09/06/2001: Daily Press Briefing Excerpts

Were we justified in leaving the conference when we did? And NGOs are there and some other governments. Are we relying on those governments to also make our State Department and official commitments known?

MR. BOUCHER: Okay. I think it is important to keep the two things you are talking about separate. We didn't leave the conference because there is violence in the Middle East. We left the conference because it was heading in a direction that we thought perpetuated some of the attitudes of discrimination, perpetuated some of the attitudes about Israel that we did not agree with and that we have worked hard to eliminate from the UN system in the past. And I think many of you have read the document itself and saw the phrases being used.

And yes, you're right, as far as we see it, not much of that has changed at the conference. And that is why we are no longer there.

In terms of the situation in the region, the violence has continued, and we have made very clear that we do oppose the Israeli policy of targeted attacks. These attacks don't help the efforts to reestablish direct dialogue between Israelis and Palestinians. They don't help the effort to halt the violence and terror, and they don't help restore a political process that could be based on trust, confidence and the implementation of the Mitchell Committee recommendations in all their aspects.

We have condemned the terror in all its aspects, in the strongest possible terms. We have consistently called upon the Palestinians to do all they can to prevent the suicide bombings, the mortar attacks and the shooting incidents that have continued. Again, we would say both sides need to recognize that down this path of escalation and retaliation lies disaster. We have consistently urged and continue to urge both sides to take immediate steps to restore an atmosphere of calm, work towards a resumption of direct dialogue.

In that regard, I would probably note the Secretary has talked in recent days several times with Foreign Minister Peres. He spoke yesterday with Foreign Minister Peres and Chairman Arafat to look to the prospect of their meeting, to discuss with them how it can be made productive and useful, and to get us back on a path where we can see ourselves, where we can see the parties take steps against the violence and implement the Mitchell Committee recommendations.

QUESTION: Are you guys hopeful, or you think that they actually may meet? Is there some reason that you think that they might? And was that the only reason that he called?

MR. BOUCHER: In several of his discussions with Israeli Foreign Minister Peres, he has talked about the conference in South Africa, as well as the prospects of a meeting. Certainly we have always believed in direct dialogue.

QUESTION: (Inaudible.)

MR. BOUCHER: I would say that -- no, I don't have any particular information on the when, where and how; that is for them. Our discussions with them have been to say that this could be useful. It is important to make it useful. And let's talk about how it can be useful in terms of getting the violence down and getting back into the Mitchell Committee recommendations.

QUESTION: When did he speak to Chairman Arafat? You seem to imply yesterday.

MR. BOUCHER: Yesterday.

QUESTION: It was yesterday?

MR. BOUCHER: Yesterday, yes.

QUESTION: Did he talk about the Durban conference with Mr. Arafat at all?

MR. BOUCHER: I'm not really sure. Let's see if I have that here.

QUESTION: Okay. And on the Durban thing, I know you are trying to keep them separate --

MR. BOUCHER: I don't know for sure.

QUESTION: -- but it's hard to keep them separate. What does the United States think of the compromise language proposed by South Africa on this? And if this language was approved, would you perhaps reconsider your withdrawal from the conference?

MR. BOUCHER: We have said quite consistently, we appreciate the efforts of South Africa, we have appreciated the efforts that others have made, for example the Norwegian Foreign Minister; the Secretary General of the United Nations. I don't have any responses to hypotheticals at this point. Since our departure, we have seen another couple days of the same kind of insistence and arguing, and we will just have to see how this turns out.

QUESTION: Do you have any evidence at all of Iraq's Syrian military cooperation? There has been a lot of talk and rumors perhaps. Have you been in touch with Syria recently about this?

MR. BOUCHER: I really don't know at all. I hadn't seen the rumors and talks. I hadn't asked about it; I'll check.

QUESTION: Can I go back to Durban, which is why I wanted to clarify -- your Consul General, has he kept to the rule of not even going inside the meeting room, not sitting in the chair?

MR. BOUCHER: Yes, we are not there. In fact, we -- our Consul General, who was on the list for the conference, advised the conference secretariat to stop processing the US application for credentials because the United States was withdrawing its application.

So I guess we had submitted originally an application for credentials that hadn't been acted on so we could have some people there, and we have now just pulled that out. And we have nobody requesting accreditation at the conference right now.

QUESTION: But he himself, right?

MR. BOUCHER: He is in Durban, and obviously he is still following events there and reporting back to us.

QUESTION: Right, right. But is he accredited to the conference?

MR. BOUCHER: I don't -- at this point, we have withdrawn the US application for credentials, because we were -- that means we are out of there.

QUESTION: So those that were already issued have been --

MR. BOUCHER: Had not been formally approved and authorized, I suppose, is the answer.

QUESTION: -- shredded or something.

MR. BOUCHER: But whether he has actually been on conference grounds to talk to the delegations, find out what's going on, I don't particularly know. But he is certainly not there sitting in the chair representing the United States, participating in the conference, negotiating text, or otherwise representing or attending on behalf of the United States.

QUESTION: Can I go back to the discussions with Peres and Arafat for a moment? Did the Secretary offer to host a meeting between them or anything like that?

MR. BOUCHER: No. Not that I -- can I say no? Yes, I can say no.

QUESTION: Another one on this one. I see that Congressman Conyers has been writing to the Secretary of State on a subject dear to our hearts, the question of the Arms Export Control Act, and got an answer saying pretty much what you say.

Can you tell us, have there been any other letters from Members of Congress on this? Is there much demand for an explanation from Congress on it?

MR. BOUCHER: I don't think I see all the letters. This is the only one I am familiar with. The Secretary did write to Congressman Conyers, I think about two weeks ago, actually. It was during the recess. I'll double-check and see if we have any --

QUESTION: The Under Secretary says that the Department has been monitoring Israeli actions. What exactly does he mean by that? I mean, is this sort of -- does that just mean you read the wires and put them in files, or does it go beyond that?

MR. BOUCHER: He means what I mean when I say it. As you know, I have always said that we continue to monitor this area; we continue to urge the Israelis to exercise restraint. We have a variety of contacts, means, people and others who can help us follow the situation out there, in addition to the amount of time and attention we obviously pay to the wire services.

QUESTION: Any plans for the Secretary to meet with Arafat at the UN?

MR. BOUCHER: Nothing that I -- I have nothing one way or the other at this point.

QUESTION: You may not go for this, but what would -- (laughter). It's very doubtful, but if you are monitoring Israeli actions and what they have been using, the US-supplied weapons and equipment for does not rise to the level of where you would make a complaint or a report to Congress about it, what would cross that line? It is hard to see. They are using them now, but I don't understand what then would broach this threshold, really.

MR. BOUCHER: It is a non sequitur to say what would cross that threshold would be an action that crossed the threshold. We have obviously paid close attention and watched this area through the past. It has been a part of US law for a long time. I don't want to speculate or give a list of hypothetical actions that one could carry out that would not been seen as self-defense, but I think the point is we have not made such a report.

Now, I don't want to detract -- I think we are wrong in pushing this into a legalistic discussion of US law. We have made quite clear that we are opposed to the policy of targeted killings. We have made quite clear that we are opposed to the use of heavy weaponry in these circumstances, particularly in populated areas where the risk of innocent casualties is very high. We have made clear that we think that the process of escalation and response needs to be broken and that the parties need to work very hard to get back to security cooperation, as we have made clear we think the Palestinians have a strong responsibility to stop terror and to take actions that prevent terror.

So everything that we have done in sort of the policy terms and the discussions has been to try to move the process, move the situation away from this kind of escalation and retaliation, to move it away from these kind of attacks, as well as to -- by stopping the terror and getting the parties back into cooperative security arrangements. So for us it has been a matter of policy, a matter of a focus of our diplomacy and how we work this, not so much a legalistic question of a particular standard in US law.

QUESTION: If you have made clear your opposition publicly, it obviously hasn't worked. So why would you be against what I think amounts to just not -- why would you continue to send a stream of spare parts for the heavy weaponry that you oppose the Israelis using in these instances? And that is what the Arms Export Control Act would do. Why is it such a difficult decision, it seems?

MR. BOUCHER: I would say clearly that the United States knows that Israel has legitimate needs for self-defense. The United States has been a partner with Israel in its defense, although we may be opposed to certain actions that Israel carries out, so we have made that clear too.

Teri, you had more?

QUESTION: I just wanted ask, do you know if the Congressman was speaking on behalf of any kind of group or caucus within Congress, or did it appear to you to just be an individual letter?

MR. BOUCHER: I don't know. I don't remember the incoming letter or whether you said that or not.

QUESTION: Thank you.

QUESTION: Mr. Boucher, any comment on Mr. de Soto's statement the other day for the resumption of the Cyprus talks September 12th, which however were turned down immediately by Turkish Cypriot leader Rauf Denktash?

MR. BOUCHER: I think I would just say that we believe that all the parties need to do their maximum to support the UN's good offices' mission. The United States continues to support fully the UN Secretary General and his Special Advisor, Mr. de Soto.

QUESTION: Any change in your policy for a bi-zonal and bi-communal Republic of Cyprus?

MR. BOUCHER: We support the efforts that the United Nations is making in that regard.

QUESTION: Can I move to Colombia, please? Not really move, but just subjects. (Laughter.)

MR. BOUCHER: You'll have to check that with the family.