We are pleased with the level of participation and we encourage both sides to conclude a just and lasting agreement.  We also encourage both sides to adhere to the terms of the Memorandum of Understanding that calls for a cessation of hostilities and unimpeded humanitarian access.  Those talks are ongoing in Kenya, and we thought we would call attention to that fact with a statement.  So we will give you the details in writing after the briefing. 

The second is to say that we have joined 47 governments on the South African-led Kimberly Process in Interlaken, Switzerland, to eliminate "conflict diamonds" from international trade beginning January 1, 2003. 

This declaration in Interlaken is the culmination of two years of intensive coordination and cooperation among governments in a global coalition, including the diamond industry and civil society.  We have worked intensively over the past two years to combat the trade in "conflict diamonds" and the creation of a trading system that fulfills -- the creation of a trading system fulfills an international commitment to the innocent victims of conflicts that have been fueled by the proceeds of "conflict diamonds."

So that's good news, and we have worked hard on that for several years and are glad to be able to join with 47 others in reaching agreement.

QUESTION:  -- by the diamond trade.  Which wars?

MR. BOUCHER:  The issue has mostly been in Africa.  I think we have talked about it in terms of Liberia. We have talked about it in terms of Sierra Leone, Angola, various others -- Congo, those regions in some of those conflicts in Africa where we've seen partly fueled by the diamond trade.

QUESTION:  On that Richard, it's been a long time since I wrote about this, but I seem to remember that there was -- the United States had some objection to the original proposals, or maybe I'm imagining it.  How has that been sorted out?

MR. BOUCHER:  No, I don't think we objected to this.  We have worked very hard to try to get understandings with the industry and with the NGOs and with the countries involved to protect legitimate trade in diamonds and to reach agreement on certification process so that diamonds can be certified and we know which ones are legitimately mined, and therefore exclude from the trade those that not.

QUESTION:  Richard, did the Kimberly Process exist before now and the US just joined it, or is this something that already existed and the US just --

MR. BOUCHER:  The Kimberly Process has been the process of reaching agreement on this.  It's been a process.  South Africa has done a lot of effort to bring it together and we have tried to play a strong part in this.  We have had special negotiators work on this and Assistant Secretary Walter Kansteiner is heading our delegation out there.  We have seven people out at this conference in Interlaken.  So they have been able to implement these -- they are now going to implement the system that's been agreed.

QUESTION:  Are the African countries there?

MR. BOUCHER:  Yes, South Africa's played a very important role in bringing this together.

QUESTION:  And Sierra Leone?

MR. BOUCHER:  I don't have the whole list.  There are 47 others who are there.  I don't have a list with me.

Okay?  So I would be glad to take your questions on these or other topics.

QUESTION:  Mr. Sharon has called for elections.  Would this have any bearing on the timetable for the Quartet, the US and its partners?

MR. BOUCHER:  As we have always said, we are not going to get into political commentary or speculation about other people's governments.  The democratic process is unfolding in Israel and obviously we are paying attention, but I'm not going to speculate at this point.

QUESTION:  Well, I really wasn't asking what you thought of the prospects of a new Israeli Government, but, no, I just meant will you proceed on course with your roadmap?  And it's not exactly a pell-mell race, but, I mean, there has been a series of stops.  Mr. Satterfield, apparently, is going to the region soon.

Are you going to follow through or do you think it's wise to wait and see what kind of Israel there will be in January? 

MR. BOUCHER:  We are going to follow through.  The issue of peace in the Middle East has been very important to us throughout this Administration, throughout the efforts that we have made.  The President's vision on June 24th was not based on a particular government; it was based on the need for security for both sides, an end to the violence, reform in the Palestinian community, and obligations by both sides to get on with the business of creating an environment and a state, a Palestinian state, that can live side by side with the State of Israel.

So those goals remain important.  We are going to continue to work this process.  And as I said, both parties will have obligations and responsibilities in it not dependent on a particular government.

Deputy Assistant Secretary Satterfield will travel to Amman, Jordan, for meetings on November 14 and 15.  These are discussions with counterparts in the International Task Force on Reform; that is, the US, European Union, United Nations, Russia, Norway, Japan, International Monetary Fund and World Bank.  Discussions will focus on the Task Force's efforts to advance Palestinian civil and institutional reform that make possible free, fair and credible Palestinian elections in early 2003, in order to help realize the President's vision of a final settlement based on two states living side by side in peace and security.  So that is an ongoing part of the process.

QUESTION:  You're saying basically a single-purpose trip?  I mean, no tour like Mr. Burns just had?

MR. BOUCHER:  I don't have a complete itinerary, and it is sort of ten days away, so I would leave for -- but the main purpose of the trip is to go to Amman for the Task Force meetings.

QUESTION:  Richard, if I can be slightly more specific on this, it looks like the Israelis will, in fact, have elections in late January.  You need Israeli approval for your roadmap before things start moving.  Can we expect that you will wait until after the Israeli elections before you -- before you expect to get final approval, Israeli approval, of that roadmap, and therefore movement?

MR. BOUCHER:  I don't want to expect anything one way or the other at this point.  I just want to say that the issues, the need for people to move forward, remains.  The desire to move forward remains.  The importance of moving forward remains.  So the United States will continue to pursue this as we can. 

Until we see what kind of Israeli government there will be now and in the future after the election, I don't want to start speculating one way or the other.  What we do know is that this work has to continue, and we will be continuing it, as appropriate, in the coming months.

Okay, Gene.

QUESTION:  Are you still opposed to the January 20th date for the Palestine Authority to move forward, or is this November 14th-15th meeting going to require many more months of preparation before --

MR. BOUCHER:  We've never tried to pick a specific date for the Palestinians to have elections.  We have said we agree that one should look toward the institutional changes and reforms that could lead to free, fair and open elections in early 2003, and that has been the general assumption that the Task Force has been operating under.

QUESTION:  A follow-up, please.  What are the tic points for reform of the Palestinian Authority so that they can move forward to the January 20th date, supposedly?

MR. BOUCHER:  I think the specifics of what needs to be done and what we can do to help Palestinians who are interested in reform are the kinds of things that the Task Force will be discussing when they get together.

QUESTION:  One, you do -- would you accept the premise, though, to have a Palestinian election and an Israeli election in the same time, within a week or two of each other, might be a bit problematic?

MR. BOUCHER:  I'm not going to play around with speculation on things that haven't been set yet.  As far as I know there's no final date for the Palestinian election.  I'm not quite sure of the status of the Israeli election date.  But early 2003.  That's as much as we've taken a position on.

QUESTION:  But they both looking like they're early 2003.  You don't have a position at all on whether these --

MR. BOUCHER:  No, I'm not taking a position on the conjunction.  I'm just saying our position has always been sometime in early 2003.  That's a much longer period than a week or so, and we'll see, you know, where we get to on reform and when it can happen.

QUESTION:  All right.  And has the Secretary been in touch with his new counterpart or is that something that you'll wait to --

MR. BOUCHER:  I don't think the interim Israeli Government has been formed yet.

QUESTION:  Or is that something that you'll wait for --

MR. BOUCHER:  Until the government is formed?

QUESTION:  Yeah, till a swearing-in or some kind of --

MR. BOUCHER:  I don't know of plans one way or the other.  We'll just have to see.

QUESTION:  So, has he been in touch with anyone over there since the election, since the announcement of the --

MR. BOUCHER:  Not directly, no.  Not on the phone.

QUESTION:  Are there any members of the Palestine Authority expected to be in Amman, or is this going to be a matter of imposing a democratic solution on the Palestine Authority without any negotiation?

MR. BOUCHER:  Our effort throughout this process has been to try to support Palestinian efforts for reform.  As you know, there is a lot of movement within the Palestinian community in favor of reform, in favor of changing the institutional arrangements for the Palestinians so that they can support the eventual creation of a state, in order to do other things as well -- to support a new security apparatus that can take responsibility for stopping the violence and support new financial arrangements so that the money that donors give and the money that Palestinians have and the money that's returned to the Palestinians by the Israelis could be spent on real needs and not in a transparent manner.  So there has been a lot of push for reform within the Palestinian community, and the international community has looked, in turn, to how they can support that and how they can encourage that.  And that is what we will be doing.

Normally, when the Task Force gets together, there are Palestinians.  Whether they are actually participating or whether they are just there, I don't know for this particular meeting.

QUESTION:  Is the Jordan Government going to be present at these?

MR. BOUCHER:  I would have to assume so, but I don't have the details of participation by others at this point.

Teri.

QUESTION:  On Qatar.  What are the implications of the US Government's missile strike yesterday and --

QUESTION:  Qatar?  You mean Yemen?

QUESTION:  I'm sorry.  Yemen.  I'm sorry, in Yemen.  And I'm sure many Israelis are wondering what the difference is between this and in targeted killing.  And me, too.

MR. BOUCHER:  As far as the events in Yemen, I have nothing for you on that.

QUESTION:  But can you say that you are against targeted killings?

MR. BOUCHER:  Our policy on targeted killings in the Israeli-Palestinian context has not changed --

QUESTION:  In other contexts?

MR. BOUCHER:  -- and we've discussed that and explained that many times.

QUESTION:  And in other contexts?

MR. BOUCHER:  I'm not going to speculate.

QUESTION:  Well, so you have one rule for one conflict and another rule for another conflict?

MR. BOUCHER:  I would say that -- if you look back at what we have said about targeted killings in the Israeli-Palestinian context, you will find that the reasons we have given do not necessarily apply in other circumstances.

QUESTION:  If I remember, your opposition, stated opposition at the targeted killings, has not been confined to instances where civilians were victims.  I think, basically, it was a flat disapproval of targeted killings.

MR. BOUCHER:  We have explained our opposition for a number of reasons.  Sometimes all apply and sometimes some apply, but they are particular to those circumstances and I don't want to talk about any speculation about other events.  But I think we all understand that the situation with regard to Israeli-Palestinian issues and the prospects of peace and the prospects of negotiation and the prospects of the need to create an atmosphere for progress -- a lot of different things come into play there.

QUESTION:  And what's special about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict that make targeted killings inadvisable?

MR. BOUCHER:  All the things I just cited to your colleague.

QUESTION:  I didn't hear those.

MR. BOUCHER:  Well, you can look at the transcript.

Sir.

QUESTION:  Is there any concern in this building or elsewhere in this town that the reports that imply, that say that you guys had something to do with this incident yesterday, may result in attacks against -- new threats against US facilities, whether these reports are true or --

MR. BOUCHER:  Whether they're true or not?  I guess what I would say is our missions in the Gulf, the Middle East, in Yemen in particular, operate at a very high state of alert, protection, readiness.  I'm sure they will continue to do so. 

Whenever there are reports of events that could lead to potential security threats, then the embassies review their security postures, and I'm sure they will make any appropriate decisions.  I would point out they are already at a very high state of security and therefore I'm not predicting particular steps at this moment.  But I'm sure that any embassies that might consider themselves affected would get together with their whole country team and look at what they might do to further improve their security. 

QUESTION:  I just wondered, yesterday there were officials -- not in this building, but I think at the Pentagon -- who talked about the incident that happened yesterday and said that the person, the main person who was killed, was basically a bad guy and that people shouldn't be sorry to see him go.  Do you share that?  Can you --

MR. BOUCHER:  I really have nothing to say on any particular incidents yesterday. 

QUESTION:  Can you confirm that six people were killed in a car by an explosion?

MR. BOUCHER:  That wouldn't be for me to confirm.  I think the Yemeni authorities have already confirmed that.

QUESTION:  Okay, well, I'm just a little confused about the whole thing because it seems to me that either, one, you say that you did have something to do with it and that you're happy about it and you're proud of it, you have the guts to come out and admit it, rather than -- or you say we had nothing to do with it and --

MR. BOUCHER:  How about I say I have nothing to say about it?  Which is true. 

QUESTION:  Richard, can we --

MR. BOUCHER:  We have another question back there. 

QUESTION:  Yeah, one more.  The new Foreign Minister of Israel has called for the expulsion of --

MR. BOUCHER:  First of all, you're changing the subject.  But second of all, you're starting your sentence with a premise that I don't think is true.  So he was asking me before if I wanted to comment on the new Foreign Minister of Israel, and I said I don't think that Israel actually has a new Foreign Minister quite at this moment.  So rather than commenting, let me go back to his question on this subject.

QUESTION:  Can we just go back, actually, on the last topic?

MR. BOUCHER:  Yes.

QUESTION:  When you draw a distinction between the Israeli-Palestinian context and other contexts, are you saying that targeted killing might be a legitimate practice in other contexts?

MR. BOUCHER:  I'm not drawing a distinction between anything and anything else; I'm just saying that if you look carefully, if you look at what we have said about targeted killings in the question of the Israeli-Palestinian disputes, you will see, first of all, as I said today, that our position has not changed, and, second of all, that the factors that we cited for our opposition to targeted killings were particular to that set of circumstances. 

QUESTION:  So, in other circumstances, it might be legitimate?  That's a natural corollary of what you're saying. 

MR. BOUCHER:  Well, I'm not comparing and contrasting; I'm just saying that we've made our position clear and we stick by it. 

QUESTION:  So I take it they didn't --

QUESTION:  -- tell us about this UAE agreement is?

QUESTION:  I'm sorry, I have another one on --

QUESTION:  You want to keep on that?  Sure.

MR. BOUCHER:  We have another one back there, too.

QUESTION:  Has the US Embassy in Sanaa taken any unusual measures?

MR. BOUCHER:  As I said, they already operate at a very high state of alert.  They will constantly review their security posture.  If they take any measures that we could talk about, we would tell you about them.  At this point, I don't have anything to say. 

Mark.

QUESTION:  Richard, correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't the State Department Annual Human Rights Report have a category of extrajudicial killings, which are widely viewed among human rights groups as being against international humanitarian law?

MR. BOUCHER:  You can look at the State Department Human Rights Report to see what categories there are and how they are defined.

QUESTION:  And does the United States have a position on extrajudicial killing?

MR. BOUCHER:  We have taken positions on various things that have happened around the world.  As far as the events in Yemen, I'm not here to try to take a position on that.

QUESTION:  Is the opposition to targeted killings solely in the Israeli-Palestinian context, or is it a broader American opposition to extrajudicial killings?

MR. BOUCHER:  Extrajudicial -- I can't even say it.  Extrajudicial killings -- I think if you look in the Human Rights Reports you will find how those things are defined.  And certainly it is one of the concerns that we have had in many countries in terms of human rights violations.  But again, I think you can find the actual definition and the reasons for which the United States is opposed and the kind of offense we are talking about and not to -- I wouldn't take one particular definition and try to stretch it over every event, presumed or confirmed.

QUESTION:  Given the importance of what happened yesterday in Yemen, why do you have absolutely nothing to say about it?

MR. BOUCHER:  It is not an event that I am here to talk about.  I am sorry but we are just not in a position to talk about it for a variety of reasons.

QUESTION:  Well, can you talk about -- how about talking about the reasons why you're not in a position to talk about it?

MR. BOUCHER:  No.  Can't do that, either.

QUESTION:  Did the Embassy -- has the Embassy -- the Ambassador -- there were some reports yesterday saying that these people may have been involved in a plot to kill the Ambassador there.  Are you aware of any -- of any new threat or any threat to the Ambassador in Yemen?

MR. BOUCHER:  I don't have anything on that.

QUESTION:  Well, that's a bit different than -- that's not a no.  So you say -- we're supposed to write, "The State Department doesn't have any information on whether there was a threat against its Ambassador in Yemen," or, "The State Department doesn't want to talk about any possible threat"?

MR. BOUCHER:  You could say the State Department Spokesman didn't have anything to say when asked the question.  And if there is something -- I'll check on it.  I did not check on that specific element this morning and so I don't have a particular, specific answer to that specific question.  If I can get one, I will give you one.

QUESTION:  -- tell us about the UAE meeting?

MR. BOUCHER:  I know.  I'm glad somebody cares about something we can actually talk about.

QUESTION:  I mean, by the way, more than two sentences would be superfluous. 

(Laughter.)

MR. BOUCHER:  Oh, but I have so many wonderful sentences here.  All right. 

First of all, the Secretary has been very pleased to welcome Minister of State for Foreign Affairs, Sheikh Hamdan Bin Zayed of the United Arab Emirates.  Meetings this morning included a meeting with the Secretary and then the inaugural meeting of the US-United Arab Emirate Strategic Dialogue.

The United Arab Emirates have been a trusted friend in the region and critical partner in our efforts to promote regional stability and to advance the campaign against international terrorism.  We appreciate their solid efforts in this regard and the Strategic Dialogue demonstrates our mutual commitment at the highest levels of our governments to advancing our already extensive bilateral relationship. 

The Dialogue included participation from a broad, interagency group, including senior representatives from the Bureau of Near Eastern Affairs, Economic and Business Affairs and Political-Military Affairs.

The Secretary and Sheikh Hamdan focused on the discussion of the regional security, counterterrorism cooperation, export controls, proliferation questions.  Basically, they talked about the issues of comprehensive peace between Arabs and Israelis based on UN resolutions and the Arab League Summit communiqué, things like that.

And they talked about the status of the UN resolution and the excellent cooperation that we have bilaterally with United Arab Emirates.

QUESTION:  Did they talk about the Iraq situation?

MR. BOUCHER:  The status of the resolution in New York, yes.

QUESTION:  Does the strategic relationship have any bearing on whatever preparations the US might be making for war with Iraq?

MR. BOUCHER:  The strategic relationship is one of cooperation in many, many areas of security, and they reviewed that cooperation briefly but basically agreed that it was very good in any number of areas.  So excellent, wonderful -- words like that.

QUESTION:  Did the United States ask the UAE for any -- for the use of any facilities for a possible military operation in Iraq?

MR. BOUCHER:  As you know, the President and the Secretary have both made clear that we haven't made any decisions on military action, and so speculation about the use of bases for such action would be premature at this point.

QUESTION:  I'm not speaking -- I'm asking whether you asked them whether they would be willing to --

MR. BOUCHER:  I just said it would premature to do anything like that at this point.

QUESTION:  It would.  So you're not making any plans for an eventuality of possible war?  None at all?  You haven't approached anybody?  You know, the Saudi Foreign Minister is just answering questions on TV about this.  It's not because they've -- you know, the US has made no approaches to any government, including the UAE, about what might happen or what it might need or want in the event that --

MR. BOUCHER:  I didn't say that.

QUESTION:  Oh, okay.  So it's not -- it's only premature for you to talk about it from the podium; it's not premature for you to talk about it with other governments?  Is that it?

MR. BOUCHER:  We obviously prepare for a variety of contingencies.  We obviously prepare for -- in our discussions with other governments.  But to say at this point -- I was asked, "So, did you ask them for the use of bases in the event of military conflict against Iraq?"  And I said it would be premature to start speculating on questions like that for us.

QUESTION:  For us to speculate, not for you to --

MR. BOUCHER:  For me, as well.

QUESTION:  Hmm?

MR. BOUCHER:  For me, as well.

QUESTION:  But it's not premature for you to discuss it with them?

MR. BOUCHER:  We talk about our military relationship with other governments.  These relationships evolve.  They have a good foundation.  But we are not at the point yet of asking governments if we can carry -- you know, for particular aspects of a conflict that has not been decided upon.

QUESTION:  So you didn't, then?

MR. BOUCHER:  No, we did not.

Betsy.

QUESTION:  Do you have anything new and different today to say about the resolution? 

MR. BOUCHER:  New and different is a pretty high standard, Betsy.

QUESTION:  It's true. 

MR. BOUCHER:  Our discussions have continued.  The Secretary of State has been on the phone conducting his discussions with his counterparts.  He has talked to Foreign Secretary Straw, Foreign Minister Villepin, Foreign Minister Ivanov this morning, continues to discuss with them some of the particular aspects of the resolution.  And our mission in New York has continued to keep in touch with other members of the Security Council to work towards a resolution.

We are moving closer now to having a text that we think can gain broad support.  We think there is growing support in the Council for a strong resolution that makes clear to Iraq that it has failed to comply in the past, that it needs to comply with a tough inspection regime, and that there will be serious consequences if it doesn't. 

So we are taking into account the issues that have been raised and the items that have been raised by other governments, but it still meets our bottom line.  We would expect to circulate a revised resolution shortly and then proceed to a vote thereafter.

QUESTION:  Can you clarify "shortly"?

MR. BOUCHER:  No.

QUESTION:  Will the British co-sponsor?

MR. BOUCHER:  This is being discussed as a joint US-British text, yes, as one that we can both co-sponsor.

QUESTION:  On the same subject?

MR. BOUCHER:  Same subject.  Barry.

QUESTION:  I can't figure out Mexico's position, but you'd probably tell me to ask Mexico. 

MR. BOUCHER:  I would.

QUESTION:  But I would ask you, though -- I don't know who's on top of this, Fox or Castaneda -- but the Foreign Minister is speaking now, he thinks 14 or 15, except for Syria, would support this resolution.  Fox's office puts out a statement which sounds like the French position.

Anyhow, is the Mexican Foreign Minister on the mark in predicting such overwhelming support? 

MR. BOUCHER:  I'm not in a position at this point to predict a particular vote.  We are continuing to work with the other governments involved.  We continue to take into account their concerns in a resolution that we think can take into account their concerns and yet still do what it has to do in terms of what we have specified.

And as I said, I think there is growing support in the Council, but I don't have a vote count at this moment. 

QUESTION:  Is Mexico one of the countries that has concerns, still?

MR. BOUCHER:  You would have to ask the Mexicans that. 

QUESTION:  Richard, have the members of the Administration agreed amongst themselves on the text of the revised resolution? 

MR. BOUCHER:  The -- yes, and -- but you have to understand it's an ongoing and evolving discussion because, as we hear from others and hear back from others on things that we have proposed, then we get back in terms of other members of the Administration and decide how to go back.  So there's a back-and-forth discussion and an ongoing process in the US Government to make sure that we are all together as we go forward.

QUESTION:  Okay, if I could just follow up.  The Mexicans, as you know, said 14 out of 15 would support what they've been told, and others are predicting a similar level of support, and people in the UN are now saying that the problem is in Washington and not in the Security Council, that that's where the obstacle is.

MR. BOUCHER:  I don't know of any basis to say something like that. 

QUESTION:  Can I just -- I realize you don't want to be specific about this, but when you said in answer to Betsy's question you expect to circulate the draft shortly, are you still talking -- it hasn't slipped from what you said yesterday that it would be days, this week?  You're still hoping to get this thing out there so that it can be voted on, perhaps, by the end of the week, right?

MR. BOUCHER:  Something like that, yes.  I mean, it's hard to sort of game the whole timetable but --

QUESTION:  I know.  I just want to make sure that what you said yesterday hasn't changed --

MR. BOUCHER:  Yes.  "Shortly" is sooner than soon.  It's actually sooner than very soon.  So we'll see. 

QUESTION:  Richard, I mean, it's --

MR. BOUCHER:  In a matter of days?  Is that better for you?  I can't tell you precisely --

QUESTION:  Well, yesterday you said this week, and then today you say shortly.

MR. BOUCHER:  And I'll stand by it. 

QUESTION:  And -- okay. 

MR. BOUCHER:  Okay, this week.  Move all this forward this week.  That's what we're trying to do. 

Sir.  South Asia?  Same?  Nick. 

QUESTION:  Yesterday you said that most likely it's going to be a US-tabled resolution with support from Britain.  Now you're saying it'll be both.

MR. BOUCHER:  No, I didn't.  I said --

QUESTION:  So what changed?

MR. BOUCHER:  No, nothing changed.  I think I said yesterday the last version that we put forward, I think, was US-sponsored with support from Britain.  This new draft, I think we can expect the British to co-sponsor with us.  I think yesterday I reserved judgment on how we would come out on this particular iteration. 

Sir.

QUESTION:  Richard, according to The New York Times, Pakistani officials are saying that Karachi is the heart for al-Qaida and there are hundreds of al-Qaida still in Karachi apartments, and at the same time, paper also saying that Pakistani officials this week have released the ban by the US a Muslim leader in Pakistan and they said that Pakistan officials are saying that they have no evidence against him after 13 years in jail, and he is responsible for killing hundreds of people in Afghanistan and elsewhere.

Any comments? 

MR. BOUCHER:  As far as Karachi, I think we have spoken before about the situation there.  I don't have anything new to say about the situation in Karachi, nor about -- I think we have talked before about our extensive cooperation with Pakistan and its security authorities in terms of the crimes that have been committed against Americans, including Daniel Pearl, in Karachi and any other -- a lot of other security cooperation that we have with Pakistan.

As far as the specific release, that's not something I'd heard about or looked into.  So if I can get you something, I will. 

QUESTION:  And in Washington, Pakistani Ambassador is saying that his country will continue to support freedom struggle for the Kashmiris and they are not terrorists; they are freedom fighters.  At the same time, US is trying to calm down the both countries and solve the Kashmiri problem.  So where do we stand on --

MR. BOUCHER:  We stand exactly where we've always stood.  I didn't see those particular remarks, so I'm not going to try to interpret them for you.

QUESTION:  And one on -- during this auspicious Days of Celebration Diwali in India, Hindus are still under attack in Bangladesh.  Another Hindu temple was burned to ground last week, and Indian Americans or Hindus in this country are calling on the Secretary to step in and do something because minority Hindus are still under attack in Bangladesh. 

MR. BOUCHER:  I'll see if we have anything particular to say about that.

QUESTION:  And one more, finally, on Sri Lanka.  This week, Sri Lankan Government sentenced to eight years the leader of LTT.  Any comments on that?  And where does the peace process stand now?

MR. BOUCHER:  I'll have to check and get you an update. 

QUESTION:  The fuel is about to leave Singapore to DPRK, and you guys are not going to block this?  Or when can we expect a final decision?  I think the ship will leave in the coming days. 

MR. BOUCHER:  Yes, there is a shipment being loaded at this point, as scheduled, but I would have to say that the whole issue of delivery is still a matter under discussion between the US Government and other members of the Korean Peninsula Energy Development Organization.  The Executive Board includes us, South Korea, Japan and the European Union.  So we are still discussing it with our other partners in the organization.  No decision has been reached yet, but we would expect the board to decide to shortly on how to proceed regarding oil shipments.

QUESTION:  Do you know if there was an actual meeting of the board or that something that is done in phone calls between capitals?

MR. BOUCHER:  I'm not aware of a specific meeting of the board.  I would have to check and see if there's something scheduled.

QUESTION:  According to some people, there is a meeting of the NSC, the principals, to decide about North Korea policy today.  Do you know anything about that?  Will the Secretary go to it?

MR. BOUCHER:  I wouldn't be in the habit of confirming meetings at the White House, so you'd have to check there.  That was my answer yesterday when asked about another principals meeting.  I have not done so in the past.

Okay.  Dave.

QUESTION:  Can you discuss the Ukraine report that's gone to the Ukrainian Government?  It looks like it doesn't really reflect well on the president's actions there.

MR. BOUCHER:  Well, we have spoken in the past about President Kuchma's approval of this sale and our authentication of the tape.  So we know that that occurred. 

We sent a team out to look into the facts of the matter and try to get as much information as possible on whether the Kolchuga was transferred to Iraq.  They have come back. It was a US-United Kingdom Experts Team that went.  They completed their report.  They've handed the report to the Government of Ukraine today in Kiev and we've asked the government to answer some follow-up questions. 

So once we get that back, we will be looking at their answers, as well as the report itself, and factor that into our policy review in terms of our relationship and our future assistance and programs.  That is where we stand.

QUESTION:  On that subject, are there plans to show this report to anyone else before -- NATO, in particular?

MR. BOUCHER:  At this point, we're still deciding exactly, you know, where it should be circulated after we get the answers.

QUESTION:  There's no decision now on whether to give it to your allies --

MR. BOUCHER:  At this point, I don't have a decision on circulation of the report more widely.

Teri.

QUESTION:  If the US plans to take its own actions against Ukraine, as has been spoken about before, when do you think that'll happen, or at what point is that process?

MR. BOUCHER:  I don't know that there is a specific timetable.  There is not a specific timetable or date for making further policy decisions.  But certainly, the review of policy was awaiting this kind of report, waiting to see the kind of cooperation we might get, waiting to see the kinds of answers we might get from Ukraine, both during the team's visit, now that we've put some more to them.  And once we get that, all that will be factored into questions of policy.

QUESTION:  Can I ask about another subject?

MR. BOUCHER:  Are you on Ukraine or something else?

QUESTION:  About a half a dozen Members of Congress -- Maloney, Lowey, Waxman -- have written -- others have written the State Department, the Secretary -- saying that there's a $3 million cut in World Health Organization funding because of the Administration's objections to anti-abortion -- the Administration objections to pills that serve as an abortion device. 

Are you cutting funds now to the World Health Organization -- the Administration, I mean -- and is the Secretary in favor of doing this?

MR. BOUCHER:  The simple answer is no, we're not cutting off funding to the World Health Organization.

QUESTION:  I mean, $3 million worth?

MR. BOUCHER:  Well, there is the Kemp-Kasten Amendment and we have to look at how the funding is allocated or how we do fund.  But we wouldn't provide funding that was in violation of US law, but, at the same time, we're not cutting off the World Health Organization.

QUESTION:  Okay, so let me, let me see if I understand.  They say you're going to deprive the WHO of $3 million and they state their reasons, what they understand the Administration's reasons to be.  I think you're saying you're reviewing how the money is spent in this program, and if it isn't spent the way the Administration likes to see money spent, that maybe you will cut it off.  No?

MR. BOUCHER:  There is a US law that has been on the books since 1985, the Kemp-Kasten Amendment --

QUESTION:  Yes.

MR. BOUCHER:  It has been included in every Foreign Operations Appropriation since 1985.  </