. I read "maximum effort" to mean
he can make a maximum effort without being able to go to the beach. He
can make a maximum effort from where he is, provided he has a
telephone.

MR. BOUCHER: I've given you our statement on this subject. We have
talked about the need for the parties to focus, we've talked about the
need for maximum effort, and we've talked about the need for both
sides to create an environment where we can move forward. That's what
we're looking for from both sides. That is, I'm afraid, as specific as
I'm prepared to get on these actions and decisions and whatever
ongoing discussion there is in the Israeli Government on this.

QUESTION: But I think you're saying it's doable under current
conditions.

MR. BOUCHER: I have said what I've said. I'm not going to try to adopt
anybody else's phrasing. I'm sorry.

QUESTION: Is there any sense that the Israelis are moving the
goalposts on Arafat and that he did detain people involved in the
assassination of the Tourism Minister, which was one of the stated
reasons why they imposed this restriction on him in the first place?
So now that he's complied with that, why are you not asking the
Israelis to come through on their part of the bargain?

MR. BOUCHER: I don't think I have any judgment one way or the other on
that. What I have to tell you is that we do think that both parties
need to create the environment so we can move forward, and I'll leave
it at that for the moment.

QUESTION: Just to try and follow up on that, and to pick a name that I
haven't heard mentioned, I'm a little confused where General Zinni
stands. You didn't mention --

MR. BOUCHER: You mean where he physically stands right now?

QUESTION: Well, that's part of it. You didn't mention that the
Secretary had talked with him since he returned. I just wonder, has he
consulted with him? And as part of your move --

MR. BOUCHER: I don't think so. I'll have to double-check on that, but
he didn't mention it this morning.

QUESTION: All right. And as part of your effort to get the parties to
do it, are you considering sending General Zinni out there to help
them?

MR. BOUCHER: There's nothing new on potential for travel by General
Zinni. We have always said he would go when it was useful, but haven't
made any decision like that at this point.

QUESTION: Has Mr. Haass returned?

MR. BOUCHER: Has Mr. Haass returned? He should have, but I haven't
seen him yet.

QUESTION: He was in the cafeteria.

MR. BOUCHER: He was in the cafeteria. Confirmed sighting of Richard
Haass. (Laughter.)

QUESTION: Richard, does the United States disagree with the EU on this
idea of Arafat being able to move? I'm not asking you to be specific
about -- only just to be specific about whether you agree or not
agree, not on what you're calling for.

MR. BOUCHER: You want me here to tell you again what our position is?

QUESTION: No, I don't want to hear that again.

MR. BOUCHER: I'd love to, if I had the chance. But since you're not
giving it to me -- (laughter). I don't know how to characterize the
European position on this. We heard something from the Foreign
Minister out there. I think there is agreement on many points. The
general approach that we have described, that they have described --
looking for 100 percent effort to stop the violence, implementing
Mitchell and Tenet, getting back to negotiations -- I think the US and
the EU positions are very, very close on that. There are some subjects
and aspects that are still under discussion in the European Union,
where I can't characterize their position.

On this one, I guess I would say I'm not in a position to compare and
contrast the United States view and the European view, but I think on
all the fundamentals we're basically aligned.

QUESTION: But wait, are you saying then that you're not sure that this
is the EU position?

MR. BOUCHER: I'm not able to characterize the EU position. I don't
think I want to get into trying to compare and contrast our positions
with theirs.

QUESTION: Right.  Well, I'm not asking you to characterize it.

MR. BOUCHER: I've given you our position, and I'll leave it to you to
do whatever analysis --

QUESTION: Well, but you do realize that your position leaves a lot to
the imagination, yes?

MR. BOUCHER: I would hope one wouldn't imagine; one would just read
the words and focus on that.

QUESTION: Change of subject?

MR. BOUCHER: By popular demand?  No, one more.

QUESTION: Reviewing the last 11 months, is the US really relevant to
what's happening in the area? You've been saying cease the violence
and so on, and Tenet and Mitchell, but really nothing has changed, and
it's gotten only worse. Are you at all considering a change of policy
on this?

And secondly, have the Saudis approached you diplomatically with their
effort, their plan?

MR. BOUCHER: On the first question of, "Is the US relevant?" Yes. We
think so; more important than that, the parties think so. And they
continue to work with us, they continue to look to us, and they
continue to work with us on ways to stop the violence, ways to get
back and move forward in this process.

As far as -- yes, we've had diplomatic discussions with the Saudis on
these ideas that they have talked about. The Secretary talked to the
Crown Prince over the weekend.

Change of subject.

QUESTION: In light of the holes being found in tunnels related to the
Embassy to Rome, are you taking any additional steps there and other
embassies, since this sheds new dimension on security of embassies?

MR. BOUCHER: I would just reiterate what we have said before. We're at
a very high state of alert. We are taking all possible precautions in
our different embassies overseas, including at the Embassy in Rome. We
rely and work with host governments to maintain security for our
embassies, and we have appreciated the cooperation and support we've
gotten from the Italian Government. And the fact that they are finding
these things and investigating these things I would cite as an example
where our cooperation can uncover stuff and lead, we hope, to a safer
environment for our people and the people who visit us at the
embassies.

The Italian authorities informed us of this hole in a tunnel near the
Embassy over the weekend. We're working closely with them to
investigate the matter. It's an ongoing investigation. I can't draw
any conclusions at this point.

QUESTION: You said something about the fact that the Italians are
going out and arresting -- finding these people and arresting them,
and investigating this.

MR. BOUCHER: I think I said finding these things. I was referring to
the hole, actually, at this point.

QUESTION: Right, right, and investigating these things. You spoke
about that in terms of US-Italian cooperation. Was there some -- did
you tip the -- did the US tip these Italians off to this whole thing?
Or are you not suggesting that?

MR. BOUCHER: I'm not suggesting that. I'm suggesting that the Italians
authorities informed us over the weekend of the existence of the hole.

QUESTION: Can you talk about -- on Iraq, would you like to comment on
the announcement of talks between Iraq and the UN on the sanctions in
March, and what you hope that could be achieved at this?

MR. BOUCHER: I hadn't seen the announcement, so I'll have to get
something for you on that. I think we've commented on the general
proposition in the past. I'll see if there's anything new in the
announcement.

QUESTION: We heard that (inaudible) northern Iraq (inaudible) they are
coming to Washington, D.C., to speak with the State Department
officials. Have you scheduled any meeting with them?

MR. BOUCHER: I don't know.  I'll have to check.

QUESTION: On Zimbabwe, you may also not have anything on this yet, but
do you have any response to the charges being --

MR. BOUCHER: To the what?

QUESTION: The charges that have been leveled against the opposition
leader? He's been accused of treason fairly recently.

MR. BOUCHER: My understanding is that Mr. Tsvangirai was charged with
treason, not arrested. We have seen press reports that suggest the
government is trying to link him to an alleged plot to assassinate the
president, President Mugabe. This falls against a backdrop of a very
well documented campaign of violence and intimidation against the
opposition.

We are aware of no convincing evidence that there is any basis for
these allegations. It just appears to be another tragic example of
President Mugabe's increasingly authoritarian rule, his government's
apparent determination to intimidate and repress the opposition, as we
approach the March 9th and 10th presidential election.

QUESTION: In the meeting with the Spanish Foreign Minister, there
wasn't discussion on ESDP and the pending problem with the
ratification of ESDP from the European Union?

MR. BOUCHER: There was some discussion of this, both in terms of the
emphasis that we all put on NATO, as well as the European Union's
developing capabilities, and a desire to resolve this issue as soon as
possible. And that was pretty much it.

QUESTION: And the position of the US remains the same that the
Istanbul paper is a good agreement?

MR. BOUCHER: The position remains the same for the United States, yes.

QUESTION: With the new developments of the war -- the conflict in
Colombia, how concerned is the US Government regarding the security
that the Venezuelan Government is providing to the oil pipes and other
sources of oil, taking into account that Venezuela is a supposed
reliable supplier of oil to the US?

MR. BOUCHER: Are you talking about Colombian oil pipelines or
Venezuelan oil pipelines?

QUESTION: I'm talking about Venezuelan pipelines, because with the
spread of the conflict up along the border, there is certain concern
that the Venezuelan pipes could also be at risk.

MR. BOUCHER: I'll have to see if that's a situation that we've
addressed. As you know, we have been concerned about the pipelines in
Colombia because there is a history and a record of their being
attacked repeatedly and shut down from time to time, depriving the
government of oil revenue, as well as depriving the world or the
region of Colombia's resources. So that is a proposal that we've made
to our Congress we're looking for funding for. I really don't know
exactly where we stand with the Venezuelan pipelines. I'll have to
look at that and see.

QUESTION: (Inaudible) kidnapping presidential candidate (inaudible)
put new light on the instability of the democratic process in
Colombia. What are the concerns of the US, and will there be any
effort to help out as they approach the May elections and assure
security?

MR. BOUCHER: Well, I don't think we would say that this is some
example of the instability of the democratic process in Colombia. We
would say it's another very tragic example of the pattern of behavior
by the FARC, which the organization has committed over a hundred
terrorist acts, including the murder of 20 civilians and last week's
hijacking of the civilian airliner. Activities like these have led to
the understandable decision of President Pastrana to suspend the peace
talks.

We will continue to support the Colombian Government at this difficult
time, and we strongly condemn this kidnapping and call for her
immediate release.

QUESTION: Can you talk about reports that the US is going to provide
military intelligence to Colombia, and in general about the expansion
of US assistance to Colombia for counter-insurgency rather than
counter-narcotics?

MR. BOUCHER: I can't talk any more about what we're providing in
support for Colombia than I did on Friday when I talked about
providing more information, spare parts, things like that. And if
there's anything else to talk about, I'll get to you when we do.

QUESTION: I wanted to go to the Pearl case. Ambassador Chamberlain
said that the US has been seeking the extradition of Saeed Sheikh for
quite a while before the Pearl abduction. Can you talk about the State
Department's role in this and the kind of talks that were going on,
and perhaps what we're expecting from Pakistan now differently than
before the killing took place?

MR. BOUCHER: As our Ambassador to Pakistan has said, this is an issue
that she raised in January because the United States wants to, as Ari
said, get our hands on Omar Sheikh. And it's an issue that we need to
address, will address with the Government of Pakistan, we'll continue
to address with the Government of Pakistan, even after the horrible
kidnapping of Danny Pearl. I suppose it remains all the more
important, but we had started to pursue this before the kidnapping.

Our Ambassador will meet again, I think with President Musharraf, in
coming days -- I think as early as tomorrow, she said -- and this will
be a topic of our continuing discussion with the Pakistanis to try
work it out.

QUESTION: Why didn't the US get him extradited, although I understand
it's not under a treaty?

MR. BOUCHER: There is an extradition treaty. It's old, but there is an
extradition treaty. But this is a subject we'll have to work out with
the Pakistani Government, and one that we continue to discuss. And
she'll discuss it again tomorrow, I expect.

QUESTION: On the treaty, my understanding is that dates from 1942 and
it's a treaty with Britain that was done pre-partition,
pre-independence. How is that still in effect?

MR. BOUCHER: I'll get the legal analysis of it, but it continues, in
our view. At least that's what I've been told. I'll get you the
legalities of all that.

QUESTION: Is that only our view?  The Pakistanis are disputing?

MR. BOUCHER: I haven't heard it disputed. I haven't had a chance to
look into all the legal aspects of this. I'm just told that there is
an extradition treaty from that time that continues in effect.

QUESTION: Following up on Terri's question (inaudible) diplomatic
contacts as long ago as November, either pursuant to a judicial action
in the United States or not, about our trying to get our hands on this
-- is there anything that you could just walk for the record through
that chronology a little bit?

MR. BOUCHER: I'm not aware of how far back it goes. The ones I know of
are in January, in early January, when our Ambassador raised this with
a number of people in Pakistan. And then she has followed up
subsequently. I'll have to double-check and see if there was anything
prior to that.

QUESTION: Can I follow up on that? If this guy was so dangerous and
you were seeking his extradition, were you -- did you know about his
whereabouts before then. And why weren't -- why was he able to lure an
American into this elaborate web when the US was seeking his
extradition? And were there being tabs kept on him or anything?

MR. BOUCHER: Don't know.

QUESTION: Can you check?

MR. BOUCHER: Not sure. Really, when it boils down to it, you're asking
whether we're keeping tabs on some foreign person in a foreign
country, and that's not something we necessarily discuss that much.

QUESTION: Well, Richard, wait.  I'm not sure she's asking that.

MR. BOUCHER: I think that's what she is asking.

QUESTION: Well, then let me then  -- 

MR. BOUCHER: Do you know his whereabouts  -- 

QUESTION: Let me rephrase it then. Do you think that if you had been
-- if people had known that you thought this guy was a bad guy, I
think --

MR. BOUCHER: We didn't know that we thought this was a bad guy,
because we were trying to get a hold of him. Because before the
kidnapping we had been pursuing the issue of whether we could get him
to the United States.

QUESTION: Oh, I thought this was only coming out now. Maybe I'm wrong.
You had publicized the fact that you think that -- that you were
looking for this guy?

MR. BOUCHER: No, we had not publicized it, but we had pursued it with
the Pakistani Government.

QUESTION: Well, given that -- if I could follow up. Given that this
happened with a suspect that you thought was potentially dangerous,
are you thinking about letting other Americans and foreign journalists
know about potentially dangerous characters in countries where they
are that the US is seeking their extradition?

MR. BOUCHER: Our security officers at our embassies and other people
are always happy to meet with journalists. We do meet with journalists
to discuss the situation in any given place. As you know, we have had
meetings with journalists in Pakistan, both in Karachi and Islamabad,
I think. And we're always happy to try to help people understand the
security environment.

QUESTION: May I ask why it was in January that you started this
process of trying to --

MR. BOUCHER: I didn't say it was in January we started. I said I knew
we did it in January, and I'd have to check and see if we had done it
prior to that. That was Todd's question.

QUESTION: Do you know what that particular timing -- why you  -- 

MR. BOUCHER: That's sort of predicated on when did you start, and I'll
have to find out when we started to see if there was any particular
aspect that led us to do it in January, if we had not done it before,
or if we had done it in January as a follow-up to something we did
before.

QUESTION: If this is Elaine's question, forgive me for this one final
filler, but was whatever you did in January pursuant to any judicial
action that had been taken in the United States with respect to this
person; in other words, like an indictment, or a sealed indictment?

MR. BOUCHER: That's a question -- if it were a sealed indictment,
obviously I would not be in a position to discuss it, would I?

QUESTION: Unless it had been unsealed subsequently.

MR. BOUCHER: Unless it had been unsealed subsequently. But that's sort
of part and parcel of why did we pursue it in January, and whether it
was a new action or a follow-up. I'll try to check on that.

QUESTION: Thanks.

QUESTION: Did Daniel Pearl meet with any US officials where he
specifically mentioned this particular individual?

MR. BOUCHER: I don't think that's something I can go into. I'm sorry.

QUESTION: With respect to journalists, what are we doing with Shawn
Crispin, who also apparently works for a publication owned by Dow
Jones? And they're saying in Thailand that he may be a threat to
national security. Has he been working on anything with respect to
al-Qaida?

MR. BOUCHER: You're asking about the Far East Economic Review
journalist in Thailand?

QUESTION: Right.

MR. BOUCHER: As far as what he was working on, you'll have to check
with his newspaper to see. But I would say we are concerned about the
prospect that Thailand may bar certain journalists from working in or
entering the country for publishing reports that were critical of the
government. We would encourage Thailand to uphold its reputation as a
strong supporter of freedom of the press, consistent with its
constitution and its past practices.

Ambassador Johnson in Bangkok raised this issue with Prime Minister
Thaksin in a meeting on February 25th, and he expressed our concern.
And once again, I would say that free press is an essential element of
any democracy.

QUESTION: New subject?

MR. BOUCHER: Please.

QUESTION: Has this building told Radio Liberty and Radio Free Europe
not to start broadcasting in Chechen into Russia? I guess apparently
the service was supposed to start on Thursday.

MR. BOUCHER: This is a matter that has been discussed and continues to
be discussed with the White House and with the Congress. It's the
issue whether Radio Free Europe, Radio Liberty broadcasts should be
done in North Caucusas languages. It is important to point out the
North Caucusas already receives Radio Free Europe and Radio Liberty's
Russian language broadcasts; and second, to point out that our policy
towards Chechnya is clear: there is no military solution there, and
that we have continued to support a dialogue between both sides.

So with those statements of policy, I would say the discussion of
broadcasts in Caucusas languages remains a subject of discussion.

QUESTION: Well, can you confirm that the contents of the letter that
Deputy Secretary Armitage wrote to the Broadcasting Board of Governors
that were reported in today's Post?

MR. BOUCHER: I can't confirm the contents of a letter, but I can
confirm that as part of that ongoing discussion Deputy Secretary
Armitage did send a letter.

QUESTION: And what's the status of this -- I mean, as I understand it,
the Congress is -- this is a congressionally mandated program, is it
not? What are you telling the Hill about your reluctance to follow the
law?

MR. BOUCHER: Well, I didn't express any reluctance to follow the law.
I just said that we're in discussions with the White House and the
Congress on the issue.

QUESTION: Okay, well, is it fair to say that this programming isn't
going to begin on Thursday, as it was supposed to?

MR. BOUCHER: We'll have to see.

QUESTION: So it still could?

MR. BOUCHER: We'll have to see.

QUESTION: I'm sorry. So you're saying that you are opposed to these
broadcasts?

MR. BOUCHER: I said this is a matter of discussion with the White
House and with the Congress, and while those discussions are ongoing,
I'm not going to be able to report to you further.

QUESTION: Do you have any plans to meet with the North Koreans in New
York City in the near future? South Korean mediators are reporting
about that.

MR. BOUCHER: I don't know of any specific plans, but we do meet
periodically from time to time up there. I wouldn't be surprised if we
did. I'll have to check and see if there's any specific meetings on
the schedule. But it wouldn't be too surprising if we did because we
do that all the time.

QUESTION: A question about Taiwan. Can you comment about the possible
withdrawal of Douglas Hall's nomination as Washington's envoy to
Taipei?

MR. BOUCHER: I haven't heard any discussion of that.

QUESTION: And a protocol matter. Is it true that his appointment is
being held up because of a delayed FBI background check?

MR. BOUCHER: I wouldn't discuss anything like that anyway. I don't
know.

QUESTION: Angola. Reaction to the death of Mr. Savimbi and the arrival
of the president of Angola, expected in a couple hours?

MR. BOUCHER: We put out a statement over the weekend on Saturday about
the death of Mr. Savimbi, so I'll just stick with that. And as far as
the arrival of --

On the death of Jonas Savimbi, let me reiterate what we said on
Saturday. Jonas Savimbi has been killed in an Angolan armed forces
offensive in Moxico Province. The death of the UNITA leader is yet
another casualty in a war that should have ended long ago. We call on
both sides in conjunction with the peaceful opposition, civil sectors,
and the international community to fulfill their obligation to bring
peace to the Angolan people. The United States remains committed to
achieving peace and equitable development in Angola.

President Bush is meeting on Tuesday, February 26th, with President
dos Santos of Angola, President Chissano of Mozambique, and President
Mogae of Botswana. Among the objectives of this summit is to discuss
how the leaders, in conjunction with the United States, can help
achieve peace in the region, including in Angola. And I would note in
that context that the Secretary has a meeting this afternoon with
President Chissano as well.

QUESTION: Isn't Savimbi's disappearance or removal -- isn't that a
positive step? Not that you favor ambushes, but doesn't that move
chances for peace a bit further when they've lost -- the insurgents
have lost their key leader, albeit once the US's boy, but not for a
long time.

MR. BOUCHER: I think I'll leave it to you to speculate on what it may
mean. We would reiterate our view that the parties to this conflict
need to put down their arms, need to reach an agreement.

QUESTION: No, that's not the point of my question. My point is, if the
absence now, the removal -- whatever the right word would be, the
polite word would be -- from the leader of the insurgent movement,
isn't that something that will contribute to peacemaking?

MR. BOUCHER: We'll have to see.

QUESTION: One more on Iraq? Did the Secretary talk about Iraq with the
Spanish Minister today? As the EU position --

MR. BOUCHER: That's a stumper. I don't remember any particularly
extensive discussion. I think it did come up. Yes, it did come up in a
general sense, and that's the problems that are being posed by Iraq,
their failure to admit inspectors, their failure to abide by UN
resolutions, and that's an issue that all of us need to deal with. And
I think that was the tenor of their discussion this morning.

QUESTION: On the Berenson case in Peru, you commented at some length
the other day, and this morning The Washington Times has come out with
an op-ed saying that essentially the Department of State should not
take up the Berenson case the way they have, unless they're also
willing to take up the Walker case, because the Walker and Berenson
case are very similar. Do you have any comment on this?

MR. BOUCHER: No, I'm glad not to have seen that, and therefore I won't
attempt a similar analysis.

QUESTION: Thank you.

(end transcript)

(Distributed by the Office of International Information Programs, U.S.
Department of State. Web site: http://usinfo.state.gov)