*EPF401 06/27/2002
Transcript: State Department Noon Briefing, June 27
(Israel/Palestinian Authority, Pakistan, UN/International Criminal Court, China/Taiwan, Austria, Iran/Iraq, Cuba, Argentina/Brazil) (8610)

State Department Spokesman Richard Boucher briefed.

Following is the State Department transcript:

(begin transcript)

U.S. Department of State
Daily Press Briefing Index
1:10 p.m. -- Thursday, June 27, 2002

Briefer: Richard Boucher, Spokesman

ISRAEL/PALESTINIANS
-- Consul General Schlicher's Meetings with Palestinians
-- Positive Steps to be Taken by Both Sides
-- Reforming the Palestinian Institutions/Funding for the Palestinians
-- Support for United Nations Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA)
-- Whether Chairman Arafat is Capable of Leading Transitional Reform Process
-- Secretary Powell's Telephone Calls
-- Contact with Full Range of Palestinians/ Visit of George Tenet
-- Leadership Tinted by Terrorism/ Hosting International Conference
-- Reaction to President Bush's Speech

PAKISTAN
-- Designating Two Sikh Organizations as Financially Designated Global Terrorists/President Musharraf asking for Western Assistance

UNITED NATIONS/INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL COURT
-- Implications of the International Criminal Court for Peacekeepers

CHINA/TAIWAN
-- Peaceful Resolution/ One China Policy/ Arms Sales to Taiwan
-- Former Secretary of Defense Cohen's Visit to China

AUSTRIA
-- Secretary Powell's Meeting with Tom Sylvester and Congressman
-- Chabot

IRAN/IRAQ
-- Earthquake Aid/Tankers Carrying Smuggled Iraqi Oil

CUBA
-- Reaction to Castro's Statement

ARGENTINA/BRAZIL
-- Economic Crisis/ Riots in Argentina


U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE
DAILY PRESS BRIEFING

1:10 P.M. EDT -- THURSDAY, JUNE 27, 2002
(ON THE RECORD UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED)

MR. BOUCHER: Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen. I don't have any statements or announcements. I would be glad to take your questions.

QUESTION: Well, yesterday you said Consul General Schlicher will be meeting at some point with all levels of Palestinian leadership. Has he had any meetings, and --

MR. BOUCHER: I haven't checked today to see what meetings he's had, but he continues to meet with a full range of Palestinians, and that's our intention. We want to keep working in the Palestinian community with the Palestinians on their hopes for reform, on their hopes for a new direction, and on what the President laid out as a realistic way to achieve their hopes for a Palestinian state.

QUESTION: Palestinian officials are saying it's hard to -- and impossible, probably -- to implement the things that the President has asked under Israeli curfew, with all sorts of restrictions. And they also of course are claiming Israel -- it seems every three months Israel, they say, destroys their security apparatus.

Is there anything the US has on that? I mean, can these things be done under these conditions?

MR. BOUCHER: I think we have always believed that there is much that can be done, there is more that can be done, and that as things are done, as the President said in his speech, as the security situation improves, we look to Israel also to carry out its obligations.

So as the Palestinians put in place a new security apparatus, which George Tenet's already been out there to talk to them about, as the Palestinians issue orders within their own organizations to stop violence, as the Palestinian leadership speaks out -- if they ever will, or if they will again, shall we say -- as the Palestinian leadership speaks out from time to time, and we would hope repeatedly and effectively makes clear that the Palestinians should not engage in violence.

If there is an improvement in the security situation, then there are also obligations on the other side, and we expect to see an easing of the situation, and then they would be able to do still more. So there's not -- it's not an either-or proposition. There are things they can do now, and there's more they can do once they start to achieve something.

QUESTION: Just a couple questions to follow up on that. Can you say, without getting into the intelligence information, to what extent the United States Government believes the Palestinian leadership is intermingled with terrorist elements in -- operating out of the West Bank and Gaza? And --

MR. BOUCHER: I can't say it any differently than I've said it in past days. And we have made quite clear that we believe that the current structures, the current organizations and current leadership is tainted by terrorism, that there have been elements in these organizations and elements of some of the political movements that have been directly involved with terrorism. We've cited the people involved with bringing weapons in for terrorism in the Karine A affair. We've talked about various other pieces of information in the reports we've sent up to Congress.

So as the President made quite clear, we think that the current structure and current leadership has been tainted by this terrorism. And we need to make clear that in reforming the Palestinian institutions we need to create clean institutions that aren't involved with terrorism.

QUESTION: Well, just to follow up, it seems like there's a bit of a Catch-22. You're saying that the Palestinian Authority, which is tainted by terrorism, should speak out and work against it, and then the Israelis would -- you would ask the Israelis to do more in terms of lifting the incursion. But, I mean, how can you expect, if you think that they're tainted by terrorism, for them to then credibly work against it?

MR. BOUCHER: The Palestinian people have aspirations, and they have aspirations to be a democratic, well governed state, living side by side with the Israelis. What the President laid out in his speech is the way to achieve those aspirations, is to start work on it. It's not just current leadership; it's all Palestinians who can move forward down this road.

And certainly anyone in the current position of authority hasn't lost his responsibility to do what's right, which is to end any ties with terrorism and help with this process of reform. We've seen some steps in that direction which we consider positive. There was the signing of the basic law, the passage of the judicial reforms. There have been some financial reforms decided upon, a new cabinet appointed and things like that.

So some of this has already been positive. But we want to encourage that and see the momentum grow and see those kind of steps continue, and part of that is getting a hold of the violence.

Teri.

QUESTION: Can you clarify remarks the President made about funding for the Palestinians? I think there's some misunderstanding about it.

MR. BOUCHER: Well, first of all, I think we need to clarify the question that was asked here yesterday, because I don't think it was an entirely accurate portrayal of what the President said.

QUESTION: It was a verbatim quote.

MR. BOUCHER: I don't think it was.

QUESTION: Yes.

MR. BOUCHER: I don't think it was.

QUESTION: "Aid to the Palestinians" is what he said.

MR. BOUCHER: I was told yesterday the President said that aid to the Palestinians will be stopped, and that's not what the President said. The United States continues to provide funding, humanitarian funding, for Palestinians through the UN organizations that work there, through nongovernmental organizations that work there.

This funding is carefully audited, as all our assistance is. And as the President made clear, when we talk about continuation or rebuilding funds, or any kind of new funds, it would have to go under very careful controls to make sure it's money well spent.

We have been making clear all along that as we talk about rebuilding, as we talk about support for the Palestinians and building new Palestinian institutions, the one thing all the donors have made clear -- the President said this -- the United States and the international community want to ensure that it's well spent, carefully audited, and done under proper safeguards. And that has been true, not just for us, but for others as well.

QUESTION: Richard, do you share the concern --

QUESTION: And so -- you didn't answer -- I mean, what do you perceive his remarks as meaning then? Just that, yeah, we're going to make sure the money --

MR. BOUCHER: That any money we spend there is going to be carefully audited, carefully controlled. The money that we give now in terms of the humanitarian support is done under those circumstances, and any further money that we or the international community might consider -- and I think the President did talk about new money -- but in any case, any money, whether it's the money we give now or any consideration of new money would have to be done subject to the reforms that mean it will be accountable, it will be well spent.

QUESTION: And it would be withheld until you believe the reforms have been --

MR. BOUCHER: I don't think any donor is going to come forward with money unless they know it will be properly accounted for and properly spent.

QUESTION: Well, actually, the Europeans have said that they had a policy of funding the Palestinian Authority, and at least it appears at this point that they are going to continue.

MR. BOUCHER: And they have made quite clear they're not going to be forthcoming with new money unless there is the kind of reform that ensures the way it is properly spent.

QUESTION: They have communicated that to the State Department?

MR. BOUCHER: Well, I think they've said that in public.

QUESTION: But is there a hold on money now? The money that we've given that you say we always have safeguarded. So what's different?

MR. BOUCHER: There's not a hold on money now. There are some funds -- there's about 120-or-so million that we spend each year for the United Nations Relief and Works Agency. There's another 75-or-so million that goes through nongovernmental organizations. None of our money goes to the Palestinian Authority. And that's again carefully audited.

There's also some money from what's called the Wye River Supplemental, and some of those projects have gone forward or not because of different reasons. But I think the point that the President made was that any expectations -- that the US and the international community will expect that for any funding of reconstruction or anything on the -- in the Palestinian areas, there's going to have to be reform, there's going to have to be fiscal accountability. And that's, as the President made clear, not just for the United States but other donors as well.

QUESTION: Is there any money that would go directly to the PA eventually?

MR. BOUCHER: I think everybody would expect that, particularly a funding directly to the Palestinian Authority. But we would certainly expect it of any money that we spent, frankly.

QUESTION: Look, you have said in the past that you are confident that all the money which goes to the Palestinian territories through UN agencies and through NGOs is properly audited and accounted for. In other words, the corruption in the Palestinian Authority has nothing to do with that money at all. Has something changed? Is there any reason why you should not just continue on the present course of feeding money to Palestinians through the UN and these NGOs?

MR. BOUCHER: I didn't say we were changing it, nor did the President. That's where the misquote of the President yesterday has led people down the wrong path.

QUESTION: Can I just follow up? The President very much gave the impression that he was -- that the Palestinians, if they voted in the wrong way, might suffer by losing some of that assistance which they have received in the past. Is this a wrong impression, a misinterpretation of what he said?

MR. BOUCHER: If they were to expect any money for the Palestinian Authority, such as they have, it would be not from the United States but from other donors. If they were to expect any rebuilding or funds or contributions, we would expect to see institutions that are fully accountable to make sure every donor -- to make sure that the funds are used for the purposes for which they are intended.

So if they continue with the kind of institutions they've got now, the kind of leadership, the kind of practices they have now, they shouldn't expect to get any money from the international community. That's about as simple a way we could put it, and that's pretty much the way the President did put it.

QUESTION: I'm sorry, but this is an important point. The European Union and others have been contributing to reconstruction in the Palestinian territories and they have not complained about money disappearing. They have said --

MR. BOUCHER: I don't think that's true. I would refer you to the European Union on that.

QUESTION: Okay, can I have another one? Mr. Fleischer, in Calgary or wherever he was, said that the United States did not consider it would be possible for Mr. Arafat to implement reform. Now, this is a direct variance with what you've told us in the last few days.

MR. BOUCHER: No, it's actually directly exactly what I've told you here. We have said leaders, including Mr. Arafat, don't lose their responsibility to implement reform, and we would still expect them all to do so. But we have expressed again and again our disappointment with Chairman Arafat and his failure to do so.

QUESTION: And you also said yesterday and the day before that you thought that Arafat, even though he is tainted by the leadership, even though they are tainted by terrorism, and even though you would like to see a different leadership in place or a new leadership in place, that you thought that the -- you're still going to work with the existing structure because you think that they actually -- that they can make some improvements towards --

MR. BOUCHER: If they want to. I've never expressed any belief that Chairman Arafat was going to do things that he has failed to do for so long. I don't -- frankly, you guys are finding a contradiction here that certainly we never intended, and I think it's belied by the actual words that we have expressed from this podium.

We've said we're going to continue to meet with a full range of Palestinians. We've said that all Palestinians have a responsibility to reform, that people that are in current positions of leadership have that responsibility to stop the violence and engage in and encourage reform.

We have also said that we have been repeatedly disappointed by Chairman Arafat. We've said that here. The President has said it. The Secretary has said it. And that the reason that they needed a new dynamic and new leadership was that this current leadership had failed to do what they should have done. It doesn't absolve them from their responsibility, but certainly we've never thought that we were placing our hopes in the present system or the present leadership.

QUESTION: I've got three extremely short and hopefully non-contentious questions on the same subject. I don't know if non-contentious is possible, but I'm going to try.

MR. BOUCHER: Be my guest. I'll give you short and non-contentious answers.

QUESTION: One, you say that you are satisfied with the way that the money that you give to UNRWA is carefully audited and is being used correctly. Does that -- can we assume from that that you do not -- this is the first question -- that you do not share the concerns that the Israelis have expressed recently about the organization?

Two, you say no money will go to the Palestinian Authority, or no additional money to other entities that serve the Palestinians will go until after they demonstrate reform. So who's going to pay for the election?

And third, did the Secretary speak with the Jordanian Foreign Minister again today?

MR. BOUCHER: Let me do number two: no. We said two questions that ended in "who's going to pay for the elections"?

QUESTION: No, that's --

MR. BOUCHER: That was one question.

QUESTION: First question, do you share the Israeli concerns about UNRWA?

MR. BOUCHER: We have consistently and regularly looked into how our money is used, and there is strict US Agency for International Development accounting procedures that are used. And so we feel that those have been satisfied, that we have -- but this is an ongoing issue for us. We want to make sure that our money is properly spent.

And because of potential misuse, we don't give money to the Palestinian Authority, the PLO, we haven't, and as the President said yesterday, without substantial reform, they shouldn't expect any.

QUESTION: You don't believe -- you don't then share the Israeli concerns that UNRWA is misusing its mandate and to incite --

MR. BOUCHER: We want to ensure -- we certainly want as much as anybody to ensure that our money is well spent.

QUESTION: Right. Well, does that --

MR. BOUCHER: But we haven't --

QUESTION: Does that include the mandate of the entire mission? It does, doesn't it? What they do on the ground?

MR. BOUCHER: I don't --

QUESTION: In other words, it's not just cash --

MR. BOUCHER: -- I guess I don't quite understand.

QUESTION: -- it's policy as well.

MR. BOUCHER: Oh, I see, you mean it's not a question of accounting; it's a question of whether we like what they do?

QUESTION: No, no. Is it -- well, that's --

MR. BOUCHER: Yes, we like what they do; we put money into it.

QUESTION: Okay.

MR. BOUCHER: We think it's the right thing. It's humanitarian assistance that goes through the UN to Palestinians who need education, health care, housing, support for water. You know, we also spend money on our other programs, with private enterprise -- water resources, democracy and good governance, higher education, maternal child health and community services.

And so there are a variety of things that we support, all devoted to trying to give Palestinians a better life.

QUESTION: How about the election question? As part of your governance --

MR. BOUCHER: Who's going to pay for the elections? I don't know.

QUESTION: So you won't?

MR. BOUCHER: I don't know.

QUESTION: Well, you're saying that no additional assistance. Could that come under your program that you just said of good governance?

MR. BOUCHER: I'm not going to speculate, Matt, on whether the money -- there is money needed, whether donors will be asked, whether we'll want to do it or not.

QUESTION: What about the Jordanian Foreign Minister?

MR. BOUCHER: The answer I gave you already was no.

QUESTION: He didn't --

MR. BOUCHER: He didn't talk to the Jordanian Foreign Minister today.

QUESTION: Richard, not to put too fine a point on this, but wasn't UNRWA the agency that was overseeing the refugee camps where the Israelis found all these caches of weapons and all the people preparing for suicide missions and stuff?

MR. BOUCHER: They don't oversee the camps in those terms. The responsibility for security in those areas would fall to the Palestinian Authority, and what the Israelis found was that there was not much oversight, if any, from the Palestinian Authority of the security conditions in those camps.

QUESTION: Well, I mean, did UNRWA have any kind of responsibility? I mean, don't they have some obligation to sort of report the information? Did they do that? I mean, the Israelis complain that they are providing an infrastructure in areas that had been basically taken over by terrorists. I mean, it seems to me that if you're arguing that there's no accounting problems, it's almost like you're not looking at the broader issue the Israelis have raised.

MR. BOUCHER: First of all, I think your colleague just asked me if we'd looked at these broader issues, and I said we believe these programs are worthwhile. I don't know any better to say it. These are not -- they're not in control of those areas, but they do provide assistance on a humanitarian basis to people who need it.

The responsibility in those areas for security falls to the Palestinian Authority. And we have repeatedly talked about their failure to do that properly.

Teri.

QUESTION: Can you talk about phone calls? I understand he has spoken to the Saudi Foreign Minister.

MR. BOUCHER: Yes, the Secretary this morning talked to Foreign Minister Saud of Saudi Arabia -- Saud al-Faysal of Saudi Arabia. He talked to Jack Straw, the British Foreign Minister. And he talked to President Musharraf as well. He wanted to obviously -- they talked from a --

QUESTION: -- in your statement yesterday.

MR. BOUCHER: He wanted to express our sympathy with the loss of life for the Pakistani soldiers that were killed, and also just go over the current situation.

QUESTION: Follow-up. Is there a political report coming out by the end of this month? I believe Bill Burns said that up on the Hill the other day.

MR. BOUCHER: Yes, I think there is. I'd have to look at the schedule of exactly when they're due. But they're every six months or so, right? And sometimes they're on time.

QUESTION: Sometimes they're not. But this one would be on time, I believe, if it came out by the end of the month, right?

MR. BOUCHER: We always try to make them on time.

QUESTION: The situation in Hebron is kind of I guess getting worse by the hour. Are you or any American officials on the ground trying to mediate between the two sides, trying to work out an end to the situation there?

MR. BOUCHER: We're concerned about the situation. We're following it closely. We're getting regular reports from our Consul General and our Embassy about it. We are in touch with the parties, but I wouldn't ascribe any role beyond that with us.

QUESTION: And no mediation?

MR. BOUCHER: I wouldn't describe our role that way, no.

QUESTION: When the Secretary spoke to President Musharraf, did they discuss at all the decision to designate two Sikh organizations as -- I can't remember what the acronym is -- FD-something --

QUESTION: GT.

QUESTION: GTs. Thank you.

MR. BOUCHER: I don't know what an SCGT [sic] is, but anyway --

QUESTION: Financially Designated Global Terrorist.

MR. BOUCHER: Oh, I don't know specifically if they did or not. Is that in the Federal Register?

QUESTION: No, it's Treasury. But the point is that there are two groups that Britain designated a few months ago and --

MR. BOUCHER: No, I know. I know what the issue is. I'm just not sure I'm allowed to talk about it today, whether it's out yet or not, but I guess it is.

QUESTION: Could you take the question?

MR. BOUCHER: I'll take the question and see if there is anything more to say on that from our point of view. I don't know if they got into that specifically.

QUESTION: I'd like to go back to this question of reform and Arafat, because I didn't understand your answer. I'm sorry.

Does the State Department believe that Arafat is capable of leading a transitional reform process until new leaders take over?

MR. BOUCHER: Jonathan, you have to -- no. The simple answer is no. We have asked him repeatedly to do things like that, to undertake the reforms, to take the steps necessary against violence. The Secretary has asked him directly face to face. And as the President and the Secretary have expressed, we have repeatedly been disappointed.

Does that mean he or anybody else is absolved of the inherent responsibility to do that? No. But are we putting our hopes in him? No.

QUESTION: Okay. So what exactly is the purpose of the contacts which you've described over the last few days which, the impression we got of which was that this was part of the encouraging them to carry out reform.

MR. BOUCHER: You asked me a question about Arafat. I gave you an answer about Arafat. We have a full range of contact with Palestinians. There are people throughout the Palestinian community who do really want to reform their institutions, who do really want to set up good government, who do really want to get a handle on violence and take responsibility in their own areas.

And we will work with people throughout the Palestinian community -- whether they're in government, in leadership positions or elsewhere -- who want to do that, and encourage everybody to do that in the direction the President said, because we believe, and the President said clearly, that's the only way they're going to be able to create the state that they aspire to.

QUESTION: I'm sorry, you just -- you rightly pointed out that Jonathan asked you only about Arafat. Does that mean that there's no reason for US officials to ever speak with Arafat again, except for maybe on a personal level? For an official American to have an official conversation with Arafat? It sounds as if there's no reason.

MR. BOUCHER: Again, I'm not trying to draw a broad dicta on this one. I would just say that we will keep in touch with a full range of Palestinians, and leave it at that.

QUESTION: Does that range include Arafat?

MR. BOUCHER: I'm not going to try to get into specific individuals that way.

QUESTION: Can we have that? That's a really important question. I mean, that's a really important question. Are you or are you not going to meet with Arafat? It's like, you know, "a full range of Palestinian leadership"?

MR. BOUCHER: Sorry, that's all I can tell you at this moment. The question has not arisen.

QUESTION: I have a question on security.

MR. BOUCHER: The gentleman back here has a question.

QUESTION: Are these people in -- I mean, this range of people that you're talking to, are they part of the Palestinian Authority structure at the moment? Are they in civil organizations? Are they NGO?

MR. BOUCHER: There's people all over. It's a full range. There is a full range of people on the Palestinian side in all kinds of different positions who are talking about reform and supporting reform, and who want to have a responsible government. If you read the newspapers out there, which you probably do, you see legislators speaking out, you see academics, you see banking and economic officials, you see people in leadership positions. And as I said, even the Palestinian Authority, with the current leadership, has taken some positive steps in the direction of reform.

So what we want to do is keep meeting with people, encouraging this, and making clear that we do believe that people have a responsibility to end the violence, to get on with reform, and to really make it possible for all this to achieve a Palestinian state.

QUESTION: Do you feel -- there's been somewhat conflicting reports on the media from some of the Palestinian officials. I mean, there's all sorts of waves within the PA and then people outside. Some people are agreeing with what the President is saying. Some people are not. Some ministers saying this and other ministers saying that. What is your view on that? Are you in contact with these officials, some like Saeb Erekat and Nabil Shaath? I know he was here last week.

MR. BOUCHER: We've been contact with a full range of Palestinians. I don't think it does us any good to try to define who we've talked to because we may talk to somebody else tomorrow. But we do keep in touch with a whole variety of people in different positions and different walks of life to encourage reform, to encourage responsibility, and to encourage an end to the violence.

QUESTION: You're singling out security as one of the subjects that should be talked about with Palestinian officials. But you also yesterday spoke of the Tenet plan as being, you know, there as being a standing --

MR. BOUCHER: I haven't talked about the -- I think yesterday we talked about the visit of George Tenet, and how he was working with them, had started working with them on the issue of reforming the security services. That's a little different than the Tenet plan, which is --

QUESTION: Oh, all right, then I got it wrong, because my impression was you were saying that there is a blueprint; now the problem is to get it implemented. But if that's wrong, then how are you going to proceed? Like with Tenet, or someone else? Should I mention Zinni? How are you going to proceed with improving security if you don't have a fixed blueprint? Presumably you have to do more work. Or do you want the two sides to meet and do it themselves?

MR. BOUCHER: Yes, yes, and yes. So --

QUESTION: So who goes out there?

MR. BOUCHER: And quickly. One of the things that we do have underway, and we have it underway because of the visit of George Tenet, and remember it was discussed during the Secretary's visit as well, is that we need to reform Palestinian security institutions that have failed in the past to control the violence and that have, we know, had all kinds of contacts with terrorism.

In order to do that -- and there have been plenty of calls within the Palestinian community as well to do that, and suggestions and proposals put forth within the Palestinian community. We want to work with them on that. Director of Central Intelligence George Tenet was out there to talk to them, and it's an ongoing issue of discussion between US officials and others. There are many other governments that are interested in this.

How exactly it will proceed within the Palestinian community and with the support of outsiders, I'm not quite sure I can define yet. So yes, there is more work to be done. But this is one of the first items on the agenda for us and others, and it appears for the Palestinians as well. Because they see that taking responsibility for security in their areas is an essential part to securing progress.

He had one more, I think, on his list.

QUESTION: I'd just like to follow up on Jonathan's question. If you have no faith in Arafat, you have no hope that he's going to carry out the reforms that the President asked about, are you going to try to take him out of power? (Laughter.) Not take him out, but take him out of power?

MR. BOUCHER: Well, let's put the cards on the table here.

QUESTION: No, no, no, the full stop was after "out of power", or the question mark was after "out of power."

MR. BOUCHER: The President has made clear in his speech -- and I think you've all noticed that the President talked about new leadership. He talked about elections, democracy, new institutions, new dynamic, new leadership. We have admitted; we have said it's for the Palestinians to decide on their leaders. But we have also made clear that for us to work with them and achieve a Palestinian state, it's going to take new directions and new leadership. Because that's, we firmly believe, the only way and the only realistic way that they can achieve that vision.

QUESTION: Following up on Barry's question, does the US Government have a position on whether or not Jabril Rajoub, Amin al-Hindi, or Mohamed Dahlan are included in the group of leadership tainted by terrorism, and should no longer be involved?

MR. BOUCHER: I'm not in a position to report to you here on specific individuals.

QUESTION: Is that possible to have as a taken question?

MR. BOUCHER: I doubt if we're going to want to be able to do that, because -- I think we're just not in a position to do that in public.

QUESTION: Is the administration still planning to host this international conference? And if so, is it ministerial, as you've said before?

MR. BOUCHER: We still consider that a ministerial meeting could be appropriate and useful at some point in this process. It wasn't in the President's speech. It's not an immediate item on the agenda at this point. Getting going on this reform, getting this momentum going, starting to see an improvement in security and seeing the reciprocation on the other side were the things the President talked about most immediately.

But it may be that at an appropriate time a ministerial meeting could be useful. So it's still one of the ideas out there.

QUESTION: Can I ask another? It doesn't sound as if there's an immediate strategy for how you go forward. So, I mean, is it fair to say that what you're really doing here is looking for breathing space? Or what is the right phrase to describe what you're doing?

MR. BOUCHER: Gee, I don't get questions like that. I'm not prepared to deal with them. I would say what we're doing is gathering -- we're assessing, first of all, the reaction to the President's speech. The President is up in Kananaskis with the leaders of the Group of Eight, and talking to them about the way forward, as he's outlined it.

The Secretary himself has been in touch now with a half a dozen or perhaps more foreign ministers from Europe, from the region. Our envoys in the region, our ambassadors in different countries in the region, as well as our Consul General in Jerusalem, has been in touch with the Palestinians and have been getting assessments, looking at how this can be done, looking at the contributions that all these different governments and countries and people can make. Because certainly the US is not the only player, and we look to others to play an important role, as they have in recent months.

So as we assess that and gather together the contributions of others on the way forward, we'll be, say in a variety of different ways, moving to operationalize the path that the President laid out.

QUESTION: Can I change the subject?

MR. BOUCHER: Sure.

QUESTION: On Monday, I believe, the same day as stamp prices rise, the ICC comes into effect. How does -- how goes the battle at the UN over this? Is it still basically you and Israel against the world, or have you managed to convince some of your reluctant partners in Europe to join the immunity fight?

MR. BOUCHER: Well, I have a blank page at that spot.

QUESTION: And that's bad news?

MR. BOUCHER: No, it's not bad news. It means I have to think before I speak.

The United States is circulating at the United Nations this morning some ideas about how to make sure that with respect to the renewal of the Bosnia forces that the International Criminal Court doesn't impede the operation of these essential troops. We continue to believe very strongly in this mission. We continue to be concerned about the possible implications of the International Criminal Court for peacekeepers and Americans who are on missions like this, and we want to see these missions maintained. That's why we're circulating, I think informally today with other members of the Security Council -- all 15 -- some ideas about how that can be done in resolutions.

The Secretary has been in conversations with a number of foreign ministers on this issue. Our Ambassador Negroponte up at the UN has talked to counterparts in the Perm 5 countries, and now he's talking today to a wider group of people.

But I think the point is the United States believes very seriously in the mission, but also believes very seriously we can't allow that mission to be compromised by the International Criminal Court. And therefore we need to work this out, and we're making that point to people today.

QUESTION: Any ideas? Is this something you're prepared to tell us, or do we just have to wait for the people at the UN to blab, which they will, so you might as well --

MR. BOUCHER: I think you have to wait for the people at the UN to blab. Since it's informal at this point, we haven't -- as far as I know, we haven't put a resolution in blue, which is the point at which it becomes common knowledge.

QUESTION: All right. Is this just within the Security Council that this is happening, or do you bring in others? I just want to know because I'm trying to get an idea of the --

MR. BOUCHER: Well, we're talking at the Security Council. We're also talking to governments in their capitals, and the Secretary has been on the phone with a couple foreign ministers on this subject.

QUESTION: So the prospects for someone to leak this are larger than just the --

MR. BOUCHER: Very high. Oh, yeah. Very high.

(Laughter.) QUESTION: That's what I was just trying to figure out, Richard, if it was only 15 we could look at or if we could go beyond.

MR. BOUCHER: Almost certain, almost certain.

QUESTION: I just want to go back to President Musharraf. There were reports that after this attack -- was it yesterday? I think yesterday or the day before -- that he was asking for more Western assistance. Did that come up in his conversation with the Secretary, and was the Secretary able to make any assurances to him?

MR. BOUCHER: I don't know. I'll have to check. I'll see if we've had any conversations with the Pakistanis about that.

QUESTION: China? We asked Secretary Armitage yesterday about Taiwan, and he of course said a peaceful revolution -- not revolution -- peaceful resolution.

MR. BOUCHER: Resolution.

QUESTION: How come US officials repeatedly refuse to use or talk about unification? It's never mentioned in any of their policy addresses or responses to any of the questions.

MR. BOUCHER: I'm sure there's a long list of words we don't use. We use the word "peaceful resolution of this issue."

QUESTION: Why don't you talk about -- because if you offer the Palestinians a prospect of statehood, why don't you offer some Chinese the prospect of unification to solve this problem?

MR. BOUCHER: I think there's no doubt we have a One China policy. We believe in peaceful resolution of the issues. And that's what our policy is. Rather than explaining what it's not, let me just tell you what it is.

QUESTION: Can I have one more?

MR. BOUCHER: Sure. You need another word that we don't use, or not?

QUESTION: Never mind. The Chinese Foreign Ministry yesterday protested again the arms sales to Taiwan, that the US delegation is going to Taiwan to talk about the submarine sales. If you accept the One China policy as the premise, any deployment of missiles, whatever in Fujian, that's a domestic issue. Why are the States so concerned?

MR. BOUCHER: Well, as you know, this has a lot of history. And if you go back to the history of it, the United States has had a One China policy. We support the three communiqu�� and the Taiwan Relations Act, which goes with our One China policy. We have always made clear we will provide the necessary equipment for the people of Taiwan to have their self-defense. We have done that through the years. We have done that based on the One China policy, the three communiqu�� and the Taiwan Relations Act. And that continues.

Now, the military situation across the Straits therefore has a direct bearing on peace and stability across the Straits and what we may have to provide to the people of Taiwan for their legitimate self-defense. We have made quite clear, and I think this administration has made increasingly clear, that the deployment of missiles in Fujian Province has a direct bearing on our thinking because we do believe in peaceful resolution, because we do believe that the only way to resolve this is peacefully, and missiles aren't a way to resolve it peacefully.

George.

QUESTION: The Secretary met with Tom Sylvester this morning. His daughter was abducted by his ex-wife seven years ago. Do you have any comment on the meeting?

MR. BOUCHER: As you note, the Secretary did meet this morning with Mr. Sylvester and with Congressman Chabot. We have followed this case for many years. It's been a matter of great concern. We work very actively on it. In fact, in our 1999, 2000 and 2001 reports to Congress on compliance with the Hague Convention, Austria was found to be noncompliant based solely on this case.

Secretary Powell and Assistant Secretary Ryan have raised the case with the Austrian Government, as have other officers of the Department and our Embassy in Vienna many, many times.

The facts are as follows. Carina Sylvester was taken to Austria by her mother in 1995 at the age of 13 months. Her father, Tom Sylvester, filed a Hague application and won custody of his child, but lost the effort to enforce the order to return.

An Austrian court subsequently decided that the delay in enforcing the court order caused by the mother's actions in prolonging the judicial process somehow justified revocation of the return order. Mr. Sylvester then filed a Hague application for access to his child. He was able to visit his daughter for only one day in 1999, and later that year an Austrian court granted him limited supervised visitation three times a year. Mr. Sylvester has since then only been able to see his child for a few days.

Now he is seeking unsupervised visits with his daughter in both Austria and the United States. We are supporting him in that. We are trying to help him achieve that. We recognize the pain that these cases cause and the importance of pursuing them, and we help our nationals pursue them.

QUESTION: He said the Secretary would be in touch with the Austrian Foreign Minister very soon on this matter. Do you know anything about that?

MR. BOUCHER: I would expect he will.

Teri.

QUESTION: On that, does this set a precedent for the Secretary becoming more involved in a number of these cases? There are so many.

MR. BOUCHER: There are so many. They are very difficult. They are very painful cases. Where we can help, we do. You find our consular officers very active around the world. The head of our Consular Affairs, Mary Ryan, has been very active, a member of the negotiations with Germany on the general issue. And certainly the Secretary of State has been involved with Germany on these issues, as well as Austria and elsewhere.

So it's one of the things we do. It's one of the things we do to defend the interests of Americans, the decisions of American courts, the international rules that govern these things, and the interests of American citizens.

QUESTION: Will you find more successful resolutions once the Secretary publicly takes a stand on this and talks to his counterparts?

MR. BOUCHER: I would say we've been somewhat more successful in Germany, but I can't say we have been in every case. These are very difficult.

QUESTION: Any news on assistance to Iran for the earthquake people?

MR. BOUCHER: Actually, we think we've defined working with the United Nations, and they with the Iranians, defined the kind of things that we're going to provide. We'll be providing: six 10,000-liter water bladders; two water purification systems, each capable of supporting 10,000 people per day; 5,000 wool blankets; 12,000 personal hygiene kits -- that's soap, laundry detergent, toothbrush, toothpaste, things like that.

The total value of the aid is approximately $300,000. It will have to go out with the air freight -- take some other -- work out some other procedures, and UNICEF will handle taking the stuff and delivering it.

QUESTION: So you don't -- you're not planning to use US planes for this?

MR. BOUCHER: I think it's contracted transport, and then --

QUESTION: So what exactly is the status of all this equipment? You've agreed to give this?

MR. BOUCHER: We've agreed to give it and we're getting it together. This is -- we've agreed with the United Nations that among the things that Iran has said it's needed, the United States will supply these. We're working with the United Nations now. We have these supplies. We'll be contracting for the transport and delivering to the United Nations so that they can handle the distribution.

QUESTION: Does that mean, Richard, that apart from the original offer and the Iranian -- the original official offer and the Iranian official response to you guys that everything else has been done through the UN -- in other words, the Iranians go to the UN and say we need this?

MR. BOUCHER: I think that's what I explained yesterday. The Iranians had said they are interested in what we provided; would we please talk to the UN about how it fits, because they've given the overall plan to the UN.

QUESTION: Right. But the UN takes what the Iranians -- the Iranian wish list, basically, and then divvies it up between all potential donors? Or do the Iranians specifically say we want from the US whatever it is that --

MR. BOUCHER: We want American water bladders?

QUESTION: They didn't say that?

MR. BOUCHER: I don't think so. I think it was done, you know, in consultation. Now, obviously the UN and we, and the UN and the Iranians, are in consultation to make sure that what we can provide, what we have, is what they need, fits the bill.

QUESTION: Yesterday the Pentagon said that the Iranians apparently are no longer allowing tankers carrying smuggled Iraqi oil to use their territorial waters. Can you tell us if there has been any sort of diplomatic contacts on this issue lately, and if there's any sort of --

MR. BOUCHER: I'll have to see if there's anything we can say on it. I don't know, frankly.

Teri.

QUESTION: A follow-up from yesterday. Did you get anything on DS involvement in the arrest of this guy al-Sharak?

MR. BOUCHER: Unfortunately, not a lot. We've been working with other agencies on this matter. The piece of paper that I had I can't even find. How interesting.

We have been working with other agencies on this. We have played a role in this, but the matter is now under investigation and about to proceed judicially. I think he is currently in custody with the Immigration Service for overstay of visa or some such thing. So I'm afraid there's not much more I can say at this moment on the particular facts of the matter.

QUESTION: You know, Castro seems upset by what he claims as improper behavior by the US Interests Section in Havana, and he has also rejected President Bush's idea that -- to bring Cuban students here on scholarships. Any comment?

MR. BOUCHER: There was some talk also, I think, in his statements about getting rid of the bilateral migration accords, which actually have been quite important and useful for both of us. We just held ten days ago the 17th annual talks on our bilateral migration accords, and while not perfect, these have helped us regulate the flow of people and indeed the safety of Cubans who might want to come to the United States. So moving away from this system would be a mistake and dangerous for the Cuban people.

As far as threatening the -- I think he threatened to close the US Interest Section in Havana. We think the Interest Section is a vital link to the Cuban people. It carries out the present policy by keeping them informed and providing information to ordinary Cubans so that they can understand democratic development and open markets. This is a legitimate outreach function that is respected all around the world, but maybe that's why Castro doesn't like the Interest Section.

Frankly, the Cuban Interest Section here does similar things in putting out information on Cuban policy. And we don't object to that. So we think his complaints are basically groundless. And in fact, some of the ideas that he's putting forward would be detrimental to the welfare and the interests of the Cuban people.

QUESTION: Wait a second, how about the other part, on the scholarships?

MR. BOUCHER: On the scholarships, I didn't see that element particularly. But I think we would continue to believe the Cuban people deserve an education, and if we can help with that, we would want to do so. And we wouldn't understand anybody who would like to deprive them of that opportunity.

You had one more?

QUESTION: Two widely disparate questions.

MR. BOUCHER: Okay.

QUESTION: Last Friday, the Financial Times reported concerns of the economic crisis in Argentina spreading to Brazil. And as you know, there were riots in Argentina. How serious do you expect the financial crisis will be, and is there anything that we can be doing to ameliorate it?

MR. BOUCHER: We are, first of all, working on both those situations, both Argentina and Brazil, following them closely, have our people down there working it. And obviously the economic policy people in Washington are following it all very closely.

We have worked with the international institutions involved, the IMF in Argentina particularly closely, to try to ensure that we can support a sustained effort at economic recovery. Beyond that, I don't think I want to predict how serious or what might happen to the crisis. I'll leave that to the economic experts if they really want to at this point.

But these are matters that we've been following very closely and working on and trying to make sure that the United States, with the rest of the international community and the institutions involved, can make a positive contribution.

QUESTION: What do you think is at the root of this? Because it's -- you know, this year Argentina has just basically, you know, deteriorated almost beyond recovery.

MR. BOUCHER: Well, there's a lot of history here, and I'd really leave it to others to try to recount it, frankly.

QUESTION: One more question, going back to China. Former Secretary of Defense Bill Cohen said that when he was in China there were three subjects they wanted to discuss, and that was Taiwan, Taiwan and Taiwan. And he said they said there was --

MR. BOUCHER: They also like to talk about Taiwan.

QUESTION: He said the Chinese said that -- Mainland China said it was One China/Two Ideologies. The Taiwanese said there was One China/Two Interpretations. And former Secretary Cohen said surely there must a lawyer somewhere who can reconcile those two -- the vocabularies. What --

MR. BOUCHER: Let me make a couple things clear. First of all, our dialogue with China, what we do with China, goes well beyond the issue of Taiwan, but they do raise it frequently in our meetings and we talk about it in the terms that I've talked about it today and that we consistently use.

The cooperation between the United States and China against terrorism, economic cooperation, educational exchanges and these things are all very positive, and we work together on international issues like India-Pakistan, Korean Peninsula.

The question of interpretation of One China and how to define a basis for discussions, we leave to the Chinese themselves, the Chinese themselves both in the Mainland and Taiwan, to work out. So if there's a lawyer that wants to cut the difference there, well, let it be a lawyer from Taiwan or a lawyer from China.

QUESTION: Is there any reason for optimism about a peaceful resolution?

MR. BOUCHER: Our belief is that there is substantial reason for that to happen; there is substantial reason for the sides to be able to deal with each other peacefully; there's abundant reasons why everybody should want to keep it peaceful. But we'll leave it to them to decide on dialogue and what it might produce.

(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