U.S. Department of State Daily Press Briefing #119, 97-08-20
From: The Department of State Foreign Affairs Network (DOSFAN) at <http://www.state.gov>
1002
U.S. Department of State
Daily Press Briefing
I N D E X
Wednesday, August 20, 1997
Briefer: James P. Rubin
ANNOUNCEMENTS/STATEMENTS
1 Disruption of a Meeting of Ethiopians in Boston, MA
MIDDLE EAST PEACE PROCESS
1-2 Chairman Arafat's Remarks on Options to Palestinians and his
Commitment to Combat Terrorism
4 Security Meetings
ISRAEL/LEBANON
2 Bombing Attacks in Lebanon/Israel-Lebanon Monitoring Group
Meeting
2-3,6,9 Secretary Albright Conversation with Syrian FM on Fighting in
Lebanon
3-4 Hezbollah's Supply of Katyusha Rockets
5 Hezbollah Connections to Iran
16 Effect of Fighting on Secretary Albright's Trip to the Region
IRAN
5 New Government and the Possibility of US-Iranian Dialogue
BOSNIA
6-7 SFOR Inspection of Police Station in Banja Luka
7 US Support of President Plavsic
7-8 Municipal and Parliamentary Elections in Republika Srpska
8 Karadzic, Milosevic and SFOR
BULGARIA/SLOVAKIA
9 Dismantling of SS-23 Missiles
SWITZERLAND
9-10 Under Secretary Eizenstat's Comments on Increasing the
Holocaust Victims Fund
CUBA
10-11 Travel of Catholics to Cuba During the Pope's Visit
11 Reports of Continued Arrests
LATIN AMERICA
11-12 Rio Group Meeting and Opposition to US Lifting Arms Sales Ban
16 Possible Visit of Under Secretary Eizenstat to Central America
CHINA
12 Congressman Wolf's Visit to Tibet
12 Jamming of Radio Free Asia in China and Vietnam
RUSSIA
13-15 U.S. Diplomat Involved in Traffic Accident
15 President Yeltsin Concerned About US Influence in Caucuses
Region
AZERBAIJAN
15-16 Elections in Nagorno-Karabakh
NORTH KOREA
16 Possible US-DPRK Women's Soccer Game
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE
DAILY PRESS BRIEFING
DPB #119
WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 20, 1997 12:37 P.M.
(ON THE RECORD UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED)
MR. RUBIN: Greetings, ladies and gentlemen - a little late, but we're
still trying to hold as close to 12:30 p.m. as possible. I have no
announcements. There will be a posting on the subject of the disruption of
a meeting in Boston after the briefing.
First question.
QUESTION: Without trying to draw parallels to the Seeds of Peace event -
the Secretary's going to support the program, I understand, with public
statements today. Here's the AP lead out of Gaza City: "Hugging and kissing
the Islamic militant rivals - or his Islamic militant rivals - Yasser
Arafat called Wednesday for Palestine unity and warned Israel that 'all
options are open,' including a new Palestinian revolt."
I wonder what the State Department thinks of that type of statement.
MR. RUBIN: We have made clear that we do not believe that violence is the
answer to the problems in the Middle East. That is why we have been working
so hard on the peace process. We have received a series of assurances from
Chairman Arafat in the course of Ambassador Ross and others' discussions in
recent days and weeks that he will assist in the fight against terrorism;
that he will assist in the renewal of security cooperation.
As you may have noticed in the recent days, there has been money released
by the Israelis. I think that's a sure sign that they believe there has
been cooperation in this fight.
In short, we will judge Chairman Arafat by his actions. In recent days,
things are better; but there's still a long way to go.
QUESTION: I keep somehow reaching for Secretary Shulz's - and I don't
have the full quote - but how he always - how he often said words in the
Middle East are very important. You have private assurances. This is the
man's public statement. Which do you think resonates more with the
Palestinians - his public statements or what he confides to Dennis
Ross?
MR. RUBIN: Well, let me make clear that we have said - and I think I said
this in a response to a question from you or one of your colleagues last
week - that we don't see the role of Hamas or Islamic Jihad in the peace
process. They are the enemies of peace, and they don't belong in any
serious discussion of peace.
At the same time, Chairman Arafat has signed peace agreements; he has
implemented peace agreements. He has indicated he wants to negotiate
further peace agreements. We have worked with him, and he is a partner in
that process. But again, Secretary Shulz's words aside, we're going to
judge - in the area of security cooperation and anti-terrorist cooperation -
Chairman Arafat by deeds. Deeds are the coin of the realm when it comes to
fighting terrorism.
Yeah.
QUESTION: I'd like to go back to the SS-23 missiles.
MR. RUBIN: Do we have any more on the Middle East?
QUESTION: Yeah, on the Middle East --
MR. RUBIN: Yeah, go ahead.
QUESTION: Have you been keeping track of the situation in Lebanon?
According to recent reports, there have been some air raids and some
further civilians have been injured. Have you been keeping track of that?
Do you have any reaction?
MR. RUBIN: Yes, we are urging all the parties to exercise maximum
restraint and do their utmost to restore calm and prevent civilian
casualties. It is time to end the cycle of violence and retaliation. It is
our strongly held view that civilians should not be made the victims of
attacks by any side.
We would like to make clear our condolences to the families of those killed
in Sidon -- thank you; I don't want to get that (pronunciation) wrong --
our wishes for a swift recovery to those wounded in Qiryat Shemona and
Sidon.
The meeting that we have pushed today is going to happen and that is the
Israeli-Lebanese Monitoring Group meeting. That is designed to implement
the April 1996 understanding. That is the proper venue for handling these
kinds of incidents. Ambassador Ross, Secretary Albright, other diplomatic
officials have been in touch with the relevant parties in recent days in
order to try to urge maximum restraint. We want to see that continue and we
hope that this cycle of violence will not be extended.
The parties did restate their commitments to us during our contacts with
them that they would uphold the 1996 understanding, and that is what we are
going to be talking about in that group.
Yes, Sid.
QUESTION: There is a report out of the region that the Secretary got a
phone call from a leader in the region, night before last, middle of the
night. She woke up and immediately called the Syrian foreign minister. Can
you discuss if that is true? And why would she be calling the Syrian
foreign minister to seek a cessation of violence between Israel and
Hezbollah?
MR. RUBIN: What I can tell you, without getting into all the details of
who woke who up and what the Secretary was or wasn't wearing when she
received this call, is to say to you that she did speak to the Syrian
foreign minister. She made clear the importance to him of maximum restraint
being used by all the parties in the field, and all of the relevant parties
to this understanding. We have discussed these matters with the Syrians and
the Lebanese in the past and regard them as the right party to try to
influence the Hezbollah.
So we understood from that conversation that the Syrian Government was
going to do all they could to try to ensure that the April 1996 understandings
were lived up to and that a cycle of violence was not escalated.
QUESTION: Was this a special message? Presumably they had already heard
your public appeals and maybe even they received messages from the
Secretary before that. Well, you know, the middle of the night is dramatic -
-
MR. RUBIN: Well, again, that's - I didn't say it was in the middle of the
night.
QUESTION: Was this urgent? No, no, you didn't say. But was there a
special urgency? Or was it a specially dramatic need to do this at a
particularly irregular time of day? Can you fill it out a little bit?
MR. RUBIN: Again, I don't have the exact time that this occurred. I do
know the Secretary spoke with the foreign minister of Syria and the
decision to make that call was made by virtue of the fact that we were
concerned that this was going to have a chance of spiraling.
QUESTION: Well, would you say it reinforced something that she had
already - or the State Department --
MR. RUBIN: The Secretary does not often call the foreign minister of
Syria. So when the Secretary of State calls the foreign minister of Syria,
it is designed to show a seriousness with which we are concerned about the
problem and to the extent in the coming days that we do not see this
escalate, and we see the situation calm down, well, perhaps that call might
have had an effect.
Yes.
QUESTION: Hezbollah has been firing a lot of Katyushas lately, which
suggest that they might be running low. Do you think they're still being
supplied, via Syria, by Iran?
MR. RUBIN: As I understand it, the question of who gets what weapons from
where requires an analysis of material that I'm told we don't talk about
from this podium. So I won't make a practice of starting that.
We do believe that the Syrians and the Lebanese have influence over
Hezbollah. That is why they are the party to the April 1996 understanding.
That is why our previous demarches and discussions on this issue tend to go
to the Syrians and the Lebanese. That is why the Secretary of State called
the foreign minister of Syria.
Yes.
QUESTION: Jamie, you said that you felt - just a moment ago - that you
were concerned about the situation - the United States was - because you
felt as though it was spiraling, it was changing.
MR. RUBIN: No, I didn't say that.
QUESTION: What was --
MR. RUBIN: I said we wanted to ensure that it did not do that.
QUESTION: And do you think that there's been a lot of observation that
maybe the region is on the verge of a battle, as we saw last year that
ended the fighting in Southern Lebanon? Is the United States concerned that
we're on the verge of a serious situation or a battle of sorts?
MR. RUBIN: It seems like I answered this question on Monday when you
asked me it. The answer is, we have a crisis of confidence in the Middle
East. The peace process is in trouble --
QUESTION: I was referring specifically --
MR. RUBIN: -- and the peace process more broadly is in trouble. We have
seen clearly in the last weeks the use of force in the area of Lebanon that
we've talked about, that we're concerned about. We've urged maximum
restraint on the parties. We're going to work as hard as we can through the
groups designed to stop this to try to deal with it.
Yes.
QUESTION: There is a meeting today and tomorrow of the mechanism of the
three sides in Israel - Palestinians and the CIA and the Israelis. Can you
tell us something -- what is the --
MR. RUBIN: Again, our practice is - and I'm sorry to bore you with this -
but our practice is going to be to minimize our public discussion of those
meetings so we can maximize the chance that those meetings serve their
purpose - which is to increase security cooperation.
QUESTION: Jamie?
MR. RUBIN: Yes.
QUESTION: On Hezbollah, we've been told frequently from this podium,
among other places, that Hezbollah is basically a creature of the Iranians,
not the Syrians. So, one, are you making any attempt to contact the
Iranians? And two, can you explain the apparent contradiction that you're
talking to the Syrians about something that the State Department says is
run by the Iranians?
MR. RUBIN: This sounds like a trick question.
(Laughter.)
I think it is not news to all of you that the State Department and the
United States Government believes that the Syrian Government has influence
over what transpires in Lebanon; and that in the past, when this agreement
was negotiated by Secretary of State Christopher, a lot of time was spent
with the Syrian Government working on precisely this issue. So therefore, I
don't think anything I said suggests a new view of Hezbollah, other than we
believe the Syrian Government has an influence that we would like it
to bring to bear to ensure that this situation doesn't spiral out
of control.
QUESTION: Are you trying in any indirect way to get word to the Iranian
Government?
MR. RUBIN: Our position with the Iranian Government, in terms of a
dialogue with them, is well known; and I'd be happy to repeat it for you.
But if and when we make contacts with governments, we don't always talk
about them. But I'll be happy to state what our position is on contact with
the Iranian Government. That is, we're prepared to have an authorized
dialogue with the government of Iran, should it be willing to discuss the
areas of concern to the United States - namely its opposition to the Middle
East peace process; its pursuit of nuclear weapons; and its support
for international terrorism.
Yes.
QUESTION: Jamie, still on Iran, a new government has been approved by the
parliament of Iran today. Do you see any signs that this government is
going to be any more moderate from your point of view than its predecessor?
MR. RUBIN: I think since the time that President Khatami was elected, we
have stated that we regarded this as an interesting development. We have
watched with interest his election, the nature of his cabinet. The
President and the Secretary of State has made clear that our argument is
not with the people of Iran.
So to the extent that the election of President Khatami and the approval of
his cabinet indicate that the will and welfare of the people of Iran will
be reflected by its government, we would welcome that. But again, what we
need to see in Iran, like in the Middle East and like in Bosnia, are
actions. We are going to be waiting to see actions.
QUESTION: Can I go to Bosnia?
MR. RUBIN: Yes.
QUESTION: One more on the Middle East.
MR. RUBIN: Yes.
QUESTION: Concerning the Secretary's phone call to the Syrian foreign
minister, was there any concern that the Syrians would get involved in this
escalation directly, and not only the Hezbollah. There have been some
rumors about massing troops - Syrian troops at the Golan and other
threatening signs like that?
MR. RUBIN: My understanding is that the purpose of the phone call was not
because we believed that this was escalating to the kind of conflict you
are describing, but rather that in order to keep it at the relatively low
level that it's at, compared to that which you described, we needed to see
whether the Syrian Government could do what it could do to influence
positively the Hezbollah. That was the purpose of the call.
QUESTION: When was the phone call?
MR. RUBIN: I will have to get you the time on that.
QUESTION: And the day -- what day?
MR. RUBIN: I'll get you - I don't want to because depending on the hour
of the day. So I will get you the - can we call up now so that by the end
of this briefing I can give them the time and date of that call? Someone
can go get that? Thanks.
Yes.
QUESTION: So on Banja Luka. Can you tell us what your understanding is of
what has been happening, what the NATO forces have been doing in Banja Luka
in the last 24 hours? How far will NATO go to protect Mrs. Plavsic? And I
have a couple of follow-ups.
MR. RUBIN: Follow-ups?
QUESTION: Yes.
MR. RUBIN: We understand that SFOR has taken a number of steps in the
last day. The SFOR troops, accompanied by International Police Task Force
officials, conducted inspections of the police stations and assisted in the
transition to new police officials appointed by Mrs. Plavsic. We understand
that the inspections and changes of leadership have proceeded relatively
smoothly and peacefully, and that the Pale-backed police -- the bad guys
in this case -- have departed and the newly appointed officials have
taken over. SFOR officials indicate that the situation is relatively
calm.
The evidence uncovered this past weekend led to these new operations to
continue to investigate human rights violations and other illegal
activities by the Pale-backed police. We understand that the SFOR has taken
over five buildings, including the police headquarters, three police
stations, and a police academy, and that they have uncovered evidence of
serious criminal activity conducted in the main Banja Luka police station,
including the bugging of President Plavsic's communications.
SFOR has estimated that in their activities, they have found as many as
three truckloads of weaponry that were brought into that station,
presumably very recently. These included brand new assault rifles, hand
grenades, mines, rockets, sniper rifles and explosives. We understand that
Mrs. Plavsic has visited the new police chief and his staff at headquarters,
inspected the confiscated weapons.
In short, SFOR is prepared to support the rule of law in the Republika
Srpska. The legally elected president, Mrs. Plavsic, took an action that
the Office of the High Representative has now agreed was justified and that
means changing the police chief, that we have all called for the resignation
of Interior Minister Kijac, and that these resignations would contribute to
the reduction of the size and power of those officials who are thwarting
peace and improve the chances that Mrs. Plavsic, who has taken the
courageous decision to support Dayton, will have an opportunity to
improve the lives of her people and bring both peace and prosperity
to Bosnia.
QUESTION: Don't you find a certain irony, though, in the fact that the
U.S. and its allies now find themselves supporting Mrs. Plavsic, who is
still in her speeches speaking in favor of ethnic cleansing and defending
what the Bosnian Serbs did in the first half of the war?
MR. RUBIN: At some level, foreign policy is a combination of pragmatism
and principle. In this case, we believe that Mrs. Plavsic is pragmatically
pursuing the implementation of Dayton. She has taken courageous stands in
supporting Dayton, supporting peace, supporting prosperity for her people
at great risk to herself. So long as Mrs. Plavsic continues to support the
path of peace, we will continue to support Mrs. Plavsic.
QUESTION: Do you think that the elections - the municipal elections that
are scheduled in September and the parliamentary elections that Mrs.
Plavsic has declared should occur in October are going to be held on
schedule?
MR. RUBIN: Ambassador Gelbard was in Vienna today. He was discussing with
the Contact Group members the precise question of elections. I think there
is unanimity in the Contact Group that Mrs. Plavsic deserves the support of
the international community and that a free and fair election should be
held. The question of how that election will be held and the details
surrounding it is something that is going to come up, I believe tomorrow,
at an OSCE meeting also in Vienna. That will be a time when further details
can be fleshed out.
But we do believe that the government that Mrs. Plavsic represents is one
that is pursuing Dayton, that is pursuing democracy. Meanwhile, the Pale
Serbs don't seem to get it. They continue to try to flood the air waves
with venom and vile descriptions of those who support peace. They continue
to try to violate Dayton through intimidating the people who are supporting
democracy and the continue to do harm to their own people by not realizing
that only through Dayton can peace and prosperity be brought to their
land.
QUESTION: One last one - Mr. Karadzic has body guards, as we all know - a
large number of them. Do you know whether or not there are men who work
directly for President Milosevic of Serbia who are also protecting Mr.
Karadzic?
MR. RUBIN: I'd have to take that question. Whether we could get into it
or not, I don't know.
Yes.
QUESTION: Just following up on this, you said that in short SFOR was
prepared to support the rule of law, which is the elected president, Madame
Plavsic. Does that mean that SFOR is ready to remove Karadzic from the
region soon? And just if I can finish this - because it seems as though
while he's in the region wielding his power, that the president's hands are
tied and she's basically a figurehead.
MR. RUBIN: We believe that Radovan Karadzic is an indicted war criminal
who's thwarting the will of this people and the will of the international
community. We believe he belongs in The Hague. We believe that he should be
facing trial for the crimes he's alleged to have committed.
His time will come. There is no statute of limitation on war crimes. We
believe that the people who have influence in the region, including
President Milosevic, would be doing their utmost to comply with Dayton -
which means getting Rodovan Karadzic to go to The Hague and submit himself
to the Court of International Justice.
QUESTION: There's no sense of urgency on the part of SFOR to think about
removing Karadzic at all?
MR. RUBIN: I don't think anything I said could be interpreted as no sense
of urgency on the part of SFOR.
Yes. Same subject?
QUESTION: Yeah, different subject.
MR. RUBIN: Same subject?
QUESTION: No, different.
MR. RUBIN: Any more on Bosnia? Okay, go ahead.
QUESTION: I just want to refer to yesterday's statement of the spokesperson
of the Slovak Government saying that the United States has never requested
dismantling of SS-23 systems; while you said on Monday that there have been
ongoing negotiations or talks with Slovak parties about this. And also, I
want to refer to yesterday's statement of the American Embassy in Slovak
Republic saying that if something that is happening, it is at an unofficial
level. What's your standpoint?
MR. RUBIN: My view today has not changed - that we have been discussing
with many governments over recent months - including Bulgaria and Slovakia -
the need to try to limit the dangers from so-called Category I missiles.
Those discussions will continue and we will be offering our assistance to
try to ensure that missiles capable of carrying weapons of mass destruction
don't spread. That is our view and we've been discussing it with many
governments.
As far as how we make those discussions, who that we have them with at what
level, that's not something we normally discuss, publicly.
QUESTION: But the spokesperson said that they didn't know anything about
this issue. So how do you describe this? There's a discrepancy.
MR. RUBIN: I would ask you to maybe keep asking and maybe he'll find
out.
Yes.
QUESTION: According to the Slovak press, the U.S. Embassy in Bratislava
yesterday declined to comment on this - that the talks were confidential.
Can you confirm the talks were confidential, or that the State Department
provided the American press with the information concerning confidential
talks?
MR. RUBIN: I can confirm that the United States doesn't get into public
discussions of precisely what we say during diplomatic negotiations.
Yes.
QUESTION: Different subject?
MR. RUBIN: Sure. Oh, before we get to that, the Secretary of State called
the foreign minister at 1:56 a.m. Eastern Daylight Time, on Tuesday, August
19th.
Okay, yes.
QUESTION: Under Secretary Eizenstat, on a Swiss talk show yesterday
appeared - I guess that's what you'd call it - appeared to be calling for -
appeared to state a new U.S. position on the Nazi gold issue. That being
that not only banks but insurance companies and other concerns that
profited from trade with Nazi Germany should also contribute to funds for
the survivors of the Holocaust who have claims in this case. Is that
true?
MR. RUBIN: The reports appear to be exaggerated of what Under Secretary
Eizenstat said. As I understand it, he didn't offer a blunt warning about
augmenting the fund. Rather he reiterated the hope of the U.S. Government
that additional contributions by Swiss private sector institutions will
substantially increase the fund that has been established. In the interview
with Swiss television, he praised the very positive steps -- including
the establishment of this special Holocaust fund -- that Swiss private
sector institutions, as well as the Swiss Government, have taken over in
the last year. He cited Switzerland's positive steps as a model for other
World War II neutral countries in addressing their roles in the war,
particularly in relation to Nazi gold and Holocaust assets.
As I understand it, the private fund comes from private banks to be matched
by pledges from the national banks. But the level of detail that you
describe was not the way that it was explained to me, but rather he was
just making an urging that they continue down the path they have started.
QUESTION: Why would it be appropriate for private concerns in Switzerland
to contribute to a fund that is supposed to - that's the question. Why
should private firms be contributing to this fund?
MR. RUBIN: Well, again, I think the area involved includes banks, which
may or may not have done all they could or could not have done over the
years to try to find those with unclaimed accounts. So the fact that they
would participate shouldn't be a surprise.
QUESTION: But insurance companies and --
MR. RUBIN: Well, I will have to check that. That is not what I was
advised. But we will try to get you a posted answer for that.
Yes, Betsy.
QUESTION: Different topic?
MR. RUBIN: Yes.
QUESTION: Is the U.S. Government planning on easing restrictions on
travel by Catholics to Cuba for the visit of the Pope to that country in
January? And have any licenses that have been requested by various
archdioceses or other organizations been granted yet?
MR. RUBIN: We view the possible visit of the Pope as an important
development in the sense that it is an important event in bringing to the
Cuban people a message of hope and the need for respect for human rights.
We have received requests by many Catholics, including the Archdiocese of
Miami to permit - consistent with our laws - namely we are not taking any
steps to ease the embargo - travel to Cuba and donations of humanitarian
assistance to the church in connection with the visit.
We will take a look at each of these requests pursuant to our licensing
requirements. We will expedite them in accordance with our law and the fact
that we believe this is an important event, a Pope coming to Cuba.
We believe that His Holiness has played an important role in both -- in
religious terms around the world, and we hope he can bring a message of
hope and support for human rights and support for the people of Cuba. So we
will expedite requests. My understanding is that no actual license has yet
been granted. We have given some preliminary indications, that we would
want to be able to expedite requests so that people who wanted to go there
would be able to do so.
Any more on Cuba?
QUESTION: Yes.
MR. RUBIN: Okay.
QUESTION: There were reports this morning of several people being
arrested again? Can you confirm these? Do you have anything on this?
MR. RUBIN: I don't have any new information on new arrests. I think we
have said for some time now that it's troubling to us and outrageous in the
extreme that people who are merely trying to report the truth are thrown in
jail -- whether that's reporting the truth about economic developments in
Cuba or reporting the truth about the wishes of the people. Apparently, Mr.
Castro can't accept the truth as a defense in people's written material
or any journalistic activities. I don't have any new information
about new arrests, though.
QUESTION: Latin America.
MR. RUBIN: Yes.
QUESTION: In a couple of days in Paraguay, there is going to be a meeting
of the members of Grupo Rio, and the Mexican Government is trying to
convince all their neighbors in Latin America to form a moratorium
rejecting the fact that the United States lift the arms - the sale of arms
embargo to Latin America a few days ago.
The Mexican Government is saying that this policy could form an arms race
in the region and also as a result of that instability in the region. What
is the response of the United States to this kind of declaration by the
Mexican Government? And also, the United States is going to continue to
pursue its policy to sell F-18s or F-16s to Chile?
MR. RUBIN: I haven't seen the specific report you are referring to, but I
would be happy to tell you the reasons why we think that our policy will
not contribute to an arms race in the region. We did not end an embargo. We
previously had a presumption against sales, and now we said we would treat
them on a case-by-case basis. We will examine the specific needs of the
nation requesting the weapons, if we get such requests. We will examine a
whole series of factors, which I could get for you, in great detail
including the regional situation, the arms balance in the region, the
ratio in terms countries' spending on military versus other activities.
So I don't want to have left any of these criteria out. There are a whole
series of them, and they're designed to ensure that we behave as carefully
as possibly. But let's bear in mind that Latin America is now a continent -
with the exception of Cuba - run by democracies. A lot of the dangers that
existed years ago, when Latin America was a battlefield in the Cold War,
are over. So we're trying to update our position to reflect new realities.
But it doesn't mean we're interested in flooding Latin America with
American arms; we're not. We're interested in acting responsibly.
Yes.
QUESTION: Congressman Wolf is going to host a news conference in a few
minutes about his visit to Tibet. I was wondering if the Department was
aware of the visit, and whether it has any comment.
MR. RUBIN: We were not aware of the visit prior to it taking place. We
understand that he traveled to Tibet on a tourist visa and that the Chinese
Government permits tourists to travel to Tibet, but others - including
diplomats and members of Congress - have difficulty getting permission to
travel there. To address the concerns the international community has about
conditions in Tibet, it would be helpful, in our view, if the Chinese
Government would allow more official travel to Tibet.
I think you're familiar with our policy on Tibet. I'd be happy to repeat it
for you. We would be interested in talking to Congressman Wolf to see his
reflections and his observations, but we didn't know about the visit in
advance.
QUESTION: Also on Asia --
MR. RUBIN: Yes.
QUESTION: We're getting reports that there have been dramatic increases
in the jamming of American radio stations, particularly Radio Free Asia in
China, in the Mandarin language, but also in Vietnam. One, are you aware of
this? And two, are you trying to do anything about it?
MR. RUBIN: I'm not aware of those reports. We'll try to get some
information for you on that.
Yes.
QUESTION: Jamie, do you have any details on the accident in Moscow in
which a diplomat hit a pedestrian?
MR. RUBIN: Yes, I do.
QUESTION: What is the status of the Russian investigation, as far as the
State Department understands it?
MR. RUBIN: On August 18th, a car driven by a U.S. diplomat was involved
in an accident with a pedestrian in Moscow. We regret this tragic incident.
The diplomat has cooperated with the police inquiries. Russian authorities
are continuing to investigate the incident and the embassy is cooperating
with them.
We have taken the decision to withdraw the diplomat. He's on his way back
to the United States. We felt that was the best action to take at the time.
The Russians were cooperative with us in permitting the return of the
diplomat.
Yes.
QUESTION: Did they ask for him to be withdrawn? Or was that a decision of
--
MR. RUBIN: That was our decision.
QUESTION: Can you give us his name? It's been reported in the Russian
press.
MR. RUBIN: I can get you his name. I have his first name in front of me,
I don't have the last. Before the end of this briefing, maybe we could get
you his name, too. Then we'll have done one phone call and one --
QUESTION: So the investigation is over, as far as you know?
MR. RUBIN: I don't know that the Russian investigation is over. I know
that we have cooperated with - told the Russian Government we're prepared
to do what we can in this case, but that the diplomat was withdrawn and is
on his way back to the United States.
QUESTION: Did the Russians ask for his diplomatic immunity to be waived
so he could stand trial?
MR. RUBIN: I believe they did not.
QUESTION: Did you withdraw him so they wouldn't have a chance to do
that?
MR. RUBIN: We made a decision that he was no longer in a position to
effectively function in Moscow because of this incident. Therefore, we
thought it would be appropriate to return him home. It was obviously a very
traumatic event for him, involving an accident with his wife in the car
with him, where a Russian woman, apparently, was severely injured. So the
decision was made to bring him home because he could no longer operate
effectively and the incident was quite traumatic.
We did not receive a request to waive the immunity. As a matter of practice,
we have not waived immunity. But we didn't receive a request, so it's a
hypothetical question at this point.
QUESTION: What was his position --
MR. RUBIN: Sorry?
QUESTION: What was his position within the embassy?
MR. RUBIN: He was a political officer, I believe. But we'll get you his
full name and all of that information as soon as we can.
QUESTION: What was it about this accident that made it impossible for him
to continue his job as political counselor at the embassy?
MR. RUBIN: I don't know that he was political counselor. I think he was
in the political office. We believed that the attention that this kind of
an incident would draw would make it impossible for him to function
effectively there. Therefore, the course of wisdom was to bring him home in
light of the trauma he had just been through and the fact that we believed
it would not be possible for him to function effectively there.
QUESTION: Will the United States consider compensation for the woman who
is severely injured and her family?
MR. RUBIN: We're not at that stage. We don't know what is going to be
requested. We don't know if it will reach that level. So it's premature at
this point.
QUESTION: One last question.
MR. RUBIN: Yes.
QUESTION: Was the American diplomat - have you determined whether he was
at fault or whether he had been drinking? That sort of thing.
MR. RUBIN: It's our understanding that we have - at the time of the
incident, it appeared that the initial reporting was that it was clearly
not his fault. That became more complicated and confused over time. But we
have absolutely no reason to believe that he was driving under the
influence of alcohol. He has no record or history of bad driving. He was
returning from working out with his wife and, according to him, was driving
at 15 miles an hour.
Any more on this? No.
QUESTION: Why is there some question about his fault? You said it had
become more complicated - the question of responsibility or fault.
MR. RUBIN: Well, again, things, as they do in these cases -- we haven't
seen a final police report or don't know where it's going to end up. But
clearly it was an incident that was getting attention that would make it
difficult for him to operate. It was traumatic for him. So we decided to
bring him home.
Let's see, yes.
QUESTION: Russia - I'm sorry - Yeltsin and the Caucuses. The president
has issued a statement that he's concerned with U.S. involvement there. Do
you have any kind of statement on that?
MR. RUBIN: Well, I could say this - that we believe in the independence
and territorial integrity of each of the nations in that region. We do not
believe in spheres of influence for the United States or any other
country.
We have actually been working quite well with Russia on the subject of
Armenia and Azerbaijan and the conflict there through the Minsk Group,
which has been revitalized in recent weeks in its attempt to try to resolve
or support a resolution of that process.
We and Russia have common interests in that region. We have an interest in
stability there. We have an interest in commercial development of obviously
the important energy resources that are there. So we want to work closely
with Russia, and we don't see ourselves as having a sphere of influence or
an interest of that kind. Rather we want to see independence, territorial
integrity of each of the countries.
QUESTION: This issue.
MR. RUBIN: Yes.
QUESTION: I would like to ask the same question which I asked in the last
briefing about the election in so-called Republic of Nagorno-Karabakh. Do
you have any comment about this election? Even Russian foreign minister
made a statement about this election.
MR. RUBIN: Well, as you know, we don't recognize that entity, and any
election that purported to increase the legitimacy of that entity, we
wouldn't recognize.
QUESTION: May I continue? In the view of the State Department, how does
the conduct of this election affect the negotiations sponsored by
OSCE?
MR. RUBIN: I have been advised it's wiser to avoid comment on the
elections precisely because doing so might give it greater legitimacy.
Yes.
QUESTION: There's a South Korean newspaper report that there's an
athletic competition - it may be women's soccer teams - envisioned between
a team from North Korea and a U.S. team in the United States. Do you have
anything on that?
MR. RUBIN: I did, and I don't know if I'm going to be able to find it in
this book that got very thick somehow today. Let's see if it's in the back
here. It's not under Asia. Let me get back to you with that. I will have
something for you on that. Here we go. We got something.
QUESTION: This just in --
MR. RUBIN: This just in. We have had working-level discussions with the
North Koreans about the possibility of a visit by the North Korean women's
national soccer team. Such a visit, if it were to occur, would be
consistent with U.S. policy dating from October 1988 allowing unofficial
exchanges in the area of academics and sports and cultural affairs. No
dates for such a visit have been agreed upon at this time. In principle,
however, we are willing to consider such a visit.
Anything else?
QUESTION: There is a report that Under Secretary Eizenstat is going to
visit Central America this week. Can you tell us what is the reason of his
visit? And when is he going there?
MR. RUBIN: I will try to get you a statement on his agenda and the
purpose of his visit.
Yes.
QUESTION: Middle East question, again, please. You said that the
Secretary called the Syrian foreign minister. Did she call the Lebanese
prime minister, as well, and the Israelis on this? And how does the
situation in South Lebanon affect her plans to visit the area? Does it make
it difficult for her to make a decision? It affects it in a negative
way?
MR. RUBIN: Right. As far as the contacts that she has had, they have been
limited to the foreign minister of Syria. Other officials have been in
touch with all the relevant players in the region or through diplomatic
contacts. Again, the Secretary is examining the situation in the Middle
East. She plans to go there. That decision has been made. It's a question
of how soon. When she has a decision about that, we will let you know.
Thank you.
(The briefing concluded at 1:20 P.M.)
|
