97/12/31 Daily Press Briefing

The State Department web site below is a permanent electronic archive of information released online from January 1, 1997 to January 20, 2001. Please see www.state.gov for current material from the Department of State. Or visit http://2001-2009.state.gov for information from that period. Archive sites are not updated, so external links may no longer function. Contact us with any questions about finding information. NOTE: External links to other Internet sites should not be construed as an endorsement of the views contained therein.

U.S. Department of State

Daily Press Briefing

CUBA/BAHAMAS
1-5	Status of Cuban Nationals Picked Up by US Coast Guard in Bahamian Waters
5	--Prospects for Cuban Nationals Coming to US

IRAN
5-6	Reports of Test Fire Engine of Ballistic Missile/Weapons of Mass Destruction/
	Iran and US Dialogue

RUSSIA/IRAN
6,7-8	Reported Missile Cooperation
6	Ambassador Wisner's Travel to Russia

TURKMENISTAN/ IRAN
8,9-10	Gas Pipeline Project/Feasibility Study/ILSA Sanctions

AFGHANISTAN
10	Situation/Future for Afghanistan

ZAMBIA
10	Release of Former President Kuanda

IRAQ
11,12-13	Reported Mass Executions at Iraqi Prison

ISRAEL
13	Israeli Defense Minister's Comments re Increasing Settlement Construction

IRAN/IRAQ
13-14	Status of Iran-Iraq Bilateral Relations

MR. FOLEY: Good afternoon. Welcome to the last State Department briefing of 1997. I know you're anxious for a quick briefing so that the festivities may begin, after you've had an opportunity to file. So I have no announcements, and would be happy to take your questions.

QUESTION: Could you tell us what you're doing on behalf of Orlando Hernandez?

MR. FOLEY: I'd like to review the events of the last 24 hours involving the Hernandez case.

Orlando Hernandez Pedroso, who, as you know, is the half-brother of the Marlins' pitcher, Livan Hernandez, was among a group of eight Cuban nationals found in Bahamian waters by the US Coast Guard on Sunday, December 29.

Per normal procedures, the Coast Guard notified Bahamian authorities of the location of the eight individuals. Again, also in conformity with normal procedures, Bahamian authorities requested Coast Guard assistance in rescuing the eight and bringing them to Bimini. A Coast Guard cutter picked up the group the following day, and found everyone in good health.

They were transferred to a larger cutter, and delivered to Bimini late in the morning of yesterday, Tuesday, December 30, where they were turned over to Bahamian immigration authorities, and placed in a holding facility for undocumented foreign arrivals.

When the Department learned that Orlando Hernandez was among the group of eight, our Embassy in Nassau sought and received permission from the Bahamian Government to interview him. The Bahamian authorities granted permission to talk to all members of the group. We learned that Orlando's common-law wife, also catcher Alberto Hernandez and others had accompanied him in leaving Cuba. All are in excellent health, and stated that they have been treated well while in the Bahamas. All expressed an interest in coming to the United States.

I would remind you that United States policy is to promote safe, legal and orderly migration from Cuba. This policy has saved many lives over the past three years by discouraging unsafe sea voyages.

Cuban nationals interdicted at sea, or who enter the Guantanamo Naval Base illegally are returned to Cuba, provided they have no protection concerns. However, those with well-founded fears are not returned. In this case, Orlando Hernandez and others are in the Bahamas. As a general matter, individuals claiming the case of persecution are interviewed by a representative from the Office of the UN High Commissioner for Refugees. Bahamian authorities have indicated there are no plans for immediate repatriation.

As you may know, Orlando Hernandez and Alberto Hernandez were both banned from playing baseball in Cuba as a result of Livan Hernandez's defection in 1995. Given the special circumstances involved with these cases, the State Department wanted to interview Orlando and the rest of the group of eight in order to have as much information as possible about their cases. This information is currently under review, and no decision has been made regarding the disposition of these cases.

I would like to say on behalf of the United States Government that we appreciate the cooperation of the Bahamian government, and we would like to reiterate that this group of Cubans remains safe and in good health.

QUESTION: Are you concerned about Livan's mother, who's apparently here on a 90-day visa, which will shortly expire?

MR. FOLEY: Well, that's a separate question altogether from the one I've been addressing. I'd be happy to take the question and look into it, though.

QUESTION: So you're not prepared to say that he's a candidate for refugee status, in view of the fact that he has had a very difficult time in Cuba since, I believe, 1996. I believe he's been banned from baseball, and as far as I know, he's been unable to work. Wouldn't that seem to indicate that he could well be a candidate for refugee status?

MR. FOLEY: Well, we do believe that this is a case involving special circumstances. First, he has close ties to the United States. His brother is, obviously, a well-known sports figure in this country. But more significantly, the fact is that he has suffered, already, reprisals in Cuba as a result of his brother's defection in 1995 -- including being banned from playing baseball in Cuba -- and he's certainly been subjected to harassment.

He expressed a strong fear that he might be repatriated to Cuba from the Bahamas before having a chance to explain his situation to US authorities. Under existing policy, the State Department can neither confirm nor deny requests for asylum. Under US immigration law; however, asylum can only be requested and granted to aliens who are physically present in the United States.

Individuals who are outside the US, who are in need of protection, are normally processed by the country where they are located. But we are reviewing possible US Government responses in this case, given the special circumstances involved, and also given the fact that the Bahamas has a repatriation agreement with Cuba, under which illegal arrivals who have no protection concerns are returned to Cuba.

Now, as I indicated, we've received assurances from the Bahamian authorities that repatriation is not going to happen in the immediate future. However, given the fact that there is this repatriation agreement, and given the special circumstances involved, we did, number one, seek to interview Mr. Hernandez and the others, and we are reviewing our options.

QUESTION: So even though you physically - theoretically, physically have to be present in the United States to seek asylum, there may be circumstances under which asylum could be granted in this case; is that what you're saying?

MR. FOLEY: Well, I wouldn't want to describe the technical term involved. We have options. "Asylum," as defined, strictly speaking, as I indicated, can only be offered in the case where the individual involved is present in the United States. So that's not the technical term here. But there are special circumstances here. There is, we believe, a well-grounded fear of persecution if he had to go back to Cuba, and we're certainly going to take that into consideration as we review our options about the possibility of his being brought into the United States.

QUESTION: If he weren't the brother of a famous baseball player, would you - or would the Coast Guard have just immediately returned them to Cuba?

MR. FOLEY: Well, this came at the request of the Bahamian authorities, as I indicated. I can go through the chronology again.

QUESTION: No, no, I'm just saying - I mean, when the Coast Guard picks up other Cuban boat people in other waters - Bahamian or otherwise - do they normally return them directly to Cuba?

MR. FOLEY: I think there are two answers to your question, coming at it from different ways. First of all, what the Coast Guard would do in a specific case would depend on the location of the refugees. In this case, they were in Bahamian waters, in a cay - the Anguilla Cay. So in those circumstances, the normal procedure is to alert the nearby authorities and to request guidance from them. They requested that the aid be brought into the Bahamas; that's number one.

Number two, the United States did not have knowledge that Mr. Hernandez was on this boat at the time that the Coast Guard acted as it did. We were informed of this later yesterday, I believe.

QUESTION: Do you consider the whole group of them a special case, or just him?

MR. FOLEY: Well, we have talked to all eight, and are weighing the circumstances of all eight. I couldn't comment on the disposition of all the cases, including Mr. Hernandez's, until we've completed our review.

QUESTION: I didn't ask that, though. You've been - referred several times to special circumstances.

QUESTION: And my question is, do you consider that only Hernandez is the special circumstance, or the others as well?

MR. FOLEY: I couldn't -- as I said, we've interviewed all the eight. We're weighing each case on its own merits, and I'm not in a position to describe what option we may choose in all those cases. But we're going to determine each on its own merits.

QUESTION: And you talk about persecution, and all I heard you say was this man has not been able to work. Now, I suspect - and I would have to go back and sort of look at the files - but that there have been Cubans who have tried to come to this country, who have been intercepted in waters, and who have had trouble working in Cuba. I wondered, it just seems to me that this may be an instance where he's given very special consideration because of his skill.

MR. FOLEY: Well, we have an immigration agreement with Cuba that we believe, as I said, promotes the safe and legal and orderly migration of Cubans to the United States. That accord has been very successful, and the tragic incidences of deaths and injuries and losses at sea have been dramatically reduced as a result of that agreement and that policy.

However, those accords deal with Cubans who are interdicted at sea, or who enter the Guantanamo Naval Base illegally. In implementing the agreement, the accords, the United States has always acted in accordance with international standards regarding the protection of individuals who have a legitimate fear of persecution.

However, Cuban nationals in the Bahamas do not fall within the purview, technically speaking, of this agreement.

QUESTION: I mean, this man hasn't been tortured or anything, as near as you know.

MR. FOLEY: Well, I would dispute your premise, though, that what is involved is merely a case of employment. The man has been subjected to harassment, significant harassment, in Cuba. He has a very strong fear of additional and increased persecution, should he be sent back to Cuba in this case. We're taking that concern very seriously, and we'll act on that basis.

MR. FOLEY: I don't have that specific information. We can look into getting that for you.

QUESTION: You said you were reviewing the possible responses. What are the possible responses?

MR. FOLEY: I'd rather not get into that at this stage. We're looking at our options. As I said, those options will take account of the special circumstances and his fear of persecution, if returned to Cuba, and we're going to act accordingly.

QUESTION: Has any Cuban allowed to stay in the Bahamas been granted permission to come to the United States?

MR. FOLEY: I don't have that information. I'd refer you to Bahamian authorities. If we have that information, I could make that available to you.

QUESTION: Technically, the immigration agreement does not apply because it's only for people in Guantanamo intercepted at sea, but they have been intercepted at sea.

QUESTION: Because it's Bahamian waters, you do not consider it to be at sea, because it's inside of the --

MR. FOLEY: That's right. It's not -- it doesn't fall, as I said, within the purview of the agreement.

MR. FOLEY: I'd have to consult with our ambassador in Athens (laughter) on that before pronouncing myself officially.

QUESTION: Another subject -- Iran. Did Iran test fire the engine for a ballistic missile earlier this month?

MR. FOLEY: Well, as you know, Carol, in instances such as these, our assessments of Iranian missile capabilities, or tests, or anything of this nature, would be based on intelligence information, which I cannot discuss.

QUESTION: Yes, but it goes directly to the discussion and the debate that has some relevance on the public these days, which is, is Iran serious about having a dialogue with the United States, and is this a good idea for the United States to undertake? And this is a factor that needs to be weighed.

MR. FOLEY: We take reports of Iran's seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction and their means of delivery extremely seriously; and indeed, this factor is one of three -- also including Iranian support for terrorism, violent opposition to the Middle East peace process -- as sort of the triad of concerns we have with Iranian actions. And that has not changed.

At the same time, though, on the issue of a dialogue with the Iranian Government, we have stated, since the Bush Administration -- and it was repeated by President Clinton in his recent press conference here at the State Department -- our openness to dialogue, an authoritative dialogue with Iranian Government representatives. We've also indicated that in the framework of such a dialogue, that while we would be open to discussing issues of concern on the part of the Iranian representatives, that we would be addressing ourselves, first and foremost, to these three significant areas of concern.

So, in other words, our areas concerns and the issue of dialogue are not in any way mutually contradictory, because if we get to an official, authoritative dialogue with Iran, we would be raising these concerns.

QUESTION: Is Frank Wisner planning another trip to Russia to talk about these issues?

QUESTION: And do you believe - have you come to some conclusion yet about whether or not Russia is - the Russian Government is turning a blind eye to efforts to help Iran with missiles?

MR. FOLEY: Well, I can't discuss the specifics of that dialogue and the mechanism that has been in place to deal with these concerns.

What I can say is that, first of all, we take reports of transfers that might contribute to Iran's missile program very seriously. Secondly, we are aware that the Russian authorities themselves have detected some missile-related cooperation between Russia and Iranian entities. So there is a problem that the Russian authorities have recognized. We have raised our concerns repeatedly and at the highest levels of the Russian Government, and we have been assured by them that it is Russia's policy to meet its MTCR commitments.

As you indicated, we've established a mechanism to pursue with Russia the matter of Iran's efforts to acquire missile technology. We're working very hard to resolve this problem. As you indicated, as I confirmed, Ambassador Wisner is hard at work on this issue, and will be meeting again with his Russian counterparts.

QUESTION: But this has been going on for a number of months. Has there been any tangible evidence of results?

MR. FOLEY: Well, again, in the nature of both our diplomatic undertaking and the separate question of intelligence assessments and capabilities, these are not things that I can address from the podium.

QUESTION: Well, I mean, you are willing to say that the Russians acknowledge a problem; you're willing to say that Wisner is going again in January, because there's obviously more to talk about. I mean, I can't understand why you're not - if you feel that there's been some tangible progress, tangible new cooperation by Russia on this issue, why you wouldn't say it. I mean, because it leads one to the conclusion that there is no progress, and that your talk has not proved fruitful.

MR. FOLEY: Well, as I said, the Russian authorities have detected some instances of such missile cooperation. Therefore, we believe they're seized of the problem. They're working with us; we're working together to address the problem. It's an ongoing dialogue, and we're not in a position now to step forward and announce the results. Certainly, if it's determined that entities have engaged in sanctionable activity, we will apply the law.

QUESTION: Two things - first of all, have the Russians told you that in the event that they are satisfied that there has been cooperation by Russian entities, that they oppose such cooperation; that they're against it?

MR. FOLEY: Certainly the Russians have made clear that they oppose this kind of activity. They're working to compile information on the subject. We're working together with them, sharing information. We believe that they share our concerns. They've stated so, I believe, publicly, and we're working together on it.

I just am not in a position, though, to get into any kind of detail about our dialogue with the Russians on this subject.

QUESTION: Do you have any idea when this will come to resolution? I ask partly because of Congresswoman Harman's resolution, which was overwhelmingly passed by the House, urging the Administration to impose immediate sanctions on the Russian companies that are named in The Washington Post today.

MR. FOLEY: Well, we share the concerns of the Congresswoman, and that are generally shared in Congress. We have opposed congressional efforts to restrict assistance to Russia on the basis of such concerns because we believe that our assistance is directly related to strengthening our national interests.

But on the question, though, of sanctioning of entities that have been found or deemed to have been involved in such transfers, as I said, we will apply the law if we're able to determine that there has been sanctionable activity.

QUESTION: If that activity has been by the Russian space agency, would that lead to an end of cooperation on Mir and other US-Russian projects?

MR. FOLEY: We believe those projects are in our mutual interests. As I said, I'm not prepared to discuss the specifics of our dialogue with the Russians on this subject. We will apply the law if we determine that sanctionability applies.

QUESTION: What about the related Iran - still Iran, if that's all right; if I could just continue for a minute. You, in an earlier briefing in the last few days, talked about pipelines; and said - if I remember correctly - that on the question of the Shell oil company's work on the feasibility of a pipeline between Turkmenistan via Iran to Turkey, that was an issue that the US is looking at, waiting to see more on, and still waiting to determine whether or not it would be a violation of ILSA and would lead to sanctions.

Looking through a file, I found that Assistant Secretary of State Alan Larson is quoted as having said in July that the US would not sanction gas purchases by Turkey from Turkmenistan via a pipeline running across Iran. So in fact, has the Administration already decided not to sanction such a pipeline?

MR. FOLEY: No, that's not true that we - I'd have to see the specific quote to know what precisely you're talking about. But we did not say, I believe, at the time - and we're certainly not saying now - that this would not be a sanctionable activity if it came to fruition.

I believe we said then, as I can repeat now, that we will examine the project in light of applicable law at the appropriate time. What that means is that a feasibility study has been announced. I don't believe - and I stand to be corrected by my betters in the building if I misspeak - but I don't believe that a feasibility study as such falls within the purview of the law.

If it came to the stage of execution, which we hope it would not, since we made clear our opposition to the construction of such a pipeline across Iran, then we would have to face that decision and make it in light of the law.

QUESTION: The pipeline that is being - apparently, some construction is already going on. Haven't they found a loophole, in the sense that the understanding between those who are working on it is that Iran will pay for all of the construction inside Iran, thus avoiding a violation of --

MR. FOLEY: I'm not aware of whether construction has begun or not on this proposed pipeline. I've only seen the press reports that I think you're referring to also, which indicate only that a feasibility study is being launched.

There was a separate question -- remember, when this story was generated earlier in the week, two pipelines actually were involved. There's another pipeline that involved the transport of Turkmen gas to Iran that was just opened earlier this week, that I noted at the time was a project that well predated ILSA by two years, and so the law does not apply in that case.

QUESTION: Is The Washington Post correct today that there is considerable debate and disagreement within the Administration over whether or not to apply sanctions against Total and some of these other potential third-nation investments in Iran?

MR. FOLEY: Well, you won't be surprised that I'm not really prepared to comment on purported positions, purportedly taken privately by administration officials. There is a lot of speculation in that article which is not supported in fact.

I can tell you that we take our responsibilities under ILSA extremely seriously; the law is the law . A deliberate process is underway, under which, first, we are assessing the facts. Secondly, we are assessing the facts in light of US law and US national interests, strictly in conformity with the law. And lastly, I can assure you that no decision has been taken.

The Secretary of State is assembling a body of evidence and a body of recommendations, and will make her determination at the appropriate time. It has not been made. Any reports to the contrary are incorrect. And she will make that determination fully in accordance with the law.

MR. FOLEY: Well, the act itself, the ILSA act, does not provide an expressed deadline for making the determination. So I can't tell you when it will be completed, but it's being pursued very vigorously and seriously.

QUESTION: That pretty much was my question, but let me go a little further. In Martin Sieff's article, those players in the State Department that are mentioned in this decision-making, can you say at all, is this report accurate that Mr. Eizenstat favors the waiving of sanctions for the Total deal and so does Mr. Pickering and so does Strobe Talbott? Can you say - respond to those reports?

MR. FOLEY: I'd be glad to repeat what I said to David, which is that that article, as well as the others, are highly speculative, and much of the speculation in those articles is unfounded.

QUESTION: A few weeks ago, you had some visitors from Afghanistan - Taliban.

QUESTION: They met with officials of the State Department. Bombings are still going on in Afghanistan. So now, 1997, year in review, the last day, what is the future of Afghanistan; civil war will continue?

MR. FOLEY: Well, we can certainly say that the past of Afghanistan has been tragic, particularly for the people of Afghanistan; and we wish them in 1998 a better future.

Efforts are underway, promoted by the United Nations, which the United States fully supports, to bring the parties together; to urge them to see reason and to think, first and foremost, of the needs of their people and not factional interests; and that they agree to end the violence and to form a broad-based government. We believe that is the only solution possible, beginning to address the real needs of Afghanistan -- economic recovery, national reconciliation, an end to human rights violations, eradication of the narcotics production and development, all of these issues of concern to the international community.

QUESTION: You still don't support the Taliban government, or formal government?

MR. FOLEY: We don't recognize any one faction as the government of Afghanistan. As I said, we urge all the factions in Afghanistan to agree on the constitution of a broad-based government.

QUESTION: There was a report that Kenneth Kaunda was being released from jail, but kept under house arrest and banned from politics. And I wondered what you knew about that and how you felt.

MR. FOLEY: Well, at a press conference today in Lusaka, President Chiluba announced that he would sign a "restriction order," he called it, placing former President Kaunda under house arrest at his residence in Lusaka. According to our information, these restrictions include the following: first, prohibitions on political activity; second, prohibitions on interviews with the press and "loitering" by unauthorized individuals within 100 meters of the Kaunda residence.

I've just seen press reports coming in here that he has been released. If it's true, then we would welcome that development. However, we remain extremely concerned about his condition; and also, I might add, about the validity of the charges that have been made against him. The government of Zambia has not presented any evidence that former President Kaunda was involved in coup plotting. So we call upon the government of Zambia to present immediately and publicly any evidence of Mr. Kaunda's alleged complicity in the plot coup. We also urge the government, as well as the opposition, to take all necessary steps to promote political dialogue and advance the cause of democracy in Zambia.

QUESTION: Do you think these restrictions are too onerous; is that what you're trying to say?

MR. FOLEY: Well, insofar as he's been released from prison, that he's out of prison, we applaud that. But we think that the next step is for the government to put the facts it claims to have on the table. It's a serious matter. Former President Kaunda is an extremely respected international figure and statesman, and we believe that the cloud that continues to hang over him ought to be clarified and lifted. And the only way to do that is for the government to present its evidence publicly and immediately.

QUESTION: A couple weeks ago, I think it was, somebody asked you about executions in Iraq, and I don't know that there was ever a reply -- about whether you agreed with what opposition figures are saying, that there are massive executions going on.

MR. FOLEY: Well, it is true that over the past several weeks we've received a number of, we believe, credible reports that the Iraqi regime may have ordered the summary execution of hundreds, if not thousands, of political detainees at Abu Ghuraib prison and the Radwaniyah prison - detention camp, rather, near Baghdad. According to these reports, many of those killed were serving sentences of 15 to 20 years for such crimes as insulting the regime or membership in an opposition political party. We understand that families in Iraq are receiving the bodies of the executed bearing clear signs of torture.

In addition, you are well aware of the case recently of four Jordanian students who were executed for allegedly stealing auto parts. These reports are shocking, and we are actively seeking independent confirmation of them. If the reports reflect the actual situation, what actually happened, it would certainly be a horrific event and a gross violation of the human rights of Iraqi citizens, on the part of the Iraqi regime.

Now, operationally speaking, we understand that Max Van Der Stoel the UN special rapporteur on human rights, and Mr. Ndaiye, the UN special rapporteur on summary executions, are indeed investigating the charges, and we fully support their initiative. Unfortunately, Iraq has for year prevented the UN special rapporteur on human rights from visiting Iraq and does not permit independent inspection of the prisons in question.

QUESTION: During what period did you say these thousands of executions have taken place?

MR. FOLEY: Yes, yes. The reports cover the gamut, but some of the reports indicate as many as thousands have been executed.

MR. FOLEY: Well, the reports we've been getting have been multiple, so there's a basis, certainly, for investigating. Secondly, the reports are of such an horrific nature that they compel an investigation. I don't think it would be prudent to proclaim, at this point, a verdict on the reports. That's why we think that the UN rapporteur on human rights and the UN special rapporteur on summary executions ought to have the opportunity to investigate these charges, investigate on the ground and shed the light of truth on them.

QUESTION: But you repeated some very specific charges, which sounds to me like you want that out; that you think that there's credibility to these reports.

MR. FOLEY: Well, it's speculative to, as I said, provide a definitive assessment. That's why we think an international investigation is compelled at this time. But we would note, historically speaking, members of literally every opposition group and ethnic minority have been killed in Iraq over time. Also, we had the recent case of the four Jordanians executed, perhaps even - there have been reports that some Kuwaiti POWs held incommunicado since the war have been executed. So we're calling for a vigorous investigation so that these reports can be verified.

MR. FOLEY: I think, again, it's very speculative, and I would hesitate to venture to guess; except to suggest that perhaps Saddam Hussein is feeling again under stress, and the situation in Iraq certainly has not improved since his war of aggression against Kuwait. The plight of the Iraqi people has not improved during that period. There's bound to be increasing opposition, increasing anguish inside Iraq, and perhaps he's feeling the heat politically and responding in characteristic form.

QUESTION: You said yesterday that you're sure the Iraqi - I'm paraphrasing here, so forgive me if I don't have it exactly - that you're sure the Iraqi people understand that their economic plight is due to his misspending of money on palaces and weapons of mass destruction, et cetera, et cetera. Is this part of the anecdotal evidence that you used to reach that conclusion? You said people were being executed for grumbling about the regime.

MR. FOLEY: I think so. They are separate questions. The question yesterday was how he spends his own resources. I think it would not be a secret to the people of Iraq that the Iraqi regime is not broadly representative, either politically speaking or in terms of representing the needs of the average Iraqi man, woman and child. I think that's quite obvious to any observer of the situation in Iraq.

The people of Iraq know that he launched them on two disastrous adventures, first the war against Iran in the 1980s, then the aggression against Kuwait; and that their livelihood, their way of life, have declined precipitously as a result of their leader's actions. I think that has to be obvious to every man, woman and child in Iraq.

QUESTION: Your reaction to Defense Minister Mordechai laying the cornerstone for 130 new Jewish homes in the West Bank at the Beit El settlement?

MR. FOLEY: I just saw that press report coming in, but I don't think it requires much research on our side to repeat our long-standing position that increasing settlement construction does not help to create the kind of environment necessary to building confidence between the two sides, as they contemplate engaging in permanent status negotiations.

The Secretary of State and the President are doing their utmost to promote movement in the negotiating process; to help the parties through the stage of the interim committees; working on the four-part agenda that that Secretary of State has proposed. The central element of that four-part agenda is, indeed, a time-out on activities such as these.

Another part of that agenda is the effort to move in an accelerated way to permanent status negotiations. It's in the interest of all parties that we get to that stage. Any activities which tend to prejudge the outcome of the permanent status negotiations are not helpful in getting us to those permanent status negotiations.

QUESTION: You said that the Secretary and the President are doing their utmost to get to that stage. Does this move suggest to you that the Israeli Government is not doing its utmost to get to that stage?

MR. FOLEY: Well, on the issue of further redeployment, that is really the big challenge that we're facing now in our discussions with the Israelis and with the Palestinians. It's a very tough issue for the government of Israel. And we were much encouraged by the acceptance in principle of the Israeli cabinet, back some weeks ago, of a further redeployment. Now, the government of Israel right now is grappling with the nature of the redeployment. It's a matter that we're discussing with them and we're looking forward to making further progress on when the two leaders come to Washington to see the President

QUESTION: Mr. Foley, what is the State Department's reaction to reports that Iraq and Iran are beginning to exchange friendly messages, starting last month with Saddam's representative at the Islamic summit in Tehran? And today, I believe, a congratulatory message was sent to mark the Moslem's holy month of Ramadan, from the Iranian president, Khatami, to Mr. Saddam Hussein. Are these positive steps toward reconciliation from war in '80?

MR. FOLEY: Well, I would only note -- insofar as Iranian-Iraqi relations are concerned, I don't have a lot of late information at my disposition today -- I would note two things, though. First, during the OIC meeting in Tehran, we knew for a fact that the Iraqis were bitterly disappointed that the OIC failed to pass any resolutions urging the ending of sanctions against Iraq. We were very encouraged by that development.

Secondly, in the last week or ten days, there was an airplane flying from Russia, carrying goods to Iraq, that was held up in Iran, pending approval by the appropriate UN authorities. And we saw that also as an indication that Iran is committed to the UN's policies on Iraq. So I don't see any grounds at this stage for a rapprochement or an improvement in relations between the two countries.

Finally, I'd note that President Clinton today, himself, together with the First Lady, have issued a greeting to Muslims in the United States and all over the world at the start of the holy month of Ramadan.

QUESTION: Yesterday, one of the Turkish official groups, which we call the "wise men," they are trying to find out some solution between Greece and Turkey, they withdraw the whole meeting, and they said that, we are not contacting each other; instead of using the European Union mediation, we have to contact each other directly. Do you have any reaction on this?

MR. FOLEY: I couldn't react, because I haven't seen the report. I'd be glad to look into it for you, though.

Back to the Press Briefing Calendar.
Return to the Home Page.
This is an official U.S. Government source for information on the WWW. Inclusion of non-U.S. Government links does not imply endorsement of contents.