Ask the Scholar
Document scope · 1 page
Scholar
Ask about this object, its catalog metadata, its source description, or the page inventory.
For page-specific OCR and visual context, open one of the page chats.
Scholar Source Context
Document identity
localId
158699518
label
[05/18/2000-08/29/2000]
core
doc
dtoType
document
citationUrl
pageCount
1
Source metadata
id
158699518
contentType
document
title
[05/18/2000-08/29/2000]
citationUrl
collections
Presidential Electronic Mail from the Automated Records Management System (ARMS)
Automated Records Management System (ARMS) Email from the National Security Council (NSC) Bucket
imageCount
1
hasImages
yes
source
import
hasTranscription
no
Source extras
naId
158699518
levelOfDescription
fileUnit
otherTitles
42-t-26444925-20140927F-003-003-2019
recordType
description
ocrSource
nara-archive
Single page context
seq
1
pageIndex
0
type
document
mediaId
b38f05270269c6ca
ocrText
ARMS Email System
Page 1 of 1
RECORD TYPE: FEDERAL (NOTES MAIL)
CREATOR: Leah F. Pisar ( CN=Leah F. Pisar/OU=NSC/O=EOP [ NSC ] )
CREATION DATE/TIME:18-MAY-2000 12:07:51.00
SUBJECT: conference call
TO: Brooke D. Anderson ( CN=Brooke D. Anderson/OU=NSC/O=EOP@EOP [ NSC ] )
READ: UNKNOWN
TEXT:
Summary of today's press call:
Talbott briefing this am on US-Russia relations (backgrounder. )
Ross back from ME. Don't know if he has briefed POTUS yet, but he
will.
1 year arms embargo on Ethiopia-Eritrea. USUN feels this is a big
victory in Security Council. Not
addressing whether or not this
is a "new type of sanction. "
Sierra Leone: 1) Jesse Jackson in Africa. Met with Obasanjo.
Travel to Liberia, Mali, Guinea and
possibly Sierra
Leone. 2) Sankoh is in hands of authorities, custody matter for their
govt. to address. USG is reviewing courses of action. 3) USUN:
Considering resolution in increasing # of troops (might come up
this afternoon.) More troops are on their way now. Our #1 priority at
the moment is the release of the
detainees.
POTUS will do Sunday, 7:00 Oval Office address on PNTR.
Also, it looks like we're set for the 12:00 conference call tomorrow.
Participants: State, Defense, Treasury, Energy, Commerce, USTR. The
number is 757-2105 and the pin is 2122.
ARMS Email System
Page 1 of 22
RECORD TYPE: FEDERAL (NOTES MAIL)
CREATOR: "U.S. State Department" <[email protected]> ( "U.S. State Department" <state
CREATION DATE/TIME:29-AUG-2000 22:07:04.00
SUBJECT: 000829 Reeker U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE DAILY PRESS BRIEFING
TO: [email protected] ( [email protected] [ UNKNOWN ] )
READ: UNKNOWN
Steven J. Naplan ( CN=Steven J. Naplan/OU=NSC/O=EOP [ NSC ] )
READ:UNKNOWN
TEXT:
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE
DAILY PRESS BRIEFING
INDEX
TUESDAY, AUGUST 29, 2000
Briefer: Philip T. Reeker, Deputy Spokesman
CUBA
1-5
Cuba's Senior Parliamentarian Denied Chance to Attend
Parliamentary Session
PHILIPPINES
5-7
American Seized in the Philippines / Safety Level of
Philippines for US Citizens
LIBYA
6
Libyans Willingness to Mediate in Case to Secure Mr.
Schilling's Release
RUSSIA
8-12
Edmond Pope Update / Charges Against Mr. Pope /
President Clinton's Discussions With President Putin / Secretary
Albright's Discussions With Foreign Minister Ivanov / Treatment
of American Citizens in Russia / Ambassador Sherman's Talks With
Russians
LIBERIA
11-12
Jesse Jackson's Offer to go to Liberia in Response to
the Four Journalists Who Were Jailed on Charges of Espionage
PEACE PROCESS
12-14
President Clinton's Meeting in Cairo With President
Mubarak / Prospects of Three-Way Summit in New York / Effort to
Get Palestinians To Back Down on September 13 Deadline /
Ambassador Ross' Meetings in the Region / Statement of Jerusalem
Committee of the Organization of the Islamic Conference
ISRAEL
14-16
Israeli Defense Ministry Officials Visit to Department
of State to Discuss Arms Exporting Agreement / Expectations of
the Visit / Sale of Military Technology
PERU
16-18
Civilian Trial for Amcit Lori Berenson / Concerns About
Peruvian Democracy
ARMS Email System
Page 2 of 22
SOUTH AFRICA
17
Explosion in Cape Town Near the US Consulate
MEXICO
18
Mexican Judge's Sentence of Human Rights Activist
UN
19
Senior State Department Official's Plan to Give Foreign
Media the US Objectives For Millennium Summit
GREECE
19
Signing of Protocol of Cooperation Against Terrorism in
Greece
CYPRUS
19
Talks Taking Place in New York City on September 12
HUMAN RIGHTS
20-21
Release Date For Annual Report on Religious Freedom /
Military Aid to Colombia
GERMANY
21
Arrest of Neo-Nazi in West Virginia
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE
DAILY PRESS BRIEFING
DPB #88
TUESDAY, AUGUST 29, 2000, 1:42 P.M.
(ON THE RECORD UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED)
MR. REEKER: Hi, everybody. Welcome back to the State Department
on this fine Tuesday afternoon.
I would just like to take an opportunity to welcome a number of
our colleagues from embassies around the world, our Foreign
Service National employees from a number of embassies who are
focused on information and press work. We are very happy to have
them here to watch this process, and I am sure all of our
journalist friends will be on their best behavior for our
international guests so that they can see what I have to go
through every day. Maybe I should have worn my flats.
I don't have any announcements so, Barry, please.
QUESTION: Could you tell us please why Cuba's senior
parliamentarian is being denied a chance to attend a
parliamentary session that begins tomorrow in New York? I mean,
I know the authority under a proclamation, and I know the
proclamation is being cited, but what is really behind it? Just
yesterday, we heard from the US, you know, complained about
arbitrary actions taken by Cuba. Why has the US decided now to
keep this man from going to a meeting in New York?
MR. REEKER: Let me start out by pointing out and reminding
everybody that Section 222 (f) of the Immigration Act clearly
states that visa records are confidential. So I don't want to
get into specifics of individual visas in terms of applications,
granting of visas or denials.
ARMS Email System
Page 3 of 22
In terms of the meetings that you are describing, those would be
meetings in New York of the Inter-Parliamentary Union. That
organization is hosting this meeting, not the United Nations; and
we, the United States, are under no obligation or requirement
under the UN Headquarters Agreement to issue visas to individuals
attending Inter-Parliamentary Union events.
Our decisions, in terms of issuing or not issuing visas, are
based on the Presidential Proclamation of 1985, which I think you
alluded to, Barry, which gives us authority to deny entry of
Cuban Government officials if such entry will be contrary to the
interests of the United States.
I will note that we have authorized the issuance of visas to some
Cuban officials who applied to travel to this Inter-Parliamentary
Union event and just reiterate, I think, as you did for me, that
these actions are in fact consistent with Secretary Albright's
January 1999 policy that we would, among other actions,
streamline visa issuance for qualified persons other than senior
Cuban Government officials.
QUESTION: I understand your - the proclamation gives you
authority. I was just hoping that we could get some explanation
why the attendance by the top parliamentarian is inimical to US
interest, but the attendance by two of his deputies is okay. It
does smack of arbitrary, the kind of arbitrary behavior you are
accusing - you and the Secretary were accusing Cuba of yesterday.
MR. REEKER: I think, once again, if you listen to what I said
just a moment ago, as the Secretary outlined in January 1999, our
policy is that we would, among certain other actions, streamline
the visa issuance for qualified persons other than senior Cuban
Government officials. So obviously the decisions that were made,
in terms of issuing visas for this independent event, this
meeting taking place in New York, were made within the lines of
the Presidential Proclamation going back to 1985 and within the
lines of the Secretary's policy on that.
QUESTION: So can I just get this straight?
MR. REEKER: Yes.
QUESTION: You are not allowed to say if you reject a visa for
someone, but you can say if you've given a visa to someone?
MR. REEKER: Generally, Matt, Section 222 (f) of the Immigration
Act says that visa records are confidential, SO we try not to
discuss
QUESTION: (Inaudible) - authorized?
MR. REEKER: Right. And I didn't go into specific names or
otherwise.
QUESTION: Well, then let's try it this way. Has a very senior -
has the most senior lawmaker in Cuba been denied a visa to travel
to the United States?
MR. REEKER: Under the policies which I outlined earlier, the
ARMS Email System
Page 4 of 22
United States and the Department of State determined not to issue
visas to some people that had applied. I am not going to get
into specifics of those who applied, those who were denied visas,
those who were granted visas for travel, in trying to keep with
the policy of confidentiality of visa records under the
Immigration Act.
QUESTION: Your reading of the law means that you can say that
some Cuban officials have been granted visas, but it does not
allow you to say that some have not, then; is that it?
MR. REEKER: I just said some have not been granted visas.
QUESTION: How many were denied?
MR. REEKER: I'm not going to get into specifics, and that's how
we're going to try to keep within the confidentiality of visa
records.
QUESTION: But for the record, it's not law, is it?
MR. REEKER: I'm sorry?
QUESTION: It's not a law; it's an executive action.
MR. REEKER: Section 222 (f) of the Immigration Act, that is a law
that makes visa records confidential.
QUESTION: I didn't mean that. I meant the action was taken
under a Presidential Proclamation.
MR. REEKER: Right, and in keeping with the Secretary's policy
from January '99.
QUESTION: That's what I meant.
MR. REEKER: Yes.
QUESTION: Is it not a contradiction of US policy to give these
kind of ideas with the Cubans when in this forum, for example,
you are promoting Cuba to participate with other countries,
democratic countries, to give them the idea how to --
MR. REEKER: Stop right there, because this is not something that
we're promoting. This is an independent event organized by
something called The Inter-Parliamentary Union. It's not a US
event. It's not a UN event. It's an independent event.
QUESTION: But you don't see that as an opportunity for other
countries to pressure Cuba in terms of helping their democratic
process?
MR. REEKER: I think we make our points about Cuba and how they
should open their minds and their processes to democracy often
from this podium. Certainly our policy on Cuba is very clear,
and I think a number of other countries from around the world
continue to make that point as well.
QUESTION: Phil, in New York, maybe the head, or at least one of
the senior people of these union, called this a disappointing
ARMS Email System
Page 5 of 22
action by the United States. Also, the matter of the United
States not paying its dues to this union was brought up. Is that
accurate? Is the US behind in its dues?
MR. REEKER: The Inter-Parliamentary Union is not an organization
to which the executive branch of government has a connection. I
would refer you perhaps to folks on the Hill if you want
something. It's not an organization that we --
QUESTION: I'm lost. Maybe dues is the wrong word, and obviously
I don't have a lot of background on the subject. Just what was
said up there today plainly was that they were encouraging the
United States to make up its dues or its shortfall in
contributions.
MR. REEKER: I'd be happy to try to get you somebody that may
know somebody about the Inter-Parliamentary Union but, again,
it's an independent organization. It's not the UN and it's not
something to which the Department of State or the US executive
branch is involved.
QUESTION: I know, but I'm also sure you're not trying to
diminish the importance of this meeting.
MR. REEKER: Not at all.
QUESTION: There were 141 governments there; by latest count, 155
parliamentary leaders; and Cuba is the host next year. So the
timing is somewhat strange.
MR. REEKER: Thank you for those comments.
QUESTION: Maybe I missed something here. You said that you have
the authority to deny entry to people if it's contrary to the US
interest. Can you just say in general terms why this is
contrary? I mean, all during the '80s you would say Arafat
couldn't have a visa because he hasn't renounced terrorism and
that's the reason.
MR. REEKER: Look. A determination was made. Each visa request,
each visa application, is taken individually and on its merits,
and a determination was made not to issue visas to some people
and to issue visas to other people.
QUESTION: I understand that. But what I'm asking you is what is
contrary to the US interest in the case? Not specific to a
person, but in general.
MR. REEKER: I'm just not in a position to describe our
deliberations on a specific visa case, but again to point out
that our actions and the way we review these are very consistent
with what the Secretary instituted in January 1999 in terms of
our policy that we would try to streamline visa issuance for
qualified persons other than senior Cuban Government officials.
QUESTION: You said that some were denied. Could you say how
many?
MR. REEKER: I don't have specific numbers, no.
ARMS Email System
Page 6 of 22
QUESTION: Can I ask you, even though it's not a UN event per se,
does a visa carry restrictions on travel and, in fact,
participation in other - in other words, would a visa - is a visa
to attend this meeting, this kind of conference, does it carry
with it restrictions on other activities and travel?
MR. REEKER: Each visa is issued individually, but I would remind
you that a visa provides the person permission to apply for entry
to the United States. Their entry and limitations on their
travel are then determined by the Immigration and Naturalization
Service at the time of entry to the United States at the port of
entry.
QUESTION: If you can't tell us how many visas were denied, can
you tell us how many visas were applied for?
MR. REEKER: I don't believe I even have that. I checked and was
told that we authorized the issuance of visas to some Cuban
officials who applied for travel to attend this meeting of the
Inter-Parliamentary Union, and that's all I have.
QUESTION: Different subject?
MR. REEKER: Different subject. Are we done with Cuba?
QUESTION: Can you tell us what you know about the American who
has been seized in the Philippines?
MR. REEKER: Yes. We understand that an emissary of the Filipino
secretary who has been the Philippine's chief negotiator for the
release of other hostages held by a faction of the Abu Sayyaf
group on Jolo Island has reported that he has seen Jeffrey
Schilling on Jolo Island in the hands of another faction of the
Abu Sayyaf group. So the United States strongly condemns this
latest kidnapping and we call for the immediate safe and
unconditional release of this hostage and the other hostages
still held captive as well on the Island of Jolo.
Our Embassy became aware of this situation early this morning
local time in the Philippines when there was a radio report that
reported or discussed the kidnapping of an American citizen. Our
Embassy consular and security officials immediately were in touch
with Filipino authorities in Manila, and our Embassy continues to
work very closely and intensely with the appropriate authorities
in the Philippines to try to determine all the facts in terms of
this case, and we're taking the appropriate action, including
sending several Embassy officials to Zamboanga on the Island of
Mindanao where they can meet with the local Filipino authorities
to discuss this. Obviously there are Privacy Act considerations
in terms of the individual who has been reported kidnapped and
the family there. We are trying to be in touch with the family
as well.
QUESTION: Any -- (inaudible) - his condition?
MR. REEKER: I don't have any details of his condition. As I
said, we have sent officials to work with the Philippines to look
into this. Now, I think yesterday I made very clear our position
on hostages. The United States does not makes deals with
terrorists, and this organization, the Abu Sayyaf group, is an
ARMS Email System
Page 7 of 22
organization which is listed in our Patterns of Global Terrorism
as one of the radical Islamic separatist groups operating in the
southern Philippines.
QUESTION: On that point, the Libyans have now - whose actions in
securing the release of the six hostages the other day, you have
said you disagree with it and this Department has said it
disagrees with, have offered, or said that they are willing to
mediate in this case to secure Mr. Schilling's release. I'm
wondering, is such assistance or such mediation welcome by the
United States?
MR. REEKER: I have seen those same reports, and I would just
refer you to what I said yesterday and what I said just now;
that, as we have said before, the US Government wants to see an
end to this ordeal and the release of all the hostages
immediately and unconditionally. We support efforts by
negotiators to find a quick resolution. We are extremely
concerned about the safety of all the hostages, and obviously
look forward to their release. But, again, as far as payingransom is concerned, US
deals with terrorists; we will not pay ransom; we will not change
policies; we will not release prisoners or make any other
concessions that reward hostage-taking.
QUESTION: Right. But, okay, how about if the Libyans said that
they're willing to mediate and they promise not to pay any ransom
in this case.
MR. REEKER: Well, again --
QUESTION: I'm trying to find out if you're willing to accept the
help of Libya in any form short of what you just said.
MR. REEKER: I think it's premature to make any specific
statements on any requests or offers or issues specifically
involving the case because we're trying to determine all the
facts. We have seen these reports involving Libya's apparently
positive role in other Filipino hostage situations.
And as I said, we support efforts by negotiators, whomever they
may be, to find a quick resolution to this case. We are
extremely concerned about the safety of this individual reported
to be kidnapped, and all of the hostages, and look forward to
their release.
QUESTION: In light of this kidnapping, how concerned is the
State Department about the safety level of the Philippines for US
citizens?
MR. REEKER: Well, I think all of you will be aware that we have
a Public Announcement in place as part of our consular
information system which highlights some of the issues and
specifically tells American citizens to avoid travel to the
southern and western areas of the Island of Mindanao. And I can
provide you copies of that, or you can find it on our website.
I think this highlights the dangers that we outlined and have
showed in those announcements for American citizens, and
certainly the tragic kidnappings that have been taking place over
a period of months and have been highlighted in the press make
ARMS Email System
Page 8 of 22
people quite aware of that.
QUESTION: Do you know when that last Public Announcement was
updated?
MR. REEKER: I believe June 8th was the most recent update of
that. And obviously given the current situation, they may be
updating it to include information on this specific incident that
does involve reportedly an American citizen.
QUESTION: So can you tell us nothing more about this gentleman
and why he was there and why he was traveling to the Philippines?
And also, can you rule out whether he was working for the US
Government?
MR. REEKER: In terms of your last question, it is longstanding
US policy not to comment on such questions in terms of
employment. But more generally, we have seen his name reported
and, at this point, we are operating on the presumption that this
individual, an American citizen, has been kidnapped. But in
terms of providing more information about that individual, we are
just not in a position to do SO given the Privacy Act
considerations Obviously that individual is not in a position
to do Privacy Act waivers, but we are trying to be in touch with
his family, with the next of kin, and it would just be
inappropriate at this point to give any information about the
individual.
QUESTION: There has been some confusion about the circumstances
under which he came to be in their control. There have been
reports that he was looking for these people, and there are also
reports that he was snatched. Do you all have any information?
MR. REEKER: I have seen all those reports, and I don't have
anything more specific on why he was in the area, other than to
point out the warnings that we have in terms of our Public
Announcement. Those are the kind of facts that I think our
Embassy team, working with the Filipino authorities, will be
trying to establish as they continue to look at this.
QUESTION: Have they talked to his wife?
MR. REEKER: I am not aware of the particulars of whether the
individual even has a wife. I do believe there are parents
involved as well that the Embassy and the State Department have
tried to be in contact with in our usual consular response to
notify next of kin.
QUESTION: I have one more. Are you aware of any demands being
made by the rebels in order to secure his release?
MR. REEKER: I have seen a number of reports to that effect,
including the initial media report that brought this to our
attention, which was monitored by our press staff at the Embassy
in the Philippines and what then had our Embassy officials
responding immediately and working closely with the Filipino
officials. But I am not in the position to outline or confirm
any specifics from that organization or what they have reported
to be demanding.
ARMS Email System
Page 9 of 22
QUESTION: Can you give a readout on Ed Pope? What's the latest?
MR. REEKER: Are we done with the Philippines and the situation
there? Okay.
I think most of you are aware that Mrs. Pope, the wife of Edmund
Pope, the United States citizen who is currently in jail in
Lefortovo Prison in Moscow, that Mrs. Pope spent an hour and a
half today with her husband this morning, in the prison there in
Moscow. She was accompanied by two of our consular officers from
the American Embassy in Moscow.
Mrs. Pope and her husband and the consular officers discussed his
health, the status of his legal case and other personal matters.
As we had noted, Congressman Peterson, who has been very helpful
in this case, is in Moscow accompanying Mrs. Pope. Congressman
Peterson was denied permission to join the visit with Mr. Pope at
the prison.
And I will just reiterate once again that Russia's treatment of
Mr. Pope since his arrest raises serious concerns about the
safety and security of American business travelers in Russia, and
about our ability to protect the health and welfare of American
citizens who may be traveling or living in Russia. And as we
have noted, we are continuing to examine the implications of
Russian actions very closely.
I will reiterate once again that we have seen absolutely no
evidence that Mr. Pope violated any Russian laws, and we are both
disturbed and concerned that he remains in custody. To the best
of my knowledge, no trial date has been set, and we believe, once
again, that the Russian Government should release Mr. Pope and
allow him to return home.
QUESTION: Can I follow up?
MR. REEKER: Sure, follow up.
QUESTION: Can you see, perhaps, how the Russians might view
this, perhaps what he was doing there? Apparently he was trying
to buy some hardware or technology which may be perfectly legal
and declassified but, in the Russian view, that could fall. into a
gray area? And second, are you at all in a position to ever
resolve this, or is it completely dependent on what the Russians
will do?
MR. REEKER: The charges that were brought against Mr. Pope on
April 13th were charges of violation of Section 276 of the
Russian Criminal Code, which deals with espionage. To date, the
Russian Government has not provided us with any details about the
basis of these charges. And once again, as we have said
repeatedly, we have seen no evidence that Mr. Pope has violated
any Russian laws, and that we are both disturbed and concerned
that he remains in custody. They have had plenty of time to
review this case, and our feeling is that the Russian Government
should release Mr. Pope and allow him to return home now.
QUESTION: In this particular case, Phil, can you say on the
record that he was not working for the US Government?
ARMS Email System
Page 10 of 22
MR. REEKER: Again, we have a position of not --
QUESTION: But you said he was a business travel. Was it not US
business?
MR. REEKER: Again, as I say, we make it a policy, as you know
very well, that we don't discuss those things. However, we are
not aware that Mr. Pope has violated any laws, to our knowledge.
No evidence exists that he has violated Russian laws, and we
believe he should be released.
Further on this subject?
QUESTION: You said that you were examining the implications of
this. Can you expand on that a little bit? What do you mean?
MR. REEKER: Well, it is something we had discussed here while
you were away, and at some length. It is the responsibility of
the Russian Government to provide for the care and well being of
US citizens who are under detention in Russia. We hold them to
that responsibility, and it is certainly our obligation to try to
see that that responsibility is carried out.
So we need to carefully look at the implications of what they
have done in terms of medical care, which has, in our view, not
been provided to Mr. Pope. I would add that we understand that
the medical examination was performed yesterday, in which a blood
sample was taken. That would be in line with what they promised
to do in terms of performing additional medical tests after their
prison doctor had met with our embassy doctor. That was August
15th.
Obviously all of our information about Mr. Pope's health is
secondhand because the Russians have refused to allow our embassy
doctor access. We continue to insist that the Embassy doctor and
an English-speaking specialist be allowed to see Mr. Pope. We
have asked to see results of the tests that were carried out
yesterday as soon as possible.
And again, it is our right to act to ensure that the protections
that the Russian Government is required to give are carried out.
Again, it is their responsibility to protect the welfare of
detained American citizens. And as I indicated, we have seen no
evidence that he has violated any laws there, and we are
disturbed and very concerned that he remains in custody.
Still on this?
QUESTION: Still on this, yes. In the past several weeks when we
brought this up, you have said that the President has taken this
up with Mr. Putin, that Secretary Albright has spoken with Mr.
Ivanov. Has there been any recent, last few days, conversation
at those kinds of levels?
MR. REEKER: I don't have any specific additional readouts on
that. You are correct, and we have talked about it here a number
of times that the President raised this with Russian President
Putin. The Secretary has raised this on several occasions with
her counterpart, Foreign Minister Ivanov. They will continue to
do so. Obviously this is being raised and pressed at the highest
ARMS Email System
Page 11 of 22
levels, and we will continue to keep it on the agenda for those
types of meetings and conversations.
Still on Mr. Pope?
QUESTION: I think there was an implication earlier on that maybe
the US would be less of a booster for Americans to invest in
Russia. Your statement said something, not only that you have
some thoughts about how Americans are treated, but I thought you
were implying that American businesspeople might be advised to be
careful before they --
MR. REEKER: I think obviously people have to take - make their
own decisions in terms of travel to Russia or any country. As I
said, it is the Russian Government's responsibility to see to the
care and well being of an American citizen or any country's
citizen that is being held in Russia.
Their treatment of Mr. Pope to date, since his arrest, certainly
raises some serious concerns about the safety and security of
American business travelers in Russia and about our ability to
protect the health and welfare of American citizens that are
traveling there or living there. And we have to continue to look
at the implications of that, and that is what we are doing,
watching that very closely.
QUESTION: Well, SO are you saying that US business travelers
should, when considering going to Russia, should kind of think
twice about going over there?
MR. REEKER: That is not exactly what I said, Matt. It is
something we have been --
QUESTION: I am trying to squeeze some nugget out of what you
said.
(Laughter.)
QUESTION: You're specifically mentioning business travelers;
you're not saying it raises the question of all people?
MR. REEKER: Actually, I did indicate that. I said, if we go
back to what I said - and I'm happy to check the transcript -
that the treatment of Mr. Pope since his arrest by the Russian
Government raises serious concerns about the safety and security
of American business travelers in Russia and about our ability to
protect the health and welfare of American citizens - if that
suits you better - all American citizens traveling or residing in
Russia.
QUESTION: At this point, though, a formal - some kind of
statement, public announcement, the kind of thing that you
released yesterday on Lebanon, for example, you're not at that
point yet?
MR. REEKER: You know, I would be happy to refer to our Consular
Information Sheet on Russia and see where it stands now, but in
terms of something specific, I don't have that. Obviously we
have to examine the implications of Russian actions as this case
is prolonged.
ARMS Email System
Page 12 of 22
Are we done with this?
QUESTION: Do you have anything on Wendy Sherman's talks with the
Russians today?
MR. REEKER: I don't. Ambassador Sherman should be in Moscow
today. I won't have a readout of those. She's there through
tomorrow. Perhaps once she's done with those talks - and then as
you will recall, Ambassador Sherman will move on for trilateral
talks with the Japanese and Koreans to be held in Seoul.
QUESTION: Another Pope for a second?
MR. REEKER: Yes.
QUESTION: Congressman Peterson, was he carrying any sort of
message or anything?
MR. REEKER: You would have to ask Congressman Peterson that.
QUESTION: He wasn't going with any word from the Administration?
MR. REEKER: No. I mean, we have worked very closely with
Congressman Peterson in terms of strongly supporting his travel,
which he's doing obviously in support of his constituents,
including Mr. and Mrs. Pope, SO we're very supportive of that.
We are in regular contact with his office and with other
congressional contacts who have expressed concern about this
case. To my knowledge, there is no particular US Government
funding for his travel. He is there as a representative of this
American citizen who is one of his constituents, and obviously so
is Mrs. Pope.
QUESTION: I keep thinking about just last week these four
journalists who were jailed in Liberia on charges of spying and
they were - you know, Jesse Jackson was saying he'd go over. Is
there anything being contemplated along those lines?
MR. REEKER: Well, I think as I indicated, this has been raised
at the highest levels. We have been talking about this for weeks
now in terms of the Embassy being very involved and whenever
possible making consular visits, pushing continuously for access
for our Embassy physician who could actually make an evaluation
of Mr. Pope's medical case. The Ambassador clearly involved.
Clearly we've been involved here in Washington too in terms of
contacts with Russian representatives at their embassy here.
And as we just discussed, the President has discussed this with
the Russian president and made our concerns very clear, and
Secretary Albright has raised this with Minister Ivanov. So I
don't quite see the connection with Liberia. We've been very
involved and keeping very close track of this case for quite sometime, since Mr. Pop
QUESTION: New topic?
MR. REEKER: New topic. Last chance on Russia?
QUESTION: "Time is short," quoth the President with regard to
the 13th of September deadline, and Mr. Ross says to keep an eye
ARMS Email System
Page 13 of 22
on settling the matter. What is the State Department currently
doing? Can you tell us about Mr. Ross and his work?
MR. REEKER: Well, let's just recap where we stand on the Middle
East a little bit. As you know, the President arrived in Cairo
early this morning to meet with President Mubarak to discuss the
Middle East peace process and determine how best to move forward.
The President met with President Mubarak during his refueling
stop in Cairo after learning that he, President Mubarak, won't be
coming to the Millennium Summit at the United Nations in New York
next week.
I think most of you would have seen comments by Ambassador Dennis
Ross, who said in Cairo that the main purpose of the two
presidents' meeting was to compare assessments on the kinds of
contact both we and the Egyptians have had with the two parties,
to compare notes and bring each other up to date, and to consult
on how best we can help the parties to move towards an agreement.
It was described as a very good meeting and, as President
Clinton said, we and all the parties understand that we need
Egypt's involvement and leadership and support to move forward
towards a real peace in the region.
QUESTION: Thank you.
QUESTION: How would you assess the prospects of a three-way
summit in New York next week?
MR. REEKER: I don't have any specifics on the individual
meetings that the President or the Secretary will have in terms
of the Millennium Summit next week and the UN General Assembly in
the following weeks. As we have talked about, clearly the Camp
David summit produced significant progress on all of the core
issues, and the Israelis and the Palestinians have resumed their
own direct discussions since the conclusion of Camp David. And
just to reiterate what President Clinton has said, we are ready
to support the process in any way possible. If the parties are
ready to make the tough decision, we're ready to bring them
together. But I don't have anything on set meetings or
specifics.
QUESTION: Do. you have any news or specifics about the lobbying
effort to get the Palestinians to back down on their September
13th deadline?
MR. REEKER: I think everything I pointed out was very clear.
QUESTION: It certainly was. However, the Israelis are saying
that Mr. Ross will be compiling - they call it a catalog, I guess
it's a summary of Camp David, putting things on paper. And as
you said, there was great progress there until, of course, the
thing collapsed. (Laughter.) I'm sorry - no, I mean, they were
making great headway and then it fell apart. (Laughter.) That
wasn't intended to be funny.
MR. REEKER: You certainly broke up the hall here.
QUESTION: I don't know why. You made progress and then you
stumbled over Jerusalem and the refugees. But what is the point
of the catalog, which is what I'm driving at? What are you
ARMS Email System
Page 14 of 22
attempting to do?
MR. REEKER: I'm not aware of a catalog. I've seen various press
reports. What I can say about Ambassador Ross - and I think this
will come as no surprise - that he is continuing his meetings in
the region. We do hope that he is getting some vacation time in
while he is there. He has, over the past ten days, met with
Israeli Prime Minister Barak, with Egyptian Foreign Minister
Moussa and with Chairman Arafat. Obviously he was in Egypt for
the presidents' meeting this morning there. And he continues to
meet with negotiators from both sides, and he'll continue to do
so through the end of his trip.
QUESTION: (Inaudible) - to be to meet with Barak and a report on
the Mubarak-Clinton meeting. Do you happen to know if that has
happened yet?
MR. REEKER: I don't have a further readout after the presidents'
QUESTION: But you have nothing on the - obviously you're
thousands of miles away, but you have nothing on the notion of
putting things on paper, which didn't work too well in
Shepherdstown, as I remember?
MR. REEKER: I wouldn't try to speculate on what kind of notes
Ambassador Ross keeps or what his way of meeting with and
discussing these issues with the negotiators would --
QUESTION: No, it sounded like more formal than that. It sounded
like the US, as the mediator, was trying to get - intended to put
on paper the areas of progress and hoping to build from there.
MR. REEKER: As I said, there was a lot of progress at Camp
David. I think we've talked that through. We're all quite aware
of where things stand and, as the President said, we are ready to
support the process in any way we can when the parties are ready
to make the tough decisions.
QUESTION: Do you have any reaction to the resolutions adopted by
the Jerusalem Committee meeting in Agadir, Morocco which calls
for the Muslim word but is Jerusalem?
MR. REEKER: No. I saw those statements, and let me say that the
statement of the Jerusalem Committee of the Organization of the
Islamic Conference reflects the members' understanding of the
sensitivity of the negotiations currently underway between the
parties. We appreciate attempts to make a constructive and
positive contribution to the success of these negotiations and,
as I said earlier, we certainly continue to support this process
and the resolution of all permanent status issues through direct
negotiations between the parties.
QUESTION: (Inaudible) - has been the process overall?
MR. REEKER: Well, we hope that all countries will encourage both
sides to build upon the successes, the progress that was made at
Camp David, and to make the difficult decisions that are
necessary to achieve a real comprehensive peace.
ARMS Email System
Page 15 of 22
QUESTION: There had been some concern expressed in this building
that what the Jerusalem Committee - well, some hope expressed by
this building that the Jerusalem Committee would not do anything
that might make it more difficult to talk about the negotiations
over the city. Is it your view that this, what they have come up
with, does in fact fulfill the hope of - that hope?
MR. REEKER: Again, I don't know if I can characterize it in the
way you want me to, but we do appreciate the attempts to make
constructive and positive contributions to the success of the
negotiations.
QUESTION: But that stops short of saying whether this was a
positive contribution. Was this an attempt that failed, or is
this an attempt that --
MR. REEKER: I think, again, I'm not trying to categorize as
failure or success somebody else's meeting. What I'm saying is
their statement - we were not a part of that meeting, obviously -
the statement of the Jerusalem Committee reflects certainly the
members' understanding of the sensitivity of the negotiations. I
think that obviously reflects some of what you were saying and
what we discussed before. And we appreciate attempts to make a
constructive and positive contribution. And, again, we hope - we
will continue to hope that all countries will encourage both
sides to build upon Camp David and the successes and progress
that we all saw there and to make those difficult decisions now
so that they can achieve a real comprehensive peace.
QUESTION: But you're not prepared to say that this was a
positive contribution to the process?
MR. REEKER: I think I outlined exactly our reflections on the
OIC meeting in Jerusalem. Anything further on that?
QUESTION: It is not on this, but it is on Israel. I guess on
Thursday, I understand, that the senior Israeli Defense Ministry
officials will be coming to this building to talk about what they
hope will be wrapping up an arms exporting agreement. Can you
give any kind of expectation, if you think that is going to be
done before the Barak-Clinton meeting? Can you talk about it at
all?
MR. REEKER: Yes. In anticipation of your presence here, I
checked into that. Upcoming talks between the US and Israel is
part of our continuing discussions that we began earlier this
month in response to the President's announcement after the Camp
David summit that we will: (1) conduct a comprehensive review to
improve our strategic relationship with Israel; to conclude a
Memorandum of Understanding regarding our bilateral assistance;
and consider assistance to upgrade Israel's security in view of
its withdrawal from Lebanon.
I think we talked about earlier the three days of discussions
that were held earlier this month which were intensive,
constructive, beneficial. But, at the time, we said that more
work needs to be done and we had planned to have additional
discussions. The present discussions are a continuation of that
work that we began in early August, and that is what will be
taking place with the group you described.
ARMS Email System
Page 16 of 22
QUESTION: Will you be talking at all about technology transfer
and the question of whether, if Israel builds its own military
technology, who it can sell them to? There has been talk about a
list of four countries: China, Russia, India and Pakistan.
MR. REEKER: Well, in terms of questions about Israel's - any
proposed arms sales or transfers, I would have to refer you to
the Israeli Government, obviously. I think our talks will focus
on the subjects that I listed. We are not engaged in any
discussions with Israel regarding US arms sales to any country.
QUESTION: We are not engaged regarding US arms sales?
MR. REEKER: Right. Just to clarify, he was asking about arms
sales generally SO I was making a point that we are not engaged
in any discussion about that. We do take into consideration the
effect on Israel's qualitative military edge when making our
decisions about arms sales to other countries. But US arms sales
policy is not a subject of these discussions at all.
QUESTION: How about Israeli arms sales policy?
MR. REEKER: I think, in broadly discussing the issues that we
outlined - that the President outlined - in terms of a
comprehensive review of our strategic relationship with Israel,
and a Memorandum of Understanding regarding our bilateral
assistance is what we will be talking about there. I don't have
anything more specific beyond that.
QUESTION: Also, you said that the present talks? This is right;
they begin Thursday?
MR. REEKER: Yes, exactly. Present, as in this is the set of
talks.
QUESTION: And they're how long?
MR. REEKER: I don't know. I don't have a specific set of --
QUESTION: But they are not open-ended days?
MR. REEKER: No. We had three days of discussions last time. I
would anticipate a similar session beginning later this week.
More on this?
QUESTION: No. This is Peru and Berenson.
MR. REEKER: Anything else on this? Middle East? Israel? I
know that you are not asking about Israel, Mr. Lambros, so,
Barry, please.
QUESTION: What about Peru and Greece? (Laughter.) Berenson.
Is the US obliged to - as people close to the family suggest - is
the US obliged to try to get her freed, even though her situation
has been eased a bit?
MR. REEKER: Well, let's talk about the case of Lori Berenson. I
think as I told some of you last night when news first emerged on
ARMS Email System
Page 17 of 22
this, that we are very pleased with the decision of the military
court in Peru to transfer from the military court system to
civilian court system her case. Since Ms. Berenson's conviction
nearly five years ago, we have maintained that the trial
proceedings against her did not meet due process standards, and
so we very much welcome the court's decision there.
My understanding is that the case has been transferred to the
National Prosecutor's Office, and that they will determine the
appropriate next steps and, in the meantime, Ms. Berenson remains
in prison in Peru. We had serious concerns, which we have
reported on in our Human Rights Report for Peru, about the
openness and fairness of trial proceedings in the military court
and, in fact, in cases related to terrorism in the civilian
courts.
And you will recall, Barry, that with the Organization of
American States and a number of our partners throughout the
hemisphere, we continue over a long period now to press the
Government of Peru to undertake serious reforms and ensure
democratization and transparency in a number of Peruvian
institutions, including the courts.
So this action by the military court is a welcome first step. We
hope there will be a just and expeditious resolution of this
matter, and we are going to continue to engage the Government of
Peru regarding just that.
QUESTION: If you believe the suggestion of the family and people
close with them, is that the US has an obligation to try to get
her liberated. Is that correct? A legal obligation? I know you
are looking for a better system and more justice
MR. REEKER: In terms of the development that we have seen today,
and obviously we - as I just said, we welcome that as a first
step.
QUESTION: Right.
MR. REEKER: And we hope that there is expeditious resolution of
the matter overall. We take no position on her guilt or
innocence. But we have maintained since the trial back in 1996
that the proceedings did not meet due process standards. And we
will continue to express our concerns regarding this matter to
the government, as well as our hope, as I have just said, for a
just and expeditious resolution to this.
So we welcome today's development in terms of the legal matter,
but our concerns about Peruvian democracy remain unchanged. And
as I indicated with the OAS and other partners in the region, we
will continue to press on those.
QUESTION: Because the civilian court is seen as a much more open
and transparent body, do you think that the State Department will
send or the Embassy will send some representatives to view
the trial, because it's
MR. REEKER: I know our consular officials always try to attend
trials. I don't know the specifics. Obviously we don't have a
readout yet on what the next steps are. It has simply been
ARMS Email System
Page 18 of 22
transferred to the prosecutor's office, and they will determine
the next steps. So it would be obviously premature to speculate
on what the next steps would be.
QUESTION: So in such cases where there is an American on trial
in a foreign country, will there be representatives to ensure
that she has a just and fair trial, and if they see that she's
not, what are the proper steps to take?
MR. REEKER: Well, my understanding is that Ms. Berenson has
legal representation in Peru, and obviously her legal
representation is exactly that. We would certainly monitor this
trial, just as we monitored the other one and highlighted our
concerns in terms of the serious shortcomings in terms of due
process and international standards in that case.
But right now this first step has been taken and the case has
been transferred to the prosecutor's office, and they need to
determine the appropriate next steps. She remains in prison, andI am not aware of a
be.
Anything further on this? Peru? Berenson?
QUESTION: Should I take it from what you just said that you have
no information on when the trial is likely, or could start, or
whether she is going to be transferred to Lima?
MR. REEKER: My understanding, again, is that Ms. Berenson
remains in prison in Peru, where she has been, and that the case
has been transferred from the military court system to the
civilian court system, but that the step for doing that was to
transfer the case to the prosecutor's office, and that they need
to determine the next steps. So I am not aware of the next step.
But as I said, we see this as a first step, which we are pleased
with, but we want to see what is going to happen next.
QUESTION: Do you have an update on an explosion in Cape Town
near the US Consulate?
MR. REEKER: Yes.
QUESTION: Any Americans injured, or what do you think it is
from, et cetera, et cetera?
MR. REEKER: No, I don't believe there were any Americans
involved or injured in that. We are aware of a bombing. We have
been in touch with our consulate in Cape Town. We are following
developments there, just as all of you are. I think the details
will have to come from the police and South African authorities
there in Cape Town, who are conducting, as I understand it, an
investigation.
The car bomb, as it appears to be -- the blast occurred a couple
of blocks away from the American Consulate in Cape Town, South
Africa. But we have absolutely no reason to believe that this
was directed against the US Consulate, and SO I just don't want
to speculate about targets or reasons. It is obviously something
that the local police there are handling. And for details, we
would have to refer to them.
ARMS Email System
Page 19 of 22
QUESTION: Can I ask another Peruvian question?
MR. REEKER: Sure.
QUESTION: One face-saving scenario is Berenson getting a guilty
verdict in a civilian court with a sentence of the time already
served or a suspended sentence. Is that something the State
Department would be content with?
MR. REEKER: I just can't speculate on what the next steps are.
I have described for you our pleasure with this decision by the
military court. It is something that we have been pushing for
nearly five years in terms of maintaining that the trial
proceedings didn't meet due process standards. And as I said,
the case has been transferred to the prosecutor's office, and
they have to determine appropriate next steps.
We are going to monitor this extremely closely, as we have all
this time. But I think that is really as far as we can go until
there is something more to actually comment on.
QUESTION: Phil, yesterday, a Mexican judge gave a sentence of
seven and ten years to a human rights activist, one of those who
receive international - (inaudible) - because he -- (inaudible)
-- favor of the Mexicans. Do you have any reaction to those?
MR. REEKER: I don't. I'm afraid I am not even aware of the
case, so it is one that if you want to give us the details, I can
try to have the Human Rights Bureau look into, or the Western
Hemisphere Affairs Bureau.
QUESTION: And quickly, a Senior State Department was supposed to
give to the foreign media the agenda - the objectives - of the US
about the Millennium Summit in New York. Do you have - it was
canceled. Do you have any --
MR. REEKER: No, I believe there were some scheduling problems,
and we still hope to have, at the Foreign Press Center, what we
call a "scene-setter" in terms of talking about US objectives,
and some of the things. I think, with the President traveling
obviously, they just may not have had the staff - the people that
were preparing for that. So watch the schedule at the Foreign
Press Center. And we will also try to have other briefings in
anticipation of next week's Millennium Summit, and the UN General
Assembly generally.
QUESTION: The Greek Minister of Public Order, Mikhail
Khrisokhoidhis, will be in town next week to sign with your
government the well-known Protocol of Cooperation against
terrorism in Greece. Do you have anything on that, or any
comment?
MR. REEKER: I don't have anything on that. And so I will turn
to my colleagues, who can see me in the camera in the European
Bureau, to look into that, and also in our Counter-Terrorism
Office, and we will look into it.
QUESTION: The Cyprus Talks will take place finally in New York
City September 12th due to the point that the Turkish Cypriot
Leader again is undermining the whole process, and the Greek side
ARMS Email System
Page 20 of 22
already protested today to the UNFICYP.
MR. REEKER: A slight editorial comment. (Laughter.) I don't --
QUESTION: You should be aware of what is going on. Nobody
knows.
MR. REEKER: I don't have anything specific. I would refer you
to the United Nations for details on the Cyprus Talks. We have
always agreed that we won't comment on those talks, and I don't
have any details on when the talks were resuming, or what the
status of those talks is.
QUESTION: When would you plan to release your annual report on
religion?
MR. REEKER: Our Annual Report on Religious Freedom I expect to
be released on Tuesday. But we will certainly put out a notice
to the press to allow you ample time for that. It is an annual
report that has a specific time frame in terms of reporting to
Congress, and then obviously making available public copies of
that.
QUESTION: After the -- (inaudible) --
MR. REEKER: That is the date that we are looking at. I just
don't have any specific details for you. We will certainly get
back to you on that and expect to provide you with copies and a
full briefing on that.
QUESTION: Do you have any comment on the concerns voiced
yesterday by Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, in the
Washington Office of Latin America, about the fact that the human
rights of conditions have been waived - actually the conditions
imposed by Congress, in connection with the military aid being
sent to Colombia? This is seen as a green light being given to
the government to continue its --
MR. REEKER: First, I think we addressed it in great deal when
the announcements were made last week, but let me just say that
the challenges faced by Colombia are a matter of national
security interest to the United States. We have certainly
discussed that at great length.
Our assistance package is crucial to maintaining our counter-drug
efforts there, and to helping the Colombian Government and people
to preserve Colombia's democracy. Moreover, the United States
has important interest in promoting economic reform, protection
of US citizens, hemispheric stability, all of which are addressed
by our support for Colombia, and by our financial support through
Plan Colombia.
Human rights, as we have made very clear here, is a central issue
in our bilateral relations with Colombia, and we are going to
continue to engage with the Colombians - with the Government of
Colombia on the concrete measures that that government should
take to meet the certification conditions, and to improve its
human rights performance.
We continue to press the Government of Colombia to achieve
ARMS Email System
Page 21 of 22
tangible results in these areas, and we are going to carry out a
continuing series of consultations with the nongovernmental
organization community regarding human rights and humanitarian
issues in Colombia. I think we have always seen such
discussions, which we have had on an ongoing basis for a long
time, as a very positive exchange of ideas which truly help to
advance our mutual desire to assist Colombia in improving its
human rights environment.
As a number of people noted last week, we feel that the
government of President Pastrana is making a very good faith
effort to pursue that, and we are going to continue to work very
closely with them on that.
QUESTION: You said you are going to continue to consult with the
groups like she mentioned. They - yesterday, in the press
conference - gave us a document that was given to the State
Department, and they are very disappointed with the answer they
get to that report.
MR. REEKER: That is their right to be but, as I just told you
now, our position hasn't changed on that. We take human rights
as a central issue in our bilateral relationship with Colombia,
and we are going to continue to make that a major focus of our
relationship and indeed our aid and support for Colombia.
QUESTION: They give the name of five specific generals that are
working now in Colombia that they have concerns about their
relations with human rights' abusers, like the paramilitaries.
Have you given any advice to the Pastrana government about the
activities of these five generals?
MR. REEKER: I am not aware of the list. I am not aware of
specific individuals. That is obviously part of the reason for
our dialogue with these organizations, and why we find it
extremely useful. And it is something that we have done, not
just on Colombia, but on many, many countries, and many, many
issues, particularly in terms of human rights.
So those dialogues are useful; the information they can provide
us is useful. It is the kind of thing we follow up on, but I
just don't have the specifics on it. What I can tell you is that
we take this very seriously. This is a central issue in our
bilateral relationship with Colombia. It obviously will be a
major factor in our relationship as we continue to support
Colombia with our assistance package, and the counter-narcotics
efforts, and all of these issues which are really an important
matter of national security interest to the United States.
QUESTION: Did this building - are you aware of this building
having any involvement in the arrest the other day, or yesterday,
of this German neo-nazi in West Virginia?
MR. REEKER: I am not. I saw the report and photograph in some
of the local papers, but I am not aware of that. I think you
would want to talk to the Justice Department or law enforcement
agencies.
Thank you.
ARMS Email System
Page 22 of 22
(The briefing was concluded at 2:40 P.M.)