| ||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||
 |
James P. Rubin, Spokesman Press Briefing, Israel-Syria Peace Talks Shepherd College, Shepherdstown, West Virginia, January 10, 2000 |
1:30 p.m. MR. RUBIN: Welcome to the seventh day of the Shepherdstown Talks. Let me tell you what has transpired this morning. Secretary Albright met with Prime Minister Barak at about 10:00 this morning, for about an hour. She just finished, a few moments ago, an hour-long meeting with Foreign Minister Shara. And let me say the following: During the course of the Shepherdstown Peace Talks this week, we have had intensive negotiations on all of the key issues. All four committees have been established and have been working, both formally and informally. We have presented a working document to the parties, that lays the groundwork for a serious effort to bridge the important gaps that remain. We have decided to recess the talks for a short break. Prime Minister Barak and Foreign Minister Shara have agreed to return to the discussions and negotiations on January the 19th, to continue the negotiations and work further towards a peace agreement. All of us recognize that the issues we are grappling with will have fateful consequences, both for Israel and Syria, and for the region as a whole. During these negotiations and in our discussions with both sides, we have seen a seriousness of purpose and a clear commitment to achieving peace. The delegations will be leaving today. There will not be technical groups remaining. We, obviously, have received some initial comments on the working document we presented. We will receive additional comments and clarifications as we discuss the issues with the parties during this recess. There will be informal discussions to that end. So that is where we are today, this seventh day, and we are now into a recess. QUESTION: The Prime Minister of Israel said -- you remember yesterday, I believe -- that he wouldn't do anything to jeopardize Israel's security. And since this administration affirms its commitment to maintaining Israel's security, why wouldn't the United States then line up with Israel on where the border line should be drawn? MR. RUBIN: Well, our job as the mediator and the "shepherd," so to speak, of these Shepherdstown Talks is to try to encourage the parties to make decisions themselves about what's in their best interest. We recognize that these are fateful decisions for Israel and for Syria. We recognize the important security factors that are at play here. And it's not our job to be the mediator and then to simply take the position of one side or the other. There is no question that the United States and Israel have an extremely close relationship, that we have an unshakeable commitment to Israel's security. But in the current task of being the host and mediator of these talks, our job is to explore the issues with both sides, to discuss them, to try to make each understand the positions of the others. As I indicated yesterday, we have not presented, at this stage, bridging proposals that would purport to differ from the proposals of one or the other party. So we're not in the business of simply saying, from one party to the other, "Here are our positions." What our working document does it try to reflect the areas of agreement that exist, and to describe -- in an authoritative way -- the areas of disagreement and the major gaps. QUESTION: Well, here's my problem with that. There is one sort of nagging problem and, you know, I think in the context of the Wye Accord when, after it was done, the U.S. was saying -- or at least one particular mediator, American, was saying that we pretty much wrote the agreement. This document you have now, you say you hope will be a basis for an ultimate settlement. Are you saying that document -- it doesn't in any way indicate which direction the U.S. would have the two sides go on Issue A or B or C or D? Are you so pristinely neutral that you're leaving it entirely to them; or are you're kind of pushing them a little bit? And if you're pushing them a little bit, why then are you reluctant to see Israel's point of view on security? MR. RUBIN: I think I've made very clear that we have an unshakeable commitment to Israel's security. I think that should go without question. With respect to our role here in Shepherdstown and in other discussions: Our role as we have seen it emerge was first to get the parties together. And let's bear in mind that that was something that the Prime Minister of Israel wanted. It was something that the President of Syria wanted, and so we got them here. That was something each of them wanted. Each of them -- my impression -- is quite satisfied with the role the United States has played. I believe the Israelis have been quite satisfied with the role we have played, in trying to present not only areas where we think agreement is reflected in the document, but also areas where there is disagreement. And so we don't see the need to be "holier than the Pope" in a situation like this. We do see the need to be helpful, and the Israeli Government has wanted us to play a helpful role in trying to bridge these gaps. And that's what we will continue to do. QUESTION: Jamie, where are the talks going to be when they resume on the 19th? Will it be here? Will it be somewhere else? MR. RUBIN: Let me say this: First of all, let me take this opportunity to thank all the people of Shepherdstown. I think all of us who spent seven days here -- or eight days -- have found it a very hospitable place. I think we've enjoyed some of the restaurants. I hope we've done our contribution to the economy of Shepherdstown. We've certainly been heartened by the expressions of support from people in Shepherdstown, whether they be local citizens or church groups, or others who have come up to us. So we've certainly been enormously pleased with the work that has been done here, and the hospitality that has been shown by the people of Shepherdstown. We have not made a decision as to where the resumption of this peace process will take place. QUESTION: Can you give us some more information as to whether or not the Syrians or the Israelis offered any amendments to the working documents, and whether they have as yet been incorporated into it, and what the status of the text is? MR. RUBIN: Yes, the text of the working document was presented a couple of days ago. We have received some informal and preliminary comments and clarifications, and we will expect those comments and clarifications to take place during the course of our discussions with the parties during the recess. So we've received responses in one form or another, and to the extent we want additional responses, we'll be seeking those. So that is where the text stands. The two parties have it. They'll have more time to review it and raise additional issues, if they have them, or respond to additional clarifications as they're sought. QUESTION: Two questions: Can you say whether the gaps on the border issue have narrowed; and, secondly, in the next round, has there been a request for President Asad to join, or will it just be the leaders? Will the experts be coming as well? MR. RUBIN: Yes, let me say that, with respect to your first question, I'm not prepared to describe any particular issue and the extent to which new positions were put forward. I think it's fair to say that we feel that, in explaining their positions, in discussing their concerns, and in articulating their objectives, there have been new ideas that have surfaced. I'm not going to declare that there has been -- a major obstacle has been overcome in any of the particular areas, except to say that we feel that the pace of the work, the seriousness of the work, the determination that has been shown -- we do feel that we're on the right track. But, obviously, this has a very important security component and an historical component for the two parties, and they have to make the decisions. We can't do that for them. With respect to your second question: My understandings is the talks will resume in the same basic modality as they have been taking place to date, which is that Foreign Minister Shara will lead the Syrian delegation, that there will be a delegation that consists of experts on the various issues; and, similarly on the Israeli side, Prime Minister Barak will lead the delegation. We have not found that Foreign Minister Shara has been lacking the authority to make decisions, to make suggestions and to put forward the position of Syria, so we have not found that the absence of President Asad has been an impediment. We believe -- and continue to believe -- that Foreign Minister Shara has the plenipotentiary power to do the work, and that is the basis on which we will continue. That doesn't mean that I would rule out the possibility of contact with President Asad, but as far as the way the talks will resume, they will resume in the same way. QUESTION: Jamie, answering the question about the Al-Hayah report yesterday, you said it wasn't credible, and that anything about the borders of 1923 wasn't mentioned in the document; it wasn't discussed by the experts or the committees. My question is: Was it discussed in a higher level? MR. RUBIN: No, and let me be very clear on the Al-Hayah report. I said that the Al-Hayah report, to my reading, did not purport to contain the elements of the working document. It said what Al-Hayah expected the differences of the sides to be, and then listed on various issues their expectations of what the sides would say and not say. I did point out that their expectation, on one particular issue, wasn't accurate and, again, I would repeat that I wasn't quibbling whether it was done at lower levels or a higher level. To my mind, that issue was not described by the Israelis in the way that it was implied by that report. Let me say very clearly that on the borders issue, the Borders Committee has met. We have not resolved the border issue, but we are working on it and work will, hopefully, continue at the resumption of the talks. QUESTION: Jamie, about the timing of the resumption of the talks and juxtaposed with President Clinton's comments this morning about hoping for agreements or at least movement toward -- substantial movement toward agreements within the next two months with not just the Syrian track but the Lebanese track and, of course, the deadline in the Palestinian talks coming up, this all revolves around Chairman Arafat's presence at the same time: One, do you expect there to be any kind of a meeting involving everyone that's in town at the time around the 19th? And, two, do you agree with the President's assessments -- you can just hit this one out of the park -- optimistic assessment, I'm talking about the promise of the next coming weeks. MR. RUBIN: Don't you want me to be the Spokesman when the talks resume? Not everyone can vote on that question. We have said that we believe that both sides have shown a commitment to the negotiations, and a commitment to achieving peace. We have said that we don't expect this to happen overnight. We do expect it to be an issue that they work on. We think this is an issue they can move on at, obviously, a pace that they have to decide for themselves. This is an issue that will be resolved over time. It will not be resolved overnight. So I have said since the talks began a week ago here, that we didn't expect a core agreement now, but we did hope that the process that we've started could yield, at the end of the day, such a core agreement. I think the President's time-frame is quite consistent with what I've said, and certainly consistent with what I've seen here. With respect to meetings, let me simply say that my understanding is Chairman Arafat will be in Washington on the 20th. I have not heard any speculation that there would be some kind of four-way meeting of any kind. Other discussions I wouldn't rule out, but I haven't heard anything about a four-way meeting. QUESTION: What about the Lebanese track? MR. RUBIN: Well, again, we've said we would like to see the circle of peace closed, and the Syria track is only one -- a very important -- component to close that. And we would certainly hope that at the appropriate time that the Lebanese-Israeli track could be resumed, and could get on the right track the way the Syria track is, with the aim of reaching an agreement. QUESTION: You said that Prime Minister Barak and Foreign Minister Shara will come with experts. Does that mean that the committees will not be coming with them, or what? MR. RUBIN: No, I was trying to say the opposite. The committees are not going to stay here and work in the interim period. The talks have recessed, as of now. The delegations will be leaving early this evening from the hotel. At the resumption of the talks, the political level will be the same, and we do expect them to bring the same basic group of people here, so that the committee work that began here can continue, as appropriate. QUESTION: What sort of mechanism -- you said that there will be, between the ending of the talks and the resuming of the talks, that there is going to be continuing comments on clarification on the working document. What will be the mechanism for that? Will that be done through the State Department? Will there be any meetings in the Middle East or here, or any officials? And I have another question, which is: To what extent have the talks here reflected a desire to play to constituencies back home, and to what extent do people feel that they have sufficiently convinced people back home that it's time to make compromises that are needed for peace? MR. RUBIN: On the first question, we have, as I said, received some preliminary comments from the parties during the course of the President's discussions yesterday, and some of the Secretary's discussions today and yesterday. We would expect, through diplomatic channels -- i.e., the State Department -- to have continuing contact with the parties and there may be other contacts. So we will, as we have had prior to the talks, have an ability to talk to the Syrians and the Israelis and, during those discussions and contacts, I would expect there to be further clarifications or points raised. With respect to what the Syrians and the Israelis may or may not have intended by their public or other commentary this week, I would urge you to talk to them. That isn't for me to say what their intentions are: what's in their head. It's something that one can speculate on, but it's not something I'm prepared to speculate on from this podium. QUESTION: Jamie, throughout the course of the week, we've tried to get you to talk about some of the interpersonal relationships, the atmosphere, et cetera. You have used expressions like, "It's not warm and fuzzy;" you've said, "It's cordial." Can you sum it up and can you also address the broader question: Was the interaction between the Israelis and the Syrians more or less than you had hoped it would be getting them out here into the woods, as it were? MR. RUBIN: Well, I think last night was a very important development in the atmospherics department. There was the first breaking of bread between the delegations, and that is significant. There was a lengthy dinner that President Clinton and Secretary Albright hosted for the two leaders and a couple of their aides and ministers. The rest of the delegation -- and I was a participant in this, so I can certainly tell you -- had a dinner concurrently with roughly 30 or so people -- let's see, four tables of -- 32, 33 people. And I witnessed -- directly -- a fair amount of contact, a fair amount of warmth: the kind of cordiality that I've seen at other such dinners. Again, I don't want to exaggerate. It isn't that there was enormous amounts of hugging. But it was cordial and it was friendly in the sense that it was a professional endeavor and the people understood each of their -- as individuals were performing their business as -- for their governments. I think the President and the Secretary felt that the dinner included some real exchanges between the Prime Minister and Foreign Minister Shara; and that had happened earlier in the week. So I think we're on a warming trend, but I wouldn't want to overstate that. I will give you one anecdote because I gather -- and I don't know which media outlet wrote it, precisely -- there was an ever so slight error on the gym anecdote. And I talked to the two participants about what happened in the gym, and so let me tell you what they told me. As it was expressed to me directly by the participants, one of the members of the Syrian delegation, Buthaina Sha'ban, was on the treadmill working out, the way many officials work out. And when Prime Minister Barak, who happened to be in the gym at the same time, saw her on the treadmill, he cracked a joke to Foreign Minister Shara, who was also in the room, that -- something to the effect that she's not getting anywhere. And they indicated, I think, the response was something to the effect that, well, it's the beginning of the process. So there was an interchange in the gym, but it wasn't a case of one side or the other inviting a joint workout. QUESTION: (How were they dressed)? MR. RUBIN: I don't think it would be appropriate for me to describe the dress of people in the gym, or else we might have to take pictures of what everybody -- including those in this room -- look like in the gym, and I'm not sure we want to do that. QUESTION: Jamie, (can you talk about the Moscow Embassy incident)? MR. RUBIN: I think some of your colleagues have some questions I'd like to answer. QUESTION: Jamie, you had mentioned earlier about Shara having the power of making decisions and representing the regime in Damascus. I was curious if you can say that if on any issue, small or little but any substantive issue, if any decisions were made here this week? And the second question is: Do you expect any sort of direct discussions during this recess period between the two sides in the region? MR. RUBIN: I think on the second point, my expectation is the United States will be in contact with the two parties, and I don't expect that. On the first point, I think we feel that by putting the document down, their ideas on the table, we feel that there were discussions that were interesting and important that have been held, new formulations and new descriptions of concerns were put down. So we feel that we've got ourselves on the right track. But we've got a long way to go, because the decisions are of such monumental security and political importance to the two parties. QUESTION: Can you tell us, please, who asked for the recess? Was it Mr. Barak, in order to get the Israeli democracy some decisions by the government or the parliament? Or since you are describing an idyllic situation, in which such beautiful progress was made, so one could have expected that they will continue endlessly. So I would like to know who is the behind the request for a recess, and then the second part of the question: Does it look to you a little bit bizarre or strange that, with all the need of urgency and emergency to try to arrive at peace, the Israeli Prime Minister, maybe also Farouk al-Shara, all as a matter of fact, looked like summoned by the President to arrive here on the 19th, although you emphasize again and again that peace is the will of both parties. Does it look to you a little bit hasty, like in a Marine base: "Hey, you will come back in a week?" MR. RUBIN: On the first point, let me say that I think when I gave the first briefing about a week ago, the rough time frame that everyone understood was envisaged was about a week or so. I said that I had packed more clothes than that just in case, but I think we all understood that this was about the time-frame that was being expected. With respect to who sets the calendar: We set the calendar. As the hosts, that's our job, is to try to set a calendar that is understood and that is accepted by the parties. But somebody has to set the calendar, and that's one of the functions of the mediator. With respect to your second question, we don't think it's a hasty return. We think that this is about a reasonable pace; that in the first week the committees were organized; there were positive responses and reactions to the document we laid down; there were serious discussions; there was a warming trend in the atmospherics between the Syrians and the Israelis. And you put all that together, and I think it's fair to say we're on the right track. And we think that it's appropriate to have a nine-day recess, so that the leaders -- who have other responsibilities, certainly in the case of Prime Minister Barak -- can return to their countries and work on that. We certainly recognize in the case of Israel as a democracy, that they have a referendum that the Prime Minister has said he will put forward if an agreement is reached, and that there is a public component to a democracy. And he, presumably, has things he wants to do, and efforts he wants to make in that area. And we respect that, as we respect the democratic system that he leads. But we think that it's an appropriate recess time, and we're pleased that both sides have agreed to return on this schedule. We have said that we want to keep ourselves on the right track and at the right pace, but that we don't believe that it is likely that this thing can be wrapped up, you know, "one, two, three." This is a big deal. It's got big implications, and it will take time. QUESTION: Two questions: The first is, do you have any indication that President Asad was kept informed of the discussions and how things went? And, also, did President Clinton talk at all to President Asad this week? The second question is: Was there much consideration, among the U.S. negotiators, about the juggling act you'll have to do from January 19th on? MR. RUBIN: Yes. On the first question, I don't believe the President spoke to President Asad this week. I wouldn't rule that out in the future. I think it's really up to the Syrians to indicate what processes they follow to keep their President informed. With respect to the question of the juggling act: Yes, we're aware that Chairman Arafat is here. One of the advantages of having a site near Washington is that the President can travel back and forth. We know that both tracks are moving at the same time, and that has both an opportunity and a challenge associated with it. The opportunity, obviously, is to help move peace forward on both tracks, the opportunity that hasn't existed heretofore. And so that's a unique and historic opportunity. At the same time, we recognize that there will be a lot of discussion of, "Will someone or other play one track off against the other?" We have found this week that that hasn't happened. On the contrary, just as we've made a step forward in getting the Syrian peace process on the right track, the Israelis and the Palestinians themselves have worked out critical issues on the implementation of Sharm el Sheik. So we have been encouraged that, without the United States, the Israelis and the Palestinians have made progress. We don't think it's a prerequisite that the United States always intervene on the Palestinian-Israeli track. We do that when both sides want us to, and we think it's appropriate. We would far prefer a situation where the Israelis and the Palestinians can work problems out themselves, as they did this week. So it's a happy juggling act that obviously exists, and we don't think that the fact that Chairman Arafat will be here at the same time need interfere with the movement forward of both tracks. QUESTION: Is it already agreed that the entire Israeli-Syria negotiation will be here in the United States, no matter Shepherdstown or some other place, bearing in mind that the Israeli position, at least in the beginning of the process, was that they want the discussions to be somewhere in the Middle East, or the close area to Syria and Israel? The second part of the question: How long is the second round going to take? Is it going to be another one week? And what are your expectations this time? Do you expect this time a core agreement or something like this? MR. RUBIN: Well, thank you for those two questions. You may not thank me for the answers. On the first question, until we've made a decision as to where the talks should be held, I really don't want to speculate as to what geographic region or other it will take place. We haven't made that decision, and I think we have to make it first before I can inform you about that. Secondly, given that we're nine days away from that beginning, I think it's premature -- very premature -- for me to begin to speculate about what we hope in that next round, other than to say, as the President said, that our goal here is to get an agreement and that we want to move forward towards that end, and that we hope that continuation of this process will advance us closer to that goal. QUESTION: Jamie, per your discussion of the warming trend, have the two leaders shaken hands? And, also, who was it who in the gym incident actually cracked, "It's the beginning of the process"? MR. RUBIN: On the first, I haven't followed every movement of the two leaders so I can't answer for sure. I really don't know. I haven't heard that. QUESTION: Have you seen them shake hands? MR. RUBIN: No, but I said I'm not with them all the time so I wouldn't necessarily know if it had happened. But I'm trying to help you by saying I haven't heard that they did so, and I suspect I probably would have heard that. I am not as clear in my mind about the second part of that anecdote as to who said it, and that's why I didn't give you a voice. I'm aware of what Prime Minister Barak said in cracking a joke about one of the Syrian delegation's esteemed members on their -- what do we call that thing again -- treadmill, and I know that the general response was something of that nature that one or the other said or that it became the sort of second comment in the joke. But I don't know who said that remark. I guess "joke" would be too strong. QUESTION: Would you consider Shepherdstown for similar negotiations in the future? MR. RUBIN: Well, as I indicated, we were extremely pleased by the hospitality of the townspeople. I hope all of you were as pleased as I was by the opportunity to eat at some of Shepherdstown's fine restaurants and the generally good atmosphere we found here. And certainly the hospitality of the college where we are now and the hotel facilities, I think people think everyone did a first rate job. So, yes, there is no reason that Shepherdstown shouldn't be included on any list of serious candidates for future peace talks. QUESTION: (Inaudible)? MR. RUBIN: I'll have to get that. I don't have that available to me. QUESTION: The question was: Who paid for the hotel? MR. RUBIN: I just don't have it available to me. QUESTION: And another question is that in nine days the college will be back in session and there will be 4,500 students walking around. Will that complicate security? MR. RUBIN: Well, the college is only they place where you are; it's not the place where the negotiators are. So, obviously, that fact that the college will be resumed will be taken into consideration. QUESTION: Going back to the document for a second, on the 19th do you expect that there will be a revised edition of the document presented to the two sides for their perusal? In other words, are their comments and clarifications going to be incorporated? MR. RUBIN: I don't know when a new version would be presented but, obviously, we would want to take on board the clarifications and comments we receive. QUESTION: You had said during the meal last night there was sort of a warming between the two? MR. RUBIN: Warming trend, yes. QUESTION: Warming tend between the two parties. Are you hoping that in the next round of talks they'll share a dining room? I know that the U.S. had hoped that they would, towards the end of the week, end up possibly in the same dining room and they're still eating in separate dining rooms at the Clarion. MR. RUBIN: I'll have to check that. I don't know exactly what the dining situation is, but certainly to the extent that warming trend can improve, that would be a good thing. I don't think it's a sine qua non of making a peace agreement, but it would be a good thing. QUESTION: And one more question. You had said that on both sides there is the desire to work, to reach peace. Do you see a willingness to compromise on both sides? MR. RUBIN: Well, what I have said is we see the desire and the commitment to this process, and when they are ready to make the decisions they believe are necessary and appropriate, they will make them. I don't want to speculate on when and if that will happen. QUESTION: But is there a willingness to compromise on both sides? MR. RUBIN: Well, we've seen new ideas and new discussions take place here that reflect an openness to solving problems. QUESTION: Is the United States worried that when each side returns to its constituency and starts commenting on what happens here, things will start to unravel? MR. RUBIN: Well, I'm paid to worry about that. Look, each of the leaders and their teams will have to make their decisions as to how to proceed based on what they think is best. We certainly hope that the sanctity of the negotiating process can be protected because that is one of the best ways to ensure that an agreement can be reached. QUESTION: Jamie, a Palestinian negotiator tells CNN that following the talks in January with Mr. Arafat here that he expects Secretary Albright will return to the region for talks there. Is it possible, based on what you're saying about venue, that she could go to the region and the talks could resume -- the Israeli-Syria talks could resume in the region? Is there any plan for her to go to the region? MR. RUBIN: I see your question, and let me answer it the best I can. I don't believe the Secretary has made a new agenda for a trip to the Middle East. When she left the Middle East the last time in December, she indicated that she expected to return sometime in this general time frame in order to assess whether the work had proceeded sufficient to lay a basis for a three-way summit between President Clinton, Prime Minister Barak and Chairman Arafat. So that has been out there as a possibility that the Secretary will visit the region in this general time frame to lead up to a summit that would, if the basis were laid, that would allow us to achieve the February time frame for a framework agreement for permanent status. So that has been out there. Aaron Miller, one of her deputies in this area, is now heading for the region to both prepare for the Chairman's visit to Washington on the 20th as well as to get an assessment of where the talks stand. So we'll probably know more after we get a report from Aaron Miller. QUESTION: Jamie, do you have expectations for some confidence-building measures, particularly on the part of the Syrians during the next nine days? There has been much talk about this in the Israeli press. I don't know if there were discussions about this at the Clarion. I would like to know that. And, also, would you expect that a military aid package for Israel might be pretty much finalized by the time the negotiators return? MR. RUBIN: On the second one, I think it's much easier. I think finalizing a military aid package is a very, very difficult enterprise, and I think it's fair to say that we're at a very preliminary stage right now. We've only begun preliminary consultations with the Israelis on that. The first question was about the confidence-building measures. I have said at the beginning of the week that we have certainly regarded this as an area where we think Syria should be helpful to the Israelis in resolving some of the humanitarian cases that are out there. They have indicated to us that they are prepared to do whatever they can in this area. I don't have any specific case or issue to report to you at this time. QUESTION: With regard to an announcement, there is no joint communiqué being planned, obviously. Are you giving them back their telephones, and what do you expect them to follow in terms of either meetings with the press here or on their arrival in the Middle East? Has there been any discussion of that as to how to play this? And one other question. Could you comment on the Moscow summit and its impact on these talks -- the Moscow meeting of -- MR. RUBIN: The multilateral meeting. QUESTION: Multilateral meeting. MR. RUBIN: At the foreign minister level? QUESTION: Yes. MR. RUBIN: Well, the invitations are being issued. We certainly hope there will be a positive response to those invitations. I don't have a particular reaction other than to say that we hope the countries in the region see as apparently some have begun to see and take steps to that effect, that Israel and Syria are now engaged in serious negotiations, that there has been a lot of progress in the last year on the Palestinian track, and that countries in the region should be doing what they can to contribute to the climate and the atmosphere for peace by moving forward in their relationship with Israel. And some have taken steps in that regard. With respect to the first question, I forgot. The joint communiqué. Yes, we've had discussions with the Israelis and the Syrians about how to deal with public interest during this recess, so I will leave it to them to say what they intend to say. But as I said in response to one of the earlier questions, we certainly don't hope that there isn't a kind of public discussion that harms the sanctity of the negotiating process which will make it harder to get an agreement. QUESTION: Jamie, a couple of questions. The first, have you set the two sides any objectives for the next nine days? Have you asked them over that period do you want them to do specific things, say get all their comments in on the working document before they return? And the second, are there any U.S. officials going to Lebanon to try and encourage that track? Is there any work being done to try and put that together? MR. RUBIN: On the first, yes, I do expect some requests to be put to the sides with respect to this working document. I would prefer not to get into the details of that. I'm not aware, on the second question, of any specific plan for a senior official to go to Lebanon at this time. And those of you who want Moscow, I do have a little something on that. QUESTION: Jamie, you've had the Prime Minister of Israel and the Foreign Minister of Syria now coming to the Washington area every few weeks. Is this an attempt to, if not pressure them, indicate a sense of urgency for them to reach a peace agreement within a few months? MR. RUBIN: Well, I think it's fair to say that we believe that there is a historic opportunity that now exists and we hope both sides seize this historic opportunity. Historic opportunities don't come around too often, or they wouldn't be historic. And so there are any number of issues that could make it harder for such an opportunity to be seized, and we think that one has to bear in mind that intervening events could make it harder. And so, yes, we would like to see this opportunity seized. At the same time, we recognize that these decisions are painful and serious ones for the peoples of the region and the governments in the region, and so we recognize that they are going to have to proceed at a pace they're comfortable with because, ultimately, it is they who will have to make the decisions. QUESTION: What do you think is the likelihood that the Secretary could hold this next round in the Middle East and then go straight to the multilateral in Moscow? Is there any thinking along those lines? MR. RUBIN: I'm not going to speculate on where the location will be. QUESTION: Moscow. MR. RUBIN: Yes. On the Embassy Moscow situation, here is what I have been told, and this is basically all I know and then maybe we can break; that at 1850 Moscow time today, an unknown intruder gained entry into the compound. The individual was thought to be a Russian. His action potentially endangered the lives and safety of embassy personnel. He gained access to a vehicle and was using that vehicle in threatening ways. He was warned to stop. He was then subdued by force. The Russians were informed. The individual has been taken to a local hospital by Russian authorities and an investigation is now ongoing. QUESTION: Was he subdued by being shot? MR. RUBIN: That's my understanding, yes. QUESTION: Do you have any word on his condition? MR. RUBIN: He left the embassy compound alive, and the Russian authorities now have taken him to a hospital and I don't have the latest on that. QUESTION: Do you have any information on anything he might have said as to why he did this? MR. RUBIN: We are still investigating. We don't have a very clear idea. There wasn't a phone call of that kind saying that something was going to happen, so we're still investigating. QUESTION: Was it the compound where people live as well as work? MR. RUBIN: It's the embassy compound. I don't have the floor plan here in Shepherdstown for you, but I can try to get you that information. QUESTION: He came over the walls? MR. RUBIN: He gained entry into the compound, and I'm not prepared to speculate on to how he exactly gained entry. And no American was harmed. QUESTION: Can I ask a question about Elian Gonzalez? MR. RUBIN: I really don't have much to offer that hasn't been -- QUESTION: I just want to know if there is any U.S. position on a six-year-old boy being subpoenaed, and is there any concern of a precedent being set for the future? MR. RUBIN: Well, I think with respect to subpoenas of a six-year-old boy who is in the United States, it's not really the State Department's job to respond to that. I suspect those who are in the political arena will feel more comfortable responding to that. QUESTION: (Inaudible) Secretary Albright would go to the region between now and when the next round is set to begin? MR. RUBIN: I'll have to check her schedule, and I can get back to some of you, especially those who might be interested in packing. (The briefing concluded at 2:20 P.M.) [end of document]
|
