*EPF302 05/01/2002
Transcript: State Department Daily Briefing, May 1
(Colombia, Israel/Palestinian Authority, Iran, Iraq, U.N., North Korea, China, Nepal, Pakistan, Burma, Malaysia) (8690)

State Department Spokesman Richard Boucher briefed reporters May 1 in the department briefing room.

Following is a transcript:

(begin transcript)

Daily Press Briefing Index
May 1, 2002
Briefer: Richard Boucher, Spokesman

COLOMBIA
-- Determination and Certification of Colombian Armed Forces with Respect for Human Rights Related Conditions
ISRAEL/PALESTINIAN AUTHORITY
-- Overview of Situation and Diplomatic Efforts
-- Update on Resolution of the Situation at the Muqatta Compound
-- Status of Jenin Fact-Finding Mission
IRAN
-- Reported Approach by Iran for Talks with US
IRAQ
-- Iraqi National Congress Finances and Status of Liberty TV
-- Iraqi Opposition Groups and Activities
-- Status of Return of UN Weapons Inspectors
UNITED NATIONS
-- Convention for Protection of Children
NORTH KOREA
-- North Korea's Acceptance of Proposed Talks with US
CHINA
-- Secretary Powell's Meeting with Vice President Hu
-- US Assessment Team to Visit China
NEPAL
-- Upcoming US Visit by Prime Minister of Nepal
PAKISTAN
-- Referendum in Pakistan
BURMA
-- Status of Aung San Suu Kyi
MALAYSIA
-- Deputy Secretary Armitage's Meeting with Defense Minister

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE
DAILY PRESS BRIEFING
WEDNESDAY, MAY 1, 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 for you right away. We'll put out one or two things afterwards.

QUESTION: And maybe we shouldn't ask about those?

MR. BOUCHER: Well, we're putting out a statement on certification of human rights conditions for assistance to Colombia, and I think we put out a statement this morning on a group of people that are going to go out to look at UN Population Fund activities in China. I don't think I have any others.

QUESTION: So it was the Colombia one.

MR. BOUCHER: Oh, the Colombia one. Yes, it's either on its way out, or about to be. It's being finalized. Do you want me to give it? Do you want me to tell you about that off the top? Okay. We'll tell you about that on the top, and it's fairly long and detailed. But I'll give you the basics.

Yesterday, Secretary Powell determined and certified to the appropriate congressional committees that the Colombian armed forces are meeting the statutory criteria related to human rights and ties to paramilitary groups that are required under Section 567 of the Foreign Operations Export Financing and Related Programs Appropriation Act of 2002. The Secretary's determination was based on a thorough and careful evaluation of the conditions in that section and the relevant actions and policies of the Colombian military. The process leading to the determination was not intended to be a complete review of the human rights situation in Colombia, but was rather focused on the statutory criteria.

So the Secretary made the decision to certify based on the Department's discussions with the Government of Colombia and the Colombia's armed forces with a range of international and Colombian nongovernmental organizations active on human rights issues, and of course the information provided by our Embassy in Bogot?

Despite some real progress on these specific areas, both we and the Government of Colombia recognize the protection of human rights in Colombia needs improvement. While the vast majority of human rights abuses are committed by the three terrorist organizations in Colombia -- that is the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia, the National Liberation Army and the Self-Defense Forces of Colombia -- the Government of Colombia has also assured us of its understanding that the protection of human rights is a special responsibility of government. And they believe, as we do, that a secure, prosperous and democratic Colombia cannot be achieved if human rights abuses and impunity for human rights abusers is allowed.

So there will be more work to be done in these areas, although we were able to certify at this point based on the specific criteria.

QUESTION: The King of Jordan will be here next week. In fact, he'll be here this week. But he is going to see the Secretary Monday, the President Wednesday. There are reports that the Secretary has talked to the Saudi Foreign Minister, to Yasser Arafat. Of course, these kinds of conversations and meetings have happened before, but there is a sense that there is a quickening of the pace of peace efforts. Can you give us some overview of what is going on? We thought he might go out there, but it sounds like everybody is coming here. Sharon will be here next week, too, of course.

MR. BOUCHER: Let me give you an overview of what's going on. I was just waiting to see if there were any more elements that needed to be added to the question. The President on April 4th gave a statement about Middle East peace process. But we've been working since then -- before then and since then -- to implement those elements. Those elements involve defusing the current situation, as it exists there. At that time, that means securing Israeli withdrawal from the areas which they had gone into. That meant moving forward on several aspects of the problem: first, to get some real security going for people who live -- for Israelis and Palestinians, for the people who live in this region; second of all, moving forward on serious and accelerated negotiations; and third of all, moving forward on economic assistance. Those elements were the ones discussed during the Secretary's trip in addition to trying to defuse the immediate situations that we faced for withdrawal.

And, third of all, the President also talked quite explicitly about all parties needing to step up to their responsibilities. That included, obviously, the United States to play a key role, for the Palestinian Authority to exercise authority, control security problems, for the Israelis to withdraw and for the Arab nations to step forward and play an active role in seeking peace through a political negotiation.

We have seen I think parties start to do that in various ways. Our cooperation with the Saudi Government has been very positive and fruitful over the last few days since the visit to Crawford. We have been in close touch as well with King Abdallah of Jordan, with President Mubarak of Egypt and with others in the region. Remember, the King of Morocco was here about a week ago. And so we are looking for everybody to play their responsibilities.

Where we are right now at this particular moment is that I think based on what I see on television that the resolution of the situation at Chairman Arafat's compound, the Muqatah compound, is underway. As you know, we have worked with the British to try to ensure arrangements that the parties could accept so that the six prisoners that are currently at the compound can be closely monitored to make sure that they will continue in detention. The transfer, as I said, appears to be taking place now and we will then assist the British team in verifying the continued detention of those six individuals. This is a positive step. We welcome the cooperation of both sides and the UK that made this possible. We hope that progress can be made regarding the situation in Bethlehem as rapidly as possible. And Chairman Arafat now needs to take up his responsibilities to end violence and terrorism as we have said.

So that remains the agenda as we move forward, finishing the resolution of these particular issues that have impeded the completion of withdrawal, and then moving on with the agenda that the Secretary discussed during his trip that's based on the President's speech of April 4th, and that is to move forward on security and freedom from terror and violence for all parties in the region; serious and accelerated negotiations to revive hope and lead to a political settlement; and then economic and humanitarian assistance to address the increasingly desperate conditions that are faced by the Palestinian people. And we will keep working with all the parties on that.

QUESTION: I get asked and maybe others have, too, what happens to these six wanted people? Are they held in indefinite detention? Israel wanted to try them. You know all the questions so I won't elaborate, but I just don't understand if they're going to be indefinitely confined.

Everybody is unfurling a peace plan -- Abdallah got into one today, the King of Jordan. And we know the Crown Prince of Saudi Arabia has. Will there come a time, do you think, and maybe soon, that this administration will do what Bill Clinton tried to do as President and tell Israel how much of Jerusalem it has to give up, try to fix the borders, et cetera? Or is this still something to be reserved for negotiations?

MR. BOUCHER: I think if you look at the record, you will find that that's not exactly an accurate portrayal of what President Clinton did.

QUESTION: He was more specific than others had been about the terms of the settlement. Is this administration's position that it is up to the parties or will the administration get specific about withdrawal, Jerusalem, refugees, et cetera?

MR. BOUCHER: The position of the United States has been that the parties need to negotiate an agreement. The parties are the ones that have to negotiate, the parties are the ones that have to reach agreement. The position of the United States Administration, for many administrations, has been that we will do what we can, we will do what's necessary to help facilitate that process. And we have been very active in that regard in previous administrations, but also in this one.

The issues that we're dealing with now, the resolution of the situation in the compound, for example, or trying to get the withdrawal from Bethlehem or trying to move forward and design a method to go forward on the accelerated negotiating process or ways to ensure security, the United States has been very active in helping the parties deal with the issue of the moment. And at times, the United States has made suggestions or presented ideas or presented solutions that seemed to be apparent to us. So I think you can count on the United States to continue to play that kind of active role.

QUESTION: How about the six, though?

MR. BOUCHER: About the six? The arrangements that are being made are to ensure the continued detention of the people involved. That's what we intend to do.

QUESTION: But I think what Barry's really getting at, though, is is their continued detention for the length of the sentences handed down by the military court, or until -- or do you see -- I mean, do you accept that as proper justice for these people, or do you go with the Israeli version that they need to be tried by them?

MR. BOUCHER: This is an arrangement that is made to continue their detention, based on whatever the status and conditions of detention are at the present moment. I suppose one would have to say it doesn't preclude other arrangements being made. But our understanding is these people are in detention, belong in detention and should remain there as long as is required.

QUESTION: Well, required by whom, though?

MR. BOUCHER: By the decisions of the Palestinian Authority at this point.

QUESTION: Is it your hope that they would eventually work out -- the Israelis and the Palestinian Authority would work out eventually what would happen to these people?

MR. BOUCHER: Let's deal with the current situation right now. We have to ensure the continued detention of these people. That is the key to unlocking the situation at the compound, to ensuring that the Israelis are able to withdraw from Ramallah, to ensure that we can keep this process of Israeli withdrawal going so that we can get moving on the other aspects that we want to get moving on. As I said, I don't think this particular arrangement precludes some other agreement down the road by the parties, but what we're doing now is ensuring their continued detention, because that's what the parties want to see in order to complete these other actions. And that is a positive step in that it's going forward apparently right now.

QUESTION: Can you give us any details on the people -- the Americans who will be the guards? I mean, there have been different speculation about who they'll be, whether they'll be State Department employees or people who resign and then are hired by private security firms or those kinds of arrangements --

MR. BOUCHER: I wouldn't speculate too far on specific individuals at this point. We do have an individual from the State Department who is out establishing the methods for verification of continued detention. As that is put together and we decide what personnel will be required, we will then go looking or find the appropriate people to send out to join the British in that job of supervising the conditions of detention, or as wardens. They are being thought of in terms of being people with police and security backgrounds, people who know something about detention and prisons and incarceration kinds of things.

QUESTION: But if they're being transferred today, that means it has to happen pretty quickly, doesn't it?

MR. BOUCHER: Well, we can ensure the immediate detention of them and ensure that that continues, and then move as the arrangements are worked out, there may be other people going out to do this, beyond the ones that are there for the immediate transfer and to establish the presence.

QUESTION: On Jenin.

QUESTION: Can I ask one more? Were the Palestinians -- once detention is established, were the Palestinians to decide one day that they simply wanted to open the door and let these people walk out, would these monitors have any power to stop this from happening?

MR. BOUCHER: That's what we call a hypothetical. The understanding is that these people are in detention and should remain there. And these monitors will help ensure that that continues.

QUESTION: On Jenin? The United States proposed the resolution that created this commission of inquiry, and now the Secretary General considers -- is minded to disband it. What is the United States reaction to that?

MR. BOUCHER: Well, as you all know, at this point details of the Jenin fact-finding mission have not been worked out between the United Nations and the parties. As you note, we did support in a Security Council resolution the Secretary General's initiative to appoint the Jenin fact-finding team. The Security Council welcomed that initiative. We do continue to believe it's important to determine the facts about the recent events in Jenin.

We understand that the Secretary General will be communicating with the Security Council on this issue later today. We look forward to hearing what he has to say on the subject, and then the Security Council will address this issue this evening, and we'll see where those discussions lead.

QUESTION: I'd like to follow up. Secretary Powell said that he didn't have evidence that there was a massacre. And in addition, there have been reports -- it was in the paper today that the Palestinians say 59 -- or 56 bodies have been discovered.

MR. BOUCHER: According to one of the papers I read this morning.

QUESTION: According to one of the papers, a Washington paper actually. And yet the Palestinians say that they believe still that war crimes took place. Is it the view of the United States that war crimes may have taken place?

MR. BOUCHER: As the Secretary said, we don't have indications of that. What we do believe is that it is important to determine the facts about the recent events in Jenin. That's why we supported the initiative of the Secretary General. As we have noted, that hasn't been able to come to fruition because the arrangements had not been worked out.

But we do think it's important to determine the facts about the recent events. And these kinds of different views, different stories, different reports for us is another indication of why that remains a useful thing to do.

QUESTION: So are you urging the Israelis to allow the team to come in to settle this with the UN?

MR. BOUCHER: We have been working with the United Nations, with the Israelis to try to see if those arrangements couldn't be worked out. At this moment, as I said, they haven't been. But we've tried very hard, I think, in first of all encouraging them to talk to each other, which they did. Second of all, we have been working this both through our representatives in the field. Ambassador Negroponte up in New York has been keeping in close touch with the Secretary General's office, with the Israeli mission up there as well, to try to see if those two parties couldn't come to some agreement on the arrangements.

The Secretary has been very active on this, too. He talked to the Secretary General four or five times yesterday, twice this morning. He talked to Foreign Minister Peres yesterday. We have been in touch with the Israelis this morning as well. So we have been in contact with the UN and with the Israelis just to see if they couldn't work out some kind of arrangements.

At this point that hasn't been done. We'll hear further from the Secretary General later this afternoon.

QUESTION: I mean, do you think that time is of the essence here? Are you disappointed that a team hasn't gone in yet?

MR. BOUCHER: At this point I'll just stick to saying we would like those kinds of arrangements to be worked out. We would have liked those arrangements to be worked out. That hasn't proved possible at this point, and we'll hear more later from the Secretary General.

QUESTION: Richard, can I ask a technical question about the resolution? Because it came up in a question -- in fact, the resolution that you sponsored and supported in the Security Council didn't create this team, did it?

MR. BOUCHER: No, it welcomed the initiative by the Secretary General. I think that's the way I put it again today.

QUESTION: And did it in any way authorize this mission? Or did it only, well, say we think this is a nice thing?

MR. BOUCHER: It was something the Secretary General was doing that the Council thought was important and useful. As I said, it is our view that we think it's useful and important to determine the facts of what happened in Jenin. But it was something the Secretary General was doing. The Council felt it was important and useful, and we welcomed it in a resolution. We welcomed what the Secretary General was doing.

QUESTION: But that's all it did. It didn't authorize or create anything.

MR. BOUCHER: He created the commission, he took the initiative, he determined the players. As I made clear, we welcomed that initiative on his part. We thought it was important and remains important to determine the facts, and we, to the extent we could, tried to help him and the Israelis work out arrangements that might be satisfactory.

QUESTION: Richard, does the US believe that the United Nations has an anti-Israel bias?

MR. BOUCHER: That's a question that has a long history, and it really depends on what you're talking about. As you know, we had to work for many years to get Israel into some of the rotations and some of the opportunities in the United Nations. A couple years ago they became members of the Western European and Other group. And that was an important development.

QUESTION: But I'm talking about now.

MR. BOUCHER: What do you mean by the United Nations? What period of time are you dealing with?

QUESTION: I'm talking about now.

MR. BOUCHER: One could do a long analysis of this. I'm not inclined to do so, frankly.

QUESTION: But I'm not asking for a long analysis; I just want to --

MR. BOUCHER: Well, you're asking kind of a very vague and general question that you could answer depending on what your assumptions are.

QUESTION: Well, with respect to this committee.

MR. BOUCHER: I don't think we have said -- I don't think Israel and I don't think anybody has really said that.

QUESTION: They have said that.

MR. BOUCHER: Israel was quite concerned about the circumstances and the arrangements, and as we have said, we tried to help them see if those arrangements couldn't be worked out.

QUESTION: Right. I mean, if I could just follow up, please. The implication that the Israeli Government has made is that this committee was kind of set -- was setting them up. And obviously the Secretary General, being in charge of putting this committee together, is the one who the US is dealing with on this. I mean, do you think that Kofi Annan has done a good job in trying to choose the members of this committee?

MR. BOUCHER: We felt that on the basis of the Secretary General's initiative, that it was possible to make arrangements that would be satisfactory to both sides that would result in a fair assessment of the facts regarding the recent events in Jenin, and that's why we supported the proposal, the initiative. That's why we tried to help out and see if that wasn't possible to come to agreement on those arrangements. As I said, it hasn't been possible, but we thought it was possible, and we would have hoped that could have been done.

QUESTION: All the arrangements are still being worked out? I wonder if the -- last week the Secretary, responding to Senator McConnell, said he thought it might be a good idea for the fact-finders to look at the suicide bombing against Israel as well. Is that something the US thinks ought to be taken up by this fact-finding commission?

And just a factual thing about tomorrow, the Madrid Quartet -- which is really a quintet, but may be a trio. Are you getting Kofi Annan -- I don't know what it is -- are you getting Kofi Annan here literally, and Pique -- and Ivanov of course will be here -- is that basically the same group as you had in Madrid?

MR. BOUCHER: Yes. What was the first question?

QUESTION: The Secretary says, in responding to Senator McConnell last week --

MR. BOUCHER: Oh, said that they should look into everything, including the circumstances --

QUESTION: Well, he thought why don't they look into that, too. This follows up Andrea's question in a way.

MR. BOUCHER: What the Security Council welcomed, the initiative that we welcomed, was to determine the facts about recent events in Jenin. It was particularly focused on Jenin; it was particularly focused on recent events. But it did not circumscribe the facts, because that was for the group to do. So yes, the Secretary said they should look into all various aspects of the recent events in Jenin.

But that's the kind of thing that you know that was part of the discussion of the arrangements, and so far that hasn't happened, and we'll hear perhaps more definitively from the Secretary General in the Security Council this afternoon.

QUESTION: What are you hearing out of Iran? Of course today is May 1st, and the Khatami Government has been coming out with bellicose type statements, totally denouncing both the US and Israel. Can you speak for that?

MR. BOUCHER: I think that's what we hear often out of Iran. We have been looking to see a different attitude on some of these things. But no, we watch events there, we read the reports. I don't really have anything particularly new that we have heard that nobody else has.

QUESTION: Just a follow-up on Iran. There have widespread media reports in Iran that some conservative politicians have approached the US about the possibility of holding talks, exploratory talks in a third country. Do you know anything about that?

MR. BOUCHER: No.

QUESTION: A lot of us in the State Department Press Corps today received a press release from the INC saying that they had been forced, essentially, because of lack of funding, to shut down Liberty TV. They say that they weren't able to agree on a budget. Don't you guys support Liberty TV?

MR. BOUCHER: Yes, we do. And, in fact, of the about $15 million of funding that we provided to date to the Iraqi National Congress, something like 5 million of that was devoted to support the operations of Liberty TV. We fully funded that program, including the Liberty TV part of it, earlier this year. We anticipate providing additional funding as soon as grant negotiations are successfully concluded. We have been in the process of negotiating a new grant agreement with the Iraqi National Congress. That process has been complicated by ongoing problems in the Iraqi National Congress' financial management practices. Those issues remain important to us and we are working with them to resolve the problems as soon as possible so that we can sign a new grant.

QUESTION: Can I just follow up? Liberty TV has been on for a while now. What is your assessment so far?

MR. BOUCHER: As I say, we provided $5 million or so.

QUESTION: What do you think? Are they reaching the right people? Are they broadcasting stuff that --

MR. BOUCHER: Well, I don't think I have an assessment. I'm not sure how much audience Nielsen kind of work is done in their target audience area, so I'm not sure how much one can do. They do broadcast I think something like, what, four hours a day or something like that. But I don't think I have an assessment of how many people they have been able to reach that way.

QUESTION: Are you confirming (inaudible)? Is that your understanding?

MR. BOUCHER: You would have to check with the operation, themselves, over whether they are still operating or not. Tune in to turn them on.

QUESTION: (Inaudible.)

MR. BOUCHER: The fact is the United States has supported them consistently. We have been discussing a new grant to provide additional funds. They say they are out of money. We have been discussing with them a grant to provide additional funds, but frankly it has been complicated by the financial management practices that have continued to bedevil this whole operation.

QUESTION: Is one of the issues where they haven't been able to come up with paperwork on exactly how that 5 million has been spent?

MR. BOUCHER: I'm not sure whether it's a paperwork issue, but the kind of responsible accounting for funds that we're looking for, that we have discussed with them many times needs to be done as well in the context of the new grant. And we want to provide the money, but these things have to be worked out responsibly.

QUESTION: Is that the only reason that they are not getting money right now? Because of the finance?

MR. BOUCHER: Yes. We continue to support the activities of the INC. We continue to support Liberty TV programming. We are happy to fund it, but it has to be done under conditions that ensure the appropriate use of the money.

QUESTION: And it doesn't particularly trouble you at all that they say they have been forced to go off the air because they don't have enough money?

MR. BOUCHER: As I said, we have been trying to give them more money, but we have to work out the grant agreement under responsible standards.

QUESTION: So it is their fault.

MR. BOUCHER: We have been trying to work this out.

QUESTION: Richard, can you give us a bit more detail about -- sometimes you say we are financing Liberty TV, but do you know when the last payment was made on this part of the --

MR. BOUCHER: Earlier this year. I think there was a payment either in March or for March.

QUESTION: Do you know how much that was?

MR. BOUCHER: No. It's something around $400,000 a month that they need, I think, for the operations.

QUESTION: Could you update us on the conference as well, while you're on that?

MR. BOUCHER: No sort of detailed update in terms of the who, what, when and where and how, but we are working with the Iraqi opposition groups, including the Iraqi National Congress, in their efforts to make their voices heard. And we will continue to work with the Iraqi opposition groups that want to work with us on this.

QUESTION: Did you ever explain why you took it away from MEI?

MR. BOUCHER: Yes.

QUESTION: You did. I guess I was gone.

MR. BOUCHER: We discussed the issue of the useful and helpful role that the MEI had played in helping us prepare and plan for the conference, and then we indicated we intended to go forward and do the rest of the organization by using State Department people and resources.

QUESTION: You mentioned "we're working with Iraqi opposition groups and the INC."

MR. BOUCHER: Including the INC.

QUESTION: "Including the INC." So are you saying that the INC is one of many opposition groups? And the reason I ask is because the INC was created as an umbrella of numerous opposition groups, and at least as I understand the reading of the 1998 Iraq Liberation Act, it was sort of meant to be the main vehicle for funding all those.

So I just want to understand the State Department's understanding of that.

MR. BOUCHER: Our understanding is the way the situation is, that they are an umbrella group that encompasses many of the Iraqi opposition groups. We have given them a substantial amount of funding, as I said something like $15 million to date, including $5 million for Liberty TV. So they are receiving a substantial amount of funding.

There are other activities by opposition groups that may or may not be associated with the INC. Some of them may be part of it, some are not. But there are many other activities by opposition groups that we continue to support, that we continue to fund, whether they are in this umbrella or outside of it.

QUESTION: If I can just follow up. Are you encouraging these other Iraqi opposition groups? Because presumably, if you're trying to effect regime change in a country, you'd want a unified front to join this umbrella group that includes the INC, the established umbrella group. Is that part of the discussions?

MR. BOUCHER: We're encouraging all the opposition groups to work with each other. One of the reasons for having a conference is to get them together to show who they are and what they can do, and to discuss with them what they might do and I'm sure they'll discuss with each other how to organize the overall effort in opposition to the Iraqi regime.

But the point I think being that to the extent these groups work together under -- work together period, that's good. But we're not excluding people because they happen to be under an umbrella or not under an umbrella.

QUESTION: Richard, I think -- you said we continue to support other opposition groups, including ones outside the INC. Can you give us -- actually give us examples of funding that you have given to Iraqi groups --

MR. BOUCHER: A lot of this is out there on the record. I'm not personally familiar with every little bit of funding that we give. I think, for example, the people that collect war crimes information in England, I'm not sure they're part of the INC. There's various groups like that.

QUESTION: Well, they're more of an NGO than a political front.

MR. BOUCHER: Call them what you will. We provide funding for activities of groups that are not associated with the government of Iraq.

QUESTION: But you can't think of any more examples? Perhaps INDICT? Can you?

MR. BOUCHER: You asked me for one, I gave you one. Now, I'm just not -- I'll get you a dozen if you need them, but I think it's all out there.

QUESTION: Yes.

MR. BOUCHER: Or maybe I won't. Maybe we'll -- (laughter) -- no, there are other groups, and I think anybody who has followed the events over the courseof the spring and noted the various military figures that have spoken out and others that have spoken out have seen that there are many groups within this umbrella, and there are people and groups that are not. That's just the facts of the situation. We're not going to exclude somebody from funding or support just because they are in it or not in it. But we provide it our principal support.

QUESTION: But we've never -- apart from INDICT and the INC, we've never heard of US money going to any other opposition group, as far as I know.

MR. BOUCHER: I think you probably have, because I remember, but I don't remember exactly what it was. I'll get you what I can.

QUESTION: Carol Bellamy, the head of UNICEF, is in town today, and she --

QUESTION: Can we stay on Iraq? Is this on Iraq?

QUESTION: No. Go ahead.

QUESTION: Can we go over to the UN on Iraq? There were talks over there today on perhaps letting inspectors back in. What's your view of these talks, and do you realistically see Iraq letting the inspectors back in?

MR. BOUCHER: Well, that's for Iraq to address, isn't it? It's important to remember, the obligations from the Security Council rest on Iraq's shoulders. Iraq has said many times they accepted those obligations, but in fact they haven't complied fully, completely and unconditionally with those Security Council resolutions.

So the question is, are the Iraqis coming today to say to the Secretary General and to the United Nations and to the world community that they accept their obligations and are prepared to carry them out by allowing full, complete and unconditional inspections? We will hear what the Iraqis have to say. If they say that, then good. That's what they have promised to do, that's what they should be doing.

But we're not holding our breath to hear the Iraqis say finally that they actually do accept to implement these obligations fully.

QUESTION: Do you see any negotiations to be made in terms of the conditions under which the inspectors would be back in? Or like last time, do you expect this conversation to be very short, where -- MR. BOUCHER: Well, we have the same attitude as before. It doesn't take long to say yes.

QUESTION: Carol Bellamy is in town, and she is asking whether or not the United States is going to sign the Convention for Protection of Children, or the Rights of the Child, which the United States has not signed, and was wondering why has the United States not signed it; and also whether or not you expect President Bush to attend the UN General Assembly on the Rights of the Child, or on children in New York? MR. BOUCHER: I'm going to have to check on those. I don't know the answers. I'll have to check.

QUESTION: Yesterday you put out the announcement, and they talked about it at the White House a bit. But has anything moved beyond receiving a positive reply from North Korea that you want to start looking into talks?

MR. BOUCHER: We will be in touch with the North Koreans. We have been in contact with them, but as I said, we'll have to talk to them a little more about the arrangements, the specific arrangements for beginning our discussions.

QUESTION: (Inaudible.)

MR. BOUCHER: As you know, they've accepted our proposal of talks. We have welcomed their response to this, and so we'll work on determining the timing and other details of the talks. At this point that hasn't been set.

QUESTION: Do you have any more information about who delivered North Korea's message, and when and how they did it?

MR. BOUCHER: It goes back a little ways. We first heard, and I think you all started hearing after the South Korean visit, that they were going to be interested in talking to us again. There was a period of time we didn't hear directly from the North Koreans.

Last Saturday we heard from their UN mission in New York, I think by telephone, that they would welcome discussions. And so we then considered our response, and as Press Spokesman Fleischer at the White House said yesterday, we anticipate those talks taking place.

So now we're getting back in touch with them to talk about details of timing and arrangements.

QUESTION: Richard, (inaudible) this is kind of minutiae -- but did their mission call here, or did they call the US mission in New York?

MR. BOUCHER: They called here. Yes.

QUESTION: The Secretary indicated that even after (inaudible) release of Arafat, he would be restricted to Ramallah, and that in fact --

MR. BOUCHER: No, the Secretary didn't indicate that. He indicated the exact opposite of that. He said he is free to go.

QUESTION: He is free to go? Anywhere? Gaza?

MR. BOUCHER: Yes.

QUESTION: Hebron?

MR. BOUCHER: Yes.

QUESTION: I didn't see that.

MR. BOUCHER: Well, that's what we said. That's what the Israelis said, that's what the Palestinians said. So I think by this time everybody has said it.

QUESTION: Well, what about the rest of the population? Is there going to be freedom of access so that the people can be fed and watered and et cetera in these various --

MR. BOUCHER: We have made very clear the importance that we attach to freedom of access, to the ability to move, to the ability particularly to get humanitarian relief in. One of our focuses on Jenin, for example, is to make sure that humanitarian delivery is ensured, to make sure that the relief groups can get in there and do what's necessary for the population.

That applies in other places as well, and we have worked with the parties on the ground, our aid missions working closely with the United Nations on the ground to ensure the delivery of appropriate relief. We ourselves have sent a lot of supplies in there.

QUESTION: Will Arafat be allowed to visit Jenin?

MR. BOUCHER: As we have said, he is free to move around, and the Israelis have said that, too.

QUESTION: The European Union chief defense and foreign policy official, Mr. Solana, last week he said that even -- in Cyprus, even the two leaders of the communities cannot reach a solution; we will accept the Greek side of the Cyprus at the union. And in the past, in the United States you always made a mention that we prefer first solution, and then enter the union together. Did you change your policy today?

MR. BOUCHER: Solana is not a US official. So first of all --

QUESTION: I know.

MR. BOUCHER: I don't know what he said, but US policy has not changed.

QUESTION: It is not changed?

MR. BOUCHER: No.

QUESTION: Can you elaborate on what Hu Jintao said yesterday to the Secretary at that meeting?

MR. BOUCHER: On what Hu Jintao said?

QUESTION: Well, specifically in regard to Taiwan.

MR. BOUCHER: Well, I think I'll let the Chinese elaborate on what the Chinese said. I'll tell you what we said if you want to know.

QUESTION: I know what you said.

MR. BOUCHER: Let me go over the discussion last night at dinner. It was a working dinner. They addressed a number of issues, the Secretary did with Vice President Hu, and I will go through that with you. They talked about counterterrorism cooperation. They talked about regional issues and the bilateral agenda, including human rights. Both sides in these discussions indicated the desire to advance the bilateral ties that we have and to continue the positive momentum in our relationship.

Both sides agreed in particular to continue to advance in our cooperation against terrorism. There was a very good discussion of the Middle East, South Asia, of how to promote stability on the Korean Peninsula including stressing the importance of North-South dialogue. The Secretary underlined the President's personal commitment to the improvement of human rights based on respect for international standards and he urged that ongoing bilateral exchanges continue as well.

Vice President Hu raised Taiwan. The Secretary stressed our continuing commitment to our One China Policy. He observed that China's actions have an effect on Taiwan and he counseled approaches that would reduce and not raise tensions in the Strait.

QUESTION: When you mentioned that they discussed South Asia, it's an issue of Kashmir, or India, Pakistan issue? It was on the table?

MR. BOUCHER: I'm not quite sure what you mean by the phrase, "on the table." Let me just say that, yes, they discussed the situation in South Asia, the tensions between India and Pakistan over Kashmir and the need and the desire of both our countries to play a positive role in helping the parties defuse those tensions.

QUESTION: Who brought this issue of South Asia, Kashmir, or India, Pakistan, the Secretary or the Chinese leader?

MR. BOUCHER: I don't remember exactly. I think it was a subject on both our minds because we are both concerned about the tensions that have arisen there and both looking to play a helpful role in helping the parties defuse the tension.

QUESTION: Can I have a question on Nepal, please? MR. BOUCHER: Sure.

QUESTION: Nepali Prime Minister will be here in town this weekend or Monday. Now, recently Nepal's Foreign Secretary was here at the State Department. Is that the Prime Minister's visit was in connection with the Foreign Secretary's visit here or he was invited by the State Department?

MR. BOUCHER: I'll have to double-check on the invitation. Frequently we talk to foreign secretaries and then to prime ministers, so I wouldn't be surprised if one was advancing the other, but I will have to check on the situation there.

QUESTION: The Secretary is meeting with the Prime Minister?

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

QUESTION: Can we stay on the region?

MR. BOUCHER: Pick your region.

QUESTION: Did Tibet come up at this dinner at all? Was the word mentioned?

MR. BOUCHER: Don't know, I have to check.

QUESTION: Back on South Asia, what do you make of the referendum today in Pakistan?

MR. BOUCHER: Are we getting excited here? Calm down. Okay. We have seen, as you have, the Pakistani Government's figures on the vote in favor of the referendum and the voter turnout. I don't think there is really any independent verification of these figures. As we have said all along, it is for the Pakistani people to judge what the referendum means in terms of returning the country to democratic civilian rule. The United States' primary interest is in seeing legitimate return to democratic civilian rule through free and fair elections conducted constitutionally. We look forward to October's provincial and national elections. We believe these elections are the most crucial element in returning the country to democratic rule. So we look forward to a period of healthy political debate where all the parties are allowed to express their views freely and to bring their case to the public without hindrance.

QUESTION: Do you believe that President Musharraf can be a democratic ruler of Pakistan?

MR. BOUCHER: President Musharraf has promised to bring Pakistan back to democratic rule. He has confirmed repeatedly the elections on a national and a provincial level to be held in October. We have always focused on that as an important milestone in terms of achieving a return to democracy and that remains what we're focused on at this point. He has promised to do it. He has moved in that direction. He has reiterated the promises and he has also made some fairly significant statements about the general course that he intends to lead Pakistan in. So as long as this course is followed and the elections proceed as planned, we would consider that to be movement towards the return of democracy.

QUESTION: It doesn't matter if he remains in charge?

MR. BOUCHER: As I've said, we've always focused on those particular elections for provincial and national offices in October as being the most significant milestone in terms of moving back towards democracy.

QUESTION: Does this referendum, considering that at least according to Pakistanis, there was a majority that supported Musharraf, does it confer any democratic legitimacy in the eyes of the State Department now after the referendum? Is he a little bit more democratic or a little bit more --

MR. BOUCHER: I think he is who he is and he has made his commitments. He has made his statements. We have welcomed, as you know, his speech on January 12th that talked about the path that he wanted Pakistan to follow. We have welcomed the statements that he has made repeatedly about having elections in October and he has reiterated that directly to us as well as publicly. So that path remains and that's a path that we have always felt was welcome.

QUESTION: So the referendum does not factor into the State Department assessment of President Musharraf on this particular question of democratic legitimacy?

MR. BOUCHER: As I said before, in the end, it's for the Pakistani people to decide what the referendum means in terms of the kind of government they want and the kind of future they want for their country. We have supported the statements that President Musharraf has made in terms of the course he wants to follow for the country. We have supported his statements about having the elections and we have always seen that as a very significant milestone of moving to those elections in October.

QUESTION: I'll put it the other way. Do you think it perhaps detracts from his --

MR. BOUCHER: I'll put it the same way, if you don't mind.

QUESTION: -- from his credentials by suggesting --

MR. BOUCHER: I'll give you the same answer I just gave your colleague.

QUESTION: Does it cast doubt on his commitment to --

MR. BOUCHER: I'll give you the same answer I just gave your colleague. If you want me to say the whole thing, I will, but otherwise consider it said.

QUESTION: No, no.

QUESTION: One, if the State Department --

MR. BOUCHER: Hold on. I'll listen to one person if I can. Sir?

QUESTION: Thank you. If the State Department endorses this referendum or not? And, number two --

MR. BOUCHER: I'll give you the same answer I just gave to the two of them, okay?

QUESTION: Okay. Let me have another -- answer a question then. General Musharraf, there are three things about him: one, his commitment for Pakistan; two, his opposition against his opponents; and number three, that the Pakistani people are divided about his rule. They want him, but not the military rule. There are demonstrations there. So my question is that he has eliminated most of the politicians including Benazir Bhutto and then Prime Minister Sharif. And they both want to return to Pakistan, but he has eliminated all 600 politicians not to participate --

MR. BOUCHER: Are you getting to a question down here somewhere?

QUESTION: What policy State Department has or what role the State Department will play for democracy in Pakistan?

MR. BOUCHER: Exactly what I have just said three times to various members of your colleagues. I don't really have anything more to say.

All right. We've got a lady in the middle that wants to ask a question.

QUESTION: Can we go back to North Korea for one second? I'm just wondering if the administration sees North Korea's renewed interest in restarting negotiations as a legitimation of the kind of hard-line policy that Bush took. And if you have any indication as to why North Korea is suddenly changing its mind?

MR. BOUCHER: I don't want to try to interpret North Korean political behavior. Certainly the administration has maintained a consistent policy from the President's statement last June where he said he wanted to have serious discussions with the North Koreans. The Secretary of State said essentially the same thing before that. Last summer, we made clear at the ASEAN meetings that we were willing to sit down any time, any place. We have maintained that consistent position and glad at this point that the North Koreans have taken us up on the offer.

QUESTION: What is your understanding of the situation -- of what is going on on the ground right now in Burma? And Aung San Suu Kyi?

MR. BOUCHER: Are you looking for an instant update? I don't think I'm going to try to do the wire service reports.

QUESTION: I'm just wondering if you have anything more to say than you did yesterday, which was --

MR. BOUCHER: No, I don't have any news for you. I don't have any news for you, but we certainly welcome her release and the release of all the political prisoners inside Burma. It's important that it be unconditional, that Aung San Suu Kyi be afforded full freedom of movement and association. We hope the reports coming out of Rangoon indicate that the Burmese Government is serious, the Burmese regime is serious about political reform and national reconciliation. We'll watch events as they unfold, but I don't have an instant update for you.

QUESTION: What is Deputy Secretary Armitage doing with the Malaysian Defense Minister today? Is this just a pre, kind of pre-preliminary talks ahead of Mahathir's visit?

MR. BOUCHER: I think so. I'd have to check if there is anything more specific to come up.

QUESTION: I just had a question about the commission that was announced today that's going to China, or the team of -- the inquiry team.

MR. BOUCHER: The team, yes.

QUESTION: In October, Representative Smith had a hearing where he produced photographic evidence that said that the UN Population Fund was operating in the counties where the one-child policy was in effect. By sending this commission, is the State Department casting doubt on what Congressman Smith says he established in his committee?

MR. BOUCHER: As you know, there has been a lot of controversy about coerced family planning practices in China and about the activities and the role of the UN Fund in China as well. We are sending this team out there to look at these activities. This has been a subject of regular reporting from various quarters, from people on the ground, from embassies, from, as you know, congressmen and others about what is going on out there, what the UN is doing. We hear from the UN as well. I think there was a British parliamentary delegation that went out not too long ago to look at these activities. And based on our law, before we disperse this up to $34 million that we have available, we want to try to settle some of these issues and figure out, based on a balanced and objective assessment, what we should do. So this team will presumably go out in May and be able to report to us in June and then we will be able to make decisions on this funding based on the full facts and all the information that best can be made available.

QUESTION: If I could just follow up, and this will be the last question I have, at least. Are you at all concerned that because you have announced it now and they don't go there until later this month that there will be time for the Chinese and the -- I mean this is the charge from people who are concerned about this issue -- that they will sort of cover up their activities and that you won't get to the bottom of it?

MR. BOUCHER: No.

QUESTION: Did this come up with Vice President Hu last night?

MR. BOUCHER: I don't think so, no.

(The briefing was concluded at 2:00 p.m. EDT.)

(end transcript)

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

Return to Public File Main Page

Return to Public Table of Contents