| Publications | France A-Z | France/U.S. Relations | France in the U.S. | News | Aller aux Etats-Unis | Just for Kids | Going to France | Contact |
|
Daily Press Briefing Statements made by [Please note that only the original French text issued by the French Ministry of Foreign Affairs may be considered official.]
MIDEAST
I want to remind you that the Foreign Minister will be speaking about the Middle East on France-Inter at 1 P.M., and I also want to reiterate the statement he made yesterday evening: "The tragedy of the Middle East is likely to grow even worse if the cycle of vengeance continues.
Everything must be done to put a stop to suicide bombings and terrorism. But attacking the Palestinian Authority to weaken or even eliminate it would be a fatal error. On the contrary, what is urgently needed is for it to be able to commit itself fully and concretely to the fight against terrorism. And the real challenge is for Israelis and Palestinians to immediately resume their dialogue, without pre-conditions, and to fight terrorism together."
Q - A fatal error for whom?
A fatal error for everyone. Current developments are leading in the wrong direction, going in the opposite direction of what should be done. To defeat terrorism, Israel and the Palestinian authority have to combine their efforts. That presumes that the two parties--that means the Palestinian Authority as well--have the material and political means to fight terrorism. In order for Yasser Arafat to have the political means to fight terrorism, he must be able to hold out real political prospects.
Q - Do you think Israel is weakening the Palestinian Authority, and in your view, is there a direct link between Arafat, Hamas and Islamic Jihad?
With regard to the weakening of the Palestinian Authority, that seems clear; the current actions are weakening the Palestinian Authority.
As for Hamas, the Foreign Minister has just noted how different its objectives are from those of Mr. Arafat. We are expecting a lot of Mr. Arafat when it comes to acting effectively against terrorism--that's assuming he has the means.
Q - France has asked for peace talks to be held. So far, Israel has responded negatively. Can you confirm that it is the only country responding that way?
For the time being, the United States has not responded; it is still thinking about a bilateral approach with the parties. The idea of peace talks has not yet been formally presented to the parties to my knowledge; we therefore cannot say it has been officially rejected. Considerations are ongoing.
NATO will hold a fall ministerial session in Brussels on December 6 and 7.
This ministerial session of the North Atlantic Council comes at a time dominated by terrorism issues, following the attacks of September 11, and by discussions on the future of NATO-Russian relations.
The formal ministerial meeting between the North Atlantic Council and the General Affairs Council on December 6 will facilitate the continuation of contacts between NATO and the European Union. These have taken on an exemplary concrete dimension with the cooperation between the Secretaries-General in the Balkans.
The meeting of the Joint Permanent Council on December 7, attended by Mr. Ivanov, will help give a new boost to NATO-Russian relations, in response to President Putin's new strategic orientations.
The NATO-Ukraine Commission and the Council of Euro-Atlantic Partnership will also meet at the ministerial level on this occasion.
The Foreign Minister will be in Brussels on December 6 and the morning of December 7.
I want to draw your attention to the important subject of our relations with Russia. I want to take this opportunity to distribute the statement issued on the sidelines of the French-British Summit last week about Russia, and I would like to comment on it briefly: France, which originated the Founding Act of NATO-Russian relations in 1997 would like to respond to President Putin's strategic choice, which is a choice for modernization.
We are responding at a bilateral level, but also within the different international forums--the EU, NATO, the G8. NATO is not involved here.
With regard to NATO, we nevertheless agree to 20-nation contacts with Russia. This new forum must not be purely symbolic as before, but must correspond to an actual new relationship dealing with questions of substance, and which can result in joint decisions with Russia.
What subjects? They could be military or defense subjects, which are at the heart of NATO's jurisdiction: disarmament, arms control, the assessment of ballistic threats, the strengthening of instruments to fight ballistic proliferation. They could also be antimissile theater defenses or the military aspects of counterterrorism (the exchange of information, protection of forces, military infrastructures). On the operational level, we could consider planning and strategic direction among the 20 parties, and Russia's participation in the chain of command).
The Bonn-Petersberg talks are nearing their end. An agreement is within view. Mr. Brahimi has drawn up a draft agreement whose corrected version was submitted to the Afghan delegations yesterday evening. This document was drawn up in English; it is currently being translated into Pashtun and Dari, Afghanistan's two official languages. We hope that the delegations will notify Mr. Brahimi as soon as possible of their agreement on the document, which remains at this time a working document. The four Afghan delegations are at this very moment communicating to Mr. Brahimi the names they propose for the establishment of an interim government, that is to say, the executive branch. In the middle of the day today, Mr. Brahimi will assemble the four delegations and submit the list he is proposing, on this basis, to form the provisional authority. Mr. Brahimi has assumed the responsibility for presenting that list.
Q - What is France's position?
We hope that the delegations will notify Mr. Brahimi as soon as possible of their agreement on the document, and on the list of names allowing for the establishment of a provisional authority.
Q - The French authorities have always expressed the importance of sending humanitarian aid to that country. Unfortunately, French humanitarian aid has been blocked in Uzbekistan for two weeks. Considering the catastrophic situation of Afghan civilians, threatened by starvation and drought, can France consider sending such aid through other countries neighboring Afghanistan?
We have a flexible mechanism. We are trying to adapt it as best we can each time, to make it as useful as possible. We have managed to send a certain number of men to accomplish the mission established jointly with the United States, i.e. to secure the airport of Mazar-e Sharif. That mission should allow humanitarian aid to arrive under better circumstances, whether it comes from NGOs or from the United Nations. Are we ruling out the transit of humanitarian aid through other places, based on need? No, that is something we would certainly not rule out.
The President and Prime Minister emphasized to Mr. Verhofstadt what they would like to see happen in the process of considering the future of Europe, a process that was launched in Nice. We hope this ambition is reflected in the Laeken declaration. We hope the European Council in Laeken will be a real success and that the Convention, which will be put in place early next year, will operate under the best possible conditions. We have many ambitions for Laeken and for the convention.
It is in this context that the President and Prime Minister conveyed their remarks on the draft declaration of the Belgian presidency. These remarks are aimed at making the declaration a text that is both ambitious and consensual.
That is true in particular for questions that the Convention must delve into more deeply. They must be open and balanced. Questions and answers must not be given at the same time. We are attached to seeing the work of the convention resulting in the formulation of clear options. It will then be up to the Intergovernmental Conference to decide.
For now, we trust the Belgian Presidency to present an ambitious draft declaration in Laeken that the European Council can agree on.
Q - Was there any question about the progress announced by Turkey with regard to security policy?
That did not come up in yesterday's conversations with Mr. Verhofstadt, to my knowledge. The British returned from Turkey with a certain number of elements; they are presenting them to us for the first time today in Brussels, at the Politics and Security Committee. We must study these elements, keeping in mind that for more than a year, France has been trying to unblock this issue while respecting the principles decided on in Nice.
DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC OF THE CONGO/FRANCE
Deputy Minister for Cooperation and Francophony Charles Josselin will receive Mr. Amos Ngongi, the UN Secretary-General's special envoy to the Democratic Republic of the Congo, on December 5 at 6:00 P.M.
Their conversations will focus on developments in the political, diplomatic and humanitarian situation of the DRC and of countries involved in the conflict. Mr. Josselin and Mr. Ngongi should notably discuss the conditions for continuing the deployment of the UN peacekeeping mission, MONUC. It is now preparing to enter its third phase.
They will also talk about the disarmament of irregular foreign forces, some components of which were recently assembled by DRC in Kamina, and the withdrawal of foreign government armies, beginning with those of the "non-invited states," i.e. Rwanda and Uganda. The problem of maintaining the military presence of pro-Rwandan rebels of the Congolese Rally for Democracy in the town of Kisangani, contrary to Security Council demands, must also be resolved. France supports Security Council efforts to obtain this withdrawal and we expect the DRC-Goma to comply with Security Council demands and proceed without further ado with the demilitarization of Kisangani. We will continue to emphasize this to the Rwandan authorities. It will be an important part of conversations with Mr. Ngongi.
Mr. Charles Josselin will receive Mr. Ibrahim Gambari, the UN Secretary-General's special adviser for Central and Southern Africa, on December 5 at 5 P.M.
Their conversation will deal with the political and humanitarian situation in Angola and the contribution the UN could make to seeking a negotiated solution to the conflict that has been tearing Angola apart for 26 years.
After leaving Paris, Mr. Gambari should be carrying out a mission to Angola from December 9 to 15 to consult with the government, political parties and civilian representatives.
We will once again tell Mr. Gambara how much we support UN efforts to improve the effectiveness of the mechanism in place for Angola, notably efforts to improve the effectiveness of sanctions against the rebel movement, UNITA. We support a political solution to the conflict on the basis of the Lusaka protocol and pertinent Council resolutions.
Foreign Commerce Secretary François Huwart will visit New Delhi and Bombay on December 4-6, accompanied by a delegation of business leaders in India. Apart from addressing the Indian Economic Summit and speaking to the French-Indian business community, he will have several discussions with members of the Indian government. The minister will also open the proceedings of the 11th French-Indian Mixed Economic Commission, the last meeting of which was held in Paris in May 2000.
France took note of the final communiqué issued at the CEN SAD meeting devoted to the Central African Republic held in Khartoum on December 3. It should be followed by a meeting in Libreville.
France, which strongly calls for a peaceful resolution of tensions in the Central African Republic, can only encourage initiatives promoting national reconciliation and the restoration of stability and security in that country.
Q - As part of the war on international terrorism, the American executive branch is making a certain number of changes to its justice system--the right to detain individuals, the right to a fair defense, military tribunals, trials that can result in sentences including the death penalty. How does France see these changes, which have been strongly criticized even in certain circles in the U.S.? Is France prepared to extradite individuals at the Americans' request in order for them to be subjected to this kind of justice that seems a little inappropriate in certain cases?
It is true that there are debates within the United States on this question, but nevertheless, it remains an American domestic issue. As for extradition, that is a hypothetical question. First we would have to know the conditions in which such a request was presented. If it were to occur, it would be first and foremost a judicial issue; we would examine it and would respond within the framework of applicable French law.
Q - It is a domestic issue, but that kind of justice concerns non-Americans. That law is aimed at foreigners. It is therefore a human rights issue. Should France, a great defender of human rights, be concerned about the kind of change we are seeing in the United States?
For the time being, such tribunals are not in place. We have faith in the wisdom and maturity of those debating the issue in the U.S. to find solutions that do not elicit criticism. For now, I have no particular comment on something that for the most part hasn't yet been made concrete.
Q - Negotiations on the island's future are beginning today. Do you have any comment?
We have always encouraged such initiatives which, we hope, will allow for a resumption of dialogue. What's important is that this dialogue is taking place within the framework of the UN. We noted this last April. We support the UN Secretary-General's efforts to find a global and fair solution to the Cyprus question and now more than ever, we invite the parties to redouble their efforts at a time when there are important commitments in the region and for Cyprus to reach a resolution within the best possible time-frame. It is in the interest of all people on the island. It is also in the interest of stability and security in the Eastern Mediterranean.
Q - The president of the Polisario criticized France today following President Chirac's statement upon his return from the Maghreb. The President referred to the Western Sahara as the "Southern provinces of Morocco." Was that a mistake or does it indicate a change in France's position on that issue?
France's position on the Western Sahara has not changed. As the President said on several occasions during his trip to the Maghreb, "We support the efforts deployed by the UN Secretary-General's personal envoy, Mr. James Baker."
As you know, Mr. Baker is seeking the means to achieve a solution agreed upon by all the parties in accordance with the pertinent Security Council resolutions, notably resolutions 1359 and 1380.
If President Chirac used the formulations you indicated during his trip, that doesn't mean his position, and that of France, isn't constant and clear. It
Embassy of France, December 4, 2001
|
