State Department Noon Briefing

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE
DAILY PRESS BRIEFING

MONDAY, APRIL 30, 2001 - 1:15 P.M.
(ON THE RECORD UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED)

QUESTION: Did you see the story about the UN official coming up with
information concerning Iraq and their supposed nuclear radiation
capability?

MR. REEKER: That was the story that appeared in one of our nation's
leading newspapers on the weekend, I believe. I did read that,
regarding an alleged 1987 radiological bomb test. I think we have
discussed from here before that we know that Iraq actively pursued
weapons of mass destruction, including radiological weapons, and that
has been a great concern of ours obviously for many years.

We agree with the article's assessment that Iraq never successfully
developed a radiological device. UN inspections largely destroyed
Iraq's nuclear infrastructure intended to support a weapons program.
But, as we have also discussed, Iraq continued efforts to acquire
weapons of mass destruction, and that is our primary reason that we
insist on strong controls to prevent Iraq from acquiring items of
concern that would aid them in that goal. We are continuing our
efforts to ensure such controls are in place while preventing Saddam
from using the sanctions regime as a weapon against his own people.

I think it goes without saying and follows on from that New York Times
article that if Iraq wants to make clear that its weapons of mass
destruction activity has ceased, it needs to let UN inspections resume
in Iraq and to cooperate fully with those inspections and with the
international community.

Q: On that same subject, Phil, we were told by the Secretary back in
February that the Administration was working on a new sanctions regime
that would tighten sanctions on certain items and relax them on
civilian goods. We haven't heard anything about that. We were told it
was supposed to be ready for the Arab League summit in March.

Where does this stand?

MR. REEKER: Well, I think some of you got your timings a little bit
misconstrued in terms of the process of that. It is something that is
still being reviewed, and in fact we have talked about that on and
off. It is an ongoing process. I will note, since some of you had
asked about it last week, that just over the weekend Assistant
Secretary of State for International Organization Affairs David Welch
and Assistant Secretary for Nonproliferation Affairs Robert Einhorn
were in Geneva where they consulted with Russian officials Saturday on
rebuilding the international consensus on how to bring Iraq into
compliance with UN Security Council resolutions.

So this is part of the process of consultations that the Secretary of
State talked about, and that will continue. Earlier in April, the 17th
and 18th, the same two Assistant Secretaries, Welch and Einhorn, had
policy discussions on Iraq issues with the French and British in,
obviously, Paris and London. So as Secretary Powell has said, there is
broad international support on the need for controls to prevent Iraq
from developing weapons of mass destruction like those discussed in
the article yesterday, or being able to revitalize its military
commitments which threaten its neighbors in the region as well as our
forces. But at the same time allowing civilian goods to reach the
Iraqi people.

And so that is the same process we are undergoing. There is still
consultation under way, and I just don't have any new things to
announce in that vein at this point.

Q: On the same subject, can you tell us what Assistant Secretary
Walker came back with from his trip to Syria, Jordan and Turkey? I
don't believe --

MR. REEKER: I think we had readouts on that after he came back.
Certainly a number of people have discussed it. I would be happy to go
back and have a look. We can look into it for you, Jonathan. He
visited some of those frontline states again in this process of
consultation that we discussed, but I would be happy to go back to
that. I know we had stuff on it and discussed it with --

Q: You don't have it with you?

MR. REEKER: I don't. And we had discussed it with a number of your
colleagues.

Q: Two quick questions on this. How would you characterize the
consultations so far, particularly with the Russians? And at this
point, is a timeline being talked about to coincide with the renewal
of the UN Oil-for-Food program at the end of June?

MR. REEKER: That is an obvious date that does need to be looked at
because, as you just said, that program comes up for renewal at that
time. So we'll be looking at it with that. I don't have any particular
timelines to discuss at this point, but obviously, as I said, it is an
ongoing process. Consultation is ongoing. And I would describe it not
only as ongoing, but as useful and in keeping with the plan outlined
by the Secretary, as your colleague noted, earlier this year.

Q: But, I mean, would you go so far as to just simply describe what
the Russian reaction at this point has been?

MR. REEKER: No, I would let the Russians speak for their own
reactions. I think it has been very useful to have that type of
conversation. And as I said, there is broad international consensus on
the need for controls to prevent the Iraqi threat from reemerging.

Q: If I can follow up. In those conversations over the weekend, have
we brought up the issue of potentially resuming commercial, regular
commercial flights between Baghdad and Moscow?

MR. REEKER: I don't know.