*EPF502 06/28/2002
Transcript: State Department Noon Briefing, June 28
(Israel/Palestinian Authority, Mexico, North Korea, China/Taiwan, Colombia, Bosnia/International Criminal Court, Afghanistan/ISAF, UN/Iraq) (5970)

State Department Spokesman Richard Boucher briefed.

Following is the State Department transcript:

(begin transcript)

U.S. Department of State
Daily Press Briefing Index
12:30 p.m. -- Friday, June 28, 2002

Briefer: Richard Boucher, Spokesman

ISRAEL/PALESTINIANS
-- Travel to the Region
-- Aid to the Palestinian Authority
-- Terrorist Organizations
-- UNESCO's Designation of World Heritage Sites in Region
-- Chairman Arafat's Future
-- Palestinian Authority Reforms
-- Chairman Arafat's Health
-- Hamas Leader Under House Arrest
-- Louis Farrakhan Travel to Israel

MEXICO
-- Water Rights
-- Freezing Mexican Oliers Assets

NORTH KOREA
-- Resumption of Dialogue

CHINA/TAIWAN
-- Meeting with Chinese Officials
-- Prohibition of Travel for Falun Gong Members

COLOMBIA
-- Plan Colombia
-- Air Interdiction Flights

BOSNIA/INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL COURT
-- Extension of Bosnian Peacekeeping Mandate
-- Draft Security Council Resolution
-- Permanent War Crimes Court
-- Status of Force Agreements

AFGHANISTAN
-- U.S. Troops in ISAF

UNITED NATIONS
-- Expulsion of Iraqi Diplomats


U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE
DAILY PRESS BRIEFING

12:30 P.M. EDT -- FRIDAY, JUNE 28, 2002
(ON THE RECORD UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED)

MR. BOUCHER: Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen. It's a pleasure to be here. I would be glad to take your questions.

Mr. Gedda.

QUESTION: Well, since I know everything, I have no questions.

MR. BOUCHER: Thank you, sir.

QUESTION: Go to Jonathan first.

MR. BOUCHER: They must not know everything.

QUESTION: I know nothing.

QUESTION: Is there any Mideast-related travel planned in the next week or so?

MR. BOUCHER: Travel. You mean like you might ask about Bill Burns, for example?

QUESTION: Yes, like maybe Bill Burns.

MR. BOUCHER: Let me review where we are, and I'll get to the Middle East-related travel with Mr. Burns -- Ambassador Burns.

As you know, first, the President discussed developments in the Middle East with Group of Eight leaders in Canada. The Group of Eight issued a statement yesterday that supported the President's vision for two states living side by side within secure and recognized borders. The Group of Eight leaders also stressed the urgent need for reform of Palestinian institutions and its economy, and for free and fair elections.

The Secretary and other officials continue to discuss with the parties and the regional leaders how best we can move forward with the strategy that was laid out by the President, a strategy that we firmly believe is the only realistic path to two states living side by side in peace.

Assistant Secretary for Near Eastern Affairs Bill Burns will travel to London early next week to hold a meeting with Middle East envoys of the Quartet -- that is of Russia, the European Union, the United Nations and the United States. They will review steps to support and to implement the President's vision for progress on security, institution-building and reform, economic reconstruction and resumption of an Israeli-Palestinian political dialogue.

There is wide agreement with the people that we have talked to and expect to talk to that a new dynamic is needed to bring peace to the region. Israelis need to be able to live free from terror and violence, and Palestinians deserve a stable, democratic and prosperous state under new and responsible leadership. This approach will require real reform of Palestinian political, economic, legal and security structures, and we're discussing with a broad group of international leaders how we can actively support those efforts.

I point out that we continue to look to the parties, the Arab world, and the international community to contribute to those efforts, including the Palestinian reform effort that's already underway.

And in that regard, I would note, a lot of -- a number of steps, a number of positive steps are being taken in the Palestinian community to move forward on a broad range of institutional reform. There's movement underway on judicial systems, independence of the judiciary, giving more power to the legislature, more power to the judiciary; a lot of advocacy, and some steps being taken on financial responsibility; and to end corruption and things like that.

So this is a movement within the Palestinian community that we look forward to supporting and working with them as we can to see those things go forward.

QUESTION: Is that just a one-day meeting?

MR. BOUCHER: At this point, yes, that's what's planned. That will be a one-day meeting. I think we're shooting for Tuesday, but I don't think it's fixed yet.

QUESTION: Then does he go on from there, or does he come back to celebrate the holiday?

MR. BOUCHER: I think he comes back to celebrate July 4th.

QUESTION: Did you say which day that was?

MR. BOUCHER: We're shooting for Tuesday, but it's not fixed.

QUESTION: And those are the same --

MR. BOUCHER: It could be earlier.

QUESTION: This is Larsen --

MR. BOUCHER: Yes.

QUESTION: Terje Larsen --

QUESTION: Moratinos --

MR. BOUCHER: Moratinos -- Larsen, Moratinos and Vdovin. Yes. At the envoy level.

QUESTION: And we talked about aid yesterday. I see today that the European Union has in fact made new pledges of assistance directly to the Palestinian Authority. Do you approve of this? Do you think that they're wasting their money, or you welcome it?

MR. BOUCHER: I think you'd have to check with them. I think I pointed out yesterday that the Europeans and Arab donors, as well as others, have always been concerned about the way the money is spent, and look for financial accountability, and you can ask them what sort of accountability they expect for their money.

QUESTION: Well, you're not taking a position, though, on -- I mean, wouldn't that be undermining your goal of seeing new accountable leadership?

MR. BOUCHER: If there was a good system of accountability attached to the spending of the money, and it went to support reform, no.

QUESTION: What if it was the same leadership?

MR. BOUCHER: But let's -- I don't --

QUESTION: Well, I mean, not "if"; it is the same leadership.

MR. BOUCHER: No -- Eli, I mean, you're talking like they're putting a bag of money on the table in front of a leader. I don't want to assume that about European programs. That's generally not the way we or anybody else, including the Europeans, do business.

QUESTION: Yesterday, in some remarks she made in Canada, Condoleezza Rice referred to Fatah and Tanzim as a group that traffics in terror. I know that there's been some thought before about whether or not Tanzim should be considered a Foreign Terrorist Organization. Is there any change in thinking on that in the last week?

MR. BOUCHER: That's very consistent with what we've always said, that those are groups whose members, and some of the associated organization, including al-Aqsa, which I think has been associated with them, where there have been people involved in terror, and people who have been involved in working with terrorists.

So I don't think that's -- that's not a new designation.

QUESTION: Well, why is Tanzim not on the list then?

MR. BOUCHER: The list is an exact list based on a precise legal standard, and we put people on if they meet that standard. But Al-Aqsa does, and we haven't made any decisions to list those other people.

QUESTION: But you believe Tanzim does traffic in terror?

MR. BOUCHER: Absolutely. She said so; we agree, too.

QUESTION: Can I just -- on that one issue? Is there a distinction the US Government is making between organizations that are terror organizations, and then organizations whose members -- or have some members who traffic in terror or are terrorists. Is there such a distinction?

MR. BOUCHER: There is a distinction because of the way the law is written, in terms of how we list states on the one list, and organizations on the other list. And there's a legal definition that we examine groups and activities against. At the same time, we don't think any of these groups should allow their members or tolerate their members to be involved with terrorists and have ties to terrorist groups.

QUESTION: Richard, does the United States take any position or have any position or any reaction to the decision yesterday by UNESCO to condemn the destruction of Palestinian heritage sites and to list several places, such as the Church of Bethlehem, as World Heritage sites?

MR. BOUCHER: I didn't see those decisions, so I don't have any reaction. I'll look into it for you.

QUESTION: Richard, it seems fairly clear that the President's campaign to persuade the European Union and others, and the United Nations, that Arafat must go was only a partial success. When the Quartet meets in London, will Mr. Burns be -- will continue trying to persuade them, or are you willing to cooperate without agreement on that particular point?

MR. BOUCHER: I really appreciate your judgment on this, Jonathan, and I really thank you for waiting so long before you rendered it. But what the President laid out is the only realistic path to achieving a Palestinian state. Palestinians, as we've said, deserve better institutions, better leadership, and a chance to establish their state. The path that the President laid out is one that we firmly believe is the only path to achieving that, and for them to achieve that. We will continue down this path, to pursue this path, because we are committed to that vision that he laid out. It's not something where after two days we're going to say, oh, well, it didn't work.

The President looked at this carefully with his advisors, studied it carefully, determined this is the way forward, and it's the way forward that we intend to pursue, not only next Tuesday, but in the weeks and months to come.

QUESTION: But Richard, perhaps you misunderstood my question. I'm not --

MR. BOUCHER: Perhaps I did.

QUESTION: I'm not suggesting that you would change your position in --

MR. BOUCHER: You asked me if we were going to --

QUESTION: I said -- my question was whether it's possible for you to cooperate with the other members of the Quartet, and with other members of the international community, despite your disagreements over this particular point.

MR. BOUCHER: First of all, you're assuming a disagreement that is not there. You have seen the support that we had in the G-8, in the President's consultations. You've seen statements and comments, for example, by Tony Blair about the situation with the Palestinian leadership. You've seen, frankly, movement in the Palestinian community for reform, and again, I think a lot of support in the statements from the Arab world on the issue of supporting the reform and moving down the road the President laid out to a Palestinian state.

So this is something where we do think there's considerable support, and we will continue to work with all the parties to achieve that. But I guess I assumed, since you asked whether we'd be still be doing this early next week, I wanted to remind you we'll not only do it next week, but we'll do it thereafter as well.

QUESTION: Richard, you mentioned a number of positive steps that the Palestinians are taking on reform. Do you give Chairman Arafat any credit for these positive steps?

MR. BOUCHER: I think we generally give the broader Palestinian community the credit for this. That includes some of the people who are in positions of responsibility right now, and several of these -- the actual decrees and laws were signed by Chairman Arafat. But I think there's a general movement in the Palestinian community that has led to many of these things, and that's something we want to work with and encourage. And people at whatever level that do that, it's a good thing.

QUESTION: But those are the Palestinian Authority people, right?

MR. BOUCHER: Some of them are, yes.

QUESTION: There are reports in Israel today that there is a proposal to send oversight teams from the United States and from other interested parties to supervise the reform process. Have you heard of this idea, and can you --

MR. BOUCHER: I have not heard of this idea. I'd have to go back --

QUESTION: It seems to be quite separate from the old monitoring thing. This is a --

MR. BOUCHER: Yes. I think it must be some kind of interpretation of the lines in the President's speech where he did talk about the fact that the international community would be there and would help and would work and try to be involved. But I hadn't heard any proposal of oversight teams at this point.

QUESTION: I'm not expecting much of an answer, but the Berlusconi --

MR. BOUCHER: Oh, come on.

QUESTION: -- the Berlusconi-owned Italian newspaper -- newsmagazine Panorama has a report that says that the U.S. --

MR. BOUCHER: Well, Berlusconi had some interesting comments as well, in addition to Tony Blair.

QUESTION: Yes, right. But this -- the magazine reports that you had reports about -- that Arafat's health was declining, and that may have led to the decision to give the -- to call on the Palestinian people to seek new leadership. Can you comment on that at all?

MR. BOUCHER: I can't comment on that. I don't -- first of all, we're not going to comment on any foreign leader's health. Second of all, there's an assumption in there, if that's the way it's reported, that is really a premise that we don't accept. The issue is not an individual and his health; the issue is how do we create these institutions? How do we create the institutions that can take responsibility on the Palestinian side, that can support a state, that can be a partner to live side by side with Israel? And that's a much more fundamental question than an individual leader or an individual person's health.

QUESTION: Right. But you would wish him well if he were ill?

MR. BOUCHER: We don't wish ill of anyone.

QUESTION: Oh, really? I seem to remember --

MR. BOUCHER: There are a few, but --

QUESTION: -- Castro and Saddam Hussein as being people who --

MR. BOUCHER: There are a few, but we don't provide a list.

QUESTION: Richard, what are your comments that Sheikh Yassin, who is under house arrest in Gaza, showed up at a so-called rally in Gaza, and he's the leader of course of Hamas? If he's supposed to be under house arrest, are you either asking the PA --

MR. BOUCHER: I think, if you remember, about a week ago -- was it a week ago? -- when the announcement was made that he was being put under house arrest, I expressed a bit of skepticism, noting that he had been under house arrest in January, and that was relaxed over time. And we have said again that the issue is to put these groups out of business, not to temporarily put them under house arrest. So unfortunately, it fits a pattern, a pattern that we've noted and a pattern that the President noted in terms of the kind of decisions he made about where we had to go if we were going to achieve anything.

QUESTION: So disappointed, but not surprised?

MR. BOUCHER: That's a good way to put it.

QUESTION: Richard, did you see the photograph of the Palestinian baby in bomber outfit?

MR. BOUCHER: I saw the photograph; I don't have any information on it. I realize it's being discussed out there. Certainly, it's a highly objectionable display.

QUESTION: Can I ask you, on Mexico? I understand a delegation from Mexico have arrived to discuss with the State Department officials a possible finance solution to the problem on the water issue. Do you have something about it?

MR. BOUCHER: All I have about it is that we have a delegation from Mexico here today; we're talking about water. It's a major issue for both of us. I think I recounted to you all the last meeting that the Secretary had with Foreign Minister Castaneda, where the first words from the Secretary were "water, water, water," and the first words from the Foreign Secretary of Mexico were "agua, agua, agua."

QUESTION: I thought they talked about the World Cup the last time they spoke.

MR. BOUCHER: Well, that was on the phone. This was pre-World Cup.

So the delegation is here. It's an important issue to both of us. We hope they can resolve this very important issue. I can't make any predictions at this point.

QUESTION: Do you believe the U.S. will be willing to invest with Mexico in better systems to irrigate the border --

MR. BOUCHER: Let's see what the delegations work out, if there is a resolution of this, and then we'll explain it once it happens.

QUESTION: Continuing on the change of subject theme, there were talks yesterday in New York about resumption of dialogue with the North Koreans. Can you tell us anything about that?

MR. BOUCHER: I can tell you that we held a working-level meeting with North Korean officials in New York yesterday, Thursday, June 27th. We found the discussions constructive, and we expect our contracts to continue.

Secretary Powell has said we want to move this process forward. We have a number of areas that we wish to discuss with North Korea, where we want to achieve some progress. The President has proposed a comprehensive dialogue to accomplish this, and that's what we've been discussing.

QUESTION: Noting that words mean a lot in the practice of diplomacy, in the last meeting in New York you said they were also businesslike. Were these not businesslike because you didn't use that phrase?

MR. BOUCHER: No, they were constructive.

QUESTION: But they weren't businesslike?

MR. BOUCHER: They were businesslike and constructive.

QUESTION: What exactly is -- I know it's hard for you to speak about these things, but what exactly is holding up the arrangements for a meeting at a high level with the North Koreans? It seems that things move very slowly.

MR. BOUCHER: Yes.

QUESTION: Maybe, you know, do you want to blame them or --

MR. BOUCHER: No, I just -- you know, these are important to both of us, I'm sure. This is something that we've considered very carefully about how to approach these discussions. And for a while after we heard from them finally -- it took them a long time to respond to our statements of any time, any place -- after we heard from them, we've been considering our approach. We've gotten back to them now in two meetings recently to tell them that we were interested in these discussions and to start talking about when they could occur. And at this point we're still in those discussions, and when we have an outcome of that we'll move on to the next phase. I'd leave it at that.

QUESTION: Could I just follow up? When you have these meetings in New York, do they argue about the agenda or the level or the size of the table or the --

MR. BOUCHER: Well, that wouldn't be constructive, would it?

QUESTION: But what do they talk about?

MR. BOUCHER: I don't want to get into any detail and especially trying to speak on behalf of the North Koreans. But as I said, we found the discussions yesterday constructive and we look forward to further discussions.

QUESTION: Does that mean this --

QUESTION: Are you talking about still sending someone to Pyongyang?

MR. BOUCHER: I haven't said anything particular about the when, where and how of the comprehensive dialogue that the President has proposed.

QUESTION: Sorry, I wasn't trying to get you to say something about it. It just --

MR. BOUCHER: Well, you were.

QUESTION: All right.

MR. BOUCHER: But anyway, you didn't expect me to.

QUESTION: Right.

MR. BOUCHER: Without getting into any specifics, that's the stage that we've reached now, is to talk about how to conduct this comprehensive dialogue the President has proposed.

QUESTION: And can you say whether or not we -- on that question, do we -- are we talking about sending someone to Pyongyang?

MR. BOUCHER: At this point I'm not in a position to say.

QUESTION: Richard, the Deputy Director of the Taiwan Affairs Office from China was here yesterday. Is there anything you can tell us about his meeting with Secretary Armitage?

MR. BOUCHER: He is having a number of meetings, and I think in fact his meetings are continuing today. This is Mr. Zhou Mingwei from China. I don't have a readout at this point of our discussions, but let me see if we can get you something when it's over.

QUESTION: -- who are involved in the meetings at all?

MR. BOUCHER: Assistant Secretary Kelly from our Bureau of East Asian and Pacific Affairs. As you note, he did meet yesterday with Deputy Secretary Armitage. And so these are a series of consultations on where they stand, where we stand, and reaffirmation from our part of our One China policy.

QUESTION: On Latin America, the Plan Colombia has collapsed and Mr. Uribe cames here to convince U.S. Government to increase military aid to the Plan Colombia -- maybe number two. But how to keep peace in the region, because we have in Venezuela also a paramilitary group who has declared the war to the President Chavez government?

MR. BOUCHER: Well, I guess I have to start by correcting all the misimpressions in your question. Plan Colombia hasn't collapsed. We are giving money to support the Plan Colombia in Colombia, but we are also giving money to the broader Andean Regional Initiative so that we can help other neighbors to make sure there's no spillover, to make sure that their efforts against narcotics are continued and that we can continue to support them and not drop them once they've managed to achieve some success, such as they've achieved in Peru. So we want to continue to support the anti-drug efforts and the development efforts in this region, which are an essential part to beating this problem on the long term.

The collapse of the discussions with the FARC last year by the Pastrana government was something that put Colombia in a new situation, where President Pastrana had to make some very tough decisions, and he did. And we said we supported that.

President-elect Uribe has come to Washington and has had discussions with us, with people on Capitol Hill and elsewhere. And he himself has said he continues to work on advancing Plan Colombia. He still sees that as an essential part of mobilizing his resources and the resources of the international community to support Colombia and Colombian efforts in development as well as narcotics eradication.

We have gone to Capitol Hill with a supplemental request for funding and a request for authority to allow U.S. equipment that was provided for -- and training that was provided for counter-narcotics to be used with the Government of Colombia, to be used so that they could use those forces and equipment that they have also in a counter-terrorist role because that terrorism and narcotics smuggling seem to have become merged down there.

As far as paramilitary groups, whether it's in Venezuela or Colombia or elsewhere, we have made quite clear that we oppose these groups. We've listed, in fact, the Colombian paramilitary groups as terrorist organizations and made very clear that we oppose these threats to democracy, whichever side of the political spectrum they come from.

QUESTION: You mentioned the reaffirmation of the One China policy. In these meetings with the Chinese official, did people here also reaffirm that the United States will do what it takes to defend Taiwan?

MR. BOUCHER: We have -- whenever I mention the One China policy, I usually remember to mention the three communiqu�� and the Taiwan Relations Act, which are all part of that policy for us. And in the Taiwan Relations Act you'll see the -- not only policy pledge but the legal requirement to continue to provide for the legal -- legitimate defensive needs of the people on Taiwan. That is something we actually discussed yesterday as well.

Let me go back here for a second, and then we'll --

QUESTION: -- you've totally confused me.

MR. BOUCHER: Sure.

QUESTION: So should we --

MR. BOUCHER: I won't get confused. I promise. Keep going.

QUESTION: Colombia. Just on the off chance you have something on this, it's now been about two months since you announced your intent to resume the -- what do they call it? -- the air interdiction flights in Colombia and Peru. Has anything happened on that in the last days?

MR. BOUCHER: I think when we announced --

QUESTION: You're getting closer to it?

MR. BOUCHER: Yeah, we're getting closer to it. When we announced it, we described the process of training, of writing guidelines, doing the training, harmonizing the procedures in different places that has to go on. And I think -- I don't remember if we said at the time, but the expectation was it would require a number of months to do that, certainly more than two. I don't know, maybe six months or so, maybe longer. I can't remember. A longer period? Anyway, it wasn't this short a period that we expected to be able to accomplish all that.

QUESTION: North Korea again? Is it fair to say that you -- that the talks yesterday -- at the talks yesterday that you guys presented your specific ideas for the who, what, where, when?

MR. BOUCHER: I don't really think I can go beyond what I've said already on that.

QUESTION: Well, okay. Is it -- would it be fair to say that you are waiting for a response from Pyongyang?

MR. BOUCHER: I don't think at this point I'll go beyond what I've said already. I'm sorry.

QUESTION: Okay. Wasn't that -- that would have been easier to get that answer, you know, four questions ago.

MR. BOUCHER: I can give it to you again if you want five questions from now. Doesn't bother me.

QUESTION: Richard, what's the status of your talks in New York on extending the Bosnia peacekeeping mandate?

MR. BOUCHER: Our discussions in New York continue. We've been meeting with other Security Council members on the issue, still working on the particulars of a solution to the issue within the Security Council. Peacekeeping forces that currently serve in Bosnia enjoy certain immunities from prosecution under bilateral agreements negotiated with states in the region prior to the activation of the International Criminal Court, and we think it's important that peacekeepers who are already serving in dangerous situations not be exposed without the consent of their national governments to potential prosecution by an international court.

QUESTION: A follow-up. Has there been some discussion of putting the U.S. troops in Afghanistan under the protection afforded to the ISAF?

MR. BOUCHER: I hadn't heard any discussion of that, no. Clearly, I'm not quite sure what the point would be. The issue for the United States of the International Court and how it relates to our troops overseas, including in peacekeeping roles, is a broad issue and is an important issue for us. And as these resolutions come up, as these renewals come up, if we can't resolve the issue generically through a UN resolution, we're going to have to try to do it with the individual missions.

QUESTION: Can I ask again on Mexico? The attorney general in Mexico announced yesterday that the Mexican Government is requesting the U.S. Government to freeze $48 million in an account in Chase Manhattan Bank of the Mexican oilers union. Have you received that request yet?

And in the other hand --

MR. BOUCHER: I'll have to check on it. I don't know. And I'm not sure we would receive it. This might be done finance-to-finance ministry.

QUESTION: The request for extradition of Governor Manuel Villanueva has been presented already?

MR. BOUCHER: Again, I don't know if the Mexican Government -- this is a Mexican request?

QUESTION: I mean -- no, in the case of Villanueva it's a U.S. request.

MR. BOUCHER: U.S. request. That is something you'd have to check with the Justice Department on. And frankly, I don't think they'd talk about their request for extradition, but I can't address those questions here.

Jonathan.

QUESTION: I want to go back to the ICC. Sorry. Those ideas that you spoke about yesterday that were circulated in New York yesterday, it was kind of hard -- looking at them, it was -- of course they came out, but it was hard looking at them to see what exactly your intention was. It didn't seem to address the concerns of the other members of the Security Council. It didn't seem to take into account their views.

Can you explain what the thinking was behind this draft resolution?

MR. BOUCHER: The issues that we have presented is really to provide Bosnia peacekeeping forces with an appropriate immunity from International Criminal Court prosecution. That's our goal in doing this so that people, as I said, who are already serving on a dangerous mission in dangerous circumstances wouldn't be further exposed to prosecution by an international court with the consent of their national governments.

We are working with other governments. We've had ideas from some of the other members of the Security Council on how this can best be done, and we'll look at any proposals the others have to see whether it accomplishes that goal.

QUESTION: Perhaps I should put it this way: Is there room for compromise on this subject?

MR. BOUCHER: We want to achieve this goal. I suppose I would say there may be different ways of phrasing it or achieving it through the resolution, but we need to achieve that goal. It's very important to us, and if we can't achieve it we won't be able to support a resolution.

QUESTION: Secretary Rumsfeld a day or so ago talked about the intention to pursue bilateral agreements in addition to the Security Council resolution. Has that process started? And if so, who are you talking to?

MR. BOUCHER: I don't know that we've actually started any discussions on that yet, but that is provided for under the treaty and that is something we would intend to do.

QUESTION: About two weeks ago when Chinese President Jiang Zemin visited Iceland, under his pressure groups of U.S. citizens who are also Falun Gong practitioners were blocked to board the airplane headed to Iceland. And earlier this week, a 68-years-old American woman who is also a practitioner of Falun Gong was refused to enter Hong Kong. And obviously there is a blacklist of Falun Gong practitioners in the US.

My question is what action the U.S. Government will take to prevent this kind of human rights violation more effectively?

MR. BOUCHER: I would just say we've always supported the freedom of travel of our citizens, and when we become aware of these cases we always raise them with foreign governments. That's about as far as I can go on that.

QUESTION: Can I go back to the UN?

MR. BOUCHER: Sure.

QUESTION: A couple weeks ago -- I don't think four weeks ago yet -- but a couple of weeks ago, you guys said that you were expelling an Iraqi diplomat for activities incompatible with his diplomatic status. I understand that under the terms of your host agreement the Iraqis had a right to challenge that or to dispute it. I am wondering: (a) if you know if they did; and if they didn't, if this person has now left.

MR. BOUCHER: I'll have to check. I hadn't checked up on that.

QUESTION: Same kind of issue as the Chinese woman. Areyou aware that Louis Farrakhan plans to go to Israel on the 5th of July, and Israel has said it won't let him in?

MR. BOUCHER: I'm not aware of his specific travel dates or prospects. I think he did make us aware that he intended to travel, and some of our experts talked to him about that trip.

QUESTION: Is that something you've complained to Israel about, then, if he's not allowed to enter that country?

MR. BOUCHER: I'll have to see. In the end, all these decisions, whether it's Iceland or Israel or Hong Kong, are made by the authorities based on their own laws. We always think it's better to let people travel and let people in, and we make that point, but we recognize that nations and governments have authority.

QUESTION: I think you spoke earlier about this before, but this coming Monday there's a -- the first -- the world's first permanent war crimes court is going to open at The Hague. And there is stiff opposition to this by the US, Russia and China.

Is it a case that we're waiting for Russia and China to make -- to drop their opposition, or what --

MR. BOUCHER: No, we're opposed. This is the International Criminal Court that we've been discussing. We think this court operates on the basis of prosecutions without higher authority. And the last administration signed it but said they didn't seek ratification. This administration has said, like them, that we didn't seek ratification and therefore has taken the action that we took a couple months ago at the United Nations to say that we didn't feel we were bound by the terms and conditions, we didn't feel we were bound by the signature.

The principle involved is one that is very important to us, because we have global commitments, global commitments that support international security and international peacekeeping. We are all over the world as Americans trying to protect international security. We have many more people in that role than any other nation on earth.

We also have very strong codes of conduct and very strong rules for our own soldiers, and we think that they should be accountable to us and that they should not be accountable to a prosecutor internationally who himself or herself is not accountable to some higher authority like the UN Security Council.

QUESTION: In other words, you'll be waiting to -- once this gets underway, for some type of liaison to the UN or to other organizations?

MR. BOUCHER: Well, what we're trying to do is to avoid having the entry into force of this court impede our ability to carry out the very important role that we have carried out to help maintain international peace and security. So if it's in the UN authorized forces in East Timor or Bosnia or wherever else, we will try to make sure that U.S. personnel who participate in those things are given this immunity from prosecution by the Court.

And in other cases, as one of your colleagues pointed out, we will sign agreements with governments where U.S. peacekeepers might be to ensure that our national authority over our own people -- which is very careful, which is very judicious and which is very strict -- that that national authority can apply.

QUESTION: If you could clarify something for me. The United States, when it deploys forces abroad, generally negotiates status of forces agreements with the country to which the troops are being sent. And given the fact that those agreements, or even, you know, lower level agreements, have served the same purpose, for instance in Kyrgyzstan, protect U.S. forces against local jurisdiction, why do you need the bilateral agreements? What purpose do they serve?

MR. BOUCHER: There is a process defined I think, or at least mentioned in the International Court documents. They are referred to as Article 98 agreements. I haven't actually read Article 98 myself, but there are additional areas of jurisdiction that the Court might have where nations can in fact agree to handle it bilaterally instead. So I think our feeling is we need those sorts of agreements to protect us from the jurisdiction of this Court.

(The briefing was concluded at 1:20 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