U.S. Department of State Daily Press Briefing #91, 98-07-27

U.S. State Department: Daily Press Briefings Directory - Previous Article - Next Article

From: The Department of State Foreign Affairs Network (DOSFAN) at <http://www.state.gov>

U.S. Department of State
Daily Press Briefing

I N D E X

Monday, July 27, 1998

Briefer: James P. Rubin

AFGHANISTAN
1-2		Warring factions receive support from outside groups
GREECE
2-3		FM Pangalos' comments unbecoming for NATO ally
2-3		Amb. Burns has had discussions with the Greek government
INDIA
3-4,5		Some research scientists have had their US-funded research
		  contracts terminated
CAMBODIA
4-5		Too soon to give judgment on election
BOSNIA
5-6		War criminals indicted by tribunal belong only in The Hague
6		US continues to keep all options open with fugitives
		  Karadzic and Mladic
KOSOVO
7		US deeply concerned about increased fighting over the
		  weekend
7		Intense fighting has occurred on Pristina-Pec road
7-8,9-10	Belgrade government today tried to inspect diplomatic cargo
		  bound for Diplomatic Observer Mission
8		Sec. Albright has had discussions with counterparts on
		  stemming flow of weapons
CYPRUS
9		S-300 missile deal remains an obstacle to progress to aid
		  negotiation process
IRAQ
10		Oil-for-food program has worked well; US wants it to
		  continue
11		US companies should be able to participate in oil-for-food
		  program
SUDAN
11-12		US funding of famine relief has increased this year through
		  Operation Lifeline
12		US doing what it can to support peace talks as ultimate
		  solution to problem
COLOMBIA
12		US would be prepared to be of assistance in peace talks, if
		  asked
MIDDLE EAST PEACE PROCESS
12		Talks will be continuing; process is ongoing
12		If peace talks fail, there is a risk of instability by next
		  May
13		US continues to emphasize need for direct talks
JAPAN
13		Sec. Albright had a good meeting with FM Obuchi in Manila
NORTH KOREA
14		US announced dispatch last week of naval assets to Korean
		  waters to detect infiltrators

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE
DAILY PRESS BRIEFING

DPB #91

MONDAY, JULY 27, 1998, 1:00 P.M.

(ON THE RECORD UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED)

MR. RUBIN: Greetings. Welcome to the State Department briefing. Today is Monday. We will have a statement on Guinea-Bissau and the cease-fire that was announced there after the briefing.

With regard to the schedule for the rest of the week, at this point it looks like we will brief tomorrow; not on Wednesday; brief again on Thursday; and not on Friday. That can change depending on events, but that is the plan.

With that schedule, let's go to George Gedda.

QUESTION: There's a report that the Soviets - or Russians are giving lots of weapons to the Northern Alliance in Afghanistan. Do you have anything on that?

MR. RUBIN: We are aware that support is provided to the warring factions in Afghanistan by outside powers, groups and individuals; and it is our view that this support perpetuates the conflict -- exacerbating the great tragedy that has become so apparent in Afghanistan. We are actively engaged in efforts to convince the warring Afghan factions to end a conflict that has caused untold human misery and material destruction and poses a serious threat to regional and international security. We've been working bilaterally and without side parties to minimize foreign interference and promote peace.

As you know, Ambassador Richardson visited Afghanistan in April to try to see if a settlement could be - we could move in that direction. We support the UN's effort in this regard, and I would point you to the group of eight countries that includes Afghanistan - I'm sorry, the six neighbors of Afghanistan - that is Pakistan, Iran, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Tajikistan and China, plus the United States and Russia - that is the so-called 6-plus- 2 Group. And the 6-plus-2 Group have agreed that the United Nations and all member states should look at ways to limit and check the flow of arms and other supplies to the warring parties. They are also examining whether a mandatory arms embargo could be implemented in a fair and verifiable manner.

But let's be clear - the cause of the war there is primarily the refusal of the factions and groups to put the welfare of the people of Afghanistan over their own personal power, and not to stop the war that has devastated this country. It is not the outside arms that we are concerned about that perpetuates the war; primarily it is the faction leaders themselves.

So we have some concerns about outside powers transferring equipment or supplies of some kind or another, and we've been working together in the 6- plus-2 format on the kind of ideas that I've suggested to you.

QUESTION: Could you address the issue raised in the article about Russian involvement?

MR. RUBIN: Let me say this - this issue is one where we clearly have concerns, but the concerns about possible transfers from Russia are far outweighed by concerns from other countries -- in particular, Pakistan and Iran. So the suggestion that that is the driver is incorrect in our view, or not supported by the information that we have.

QUESTION: On Friday, the US Government made a statement regarding some harsh statements by the Greek Foreign Minister, and the White House spokesman asked Mr. Pangalos to revise his statements regarding the President of the United States. The Greek Foreign Minister came back with some new statements in which also implicated the Greek-American community. He said that they are thinking to contribute money to the Greek defense bank budget instead of giving political contributions in the US. Do you have any new reaction?

MR. RUBIN: Yes, let me say that the United States and Greece have a very broad and deep relationship, built up over many, many years. There are very close ties between our peoples and between our countries, between governments regardless of party or affiliation. They are a NATO ally. It is our view that the comments of one particular individual - it is because of the nature and depth of our relationship, it is hard for the comments of one individual to harm that relationship. But Foreign Minister Pangalos is certainly giving it a college try.

We believe that such behavior and comments are unbecoming the foreign minister of a NATO ally with which the United States has had friendly relations for nearly two centuries. When friends disagree and allies disagree, they should share their concerns privately, rather than resort to these kind of insulting and spurious public criticism. We were surprised by these remarks; they haven't been conveyed in public. We're surprised that these kind of comments continue to persist.

It is our view that the United States should do all it can do in cooperation with Greece and other parties to support efforts to resolve problems between Greece and Turkey and the Cyprus problem. That is what we have been doing; that is what we will continue to do, regardless of the remarks of one individual.

QUESTION: Follow-up - earlier today, your ambassador in Athens, Nicholas Burns, had a special meeting with the Greek minister of - (inaudible) - during which he complained that "the US Government has a problem with the Greek Foreign Minister, Theodore Pangalos." May we know the purpose of this meeting?

MR. RUBIN: Well, Ambassador Burns is a very able ambassador; and like the Secretary and others, was troubled by what was said by the Greek Foreign Minister last Friday.

QUESTION: (Inaudible.)

MR. RUBIN: Can I finish my answer, please? Thank you. And in discussions with the Greek Government about what is clearly a major problem between the United States and Greece. That is what he's talking about. But the details of that conversation, I don't care to get into.

QUESTION: Any response to your protest filed with the Greek Government against Mr. Pangalos statement? You filed a protest the other day.

MR. RUBIN: I think I've made clear that we believe that the comments have persisted, of one form or another. With respect to the idea that Greek- Americans should take their money this way or that way, Americans don't need any outside advice on how to participate in the workings of our democracy.

QUESTION: May I follow up to this latest - your remarks? Is that some kind of interference to the United States domestic affairs, some of the foreign government officials advised the Greek-Americans, don't want this one, don't - (inaudible) --

MR. RUBIN: Well, we're not concerned about the impact of these particular comments. They are so outrageous and so unbecoming of a foreign minister of a NATO ally that we would be surprised if anyone took them seriously.

QUESTION: Just one more on this - are you protesting to the Greek Government?

MR. RUBIN: We are certainly in direct discussions with the Greek Government about these statements that we think are unbecoming the Foreign Minister of Greece - a NATO ally.

QUESTION: On another subject, the Indian Government is complaining that some of its nuclear scientists who are working in this country on scholarships and other things have been, in effect, expelled. Is this now the policy to expel any Indian or Pakistani scientist involved in nuclear issues?

MR. RUBIN: Let me say this - it is not our policy to expel Indian scientists per se. In some cases, however, research funding for scientists has been terminated, which means that the basis for their immigration status no longer exists. We have had an extensive and fruitful program of cooperation with India for decades. Much of this cooperation is continuing. But following India's decision to test nuclear weapons, we are undertaking a thorough review of our science and technology relationship in order to ensure that our cooperation does not in any way go against the grain of our proliferation concerns.

There will be cases in which we will determine that continuation of our association with a particular Indian institution engaged in nuclear weapons or missile research is inappropriate. For example, the National Institute of Standards and Technology has reported to us that it has terminated the contracts of seven Indian researchers affiliated with organizations such as the BABHA Atomic Research Center, the Indian Institute of Technology and the Indian Institute of Science.

In short, because of the involvement of certain institutions with India's nuclear weapons or missile programs, we deem it inappropriate for them to participate in US-funded research, and that has an effect on their immigration status. It is more the function of the institution that they are affiliated with in India than the particular program or scientist involved here.

QUESTION: And does the same review apply to Pakistani scientists studying in this country?

MR. RUBIN: Certainly the kind of review that we're doing with respect to - in the follow up to the sanctions affects both of those countries that conducted nuclear explosions.

QUESTION: On that same subject, Pakistani military officials said today that a joint exercise with the United States in the fall called "Inspired Adventure" is going to be held as planned?

MR. RUBIN: I'm unfamiliar with that particular exercise, and that didn't come up in my consultations with my colleagues at the Pentagon. But we can try to get you an answer with regard to it. I'm unfamiliar with the exercise.

QUESTION: Okay, but I can check, but generally speaking, military exercises --

MR. RUBIN: Well certainly the sanctions that we imposed included a very important military component, which was to effect the military-to-military ties that our two countries had. Whether this exercise is being pursued or not and the reasons for it, I'll will have to check with you.

QUESTION: Do you have anything new in regards to the pledge of the American - the US Government to China to stop targeting 13 nuclear missiles to US cities?

MR. RUBIN: As a matter of practice for the remainder of the week - I hope you'll understand this - the Secretary is in Manila; has had a meeting with the Chinese Foreign Minister and directly addressed this issue. The officials responsible for China are with her and would be better placed to answer that directly.

QUESTION: Is the Secretary doing Cambodia or are you doing Cambodia?

MR. RUBIN: You can - she hasn't made - that's one where I think I can give you - have something to say, so pose a question.

QUESTION: Well, apparently the Cambodian officials have stopped the vote count. Do you --

MR. RUBIN: I did see a wire report to that effect right before coming out here. Where things stood last I checked in officially is that it's too soon to reach a judgment on the quality of conduct of the elections. The international observers were encouraged by the high voter turnout - over 90 percent - and the evident enthusiasm of the Cambodian people for exercising their democratic rights. The training and competence of polling officials was widely praised by observers.

It is true that hard-line Khmer Rouge guerrillas reportedly killed seven civilians and three government soldiers in an election day attack near Anlong Veng in an isolated region near the Thai border. Otherwise, voting was peaceful, with no immediate reports of election-related violence. The major observer groups and the MDI/NRI joint delegations have not issued statements yet. It is also true that Cambodian human rights observers cited lack of violence, high voter turnout and solid participation.

There are no results, even preliminary, that are yet available. I'm familiar with the report that you indicated, that suggests that some were concerned there was a problem and that's why they've delayed making some announcements. I am not familiar with the latest information from our embassy in that regard, and may be able to get you something later.

QUESTION: I have a follow-up on the Indian scientist. Does ban list - does it only include Indian institutions, or does it include individual Indian scientists also?

MR. RUBIN: Well, I think the answer I gave earlier was that the purpose of the change in policy is to deal with institutions that are involved with India's programs of concern to us - nuclear weapons missile programs. Those institutions that are integrally involved in that process or are significantly involved in that process, when they're affiliated scientists come to the United States to pursue research, we have reacted by cutting off certain of the funding for those projects; and that has affected their ability to stay in the United States.

I don't think it's fair to say that it is scientist-dependent; it's not individuals that are being excluded. It is individuals who are here affiliated with an institution that we believe is helping India to make some very wrong decisions in the area of nuclear weapons and ballistic missiles.

QUESTION: So in this stage, can you say anything about any possibility of them resuming economic aid to Cambodia?

MR. RUBIN: As you probably noted from the very preliminary remarks I gave to George, these reports are coming in hourly about what's going on there. I gave you the state of play as of a couple of hours ago, and I was unable to get a final answer to this question that George got before delaying you any further.

QUESTION: Over the weekend there was a report that the US is going to stop the search of and the pursuit to arrest the two Bosnian war criminals - Mladic and Karadzic. Is this true; has the US stopped the search?

MR. RUBIN: Let me address the question as follows. The United States has made very clear that the war criminals indicted by the international tribunal belong in one place and only one place, and that's The Hague, to face prosecution for the horrendous war crimes and crimes against humanity and other crimes that they have committed.

We have worked with our allies and others in recent weeks and months to bring to justice several dozen such war criminals, either by apprehension or by convincing them to voluntarily

surrender to The Hague. In our view, it is only a matter of time before Rodovan Karadzic and Ratko Mladic have their day at The Hague.

With respect to any suggestion that we have changed our policy, let me make very clear we have not changed our policy. We continue to keep open all options in dealing with indicted war criminals in Bosnia, including Rodovan Karadzic; and we continue to pursue and consider our options in this regard. Any suggestion that we have changed our policy and are no longer considering options in this regard is incorrect.

QUESTION: Is it true that there is trepidation among some of our allies, namely the French, that it would basically be a blood bath and that's why possibly some of the plans might have been stalled a bit?

MR. RUBIN: Let me say this - it is very difficult to talk about the planning for such an operation. If it were going to happen, it's not something we would want to talk about; and therefore talking about the thinking that goes into it is extremely difficult. I can repeat for you what I said earlier, which is that several dozen war criminals have been brought to justice. They have been brought to justice both by apprehension and by voluntarily surrendering. Meanwhile the Bosnian peace effort continues, and the SFOR forces continue to do their work and Bosnia continues slowly, slowly to regain the benefits of peace that go with it.

QUESTION: Maybe you can address - there is a fairly fantastic figure in that of the cost of this alleged operation --

MR. RUBIN: No, I don't have any information on cost.

QUESTION: $100 million of the American taxpayers' --

MR. RUBIN: I don't have any information on cost. I can say that the deployment of our forces in Bosnia is not cost-free; it does have considerable costs associated with it. We believe that making peace in Bosnia is something that is in the national interest of the United States and that will cost a lot less for us to try to put peace in place in Bosnia over the next months than it would be to deal with the tragedy if they fell back in to war. So peace is the less costly option. And one part of that, obviously, we've indicated is the more that the war criminals can be brought to justice, the more sustainable the peace will be.

QUESTION: Do you have anything on the fighting in Kosovo? There seems to be a major battle going on.

MR. RUBIN: We are deeply concerned about the increased fighting that has taken place in Kosovo over the weekend. We are concerned in particular about the increased involvement in the fighting by the Serb army. We are especially concerned about the large number of displaced persons this new fighting has caused, and that they are currently inaccessible to humanitarian assistance because of the fighting.

We urge both sides in the strongest possible terms to cease the fighting and work towards a negotiated settlement. Neither side can afford to think that the status of Kosovo is something that can be resolved on the battlefield; it simply cannot. We believe it can only be resolved at the negotiating table, and that is why Ambassador Hill has been meeting with officials in Belgrade; he'll be in Pristina today for meetings with the Kosovar Albanian leaders and Belgrade again tomorrow to meet with US allies and Serb officials.

Beginning on Saturday, there was a Serb-initiated operation to open regained control of several major roads. This operation appears to have a Serb military component to it, and there are reports of villages being shelled and destroyed. The most intense fighting has occurred on the road between Pristina and Pec. Fighting also continues around the town of Orahovac, which is now under Serb control. We surmise that the fighting is retaliation by the Serbs for recent activities by the Kosovar rebels over the past week. It is our view that both sides must realize that to continue the fighting is only going to damage the prospects for the people there.

With respect to an additional incident, we do understand there was an incident at the Morina border checkpoint over the weekend in which FRY security officials - that is, Federal Republic of Yugoslavia security officials - fired across the border into Albania. At this point, t is unclear whether Albanian border guards returned fire. We have seen reports which were yet unable to confirm that the military authorities from Serbia have apologized to the Albanian Government for the incident. We're investigating it and will provide more details as they become available.

QUESTION: Can you say whether Hill has made any headway in his efforts to --

MR. RUBIN: Well, he's working very hard; it's hard to give you a snapshot. Certainly, one of the examples of the problem we're dealing with here is that earlier today in contravention of a prior understanding, Belgrade customs authorities insisted on inspecting a shipment of diplomatic materials to be used in support of the Kosovo diplomatic observer mission. Our embassy refused to accept this breach of diplomatic protocol, and the shipment was returned to Stuttgart.

This, again, is an example of Belgrade's actions at odds with its commitments. They indicated they would give the international community the support and access it needed to send observers to the region. The materials in the shipment returned to Germany are essential for the observer mission to become fully operational. It is our view that Belgrade's clear intent here is to restrict the ability of the United States and other members of the international community to observe developments in Kosovo and collect real-time information about events on the ground.

This is in violation of both the Contact Group demands and President Milosevic's personal commitment to Russian President Boris Yeltsin to allow the international community free and unrestricted access. This is unacceptable.

QUESTION: Does the involvement by the Yugoslav army mark a kind of turning point in this conflict?

MR. RUBIN: I would not regard it as a turning point. Clearly, there have been Serbian forces that include heavy equipment in the Kosovo region for some time. They were involved early in the year when we first began to condemn these activities and develop a sanctions policy with our European allies to demonstrate our abhorrence of this policy. There continued to have been the use of heavy equipment by the Serb side. So it is not a turning point, but it is a major problem.

QUESTION: Has the United States enlisted any of its allies to try to restrict the flow of arms and money to the KLA? And is there any money coming from this country that has raised concern?

MR. RUBIN: Well, I will have to look into the specifics of what we believe is coming from the various countries. I know Secretary Albright has had discussions with her counterparts about the importance of making sure that the outside support doesn't outstrip the desire by our countries to get a peace agreement; and that we should try to discourage the kind of outside support that will only redound to the disadvantage of the people there - that is, postpone the day when we can get a peace agreement and accelerate the fighting. That is something we think is not in the interest of the Kosovar Albanians. I know she's had discussions with her counterparts about that; and I'll try to get you some more detail later.

QUESTION: To follow on that - so if the Swiss are arresting Kosovars there and freezing bank accounts, is that something the US would approve of?

MR. RUBIN: Well, we certainly don't want to see funds going to extremist organizations that are not interested in making peace. That has been our view for some time.

QUESTION: Jamie, are you surprised by the actions of the customs officials?

MR. RUBIN: Well, let me say as follows - surprised, I don't know if we can ever be surprised by the gap between President Milosevic's words and President Milosevic's actions. But so far, there has been cooperation prior to this time in the setting up and working of that observer group. So this certainly put a stop to that cooperation.

QUESTION: Can you say where the inspection took place?

MR. RUBIN: In the Belgrade airport.

QUESTION: On Cyprus, a general question - why your government is talking about the invasion of Grenada, of Kuwait, even Puerto Rico and not in the case of the Turkish invasion of Cyprus?

MR. RUBIN: Why did we do what?

QUESTION: Why you are using the word invasion in the case of the invasion of Grenada, Puerto Rico and Kuwait but not in the case of Cyprus? What is the difference?

MR. RUBIN: I am not an expert on the Grenada issue, and I'll have to check that for you.

QUESTION: Please, and also let me know what is the DOS standards for an invasion and why those standards do not apply in the case of Cyprus.

MR. RUBIN: I think we've made very clear our views on what happened in 1974, and those views have been repeated over and over again. But if you continue to want to discuss the reasons behind the different use of particular words, I will try to get the wordsmiths to give you as clear and explicit and precise an explanation as possible.

QUESTION: And the last one - any comment on Suleyman Demirel's statement against Cyprus the other day for new tears and pain on the issue of the S- 300 missiles?

MR. RUBIN: Our view on the S-300 missiles is well-known; there is nothing new in recent statements by Turkish officials.

QUESTION: About his statements as far as for new threats, as far as for new tears and pain?

MR. RUBIN: We don't question Cyprus' right to make decisions about its defense needs, but the S-300 deal remains an obstacle to our efforts to jump-start the negotiating process, and will raise tensions in the region.

We also oppose any threats to deal with the S-300s by military means. We continue to urge the Turkish Government to resolve this issue through diplomatic means.

QUESTION: Can I just go back to the inspection question? Did they give you a reason why?

MR. RUBIN: I don't have - there is no acceptable reason to try to look into it. The equipment there involved was communications equipment of spare parts. It was to have been brought into Serbia under diplomatic pouch. Officials there had told us there would be no problem in doing so. Yet, at the airport, there was an attempt to violate the sanctity of the diplomatic pouch.

QUESTION: They had given you prior approval?

MR. RUBIN: Correct.

QUESTION: Are the observers continuing to go out?

MR. RUBIN: They continue to do their work; but in order for this mission to be up and fully running, they needed this equipment.

QUESTION: Did you say when that happened?

MR. RUBIN: I believe it was today, earlier today.

QUESTION: Would you hazard a guess as to the future of the oil-for-food program? There was a report today that the Iraqi regime seems to have --

MR. RUBIN: Yes, I thought that report accurately summarized the basic situation, which is that it was the United States and the European countries and the Security Council that came to the rescue of the people of Iraq by creating a program that has provided 6 million tons of food to the - I may have gotten the tons wrong - an incredibly large amount of food to the people of Iraq - far more than they were getting when their own government refused to spend their money on food and medicine and supplies. Iraq has not been at the forefront of countries advocating this oil-for- food program; they've resisted it all along. We think that the reason they resist it is because they continue to want to use their people as pawns in an international game to try to get sanctions lifted.

Let it be clear if it's not clear already - sanctions will not be lifted unless Saddam Hussein comes clean and allows the inspectors to do their job. That is the first necessary prerequisite for sanctions to be suspended or lifted.

The oil-for-food program has worked very well in providing significant amounts of food and medicine to the people of Iraq. We want it to continue to work, and we want to work through the Sanctions Committee to make available the equipment necessary so that oil can be exported so that food can be provided to the hungry people that need it.

If Iraq were to take a decision that they cared more about using their people as international pawns than they do about the health and welfare of hundreds of thousands of innocent children and women and children and poor people, there is not a lot we can do about that other than to insist on our desire to have this program succeed, to continue to provide the facility by which food and medicine goes to the people of Iraq; and that's what we're going to do.

QUESTION: Jamie, in that connection, there was a little noticed amendment approved by the Senate about ten or 11 days ago which forbids the sale of --

MR. RUBIN: I hope I noticed it.

QUESTION: Well, some people in this building hadn't noticed it.

MR. RUBIN: Then I probably didn't, which makes me live in trepidation of this question, but go ahead.

QUESTION: Well, the amendment approved - I believe it was 60 to 37 - forbids the sale of US food to countries on the terrorism list. And it was directed mostly at Cuba, but if approved by the Congress, it would forbid the sale of food to --

MR. RUBIN: I don't know - is it passed by the whole Congress, or by the Senate?

QUESTION: No, no, no - it was passed by the Senate.

MR. RUBIN: As a matter of principle, we think that the oil-for-food program should include American companies being able to send food and medicine. That is my understanding of the way the program works. If somebody wants to change that, that would be inconsistent with what we're trying to do. We don't understand why American companies shouldn't be helping to serve a humanitarian purpose, which is to feed the starving people that Saddam Hussein refuses to feed.

QUESTION: It was one of those late-night amendments that was approved without debate --

MR. RUBIN: With debate it will not see the light of day - to continue your metaphor.

QUESTION: I suppose your confident it also applies both for Sudan, which is suffering through a much worse situation.

MR. RUBIN: With respect to Sudan, let me say this -- three years of drought and 15 years of civil war and a government-imposed ban on relief flights to certain areas in February and March have combined to produce a serious famine in Sudan. We in the United States have been working very hard on this; since 1989 we've contributed more than $700 million to relief in this area. In the current fiscal year we've contributed some $80 million, and that figure is expected to rise. The money is used for food, transportation and farm equipment. Most of it has traveled through Operation Lifeline Sudan - the United Nations' program which serves as an umbrella agency for numerous NGOs operating in Sudan. Some money is also given directly to non- governmental organizations, such as Norwegian People's Aid, which operate independently of Operation Lifeline.

To meet the current crisis, Operation Lifeline has increased it's operations significantly this year. It has increased its heavy lift air fleet from two to 11 aircraft; it has also opened three new air bases - two in Sudan and one in Kenya -- to complement its primary base in Kenya. In addition to airdrops, the Operation Lifeline delivers food by truck and barge. The current demand is for some 9,500 tons of food per month; by August, Operation Lifeline expects to be able to deliver over 10,000 tons. There are distribution problems that are significant and a genuine challenge: truck deliveries are impossible at present, due to the annual heavy rains and the lack of roads in southern Sudan; barges are also used, but with only limited success. We are now looking closely at some proposals to increase the use of trucks and barges and the use of a rail line from Khartoum to the south, but there are numerous problems with that.

We are doing what we can do in obviously a horrific situation to support the Sudan peace talks because ultimately, it is only peace that can break the cycle of famine that has been so prevalent in Sudan, and we have provided significant financial and diplomatic assistance for the talks, including sending a delegation to observe them since September 1997. They are scheduled to reconvene in August and we'd like to see them put on a fast track.

QUESTION: Can you comment something in regards with the peace talks in Colombia by the new government and the possibility that Yasser Arafat play an important role?

MR. RUBIN: I don't have anything new on that. We obviously want to be of assistance to the government of Colombia as it formulates its program to work on this problem. We've made clear we would be prepared to be of assistance, but it's up to the government there to take the lead. We will respond and consider any request they make of us.

QUESTION: What about the possibility that Yasser Arafat play a role in the peace process?

MR. RUBIN: I think Chairman Arafat is pretty busy right now.

QUESTION: Are they talking?

MR. RUBIN: It is my understanding that the meetings between the Palestinians and the Israelis, including one this weekend between Abu Mazen and Defense Minister Mordachai will be continuing during the course of the week.

We have been closely involved with both sides in trying to give them our advice and ideas as to how to close the gaps. It is too soon, however, to be able to answer the question of whether we can. It is ongoing.

QUESTION: Do you think that a resolution of this current negotiation has to come before the Knesset goes out in the next week or so?

MR. RUBIN: Whatever target date there is in the coming weeks or months, we want to do it now. There's no greater urgency this week because of what may be happening next week. We've had the same urgency in the recent weeks as we have had all spring and summer. The urgency is tied to the situation on the ground in which there is great danger that if we don't get the peace process back on track by next May and have a genuine negotiation about final status issues and put the interim issues, including the further redeployment, in train, that we face a grave risk of instability come next May.

So we've had the pedal to the metal for some weeks now. We've uncovered every rock that we can think of to try to find creative solutions. We've worked the phones day and night; we're going to continue to do that. That is based on our concern about the process and the situation on the ground, and it is not increased by any other political factors.

QUESTION: Do you think - do you still favor the direct talks without sending Ambassador Ross?

MR. RUBIN: Correct. We still think that now is the right time for the two sides to engage with each other. They've had a series of meetings; we believe there will be continued meetings. We believe that is the way we can help break the logjam. That doesn't mean we're not going to be in touch with them; we are in touch with them. We're in close contact with the sides. But it's hard to characterize the state of play at 1:40 p.m. on this particular day, other than to say that now is the time for the Palestinians and the Israelis to work together to overcome the impasse.

QUESTION: So there's no immediate plan to send Indyk or Ross to them?

MR. RUBIN: I'm not aware of any immediate plan for Secretary Albright or Ambassador Ross to meet with them?

QUESTION: Or Secretary Indyk?

MR. RUBIN: No.

QUESTION: Jamie, in Nicaragua, the former Sandanista president, Daniel Ortega, has expressed possibility of leading another revolution against the current government. Is there any concern from the US about this possibility?

MR. RUBIN: Let me check - I haven't seen that statement. We'll try to get you something after the briefing.

QUESTION: What's the US reaction to the likely prospect of Mr. Obuchi being the Prime Minister of Japan?

MR. RUBIN: Secretary Albright had a very good meeting with Foreign Minister Obuchi in Manila. I think they talked, at the time, about their relationship and the work they've done together; and I think I'll leave it to her to characterize that kind of a question.

Last one --

QUESTION: Can you - well, second to the last one, I hope - can you comment on her enjoyment of cold pizza?

MR. RUBIN: I heard a little bit about that, but I think the party has been addressing that and I don't really want to mix my metaphors unnecessarily.

QUESTION: Also, the Central Korean news agency in North Korea - they had issued some particularly harsh words with regards to the United States deploying Navy ships off the South Korean coast, equaling it to a declaration of war and other harsh expressions. Can you comment on that?

MR. RUBIN: Yes -- I've seen some reports to that effect. Because of concern about recent North Korean infiltrations and the difficulty of detection, and in response to a request from the Republic of Korea, the United States announced last week that we would dispatch naval assets to waters off the Korean Coast to support ongoing South Korean efforts to detect infiltrators. We have raised these incidents through the Military Armistice Commission, and we urge the DPRK to refrain from actions that violate the armistice. We wouldn't be in this situation if they hadn't taken actions that did violate the armistice.

QUESTION: Thank you.

(The briefing concluded at 1:45 P.M.)

U.S. State Department: Daily Press Briefings Directory - Previous Article - Next Article