*EPF302 06/12/2002
Transcript: State Department Noon Briefing, June 12
(Powell/G-8 Ministerial/Canada, North Korea/Japan, Israel/Palestinian Authority, Saudi Arabia, war crimes, Venezuela, Turkey, Costa Rica, Russia, Pakistan, arms control, North Korea) (7020)

Deputy State Department Spokesman Phil Reeker briefed.

Following is the State Department transcript:

(begin transcript)

U.S. Department of State
Daily Press Briefing Index
Wednesday, June 12, 2002
2:20 p.m.

Briefer: Philip T. Reeker, Deputy Spokesman

ANNOUNCEMENTS
-- G-8 Meeting Status
-- Congratulations to Barry Schweid on his induction into the Hall of Fame

JAPAN/NORTH KOREA
-- Trilateral Coordination Oversight Group Meeting on June 17 and 18

ISRAEL/PALESTINIANS
-- Secretary Powell's interview with Al-Hayat/Provisional Palestinian State
-- Arafat's Role/Ending the Violence
-- Evolution of Negotiations with Chairman Arafat/Meetings in the Region
-- Plans for possible Middle East Meetings

SAUDI ARABIA
-- Relations with Saudi Arabia and Human Rights
-- Americans Held Against Their Will/Congressional Hearing

WAR CRIMES
-- Former Ambassador Holbrooke and the ICTY in Milosevic's Trial
-- American Service Members Protection Act

VENEZUELA
-- American Citizens Traveling in Venezuela

TURKEY
-- Prime Minister's Health

COSTA RICA
-- Deputy Secretary Armitage's Meeting with the Costa Rican President

RUSSIA
-- Deputy Secretary Armitage's Meeting with Member

PAKISTAN
-- U.S. Citizens Detained

ARMS CONTROL
-- ABM Treaty Expiration/Congressional Intervention

NORTH KOREA
-- Envoy to North Korea


U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE
DAILY PRESS BRIEFING

1:20 P.M. EDT -- WEDNESDAY, JUNE 12, 2002
(ON THE RECORD UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED)

MR. REEKER: Good afternoon, friends, colleagues, visitors. Welcome back to the State Department. As you know, Secretary Powell is on his way to the G-8 ministerial meeting in Whistler, British Colombia, Canada. They should be on the ground there shortly. And Ambassador Boucher is accompanying him on this trip, so I am here with one quick announcement.

That is, as you are already aware, there will be a Trilateral Coordination Oversight Group meeting. We announced that on June 4th. That is the U.S., Japan and the Republic of Korea holding a meeting in San Francisco June 17th and 18th to discuss a range of issues in our ongoing coordination on policy toward North Korea. There will be a camera spray on the 17th, as usual, so any media interested in participating in that event could contact the Bureau of East Asian and Pacific Affairs' Mr. Ken Bailes, who will be happy to fill you in on the arrangements for that in San Francisco.

One other thing I did want to note today is yesterday something that occurred when the Washington, D.C. Professional Chapter of the Society of Professional Journalists inducted into its Hall of Fame Mr. Barry Schweid of the Associated Press. And we are very pleased to have Barry Schweid still with here after all these years. Congratulations, Barry, on behalf of the State Department and your colleagues in the press and Public Affairs Bureau. It's quite an honor, and well deserved.

With that, I would be happy to refer to Mr. Schweid for the first question.

QUESTION: Okay, Phil. The Secretary of State gave an interview to Al-Hayat, told them how the U.S. was talking to other countries about setting up a provisional Palestinian government. In fact, he calls the Palestinian Authority a government, which I had never heard before.

Is the U.S. consulting with Israel about setting up a Palestinian government?

MR. REEKER: I don't know, Barry, if you've actually seen the transcript of the Secretary's interview with Al-Hayat.

QUESTION: I have. I've read it.

MR. REEKER: And you'll note that, as the Secretary said, he's not making any new policy at all. In terms of this context of so-called interim states or these ideas, it's ideas that have been out there already, is what the Secretary noted. It's in the context of what others have said, what others have talked about, a number of them publicly. It doesn't mean the U.S. has endorsed it or made any decisions on that. It's not a new idea. It's not our idea. It's an idea, one of many ideas that are out there that have been discussed, not something raised by the U.S., and certainly that's premature for the U.S. to talk about at this point because, as you know, we're focused on moving forward on the three-part strategy that the President outlined in his April 4th speech and the Secretary has talked about consistently and at great length. We have talked with many leaders from the region, with others in the international community, most recently with Prime Minister Sharon. The Foreign Minister of Saudi Arabia, Prince Saud al Faysal will be here tomorrow meeting at the White House, and then with the Secretary on Friday. And so we will continue to listen, to hear the views and ideas of others and continue thinking about how we will move forward. And that includes what we will do about the meeting, the ministerial-level meeting that the Secretary has talked about, that the President has talked about, which we think would still be a good idea for moving forward.

But basically, we are still focused on the three parts of the strategy that is moving forward simultaneously on security performance, which is vital; on renewing a political process that aims at the two-state solution, which indeed is what the President has outlined as his vision; and responding to the humanitarian needs of the Palestinian people and building serious, responsible institutions in the Palestinian Authority, institutions that can be prepared for an eventual Palestinian state that we have discussed, institutions that can make a difference in the lives of the Palestinian people, that can serve their needs. And that's something we think needs to be dealt with; it's something we're talking about; it's something the Palestinian people themselves have talked about and begun in terms of beginning reforms and reconstruction of those institutions, and we want to see that continue.

QUESTION: The Secretary said that won't stop him from moving ahead with this process, and this is the process and visions, a preliminary state, a provisional state. So the question is -- and he's very harsh on Mr. Sharon -- is this something -- he says we've talked to other countries about this -- has the U.S. -- I could ask Israel, of course, and I'm trying to -- but has the U.S. talked to Israel about a provisional Palestinian state? And since the land that the state would be on happens to be held by Israel, wouldn't it sort of be proper to talk to Israel, what's to happen to the land they have?

MR. REEKER: Barry, as I just said, and I can repeat it all for you again, we haven't taken any positions. We have not raised this idea. This is an idea that's been out there for some time, that others have raised, many of them quite publicly with you and have talked about it, and that's simply what the Secretary was indicating in this interview, and he's talked about that before. Views on both sides of the issue have been expressed, and we have listened to them, we have heard them. People are consulting, and we are continuing that consulting. These are not new ideas; these are not our ideas; these are not ideas that we have raised or we have put forward. These are things that have come up in the discussion, one of many, many ideas being discussed about how you move forward ultimately toward the vision that the President, the Secretary, and so many others in the international community have outlined.

Again, it is premature for us to talk about anything specifically, because we haven't come to any conclusions about how to take this beyond what we have already talked about, that is the three-part strategy, and that we think everybody should be focused on, and that's been a successful aspect of the consultations we have been having. We have seen some movement in this, and we need to continue to see movement, reconstruction of Palestinian institutions to bring relief to the Palestinian people. Security has to be absolutely primary for the Israelis and the Palestinians, and we also have to have simultaneously a political track to move forward.

QUESTION: A few minutes ago, over at the White House, your colleague alluded to having spoken with someone on the plane, because he said that apparently Secretary Powell spoke to the people -- our colleagues traveling with them. I presume that you were in on the same phone call, or got the same kind of --

MR. REEKER: Actually, I spoke to the plane, and the Secretary was speaking with many of your colleagues on exactly the same subject, and saying the same types of things I have been saying -- ideas that other people have raised, that we listen to, that have been shared quite publicly; ideas on how you move forward, with respect to how you move forward, and that's what we are here to do, to listen to --

QUESTION: Do you know why then the Secretary chose to use the words, "the President knows that -- "

MR. REEKER: I'm not sure which -- where you specifically --

QUESTION: In the Al-Hayat interview, on page three. The Secretary says that "the President knows that an interim state or a transitional state is a way to give the Palestinians hope, something that they can see in the near future."

MR. REEKER: Simply I think, because that's an idea that's been raised. It's one of those things. There are lots of differing views on that, on how one might move forward. As I said, again, we haven't taken any position on that. Those are ideas that have been raised. They have been raised publicly. There's nothing new in those ideas.

QUESTION: So perhaps he should have said the President knows that others think that --

MR. REEKER: I'm not going to try to parse exactly what the Secretary was saying --

QUESTION: Well, that's exactly what you've been doing for the last --

MR. REEKER: -- just saying clearly what our position is and the Secretary said to your colleagues on the plane that these are ideas that have been raised before. He said quite clearly in the Al-Hayat interview on page seven that -- maybe it's not page seven -- he said I'm not making any news here; there's nothing --

QUESTION: Well, yeah, he said that after he realized that he might have something newsworthy. (Laughter.)

MR. REEKER: I think if you look at it and you listen to what I just said, and you listen to what Mr. Fleischer just said, these are ideas that have been raised before, that are out there, and there are lots of people with lots of ideas. QUESTION: Okay. I guess, that confusion --

MR. REEKER: And he put forward our ideas. I think the President as well as the Secretary are aware of all these ideas, because they have been having the meetings, the consultations, and listening to all of the various people who have come to town to talk about this.

QUESTION: The bottom line is then that any implication that the U.S. is endorsing this specific, particular idea that has been raised by whoever is incorrect?

MR. REEKER: Totally premature.

QUESTION: And the Secretary --

MR. REEKER: Totally premature.

QUESTION: Not incorrect, just premature?

MR. REEKER: As I said, we have not endorsed it, because we haven't made any endorsements. We haven't made any decisions on steps. These are ideas that other people have raised, and I am sure you can go out and find a dozen other ones, and we can talk about those, too, that other people have raised them.

QUESTION: Well, but the reason we're raising this one is because the Secretary actually raised it unprompted by the reporter in the question.

MR. REEKER: I wasn't in the interview, so I couldn't tell you exactly the context that it came up.

QUESTION: What about (inaudible) the Secretary says this will be -- will come up -- apparently he thinks it's more than just another idea, because it will be taken up at this regional ministers meeting, or whatever the U.S. is trying to organize --

MR. REEKER: I don't know that it will, Barry, because I just don't know where we are going from there.

QUESTION: He said it will.

MR. REEKER: We'll just have to --

QUESTION: He said it will.

MR. REEKER: I'll leave it to the Secretary --

QUESTION: He also seems to know that the President didn't mean it when he said he's not setting a deadline. He says the President didn't mean that; he's misinterpreted --

MR. REEKER: I don't follow you.

QUESTION: Well, the President was asked by Mubarak to set a deadline for a Palestinian state --

MR. REEKER: I'll just refer you to the White House on the President's comments.

QUESTION: Well, but it's the Secretary's statement.

MR. REEKER: I'll refer you to the White House on the President's comment.

QUESTION: You want me to ask the White House what the Secretary meant?

MR. REEKER: Barry, if you want to know the President's view on deadlines or otherwise, ask at the White House.

QUESTION: You didn't let me finish, please. If you'd let me finish it, it'll be very brief. He has parsed the President's statement that he's not ready to set a deadline to simply mean he didn't -- he wasn't ready Friday to set a deadline. And he may be ready now.

MR. REEKER: I think that's probably true.

QUESTION: Okay.

MR. REEKER: If you want to know if the President has something to say, or is ready to do anything, ask at the White House.

QUESTION: All right, let me ask you a technical question.

MR. REEKER: A technical question.

QUESTION: Yeah, about the ministers meeting. He said he'll be in the chair -- which usually means hosting -- but at the same time, he said we're looking for a host --

MR. REEKER: He will be in the American chair.

QUESTION: Oh, he didn't mean the U.S. will run the conference?

MR. REEKER: I don't have anything more for you on the conference. We haven't made decisions, as the Secretary said quite clearly, and again to your colleagues on the plane. There are no decisions made on the where or when exactly of the ministerial meeting.

QUESTION: I understand.

MR. REEKER: We still think it's an important thing that can help us move ahead. And so we will be planning with that in mind, but we have nothing to announce at this point.

QUESTION: He isn't saying the U.S. will host the conference?

MR. REEKER: I don't think he suggested that at all.

QUESTION: Okay. Because I didn't know what "chair" meant. It usually means hosting.

MR. REEKER: We can decide the definition of "chair" and whose chair is where, Barry. You're usually in this chair, so --

QUESTION: Yeah, if you read it, he's very affirmative -- "I'll be in the chair, and I'll be running that" -- so, you know, that sounds like hosting.

MR. REEKER: You had to be there, Barry.

QUESTION: Phil, is it fair to conclude, given the comments that you've made, that it's not our idea -- it's not an idea that we've raised or put forward, and that it's premature to talk about specifically? Is it fair for us to conclude that there is a serious backing away from this idea by both the Secretary and this building?

MR. REEKER: I don't think there's any conclusion you can draw whatsoever. Ideas such as this one have been raised on numerous occasions by numerous interlocutors over a period of many, many years. This isn't something new. And clearly it's an idea that's there, it's an idea that's been discussed; it's probably being discussed. But no decisions have been made. It's not our idea; it's one of many ideas. And there are probably many different views on that particular idea.

And so what is fair to say is that you can't draw any particular conclusion from this. We haven't made any determination on those ideas. We have been quite clear what our view is, what our strategy is, and how we need to move forward. And when we have something more specific to propose, or other thoughts of our own to describe, we'll do that for you.

QUESTION: Still on the Middle East, Phil.

MR. REEKER: Where else?

QUESTION: Does the State Department believe that Arafat's capable of making a cease-fire with the Israelis?

MR. REEKER: We have said all along that we thought that Chairman Arafat could do much more to bring down violence. He has a role to play. The President, and the Secretary has echoed the President's remarks in terms of being disappointed regarding the performance of Chairman Arafat. He hasn't done what he said he would on behalf of the Palestinian people; that is, a transformation of the Palestinian Authority needs to take place, and he still needs to work on that. He needs to continue to be clear in denouncing violence and terrorism, and letting his people know that that is not the way to achieve their dreams and their goals and to improve their lives; that that only sets back the process.

And so we continue to call on Chairman Arafat to do all he can, to make quite clear those views, and we are working with Chairman Arafat, with other Palestinians, to help them in this process, part of our strategy to renew and reconstruct and revitalize the institutions of the Palestinian Authority that are going to be absolutely necessary for eventual statehood. We have got to have institutions that can accomplish things, that can meet the needs of the Palestinian people.

QUESTION: Phil, if I can follow up. Can you just -- can you say yes or no, does the State Department believe that Arafat can deliver an end to the suicide bombings?

MR. REEKER: I think Chairman Arafat can use his leadership and his authority, can take the responsibility that he has promised to take, to do all he can to make clear that violence and terror only delay and set aside the dreams of the Palestinian people. And they are not the road to a solution here. And he has got to speak out against that, he has got to continue doing that, and continue working on all three of these parts of the strategy that we have talked about.

QUESTION: Well, one more shot, and then I'll drop it. So you're saying that Arafat can make a -- can tell his people that the suicide bombings are not the way towards eventually an independent state, or an interim state, or whatever, but you are not answering the direct question, can he end these suicide bombing attacks?

MR. REEKER: We have always said that Chairman Arafat can exercise his authority as the leader of the Palestinian Authority to work -- one of these tracks is security, and we had Director Tenet out there to talk about that, how to move forward on security, how to make a difference. And Chairman Arafat can make a difference in that. He's got to do that. He's got to live up to that.

QUESTION: He can make a difference, but can he end it?

MR. REEKER: He's got to do what he can to bring violence down, to end terrorism. I think we have always said the absolutism isn't here, Eli.

QUESTION: Right. Do what he can.

MR. REEKER: But he needs to do what he can, exercising his authority, and that's why security is an important track in this process, working together with the Israelis, with our support, in trying to find ways to better the security cooperation that will bring to the Israeli people, and the Palestinian people, the security that they need to go about their lives, to focus on prospering and making better lives for themselves and their children and grandchildren.

QUESTION: What is the U.S. policy against the Iraqi city of Kirkuk --

MR. REEKER: Well, let me just say I don't know what you're asking.

QUESTION: Okay. I can explain a little bit. Did the U.S. Government give any promises to the Iraqi Kurdish group about the Kirkuk City?

MR. REEKER: I just -- I don't understand the question. So maybe we can talk afterward. I'm not sure what you are referring to.

Yes, Jonathan.

QUESTION: Yes, to go back to Arafat. I wonder if you could perhaps explain the evolution of your position on negotiations with Arafat over the last few days? It's sometimes hard to keep track of what's said on the Middle East in this city.

MR. REEKER: I don't know of --

QUESTION: I distinctly recall a few days ago, you were -- this podium declined to recommend that the Israelis deal with Chairman Arafat. The Secretary said very clearly in his interview that you disagreed with Prime Minister Sharon's position, that he should not deal with Arafat. What has happened to --

MR. REEKER: I haven't heard anybody say anything different.

QUESTION: Well, two days ago the Spokesman very clearly declined to say that that was your position. He said --

MR. REEKER: I guess I'd have to --

QUESTION: -- your position with the Israelis --

MR. REEKER: -- I'd have to go back to all the various transcripts and try to figure out, if you want to try to map things out. I think I just now spent several minutes talking about the way we see the need to move forward, our three-part strategy. That's the way to move forward. We are very engaged in this. We have been meeting with leaders from Arab countries, with others in the international community, with Prime Minister Sharon just recently -- on the ground, in the region, here in Washington, over the telephone -- to discuss ways to move forward and then look at how we can have a meeting, which we think is an important step in that, a ministerial meeting, and see where we go from there.

QUESTION: Okay. But you can confirm at least that the State Department does believe that the Israelis should deal directly with Chairman Arafat?

MR. REEKER: I have never said that. I think that's a decision that the Israelis need to make. We are not going to make decisions for a democratic government.

QUESTION: No, but that's what the Secretary said in --

MR. REEKER: Well, then I'll refer you to whatever the Secretary said, Jonathan. You've got his words. I don't have them in front of me, and I'm not going to try to play word games with you anymore.

QUESTION: Tell me one -- well, I wondered whether perhaps you wanted to --

QUESTION: May I move on?

QUESTION: Does someone have a Middle East one? I want to change the subject.

MR. REEKER: This gentleman, and then we can change the subject, if you so desire.

QUESTION: You referred to the three tracks, the security and humanitarian and all that, and last week you said that, you know, Burns came back from the region, Tenet was there, Sharon was here, Mubarak was here, the Saudi Foreign Minister is coming.

Yet there seems to be no plan for a regional conference anytime soon. What exactly is the State Department doing and the administration doing for concrete steps to stop --

MR. REEKER: These discussions -- and you outlined them very well for me, thank you -- including the visits of Director Tenet, Assistant Secretary Burns to the region, the visits of various leaders here in Washington, the phone calls that the President and the Secretary have had, our discussions have focused on how best to move forward with the three-part strategy that I have talked about. I don't have any new plans to announce to you. The state of play is very much the same as it was yesterday when we went through this all before.

Responding to humanitarian needs and rebuilding responsible Palestinian Authority institutions in preparation for statehood is an important part of that. Working on the security track -- that is, establishing effective Palestinian security performance -- is vital. And renewing a serious political process is also important. That's what we are focusing on.

I don't have anything new to offer you in terms of what's next. As we said yesterday, the President and his top advisors, including the Secretary, are considering what we have heard over the past week, what we'll hear tomorrow and on Friday in the meetings with the Saudi Foreign Minister. And then we'll determine, in light of these consultations, how best to move forward from there with our strategy, including the meeting that we want to convene this summer.

So if and when there's something new to say, we'll say it.

QUESTION: During the past couple -- actually a few weeks in Congress, there's been a lot of hearings and briefings on the situation in Saudi, and now that the Foreign Minister is coming, how do you view the -- I mean, you know, talking about the future relations between the U.S. and Saudi, human rights abuses in Saudi. Today they had a hearing in Congress this morning. Are you going to bring those issues up with the Foreign Minister?

MR. REEKER: I couldn't say what the full agenda is. We usually discuss our bilateral relations. There are many aspects to them, including of course cooperation in the war against terrorism and the many aspects of that, and of course the Middle East and the situation there, as we have been discussing with the Saudis, including the vision put forward by the Crown Prince and adopted by the Arab League. So all of those things are likely to be on the agenda; I just couldn't give you a specific readout. We will let the meetings happen and see what we can tell you after that.

QUESTION: On the hearing, 92 -- and the State Department has indicated this is true -- 92 Americans are being held against their will. In one case, this woman with her two children entered the U.S. Embassy in Riyadh, stayed the whole day seeking help. They were forcibly removed by the --

MR. REEKER: As you indicated --

QUESTION: Well, in general, what is the responsibility of the State Department and the U.S. Embassy for U.S. citizens seeking help?

MR. REEKER: As you indicated, there was a hearing on the Hill today on that very subject, and I'll just refer you to that. I would be happy to check back. If there are questions left over from that hearing, we can look at it tomorrow, but I don't want to try to do two things at once. They are up on the Hill, I think even as we speak, with Deputy Assistant Secretary Crocker, and I'll let you take the lead from there and then we'll follow up.

Okay. Now, Jonathan was going to be next because he had something on this same subject.

QUESTION: Well, I was on the hearing, but unfortunately --

MR. REEKER: You should have stayed there.

QUESTION: Yeah, but unfortunately I can't be two places at the same time.

MR. REEKER: True.

QUESTION: Can you not summarize in --

MR. REEKER: No, I can't. I'm not going to try to summarize a hearing that's going on on the Hill as we speak. That would be totally irresponsible.

QUESTION: Wasn't this addressed yesterday?

MR. REEKER: And it was, I think, in great -- if you want to refer to Ambassador Boucher's briefing yesterday, he covered a number of these things --

QUESTION: I have a question that you probably will have an answer on, and will be happy to answer, I think, on one of your many areas of expertise, Phil?

MR. REEKER: Okay, Mr. Lee.

QUESTION: Why -- what is the problem that the State Department sees with having former Ambassador Holbrooke or other former U.S. officials testify in open session before the ICTY in Milosevic's trial?

MR. REEKER: I don't know why you would suggest that there's any particular problem. As you know, we have cooperated extremely closely with the Office of the Prosecutor of the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia, and we continue to do so in this case, that is, the case against Slobodan Milosevic. We have provided an unprecedented level of support to the Prosecutor.

Our discussions with the Prosecutor on these matters are ongoing. I can't really get into specific aspects or specific information that we may provide to the Prosecutor or specific witnesses or potential witnesses, but we do take very seriously the need to support the Prosecutor and the Tribunal in adjudicating the charges against Milosevic. I think we have been extremely clear about that from the beginning of this, and certainly I will remind you of our exhortations to Milosevic to go to The Hague, where he now is.

We have to weigh the need to protect compelling United States interests, including the need to protect effectiveness and security of our diplomats and the security of sensitive information. Those are the types of things we would discuss with the Prosecutor. And we will continue with those ongoing discussions.

QUESTION: Okay. But so that's the reason that you -- I mean, I wasn't suggesting that you weren't interested in seeing Milosevic prosecuted. I don't think that's the case at all. But you are concerned, however, about having current or former U.S. officials testify as witnesses openly, correct?

MR. REEKER: I think "concerned" is a question because it's something we need to look at and examine. We haven't made any decisions in terms of a number of those things, and I just can't discuss specific testimony, specific witnesses or potential witnesses. Those are matters that we would discuss with the Prosecutor. There are ongoing discussions about that. But I would say that we have been extraordinarily supportive of the prosecution at an unprecedented level of cooperation in working on this, and we will continue to do that.

QUESTION: My question is not aimed at trying to get you to say that you're --

MR. REEKER: I think I answered your question, Matt, because I don't have anything for you on specific testimony by any specific or nonspecific current or former U.S. officials.

QUESTION: The question which arose in this context before and was never adequately answered that I know of was whether former U.S. officials need approval from the administration before they could (inaudible) --

MR. REEKER: Well, former officials would be testifying in their capacity as officials at the time of their action in that case, and so the Department will work closely, the U.S. Government will work closely with the Prosecutors Office to discuss those issues. But in terms of definitive legal positions, I don't have anything else for you at this point.

QUESTION: Well, can you say if the concern that you're talking about having to weigh your desire for Milosevic's prosecution and others' prosecution with the need to protect U.S. interests and the safety of diplomats, are there also concerns about setting a precedent for having people testify before the International Criminal Court that you so adamantly oppose?

MR. REEKER: I don't know that that would necessarily be a concern or not. This is all about working with the Prosecutor to determine exactly what assistance could be provided when it comes to some of these subjects. And it's the matter of ongoing discussions, and so I couldn't really characterize it one way or the other.

QUESTION: But it's -- but the weighing of the interests against the desire for prosecution is strictly -- it's an ad hoc thing with the ICTY? Or are there greater --

MR. REEKER: There are issues at stake in terms of the effectiveness of diplomats, the security of our diplomats and the security of certain sensitive information. And that is what we have to discuss with the Tribunal.

QUESTION: Only related to the ICTY, or also possibly setting a precedent for the ICC?

MR. REEKER: I'm not aware of precedent-setting here. I just don't have any more information on it because I'm not privy to those specific conversations that are going on with the Prosecutor, and I don't think I'm going to have anything more to share with you on that.

QUESTION: Richard, maybe you said this before, but --

MR. REEKER: Philip is my name.

QUESTION: Sorry.

MR. REEKER: Richard's in Canada.

QUESTION: Have you actually received a formal request from the ICTY to ask Mr. Holbrooke to testify, and have you answered it?

MR. REEKER: I don't know. I don't know. I will check and see if I can give you an answer on that.

QUESTION: Yes, on another subject --

MR. REEKER: Same subject -- sorry. I've got to look over at this side.

QUESTION: Does the administration have a position on this American Service Members Protection Act that seems to be attached to a supplemental? There's a lot of unhappiness in Europe about it. It would seem to sort of go out of the way to penalize countries that would be ICC participants.

MR. REEKER: There is something called the American Service Members Protection Act legislation that's currently before the Congress, intended to address the possible consequences of a U.S. serviceman involuntarily being taken into custody under the auspices of the International Criminal Court, to which, as you know, the United States is not a party.

Our policy with regard to the establishment and jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court already is well known, and has certainly not changed. As you know, in May of this year, we formally notified the United Nations that we do not intend to become a party to the Rome Statute. That's because, as we have discussed, we believe that that treaty has a number of fundamental problems.

The Act's provisions grant an authority for the President to use all means necessary in terms of this issue of American servicemen being brought to the ICC, and we would certainly expect to resolve controversies like this in a constructive manner. But other than that, I don't have anything specific on the legislation.

QUESTION: Have there been complaints from other governments directly to the State Department about this?

MR. REEKER: I don't know. I have read press reporting about concerns that have been expressed, but I would just reiterate that should matters of legitimate controversy with the ICC's host country or any other country come up, we could resolve these in a constructive manner, as befitting relations between close allies and partners.

Now, the lady here had a question.

QUESTION: Yes. Why is the State Department advising American citizens who are traveling to Venezuela to take extra precautions?

MR. REEKER: You would have noted the notice we put out, our Public Announcement we released two days ago on June the 10th on Venezuela, superseding an earlier Public Announcement from May 16th. It was reflecting a change in Venezuelan immigration policy, and the continued uncertainties in the political and security situation in that country. This was particularly noting this update to our Public Announcement, noting that Venezuelan immigration officers have begun recently to require citizens of the United States and certain other countries to have at least six months of validity remaining on their passports to enter Venezuela.

So part of our Consular Information System is to make sure American citizens are aware of that, and don't try to travel to Venezuela with passports that would expire in less than six months. We understand that some U.S. citizens have been denied entry because of that.

We continue also to urge caution for U.S. citizens who travel to Venezuela, due to the unstable political environment and unpredictable security situation, and remind American citizens to consider their own personal security and take appropriate measures, noting some of the violent clashes that took place in April and that similar clashes could reoccur if the political situation deteriorates.

QUESTION: Also, on that announcement, and I quote, "There are increasing reports of American citizens being singled out for threats of harassment at the Venezuelan airports." Do you know what kind of harassment, and have you made a formal complaint to the Venezuelan Government?

MR. REEKER: I am not aware of specifics on that. That was noted in the thing. Obviously those would be reports that we had picked up through our Embassy or through here. I just don't have specifics on that. I'm sure in our ongoing dialogue with Venezuelan authorities it's something that could be raised. But we try to make American citizens aware of as much information as we have about their travel and the conditions of their travel to foreign countries, and that is why we put it in our Public Announcement.

QUESTION: So you have not made a formal complaint?

MR. REEKER: I would have to check and see at what level we have raised that, and whether one would call it formal or not. But it's obviously something we are concerned about, and that's why we are bringing it to the attention of American travelers.

QUESTION: Do you have any of the dialogue with the Turkish Government about the Prime Minister of Turkey's health situation?

MR. REEKER: I don't think so. I mean, we would clearly be concerned about his health. We would wish him well. But obviously that's a Turkish domestic issue, and I don't think there would be any particular diplomatic dialogue with --

QUESTION: Some of the Turkish press report that the U.S. Government regularly getting some report about the Prime Minister's health.

MR. REEKER: If the Turkish authorities wanted to provide us with that, I am sure we would be interested, because after all we wish him well. Turkey is a close friend and ally, and we have worked very closely with the Government of the Prime Minister. But I don't think there would be any particular dialogue on the subject. I think all of us are interested in his health and well-being, and as I said, we wish him all the best for good health.

QUESTION: I have two "D" questions.

MR. REEKER: Two "D" questions?

QUESTION: Just readouts, or pre-readouts if you would on the --

MR. REEKER: Oh, "D", as in the Deputy Secretary.

QUESTION: Indeed. On his two meetings today.

MR. REEKER: With?

QUESTION: Well, you know just as well as I do -- the Costa Rican President and the deputy-something of the Duma.

MR. REEKER: The Deputy Secretary of State, Richard Armitage, met today with the President of Costa Rica. They discussed the outcome of the recent Costa Rican elections, the challenges of the new government, and of the Central American region, and opportunities for expanding our already strong bilateral relationship, partnership with Costa Rica. The Deputy Secretary congratulated Mr. Pacheco for his victory in the election in April, and I understand that Mr. Pacheco thanked the Deputy Secretary for our defense of human rights and efforts to promote world peace. And so we had a very good meeting with our friend from Costa Rica.

QUESTION: And the second one?

MR. REEKER: The second one is --

QUESTION: Someone, a Russian legislator?

MR. REEKER: Who is this afternoon, I believe.

QUESTION: Who is the deputy-something of --

MR. REEKER: So I don't think I can give you --

QUESTION: (Inaudible.)

MR. REEKER: Yes, the Deputy Secretary is going to meet this afternoon at 4:00 here in the building with the Chairman of the "Union of Right Forces" -- that's a political party in Russia -- and Russian Duma Deputy Boris Nemtsov. They are expected to discuss political and economic developments in Russia, and various U.S.-Russia bilateral issues as part of our regular diplomatic dialogue with a variety of Russian officials.

QUESTION: Do you expect Chechnya to come up?

MR. REEKER: I couldn't tell you for sure, but it's often an issue that does come up in our discussions with Russian officials.

QUESTION: Do you have any information for us on the UPI report about a half-dozen men of U.S. origin being captured in Pakistan?

MR. REEKER: I don't. I saw that report. I was talking to my White House colleagues on it. I hadn't gotten anything on that before I came out here. It is something we will continue to check on, but I don't think anybody had found anything to corroborate or confirm that report.

QUESTION: Any new statement on the ABM Treaty expiration? And also, some --

MR. REEKER: I think that's tomorrow, so --

QUESTION: Yes. But -- well, today, for tomorrow; we're doing it for Asia.

MR. REEKER: Sorry. I can't do the 24-hour clock.

QUESTION: Okay. Well, then the other one is some Congress people sued the President and the Secretary, saying --

MR. REEKER: Some who?

QUESTION: Congressmen.

MR. REEKER: Congressmen sued? Okay.

QUESTION: Yeah. The administration basically, saying it's unconstitutional to back off the ABM Treaty.

MR. REEKER: Oh -- yes, I read news reports of that. I don't have anything on that for you, and you might check at the White House, or we can look into that.

QUESTION: My question is about North Korea issue. Do you think it is still premature to send an envoy to North Korea, which is originally scheduled in the middle of this month?

MR. REEKER: I don 't think anything was ever scheduled, so I think there is a misunderstanding there, or some mistaken information. We are looking at ways to move forward, and I think the Secretary has said we expect to be in touch with the North Koreans soon. I would refer you to his speech to the Asia Society on Monday night, where he discussed that. As you know, the President has proposed a comprehensive dialogue with North Korea. We are working out our approach to the discussions and expect to be in touch with North Korea shortly. So other than that, I don't have anything to add.

UESTION: Phil, there's a couple of pieces of legislation sponsored by I think Senator Santorum and Representative -- Congressman Engel and others that would impose sanctions on Syria. Do you have any position on that?

MR. REEKER: I don't have anything on that. Happy to look into it and see if the administration has taken a position on the legislation. But I hadn't seen anything, so it's one we will look into.

Anything else?

QUESTION: Thank you.

(The briefing was concluded at 2:00 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