THE WHITE HOUSE
Office of the Press Secretary
For
Immediate Release October 13, 2000
PRESS BRIEFING
BY
JAKE SIEWERT
The James S. Brady Briefing Room
1:27 P.M. EDT
MR. SIEWERT: Good afternoon. Let me begin with a quick statement by
the President on the Nobel Peace Prize:
"I congratulate President Kim Dae-Jung on his selection as the winner
of this year's Nobel Peace Prize. I can think of few leaders who have done
so much over so many years to earn this honor. It is a fitting tribute to
his courage in promoting peace and reconciliation on the Korean Peninsula
and to his life-long dedication of the principle that peace depends on
respect for human rights.
"This prize not only celebrates what President Kim has accomplished;
it inspires those of us who cherish peace and freedom to help him realize
his vision. Since his historic summit with Chairman Kim Chong-il,
prospects for a better future on the Korean Peninsula have risen greatly.
The American people will stand with the people of Korea until the sunshine
of peace and freedom illuminates the entire Korean Peninsula."
Q Wow.
MR. SIEWERT: Poetic -- for the NSC, especially. (Laughter.) They
must have some new staff over there. (Laughter.)
The only other thing I have to tell you is that the President has been
on the phone again this morning with leaders in the Mideast. He talked to
Crown Prince Abdullah this morning and he's also been speaking to King
Mohammed of Morocco. And we're continuing to work with everyone in the
region there to do everything we can to break the cycle of violence and try
to defuse tension in that part of the world.
The President will meet with his national security team this afternoon
at 5:00 p.m. We expect the Vice President to join him for that meeting.
He'll be joined by Secretary Albright, Secretary Cohen, National Security
Advisor Sandy Berger. And he will review both what we know about the
U.S.S. Cole and the latest in the Mideast.
Q The Vice President has been spending a lot of time on the
campaign trail and hasn't been here very much. Why is it necessary for him
to be here now? Is the President trying to give him a boost by including
him?
MR. SIEWERT: I think it was his decision to come back here, but the
President appreciates -- always has appreciated his work on the Mideast
peace process. He's been to the region four times, worked very closely on
the bi-national commission we have with the Egyptians, and has been in
contact with the President from the campaign trail about these issues over
the weekend -- and was back here, obviously, again yesterday.
He's kept abreast of what happens here by his national i security
advisor, Leon Fuerth. And the President looks forward to spending a little
more time with him today.
Q And is Bush also being briefed by --
MR. SIEWERT: I understand he's received a briefing through his
national security team. Sandy Berger spoke to Condi Rice yesterday, who
had called to get an update.
Q Jake, are there conditions holding up agreement on a summit? Has
there been any change in that dynamic?
MR. SIEWERT: We are not setting any preconditions to a meeting --
Q What about the other side?
MR. SIEWERT: -- although I think it's going to take -- both sides
have a right to expect something to come from the meeting. And I think
that they're both focused on what such a meeting might produce.
As you know, as we said this morning, President Mubarak has suggested
the idea of a summit, something that we had raised last week. We welcome
his support for such a meeting. We're working with him, and we'll make a
judgment about whether it's useful and whether it would be productive
working with the parties.
As I said this morning, we don't want to set any preconditions for
such a summit. We continue to expect, apart from that issue, that it's
important that both sides renounce violence, and recognize that differences
are best resolved at the negotiating table and not in the streets. But we
would like to get people to a point where we could have clear lines of
dialogue between the parties directly because we think that might provide a
way to defuse tension and reduce the conflict in the region.
Q You say it's important for both sides to renounce violence. But
if they don't, and since you have no preconditions and a reluctance to do
so or a refusal to do so would not preclude a summit?
MR. SIEWERT: We'll make an overall assessment on whether a summit --
whether some sort of meeting like that suggested by President Mubarak would
be helpful in reducing tension. And, ultimately, that decision will be
driven by what we think might be effective or what provides some realistic
chance of defusing tension.
But at the same time, we've been crystal clear that we think everyone
needs to renounce violence and that public declarations to renounce
violence would be helpful, given the level of violence we've seen over the
last two weeks.
Q Last night the Senior Official One suggested that there were
several steps that needed to happen before we could really talk about a
summit. They were sort of on the ground, backing away from violence, some
steps that the parties needed to make. But it sounds like today the
discussion really has advanced fairly quickly, that those parties, Barak
and Arafat, are, in fact, engaged in talking about the possibility of a
summit, that perhaps we've moved further than where we thought we were.
MR. SIEWERT: I think that there was a lot of discussion about that
yesterday. That's exactly -- the President was focused both on the
process, but also on the substance that might allow us to reestablish some
lines of communication between the parties; and that's why the President
was burning up the phone lines yesterday and spent the better part of his
day in contact with leaders in the region.
Q Jake, there are enormous security concerns for such a summit.
What can they really accomplish in person, other than a photo op, that they
can't --
MR. SIEWERT: We think a meeting might be productive. We haven't made
that assessment yet, that it would be would be productive. But a meeting
could be productive. We obviously don't discuss security matters from this
podium or anywhere else, really. But we think that there might be a
scenario under which some sort of face-to-face meeting could help defuse
the tension and reduce the level of violence in the Mideast.
Q Jake, Mrs. Clinton, Vice President Gore and a number of
Republicans have all pointed their finger at Arafat, saying he is the one
who needs to come out and make a statement renouncing violence; they've
single him out. Is the President willing to do that, or ready to do that,
to say he bears that responsibility?
MR. SIEWERT: We're playing a role here that is somewhat unique, as
the broker in these talks and we think -- we've said it's important that
public renunciation of violence is important, statements to that effect are
helpful and we're going to continue to say that. But we are doing our best
to remain in a position where we can play a useful role as mediator in this
conflict and we'll do everything we can to try to keep the trust of both
sides.
Q -- from the campaign trail that the Republican Vice Presidential
candidate said that the time for diplomacy and talk is over, it's time for
action.
MR. SIEWERT: Well, I haven't seen those reports. We're actively
engaged in talks. I'm not sure what -- I'd have to know what he was
referring to, to --
Q Do you find that suggestion helpful?
MR. SIEWERT: I'd have to hear a little bit more about the context of
that. But, frankly, we're engaged in diplomacy right now. Diplomacy is
the best way to resolve this. I'm not sure what action he refers to.
Q Jake, I thought both the Senior Officials yesterday, and you,
this morning, suggested that the talks could also be a way of defusing the
violence.
MR. SIEWERT: Yes, that's what I said.
Q So is that one of the possibilities now, for the summit? That
you could actually call a summit to stop the violence, as opposed to having
that --
MR. SIEWERT: I'm not sure I understand. I think that we believe that
we'll make a judgment about whether or not a summit, or some sort of
meeting like that suggested by President Mubarak, would be useful in
defusing tension in the region and stopping the violence.
What I said this morning simply was that it's probably a bit
unrealistic, although a desired outcome, to have absolutely no violence in
the region before we meet. But we're not going to say that we can't meet
while there's still some sort of violence. There is no acceptable level of
violence. At the same time, a meeting might be helpful in reducing the
overall level. So we'll make a judgment about that as we continue to
consult with leaders in the region.
Q Do you expect to make that judgment today?
Q -- closing of U.S. embassies in Africa?
MR. SIEWERT: I understand that the State Department has closed
roughly 37 embassies around the world, mostly in the region, in the
Mideast. But there are some outside of that region. But you'll have to
check with them on the exact closures.
Q Jake, would the President attend a summit if he felt there was
little chance that the summit would not result in a resumption of the peace
process?
MR. SIEWERT: We think that in the end, that the parties need to get
back to the table, and that that's where their differences will be
resolved. I think that -- we, again, haven't set a precondition, so it's
hard to answer that question. But we think that in the end, it might be
helpful to have a meeting, face-to-face, so that we can reduce the level of
violence. That's our most immediate objective.
Ultimately, we think the parties belong at the table, belong at the
negotiating table, and that's where they're best able to narrow their
differences. But there may be some utility to meeting in the region and
trying to find a way to reduce the overall level of tension.
Q How concerned are you to avoid a repetition of Paris last week,
which I think one of the Israelis described as a "fiasco"?
MR. SIEWERT: Yes, we would not -- I think there was good work done at
Paris. We came very close to having the parties sign an agreement. In any
case, they left with a shared sense of understanding of certain security
concerns and there has been some level of actual cooperation on security,
even in the midst of all this conflict. It may have done something -- it
may not be -- it may be hard to imagine at this point, but it may have done
something to actually keep the level of violence from escalating.
At the same time, both parties at talks there said that they were
committed to reducing the overall level of violence and they also talked to
their security forces, to their police forces and instructed them to do
everything they can.
Q It seems to have gotten worse since then.
MR. SIEWERT: I am not disputing that the situation is very tense,
remains difficult. But we don't think that there's any -- we continue to
believe that there was some valuable work done. The Secretary of State met
face-to-face and made some progress in terms of getting their security
forces to reduce tension in what was a very volatile situation last week.
Q Can you give us some sense of timing on the assessment for a
summit or any other meeting? I mean, given the fact -- given the urgency
of the situation on the ground and the risks --
MR. SIEWERT: The urgency of the situation is exactly why we are
embarked on the kind of diplomacy that we are embarked on. The President
canceled his schedule today, he pretty much cleared his schedule yesterday.
We are continuing to look at the schedule every hour to determine whether
we need to do some of the events that we had scheduled or whether we cancel
them, so that the President can devote his energies. But no one should
doubt that we're working every minute that we can on defusing the tension
here.
In terms of making a decision, I can't give you a realistic deadline
on when we might make a decision about a meeting. We will just be having
to look at that minute by minute.
Q Jake, is the United States ruling out retaliation if the
perpetrators of the U.S.S. Cole act can be found?
MR. SIEWERT: No. The President said if we determine who is
responsible, they will be held accountable.
Q Can you define "held accountable"?
MR. SIEWERT: No.
Q And are you it a terrorism act?
MR. SIEWERT: That's something that we're still in the process. We're
operating under the assumption that this was a terrorist act. But there
are investigators in the region who are looking exactly at that issue and
trying to determine who's responsible.
Q Yesterday, former Secretary of State Larry Eagleburger suggested
that the peace process was effectively dead until sometime next year.
Isn't that a fairly realistic assessment?
MR. SIEWERT: No. I think that we are focused on what we can do to
reduce the level of violence right now and that's our immediate goal. But
both of the parties have indicated some willingness, amidst some of the
rhetoric that you've heard from both sides, indicated a willingness to get
back to the table to resolve some of these final status issues and we're
going to focus now on reducing the violence.
But we certainly would not rule out trying to push them if we're able
to accomplish that towards resolving some of their differences. It may be
difficult, but that doesn't mean that we shouldn't make the effort.
Q Didn't the Senior Official yesterday suggest that the wounds
caused by this were so deep --
MR. SIEWERT: They are very deep.
Q -- that it would not be easy just to pick up where we left off
before?
MR. SIEWERT: No one is saying it would be easy. But there's no point
in abandoning the process. There are -- what is driving a lot of the
violence in the region are deep-seated wounds. We heard that yesterday
from this podium. At the same time, sooner or later, we are going to have
to sit down --
At the same time, sooner or later, we're going to have to sit down
with both sides and figure out a way to narrow those differences. And
that's something that in the long run, I think we said yesterday, was
eminently worthy of the effort that we've been expending here.
Q Jake, in Chicago there have been three attacks on Jewish people
and apparently the police are holding people of Palestinian descent,
American citizens who conducted the attacks. Are you bothered by the fact
that apparently this conflict is also coming home?
MR. SIEWERT: I had not seen those reports, but obviously we deplore
any violence against any American citizen, whether in the United States or
around the world.
Q Jake, who else is on the President's call list today? Is it odd
that he hasn't talked to Arafat or Barak today, yet, and will he?
MR. SIEWERT: We've been in pretty -- we, obviously, spoke to Arafat
three or four times yesterday; and spoke to Barak. I don't know, we have a
pretty extensive call list for you and we'll try to give you updates as the
day goes on.
MR. CROWLEY: Kofi Annan is also --
MR. SIEWERT: Kofi Annan we expect -- Sandy, I know has talked to him
several times today already. And he is still engaged in a lot of diplomacy
in the region.
Q -- Kofi Annan is speaking to Arafat, sort of like, is he carrying
the water with Arafat today?
MR. SIEWERT: Obviously, the President spoke directly to Arafat four
times, so it's hard to imagine that we're not -- the President is engaged
and obviously has been talking to him directly. But we've also been
working, obviously, through the Secretary General in the region, as well.
MR. CROWLEY: The leaders on both sides, the leaders the President is
talking to are talking to both the Chairman and the Prime Minister.
MR. SIEWERT: Yes. As we said yesterday, both the King of Jordan and
the President of Egypt have been talking directly to both parties, as well.
Q It seems like everybody is willing to have a summit, you know,
they're all eager to do this, but can't quite get an agreement to pull it
off. Why is that?
MR. SIEWERT: Well, obviously, I think, as I said to you this morning,
that people want to make sure that maybe if they're not on the same page,
they're at least in the same chapter, before we sit down and try to work
through the differences. And I think people want some assurances, both
parties want some assurances that the other side is operating in good
faith. Their level of trust has been eroded over the last couple weeks,
and we're doing everything we can to try to restore a sense that we can
work together.
Q Jake, there's a group that supposedly is claiming some credit for
the Cole?
MR. SIEWERT: We've seen those reports. We'll make our own
determination.
Q Are they even credible? Is it even possible, this group?
MR. SIEWERT: I'm not going to speculate on who's responsible and
who's claiming credit until we make our own determination.
Q Jake, if there's a meeting on the Middle East, would it have to
be in the region? Could it be somewhere else?
MR. SIEWERT: Well, that's just the option that's under consideration.
President Mubarak has indicated a willingness to host a meeting. That's an
initiative we discussed, obviously, earlier this week and last week. And
we think it might well be a worthy one, and that's something we're pursuing
right now. But we're not ruling out any other option in the future.
Wow. Complete silence. I guess we'll wrap up. We actually don't
have a week ahead for you. (Laughter.) But we're going to do our best to
try to let you know what the President's travel plans are for tomorrow,
today. So I'll try to get that for you later today. And we'll put a week
ahead out on paper.
I think -- since I wasn't asked, but I was asked this morning --
obviously, there are plans underway for some sort of memorial service for
the sailors of the Cole. And we'll be working with the Department of
Defense, but we don't have anything to announce yet. But I think that you
can expect that the President will find some way to memorialize the Sailors
who died serving their country.
Q Jake, one quick question about the conversation that the
President had with Saudi Crown Prince Abdullah this morning. Did that
focus exclusively on the Middle East peace process, or did it also concern
oil prices?
MR. SIEWERT: I don't believe there was any discussion of oil in this
particular call, though. That's something that we're obviously in close
contact with the Saudi Arabian government with all the time.
Q So the only calls he made this morning were to Abdullah and to
Mohammed of Morocco?
MR. SIEWERT: That's correct.
Q Did Mohammed offer to host a summit?
MR. SIEWERT: Not that I'm aware of.
Q Are we likely to see the President today?
MR. SIEWERT: The radio address, I expect will -- I don't think so.
The radio address will probably focus on the events of the last day or two.
Q Any specific steps that were taken to free potential American
hostages in Ecuador?
MR. SIEWERT: The embassy is working with the governments in the
region on that.
Q Is the White House doing anything in particular? Do we have a
team working on it?
MR. SIEWERT: I'll check.
Q Jake, what is the White House --
MR. SIEWERT: I thought we were done.
Q Yes, we are.
Q No, we're not. (Laughter.)
MR. SIEWERT: Terry, someone is challenging your authority here.
Q Thank you. (Laughter.)
Q Jake, what is the White House's official stand on Monday's
Million Family March led by Minister Louis Farrakhan?
MR. SIEWERT: I'm not aware that we have an official stand, but I can
check.
Q Do you have an unofficial stand? (Laughter.)
MR. SIEWERT: No.
Q Especially in light of all this Lieberman-Farrakhan controversy.
MR. SIEWERT: I don't know, I'll check. Honestly, I don't know. I
had literally forgotten that it was happening.
Q I guess that's a stand. (Laughter.)
Q Is the White House in favor of unifying families like the Million
Man March --
MR. SIEWERT: I'll check. I'll check it. Thanks. (Laughter.)
END 1:47 P.M. EDT
President and First Lady | Vice President and Mrs. Gore
Record of Progress | The Briefing Room
Gateway to Government | Contacting the White House | White House for Kids
White House History | White House Tours | Help
Privacy Statement