U.S. Department of State
Other State Department Archive SitesU.S. Department of State
U.S. Department of State
U.S. Department of State
U.S. Department of State
U.S. Department of State
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

Department Seal Richard Boucher, State Department Spokesman
Excerpt from the Daily Press Briefing
Department of State Press Briefing Room
Washington, DC, June 30, 2000

Question: Well, here we are before a long weekend, at least everybody but the Secretary. What's in store on the Middle East--do I have to call it a peace process? On the Middle East front. Any talks coming up, like the Palestinians think there are--or thought there were, anyhow, a few days ago?

Mr. Boucher: There's nothing scheduled at this point because there's no decision from the President about how he wishes to proceed. I think you saw quite clearly when we were in the region that the parties looked to the President to determine whether a summit is appropriate at this moment, whether it would be useful.

The Secretary, based on her trip to the Middle East, has provided the President with a full report and assessment of where the circumstances lie right now, what the situation is. The President has not made a decision at this point. We would expect further meetings with him and discussions among the senior advisors over the next few days, perhaps, until the moment whenever the President decides to decide one way or the other.

Question: She also said it doesn't mean everything stops while he ponders.

Mr. Boucher: There are continuing contacts among the parties and with the parties.

Question: All right. I hope you won't consider this too suspicious, but if on the Ross--you know how he's generally an open person--but on the Ross level, if you guys resume negotiations, like if you want to limit my question so that I can then not be--not have any standing for having put the question, If you guys decide to resume the negotiations like on the weekend or right afterward on a Ross or a Miller or whatever level--here or there, or he goes there, or they come here--will there be some public announcement of such, or will you just go into a secrecy mode, possibly?

Mr. Boucher: I would say that, in almost all cases in the past when we've decided that negotiations should begin or recommence or continue in a different location, that we've been up front with you and talked about those. Obviously, the parties have had some consultations that they haven't necessarily talked about, and that's up to them. But, in the end, as far as where we think we need to go in next steps, we said that was something the President would decide, and at this point he's continuing discussions with the Secretary and his other senior advisors to make that determination.

Question: So, Richard, has she already given her initial briefing upon returning from the trip?

Mr. Boucher: Yes, they had a meeting yesterday afternoon and they went through the circumstances and the situation, but I would expect to have some further follow-on discussions before the President makes his decision.

Question: As you know, there are going to be some documents released at the Archives today concerning three Americans who apparently were murdered in Chile.

Question: Can we stay on the Middle East for just a second? Sorry.

Question: Okay.

Mr. Boucher: Okay, let's do the Middle East and then we'll go over the Chile stuff.

Question: I just wanted to clarify, make very clear on what Barry is asking you. Are you saying that the Ross talks could resume before the President makes a decision, or nothing will resume until the President makes a decision?

Mr. Boucher: I don't want to try to hem in the President. What I'm saying is the President will decide on next steps. He could decide that it's the time for the summit; that, as I think he himself made clear, there are certain issues that can only be decided at the summit level. And we all recognize that the decision involves a lot of factors, including whether the President's own intervention would change the dynamic of the discussions. So he has to consider this.

Now, it may be that he and his advisors decide that there is some interim step to be done before the summit. I don't want to try to limit his options. But, obviously, as the President considers the issue of the summit he recognizes, as he has said, that there is a different dynamic at that level, and if we've done everything we can at other levels, he may want to go to that level to resolve the issues.

Question: So the talks at the Ross level that had been said from the region to be--that the Palestinians wanted to resume those in Washington after the 4th, should we say those are tentatively scheduled, not scheduled, to be determined?

Mr. Boucher: I would say that, at this point, there's been no agreement on next steps because everybody recognizes the President will have to decide, and the President hasn't announced any decisions at this point.

Question: There seems to be a shift in emphasis somewhat. A few weeks ago, it was we'd have a summit when there was enough progress made to have the leaders come together, and now it seems like a summit would be a last-ditch attempt because everything else has failed.

Mr. Boucher: No, I wouldn't conclude that. We still look for there being a basis for the summit. But, as I think we've made quite clear before, a basis for the summit doesn't mean everything is agreed in advance and we just go to sign a piece of paper. There is a different dynamic that kicks in at the summit level, and certain decisions have to be made at the summit. The question is whether that basis exists and that we're close enough that we think that the summit can be effective. And that's the kind of assessment that the President and his advisors are making.

Question: But there's only going to be one summit, correct, in this process between now and September? I mean, you can't have a summit now if the things aren't agreed to; is that correct?

Mr. Boucher: Well, the summit is to reach final agreement, so ipso facto that would imply the goal would be to reach a final agreement on all the key end-of-conflict issues.

Question: Which is the September goal.

Mr. Boucher: I don't want to preclude options down the road, but the goal, as we've said quite clearly, is to reach final agreement on the end-of-conflict issues on all the core issues that need to be dealt with at that level.

Question: Has she made any phone calls, by the way, since she got back? And I mean, you know, to players.

Mr. Boucher: She's made phone calls. Not to the Middle East.

Question: Can you tell us more about in her discussions with Arafat what he said to her concerning his intentions to go ahead with declaring a state?

Mr. Boucher: No. There is an observation I can make on that. I think the Secretary addressed this a little bit when she was in the region, but I think I'd say that the Oslo Accords that have gotten us to this stage were based on mutuality; they were not based on unilateral decision-making, and we would be against unilateral declarations.

Question: So Rebecca got some of my question, but what is the reaction of the Secretary and the United States Government generally about the pressure that the Palestinians have applied by threatening to announce a state, the Palestinian state, threatening to go back to Intifada and those kinds of tactics? What is our reaction to that?

Mr. Boucher: Well, I gave you a specific reaction on one thing. I think the only other thing I'd say is that we've always urged the parties to help create an environment where it's conducive to an agreement. So we're always looking for the parties to help do that.

Question: So we would be asking the Palestinians to back off of those kinds of pressures, those kinds of threats?

Mr. Boucher: That kind of gets to the original question of can I clarify what we may have said in those discussions. And, no, I'm afraid I can't, but I think our general attitude has been stated.

Question: I understand the PHALCON question came up while she was there as well. She raised that in Israel, correct?

Mr. Boucher: Yes, and she said there were serious discussions going on.

Question: Period?

Question: Mr. Sneh is coming here next week?

Mr. Boucher: No, let me deal with the reports that are out today. I mean, the Secretary did raise it and discuss it while she was in the region. And I think you also saw that Foreign Minister Levi said that Israel would never do anything they felt would harm the security of the United States. And that was certainly welcome.

There have been discussions and meetings at various levels. The Secretary raised this during her visit with various people. I think Secretary Cohen has been involved in this as well. We don't have, actually, official confirmation from the Government of Israel that the Deputy Defense Minister will be traveling to Washington at this time. We have discussed things with him before, but we just haven't been told by the Israelis that he's on his way. So whether that newspaper report is right or wrong will depend on what they tell us.

Question: I saw a report saying late July, so that wouldn't--does that change it at all?

Mr. Boucher: I think--yes, I think it's in a newspaper in Israel but, as I said, we don't have any official notice from the Israeli Government yet. But there are discussions that have been ongoing in various channels at various levels; among them, the Secretary is raising this. And it's a serious issue that we want to see resolved and we will continue our discussions with the Israeli Government.

Question: Did she talk to Sonny Callahan following that, that you're aware of? Do you know?

Mr. Boucher: Following?

Question: Her discussions with the Israelis?

Mr. Boucher: No, I don't think so. Not at this stage. She talked to him last--I can't even remember the timing--2 weeks ago, 10 days ago.

Okay, Middle East. Are we done?

Question: The little bit reminds me of one other thing. Just in the general sense, you know the problems, I don't have to recite it--has she talked, even at this early stage, to prominent Members of Congress about the financial aspects of a peace agreement between Israel and the Palestinians? The unquestioned--the almost certain U.S. huge sums of money to replace Israel's land with wires and other things?

Mr. Boucher: It's a pretty broad question. I mean, I'm not aware of any in the 24 hours or so since the trip that she would have done that.

Question: Well, because, you know--

Mr. Boucher: There has been--this general question has been in the air, and I'm sure it's come up in discussions. We obviously are not in a position to starting to put numbers or to--well, we're not in a position to specify exactly what's required until we get the deal. But the general issue of the United States being ready to support a peace process is certainly something that comes up all the time with Members of Congress.

Okay, Middle East. Are we done yet?

Question: On the Middle East, on the Gulf. Today, many newspapers in the Gulf--

Question: Can we stay on the peace talks--(inaudible)--

Mr. Boucher: All right, let's jump around.

Question: Do you have any reaction to the Israeli court decision today that Resolution 242 does not apply to the Palestinian talks because the Palestinian entity did not exist then?

Mr. Boucher: I'm not sure it was a court decision. I thought I saw a statement to that effect. But, anyway, I guess the only thing I would have to say on this, that 242, Resolutions 242 and 338 have been the cornerstone of the U.S. approach to the Middle East for 30 years. And it's our view that all negotiations should be based on Resolutions 242 and 338, all negotiations between Israel and the Arabs, including the negotiations between the Israelis and the Palestinians. That's the framework that we've always worked in, and it's the one we believe we should continue to work in.

 

[Daily Press Briefing continues]

Question: Richard, you mentioned today that 242 and 338 are considered the cornerstone of U.S. policy toward the peace process. Can we deduce from that is that you support the implementation of all United Nations resolutions concerning the Middle East, including 191, 194, 198, that conclude also the right of return and compensation for the refugees?

Mr. Boucher: I certainly think our support for UN resolutions is quite clear, but I wouldn't want to start--I wouldn't want you to go a step further and try to translate that into support for specific negotiation positions.

Question: But you support United Nations resolution; you're not excluding any resolution that came out from the Security Council concerning the Middle East, including the right of return and compensation?

Mr. Boucher: I don't think we've ever excluded any UN resolutions but, again, don't try to lock us into a particular negotiating position. It's up to the parties to agree on how to resolve some of those very difficult issues.

Question: (Inaudible)--resolutions on this point.

Mr. Boucher: I don't have a problem supporting the United Nations, no.

[end of excerpt]

Full transcript of Daily Press Briefing on 6/30/00

Peace Process | Near Eastern Affairs | Department of State | Secretary of State