*EPF302 05/22/2002
Transcript: State Department Noon Briefing, May 22
(Congo, United Kingdom, India/Pakistan, Pakistan, human rights, China, North Korea, Mexico, Thailand/Burma, Middle East, Department's computer system/Klez virus, Cuba, terrorism report) (6430)

State Department Deputy Spokesman Phil Reeker briefed.

Following is the State Department transcript:

(begin transcript)

U.S. Department of State
Daily Press Briefing Index
Wednesday, May 22, 2002
1:10 p.m.

Briefer: Philip T. Reeker, Deputy Spokesman

CONGO
-- Killing of UN Police Trainees in Kisangani

UNITED KINGDOM
-- Secretary Powell's Call to Foreign Secretary Straw

INDIA/PAKISTAN
-- Continuing Tension/Conflict in Kashmir
-- Deputy Secretary Armitage's Plans for Travel to Region
-- Assassination of Kashmiri Political Leader Abdul Ghani Lone
-- U.S. Contacts with India and Pakistan Officials

PAKISTAN
-- UK Withdrawing Some of Its Diplomatic Staff from Pakistan
-- U.S. Travel Warning Remains In Place for Pakistan
-- Update on Daniel Pearl Case

HUMAN RIGHTS
-- Trafficking In Persons Report Due in Early June

CHINA
-- Release of North Koreans Who Sought Asylum in Japanese Consulate

NORTH KOREA
-- Status of U.S.-DPRK Talks

MEXICO
-- Court Decision on Extradition of Drug Suspect/Death Penalty Issue

THAILAND/BURMA
-- Cross-Border Shelling

MIDDLE EAST
-- Public Announcement Released on May 21

DEPARTMENT
-- Klez Virus and Department's Computer System

CUBA
-- Prospects for International Monitors of Cuban Elections

TERRORISM
-- Patterns of Global Terrorism Report/Fight Against Terrorism


U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE
DAILY PRESS BRIEFING

1:10 P.M. EDT -- WEDNESDAY, MAY 22, 2002
(ON THE RECORD UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED)

MR. REEKER: Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen. Welcome back to the State Department. As you know, Secretary Powell departed this morning with the President for the trip to Europe. They are winging their way over the North Atlantic now on their way to arrive in Berlin this evening Berlin time, this afternoon our time. Ambassador Boucher is accompanying the Secretary on that trip, and so I am here with no other announcements or notices and can start with Mr. Schweid and his questions.

QUESTION: Phil, I wondered if you have any fresh information about the 50 UN police trainees in the Congo. Presumably the State -- the State Department presumes four are dead, but there's a question about whodunit and the fate of the 46 others.

MR. REEKER: I don't know that I can offer you any particularly new information, Barry. I think we talked a bit about it yesterday when we didn't have a formal briefing. There have obviously transpired killings of some UN police trainees in the Congo, and another group of them appear to be missing.

We certainly condemn these killings. We are awaiting a UN report on what happened in Kisingani before we can really make any further comment. We have joined in repeated demands with the UN Security Council for the demilitarization of Kisingani and the withdrawal of various forces there from the city. I think this incident illustrates the need and makes that demand even more urgent.

But at this point, it's not clear who is responsible for the killings. A number of people were killed following some apparent mutinies, uprisings among various soldiers that are there. These events took place May 14th and 15th, we understand, but the UN is currently trying to determine what happened to the police trainees there. And more correctly, actually they were people about to start training there. So we'll wait for the UN report and follow that closely.

Matt.

QUESTION: Can I change the subject?

MR. REEKER: Anybody else on the Congo?

QUESTION: I appreciate that you may not be the best person to ask about this, but you're in a better place than I think I am or anyone else in this room is. I understand that as the Secretary and the President were winging their way to Europe, that the Secretary spoke with Foreign Secretary Straw. Can you, if possible, give us a rundown of maybe what they talked about, and specifically if they talked about the situation between India and Pakistan?

MR. REEKER: I can not give you any particular rundown on that. The Secretary did speak with Foreign Secretary Straw, which, as you know, he does with some frequency on a number of topics. I think the situation in South Asia certainly is one of the topics they have been discussing lately.

Obviously it is a worrisome situation. As we have said before, we think it is vital for all sides to exercise restraint and reduce violence. It is important for India and Pakistan to resume a productive dialogue over the issues that divide them, including Kashmir. And so that's what we have continued to urge, and of course we have been working closely with the British and with other allies and interested parties in the international community to that end.

The Secretary mentioned it yesterday in his appearance with Mr. Solana. That was one of the subjects they discussed. And so we'll continue to discuss that, to continue to follow it closely, and to continue supporting efforts to reduce tension, because it is really up to the parties to agree --

QUESTION: Is there anything you can say about Deputy Secretary Armitage's planned visit to the region?

MR. REEKER: No. As you know, we have said that Deputy Secretary Armitage will travel to the region in the near future. I don't have an exact date or itinerary to announce at this point. The Secretary, as well as other officials, have been remaining very engaged with their counterparts in South Asia and with other allies, as I indicated. But we will let you know once we have a better picture of the calendar on these things.

QUESTION: Do you have any comment on Prime Minister Vajpayee's remarks?

MR. REEKER: Well, I think the most important thing I can say from here is what we have said before, and in fact what I just said, that it is vital for all sides in Kashmir to exercise restraint, to reduce violence. The shelling across the line of control in Kashmir has recently increased. It is now heavy. We find this a very worrisome development. We have repeatedly stated our strong concerns about the potential for conflict between India and Pakistan and about the danger of it spiraling out of control.

And I would reiterate once again that armed conflict can only add to the problems that divide these two nuclear-armed neighbors. It is not going to solve any problems. And that is why we think restraint, reduction in violence is vital, and most importantly, a dialogue needs to take place between these two neighbors. The surest way to lower tension and resolve disputes is through dialogue. An important component of the process, of course, is an end to infiltration into Kashmir. We have said this before, and we continue to call upon Pakistan to do all it can to achieve that objective.

And as I said already, we support efforts to reduce tensions. It is up to the parties to the dispute to agree on any use of international monitors to reduce tensions and avoid conflict. As I said, we remain engaged on the subject. The Deputy Secretary will go there in the near future, and we will continue to monitor this very closely.

QUESTION: After so many terrorist activities in Kashmir, now comes the assassination of the most modern and well known Mr. Ghani Lone in Srinagar. And that also undermines the peace process or free elections and all that. So do you have any comments?

MR. REEKER: Well, I think you saw that yesterday Secretary Powell put out a statement regarding that assassination. He expressed the fact that he was saddened and angered when we learned of the assassination of Abdul Ghani Lone, who was a Kashmiri political leader, who was assassinated in Srinagar yesterday. I don't believe we have seen any claim of responsibility for the murder, but this was obviously a direct attack on the hopes for a fair political process in Kashmir, and the killers are obviously among those who are against peace and oppose a peaceful political resolution there. It was a terrorist act that was designed to undermine the hopes of the Kashmiri people for free and fair elections without violence.

And so I would go back to reiterating the points I made earlier about the need for dialogue with all sides that are involved in Kashmir. But we certainly condemn the crime that took place yesterday in the strongest possible way, and we extend our condolences to Mr. Lone's family and to the Kashmiri people.

QUESTION: Quick follow-up. You said Secretary's anger. Anger at what? It means does he now acknowledge that there is terrorism against India or against the Kashmiri people in Kashmir?

MR. REEKER: I think you have just heard the statement, you read the statement -- exactly what the Secretary said. We were angered at the --

QUESTION: Anger at what?

MR. REEKER: Angered at the assassination of this person, which was clearly a terrorist act. Why don't you go back and listen to what I said and what the Secretary's statements said yesterday?

QUESTION: So he is trying to find out where the terrorists are coming and who is supporting them?

MR. REEKER: Again, I don't think we had seen any claim of responsibility for that act. The act is deplorable. It was a murder of somebody who was trying to use peaceful political means to resolve differences and that was clearly perpetrated by murderers who were opposed to peace. And again, the violence will not accomplish anything; will only result in more death, more tension. We need to focus on dialogue with all the parties involved to work towards a peaceful resolution of problems there.

QUESTION: I don't want to be nit-picky, but if you don't know who the killers were, how can you speak to their motives? You said it was designed to hurt the prospects for peace.

MR. REEKER: I think that is fairly obvious in the assassination of a figure of this magnitude -- what Mr. Lone was involved with. He was a political leader who was clearly assassinated in Srinagar. And while no one has claimed, to my knowledge, responsibility for the murder, it was an attack upon the hopes for a fair political process in Kashmir. This was a figure, a leader, who sought to achieve goals through peaceful, democratic means, and courageously stood up to extremists. And now he's been killed, and so we deplore that killing, we condemn that crime, and we call upon all parties to pursue a dialogue, a peaceful dialogue, to resolve their differences.

QUESTION: Britain has now decided to pull out its non-essential staff from Pakistan, as well as family members. I know that the US has already done that, but is there any thought being given to further evacuations or departures?

MR. REEKER: We do understand that Britain is withdrawing some of its diplomatic staff in Pakistan following an assessment of the internal security environment and appraisal of their security posture. You will recall, as you indicated, Teri, that this is similar to the ordered departure of our personnel in Pakistan recently. We still have a Travel Warning in place, clearly in effect for Pakistan, that indicates the fact that we did pull out non-emergency personnel and family members, as you are quite aware of.

Clearly there is security concerns in Pakistan. As our Travel Warning notes, a journalist was kidnapped and executed there. A trial is currently underway in that case. There was a bombing of a church frequented by Westerners. And so I think we continue to monitor the situation very closely. Our Embassy remains open with the decreased staffing.

QUESTION: Is there anything you want to say on the Pearl situation?

MR. REEKER: I don't think I have anything particularly new on that, but since we didn't meet yesterday -- as far as I know, Pakistani authorities have not yet completed the forensic tests to identify the human remains that were recovered last week that may be those of Wall Street Journal reporter Daniel Pearl. I'm not sure how much longer those tests will take, but we are in close touch with Pakistani law enforcement officials who continue to investigate the kidnapping and murder.

Our Consulate in Karachi and the Department are staying in touch with Mrs. Pearl and Mr. Pearl's family to keep them informed of developments, and we will just continue to see what news comes out of there.

QUESTION: It does seem to quite a grave situation between India and Pakistan. Has there been any other -- any contact with the parties themselves at a high level in the last 24 hours or so? Has Mr. Armitage been in touch with any of --

MR. REEKER: Our diplomats on the ground -- our Ambassador, the President's personal representative in both countries is in regular contact with the highest levels of both the Pakistani and Indian sides. I don't have any other particular phone calls or contacts to read out at this point.

QUESTION: Do you know whether Mr. Blackwill spoke to Mr. Vajpayee today?

MR. REEKER: I don't. I would let our Embassy in New Delhi let you know about those, as we usually do.

QUESTION: But there's nothing of Secretary Powell calling? He talked to Musharraf the other day --

MR. REEKER: No. I mentioned that Secretary Powell had talked to Foreign Secretary Straw --

QUESTION: Well, Straw. I mean, the Indian and Pakistani officials, I mean.

MR. REEKER: If you let me finish the sentence, Barry, I could get to that.

QUESTION: I just wanted to save you the time. I was just asking if -- I was following Jonathan. Has the Secretary of State spoken to Indian or Pakistani officials?

MR. REEKER: Not since it was last reported to you.

QUESTION: Thank you. That's fine. I didn't mean to --

QUESTION: There appears to be a sense of complacency here in Washington about this --

MR. REEKER: A sense of?

QUESTION: Complacency, a sense of complacency.

MR. REEKER: Complacency.

QUESTION: -- about the situation in the subcontinent, which everybody agrees is so dangerous that it could -- there could be war, as we talk, speak, now. Yesterday Michael Krepon, the president of the Stimson Institute -- Center, he just returned from India last week. He was in Srinagar. He met everybody. And he said yesterday -- told a news briefing that unless the US Government involves itself at the highest level in India and Pakistan, not at the level of Christina Rocca, there absolutely is very little chance of preventing conflict. But there appears to be -- even Mr. Armitage's visit, it is on now, off again. So it's a kind of --

MR. REEKER: There is no on or off again with Mr. Armitage's visit, and there is absolutely no complacency in viewing this. As I said at the outset in response to your first questions, we view this with great concern. We think there is a real worrisome development in the region in terms of the shelling across the line of control, which has increased. It is very heavy at this point. And we have been consistent and raise our concerns about this at all levels.

The Secretary has addressed this publicly to you. He said that Deputy Secretary Armitage will be going to the region. We don't have an exact time for that. We are working closely with other allies. And as I mentioned, the Secretary spoke to British Foreign Secretary Straw this morning. One of the subjects was South Asia. I believe Foreign Secretary Straw himself is going to be visiting there shortly. We have been talking to other Europeans on the subject, and of course engaging at the highest levels with our Pakistani and Indian counterparts.

So there is by no means any complacency. This is a serious situation which is of concern to all of us, and we will continue to follow it very closely. And again though, the important thing is that the two sides and all those involved in the disputes need to pursue a dialogue. They need to realize that violence or armed conflict will not accomplish anything in this situation. It is not a solution. The surest way to lower the tensions and resolve disputes is to have a dialogue, and that is what we have been encouraging. We support efforts to reduce tensions, and obviously the two parties need to work at resolving their disputes.

So we will continue to be very much seized with the situation in South Asia, watching it very closely.

QUESTION: On June 1st, the State Department's Annual Report on Victims of Trafficking is due to be released. We have heard from a group called the International Justice Mission, which works to free women trapped in prostitution, and they indicate that from people, their sources in the State Department, that three of what they consider to be the worst offenders -- India, Thailand and Cambodia -- are going to be given a pass when this report comes out to avoid diplomatic problems.

What can you tell us about that?

MR. REEKER: I guess I can tell you that the report is coming out June 1st. Is that right? Actually, I think it is a little bit later. That does sound right, too. It is later in the first or second week of June. And when the report comes out, we will be sure to distribute it, make it available and have briefings for you on that. I haven't read it --

QUESTION: Is there substantial disagreement going on right now about this?

MR. REEKER: I am not aware of any of the facts surrounding that report. It is an annual report that we put out, and when it is ready and releasable we will certainly bring it to your attention and make it available for you.

QUESTION: Well, I think their concern is that once it's out, then it's set in concrete, and then potential sanctions against the offending countries will not take place. It will be too late on June 1st, and that's why we're raising it now.

MR. REEKER: I am afraid I have no information on a report that isn't due out. We usually don't try to brief them before they're actually done.

QUESTION: I wondered if you wanted to make something explicit that is implicit. Way back, you said -- and you referred to Pakistan a second later -- you called for an ending of infiltration of Kashmir. Who is infiltrating? What kind of folks? Terrorists?

MR. REEKER: Clearly, there have been problems with terrorism in Kashmir. We have groups, organizations that are listed on our list of Foreign Terrorist Organizations that have been involved in Kashmir. There has been violence there. We saw violence again yesterday with the assassination of this moderate political leader. And so that is something we have been discussing with Pakistan certainly, the need to control infiltration into Kashmir. That is an issue we continue to raise, that all sides need to exercise restraint. But we have called on Pakistan to do all it can to achieve the objective of ending the infiltration into Kashmir.

QUESTION: On that -- taking up that theme, the question arises repeatedly of these --

QUESTION: Same question one more time?

QUESTION: No, this is a different question. How much control do the Pakistanis authorities have over this infiltration?

MR. REEKER: I don't think I could give you a particular analysis of that, Jonathan.

QUESTION: North Korea.

MR. REEKER: North Korea. We have another question here on South Asia.

QUESTION: Going back to reduction in the diplomatic staff and pullout, is that also -- what all you mentioning was internal security problems you mentioned. How about the shelling across the LOC and the tension between India and Pakistan? Do you think that has contributed or is contributing to pull out the staff or reduction in the diplomatic staff?

MR. REEKER: You would need to ask the British about that.

QUESTION: How about US staff?

MR. REEKER: Well, you will recall that we announced our ordered departure some time ago, and we made quite clear in our Travel Warning the reasons for that.

QUESTION: More reduction on the way?

MR. REEKER: As I said to your colleague, I am not aware of any other changes in our position in Pakistan.

QUESTION: What happens if the war goes in full scale?

MR. REEKER: Well, you are going off in a direction trying to predict the future, and obviously we are looking at the future. What we are focused on, Mr. Goyal, is encouraging the parties to have a dialogue to avoid any more conflict.

QUESTION: What I'm asking really, if this consultation is on the way or behind the scenes at the highest level --

MR. REEKER: What consultation is that?

QUESTION: As far as a war at full scale and --

MR. REEKER: I think I answered that about six times.

QUESTION: (Inaudible) -- with India, right?

(Laughter.)

MR. REEKER: I think we're descending here into something, so if anyone has a serious question -- the gentleman in the back had a question. Yes, sir.

QUESTION: The five North Korean defectors dragged from Japanese consulate in China, now they are on their way to Seoul, South Korea. Can you comment on that?

And secondly, they said they initially wanted to go to United States and sending them to South Korea is against their will. So --

MR. REEKER: Well, let me say first that we are pleased that China has resolved this case in a humanitarian manner. In response I guess to your second question, we were not approached to provide resettlement in the United States, and so we are pleased that this has been resolved. And you probably want to direct additional questions on details to the parties directly involved in this; that is, the Japanese and the Chinese governments. So I think that is about what I can say on that.

QUESTION: The United States -- they didn't refuse any political asylum for them?

MR. REEKER: We weren't approached to provide resettlement in the United States at all. There were some North Koreans who had taken refuge in the US Consulate and have gone to South Korea, have gone to South Korea, but that was resolved about a week ago, I think.

QUESTION: Were you asked to think about receiving them? Because there are some reports that the United States was asked to.

MR. REEKER: Let me try to say it a third time. I will read the sentence here. We were not approached to provide resettlement in the United States. Period.

QUESTION: We don't understand the --

QUESTION: Were you asked --

MR. REEKER: Approached. Maybe. We were not asked to provide resettlement in the United States.

QUESTION: Were you asked to facilitate the resettlement of --

MR. REEKER: Matt, that is as much as I know, so I don't think I can make it any clearer.

Is it clear to you?

QUESTION: Yes.

MR. REEKER: Okay. Sir, and then Eli.

QUESTION: Another question with regard to North Korea. There is some reports from South Korea that Mr. Pritchard will visit Pyongyang in the near --

MR. REEKER: I don't have anything new to update on that. Sorry.

QUESTION: Well, I was just going to follow up on that point. Are you concerned that given the Secretary of State as well as the President have said anytime, anywhere, any place we want to talk with the North Koreans, and now there's been this lag between their message and our response -- you know, when we kind of get it together -- I mean, could you just sort of walk us through? Have we said we will definitely talk to them; we just are getting the modalities together?

MR. REEKER: I think when last we spoke about this -- and nothing has changed since then -- we were talking to them about how to proceed from there. I just don't have any further details on that.

QUESTION: We're definitely going to meet with them? Is there any question at this point that we're going to sit down and talk with them?

MR. REEKER: Well, there's an offer and they made a statement, and we're trying to work with them and respond and figure out where we go next from here. So I don't want to prejudge anything, Eli. I just don't have any news on it.

QUESTION: Do you have anything on a Mexican court's decision not to allow extradition of a drug suspect to California?

MR. REEKER: I don't. Sorry.

QUESTION: Apparently there's been a diplomatic letter sent pledging that the US would not seek the death penalty, and they --

MR. REEKER: I would have to check into it and maybe Justice could help you, but we can look as well. Sure.

Jonathan.

QUESTION: Another cross-border shelling incident in Thailand and Burma. Are you calling for restraint there as well?

MR. REEKER: I'm not aware of it. I guess I had seen some --

QUESTION: It seems to be -- it's not quite the same scale as India and Pakistan.

MR. REEKER: I don't think so, no. I've seen some wire reports on it, probably from your fine service, and I just don't have any details. I don't think we have anything up there. I imagine the AP has one too, Barry -- and the AFP as well.

QUESTION: We didn't call them nuclear-armed.

MR. REEKER: Matt, go ahead.

QUESTION: Can I change the subject again?

MR. REEKER: Please.

QUESTION: You may not have an answer to this.

MR. REEKER: Matt is batting 1.000 so far.

QUESTION: Last night you guys put out this update to the Travel Warning for the -- the Public Announcement for the Middle East, and you added on North Africa to what had been Middle East and Arabian Peninsula.

MR. REEKER: Right.

QUESTION: And you also added on tourist sites as something to watch. And I'm just wondering, was there a new general feeling of threats out there that this is a reaction to, or was the North Africa and tourist sites thing mainly put on there because of the attack in Tunisia?

MR. REEKER: I think they highlighted that, in fact, for you in the updated Public Announcement there and noted that they had expanded it in terms of the language referring to Middle East and North Africa. As you are aware in our regional/geographic breakdown of offices here in the Department, the Bureau of Near East Affairs includes North Africa. But to make that quite clear, and I think as a reflection of the attack that took place on a synagogue in Tunisia, which is a well known tourist site -- that was back on April 11th -- in updating this we included that as well just to --

QUESTION: So it's your understanding that that was why this was done, that attack in Tunisia, and not --

MR. REEKER: It highlighted, in fact, the fact that we continue to receive information about potential terrorist actions against US interests abroad; that there's growing ongoing concern that individuals may be planning terrorist actions against United States citizens and interests, as well as tourist sites frequented by Westerners. And that is what we, in fact, saw occur in Tunisia. And so we again are reminding people to exercise caution in those areas if they are traveling or residing there, and we remain concerned about the potential for further violence.

QUESTION: Different subject? Can you say anything about the State Department's e-mail system being infected with a virus called Klez?

MR. REEKER: Let me start out by saying quite clearly that the State Department's e-mail system was not at all infected by that. There was no impact from the Klez virus -- that's K-l-e-z for our viewers at home who may be less familiar with these things. But seeing how familiar I am with it, let me just --

QUESTION: Those whose computers --

QUESTION: There are some of us here who --

MR. REEKER: Yes, Barry and I are in the same boat. Let me just walk you through that, because there has been some interest.

On Saturday, May 18th, this past Saturday, a virus attacked one of our mailing lists, a list-serve known as DOS-Travel, Department of State Travel, in fact, the list-serve which provides up to 23,000 subscribers with the public announcements, the travel warnings, and consular information that we were just discussing in terms of our public announcement for Middle East and North Africa. That mailing list was attacked by this virus, but the virus had no impact on the State Department system, on our internal systems, which have never been infected by the Klez virus. We have a very active anti-virus program here at the State Department, and we constantly monitor our system and it eradicates any new viruses.

The travel mailing list, which is maintained by the Bureau of Public Affairs, and as I said distributes about 23,000 messages daily to subscribers --

QUESTION: It delivers messages to 23,000 subscribers, right?

MR. REEKER: Isn't that what I said? Did I say 23,000 messages?

QUESTION: That's an awful lot of travel warnings.

MR. REEKER: Well, in theory. In theory there are 23,000 -- let me make that clear. We deliver to about 23,000 subscribers messages on a daily basis. And someone spoofed the address used by the list owner, that is, the Department of State. And this "spoofing," which I am told is a term which is creating another person's identity on your own computer using e-mail, so doing this sent this virus as an attachment, which was distributed to everybody on our address list. But the attachment itself wasn't actually sent from the Department of State. It was sent by these interlopers, who were posing as the list-serve.

And so with the help of our contracted hosting company, L-Soft, and the recommendations they made to improve security, that has been very helpful. We removed messages from the list-serve's archive so that no one would inadvertently download it from the archives, and instructed the list owner -- that is here in the Department -- to change the list configuration so that the attachments are blocked. And we also sent an apology to list addressees, acknowledging that the virus was distributed and assuring them that we have put in place additional safeguards.

QUESTION: Do you have any idea, then, who did this?

MR. REEKER: No.

QUESTION: Is this the kind of thing, though --

QUESTION: Can you spell L-Soft, please?

MR. REEKER: That's L dash Soft.

QUESTION: Is this the kind of thing, though, that you will try to seek out the interloping spoofer? Or is it -- and punish them? Or is the kind of thing --

MR. REEKER: I can check and see. I don't know that one can. I think it is very difficult once they have tried to assume another person's identity by spoofing. You know, they can send these viruses. And so we just need to make sure we put in --

QUESTION: Can I ask that the words "interloping spoofer" be placed into the diplomatic lexicon of the State Department?

QUESTION: How did they get hold of your mailing list, though? Or don't you know?

MR. REEKER: I really don't know. I think if certain controls aren't there, somebody can get into a mailing list and then do this and send to everyone on that mailing list a message that appears to be coming from, in this case the Department of State, and in fact it's coming from this interloping spoofer. (Laughter.) But now we have worked very closely with this marvelous host, L-Soft, to develop even better security for these list-serves as well. But it just reminds everyone it's dangerous out there. (Laughter.)

QUESTION: Phil, just for the record, just for our stories, has the State Department's internal computer systems ever been cyber-attacked?

MR. REEKER: I would have to go back and check that.

QUESTION: Okay.

MR. REEKER: I know my e-mail goes down sometimes. But I don't want to --

QUESTION: I don't want to keep it on this forever, but do you know if along with this attachment, was there an actual travel warning or public announcement that went out with this? Or was it just the--

MR. REEKER: I don't -- not that I know of. No. It was just I think this. Because it didn't come from the Department of State; it was sent from this interloper.

Yes, ma'am. Anything else on this?

QUESTION: May I change to Cuba?

MR. REEKER: Please.

QUESTION: Thank you.

MR. REEKER: I never thought I would be up here saying, "Please change to Cuba." (Laughter.) But go right ahead.

QUESTION: Are there any plans to have former President Carter or an international team to monitor the Cuban elections next year?

MR. REEKER: That is something I would have to check into. I suppose it is largely a question for the Cubans. You are quite aware of what the President has called for in terms of calling upon the Cuban Government to allow those elections to proceed in a fair manner. But the specifics of that are a good question. As I said, I think it is probably a question that can only be answered by Cuban authorities.

But I will be happy to look into anything we may have at this point in terms of what we would offer. I know the Carter Center, for instance, has monitored many elections around the world and work very closely with the Department of State, with other nongovernmental organizations and with other international groups that do that kind of thing. But I would be happy to look into it.

Any other subjects? Sorry, we have Joel here.

QUESTION: We spoke in the last day with the counterterrorism panel and discussion with Frank Taylor. This morning, the Israelis apparently shelled into Nablus and killed the -- I guess the prime leader of the Al-Aqsa Brigades. This whole situation, where militants are not being arrested and put into prison or jail, it's what you called for, talking to Chairman Arafat to do. And there's still the situation in Cyprus, where the lone 13th terrorist -- it hasn't been finalized what they're going to do with respect to the EU.

Is there any plans to have a specific -- either a task force or a series of meetings specifically on terrorism for June, when you're assembling the large meetings I guess whether here in the United States or Europe, the planned meetings with the so-called --

MR. REEKER: Joel, I think you are just way, way out there on a bunch of things. I think you know of our continued and active engagement in advancing the comprehensive strategy that Secretary Powell has talked about, that the Quartet talked about, and the President highlighted, beginning of course with his April 4th speech, and that is security and freedom from terror and violence for both Israelis and Palestinians. That needs to go in parallel with the serious and accelerated negotiations to revive hope and lead to a political settlement, and of course economic and humanitarian assistance to address the conditions of the Palestinian people. Those are the three tracks on which we are working.

We continue to urge both sides to think carefully about the consequences of any actions they decide to take. We continue to say that Chairman Arafat has got to show leadership and continue to signal clearly to his people that terror and violence cannot help them, and to move decisively to confront terror and violence.

And so we are working with the international community and the regional leaders. I don't have any new announcements in terms of anything beyond what the Secretary said yesterday when he spoke to you with Mr. Solana. But that is a process that is ongoing.

QUESTION: With respect to --

MR. REEKER: Let Joel finish.

QUESTION: All the countries spoken about, whether they be North Korea, Syria, Saudi Arabia, Lebanon and so forth, all these countries are saying, "Who, us?" with respect to either hosting terrorism or taking a blind eye toward it. Do you have any comments?

MR. REEKER: No, I think we pretty much covered it yesterday. We went through the Report. It speaks for itself. It is a comprehensive Report that we put out annually and provided you with a lot of additional information through Ambassador Taylor.

QUESTION: So it's an ongoing thing where you're speaking to those governments to see if they'll change their tune?

MR. REEKER: I think Ambassador Taylor addressed that very subject, that the fight against terrorism is an ongoing, continuous thing. We have been putting out this Annual Report for 22 years now. We will continue to do that, as well as our comprehensive war against terrorism around the world.

QUESTION: Syria's response was it's none of your business, so I'm not sure you're speaking to Syria about it. They don't seem to want to talk to you about it.

MR. REEKER: We will continue to pursue, as we have, Barry --

QUESTION: There's been conversations with Syria --

QUESTION: Syria said that --

MR. REEKER: I will let you two finish this later outside, and we can call it a day. Thank you very much.

QUESTION: Phil, Phil --

QUESTION: On the terrorism report. Ambassador Taylor said he would try to provide information to back up the flat statement -- and it's arguable, of course -- the flat statement that Israeli destroyed the Palestinian security apparatus.

MR. REEKER: I think, Barry, all you really have to do is look at some of the pictures. The statement of the thing --

QUESTION: In the Gaza, for instance, where they destroyed the security apparatus?

MR. REEKER: I don't think that's at all what that sentence suggested.

QUESTION: The Report says that Israel destroyed the Palestinian security apparatus. Ambassador Taylor kindly said he would try to find corroborating information and would provide it. I just wanted to put in a standing request, or we could ask every day, but if it comes along, maybe you could --

MR. REEKER: I think we all went and looked at what the Report said, and it was pretty self-evident. The sentence in and of itself sort of speaks for itself. It's sort of an obvious statement.

QUESTION: Yeah, probably wrong. It speaks for itself, but it happens to be a contended -- it is a contention there. Israel says they didn't and the Palestinians say they did.

MR. REEKER: Barry, we will just let the Report stand for itself. I will continue to ask around if there is something more we can feed you.

QUESTION: Thank you.

(The briefing was concluded at 1:45 p.m. EDT.)

(end State Department transcript)

(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