| 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.] MOROCCO
An earthquake badly damaged the province of Al Hoceima in Morocco during the night of February 23 –24, causing the deaths of dozens of people and injuring large numbers.
The French authorities wish to express their complete solidarity with Morocco in this painful time of adversity and offer their most sincere, heartfelt condolences to the Moroccan authorities and the families of the victims.
Foreign Minister Dominique de Villepin has sent a message of sympathy to his Moroccan counterpart, and the interior minister has done likewise.
The French authorities are ready to provide all the necessary assistance, especially in terms of civil protection, depending on what the Moroccans say they need.
Our embassy in Morocco and our consulate in Tangiers are mobilized to check that there are no French citizens among the victims.
Q - Are you expecting Morocco to ask you to send help to the area?
Yes, that’s usual. We’ll decide based on what our Moroccan friends say they need. Clearly, we’re quite ready to provide any assistance deemed necessary.
(...)
Yesterday we saw the second-largest city in the country, Cap-Haitien, taken by armed rebels. As you know, the legitimate opposition still hasn’t given its response to the scenario for resuming dialogue proposed by the Caribbean Community nations, which is the center piece of the peace plan formulated by Haiti’s main external partners. New efforts are continuing today to convince the legitimate opposition to adopt a more constructive attitude. The minister remains mobilized and is in regular contact with his colleagues from the countries involved in the crisis. In addition, Dominique de Villepin is due to have contacts later in the week with representatives of both the government and the opposition. You will be given details of these contacts as soon as we’re in a position to do so.
Q - When you say contacts, will these be personal contacts in Paris or is the minister going to go to Haiti? And when you say the weekend, what does that mean?
The contacts so far have been mostly by telephone. I believe I told you yesterday that the minister had talked on Sunday with Colin Powell, the Brazilian chancellor, Mr. Amorim, and the South African Foreign Minister, Ms Zuma. Yesterday, there were other contacts. Today, still others. So far, they’ve been by phone. The meetings with representatives of the government and opposition are planned for sometime next week and will take place in Paris.
Q - When you refer to the opposition, whom do you mean precisely?
We’re referring to the political opposition, the parties, all those who have rallied around this program, their program, the same people whom we expect to try to enter into a political dialogue, which we believe is the answer that the situation in Haiti requires.
Q - In order to get the opposition and government people to come to Paris, will there be new French proposals or is there something you’re going to put on the table which hasn’t been offered so far?
We’re convinced, like all our partners, that the crisis in Haiti is political. It therefore requires a political solution. And in a way, it’s becoming rather like a race against the clock, against the rising tide of violence in Haiti. That’s why we decided with the agreement of our partners, again the countries most directly concerned or involved in the situation in Haiti, to back the scenario outlined by CARICOM, which is based on the resumption of dialogue between the Haitian parties. That’s the point we’re at now but obviously we’re conferring with our partners constantly to see what can still be done to convince the government, which has accepted it, and the opposition which is to give its response by this evening, to resume dialogue and get down to work on the basis of these proposals and see just how far they can go.
France condemns in the strongest possible terms the massacre on January 21 in the displaced persons’ camp at Barlonyo, in northern Uganda in which nearly 200 people were killed, most of them women and children.
Everything suggests that the Lord’s Resistance Army carried out this heinous act. It must be roundly denounced, and be the subject of appropriate judicial proceedings.
France recalls that only a dialogue on the substance between the Ugandan parties will end a cycle of violence that has been going on in northern Uganda for far too many years.
France will be providing Chad with 3,850 metric tons of grain, valued at 800,000 euros approximately, as part of France’s food aid. This gesture comes in the wake of Dominique de Villepin’s visit to Chad last week. It is also evidence of French support for the Chad government in order to lessen food insecurity in that country.
Iraqi Trade Minister Ali Abdel-Amir Allaoui will be received in Paris tomorrow. Mr. Allaoui will have talks with Foreign Trade Minister Delegate François Loos. He will also have meetings at the Foreign Ministry, and a meeting with French business leaders is planned by MEDEF.
The visit reflects our wish to pursue regular dialogue with the current Iraqi bodies. I recall in this regard that a number of contacts have taken place over the past few months in both Baghdad and Paris, specifically there was a visit on December 15 and 16 by a delegation from the Iraqi Governing Council led by Abdel Aziz Al-Hakim.
The talks with Mr. Allaoui will be an opportunity for in-depth exchanges on the situation in Iraq and the prospects for change in that country, especially in the economic sphere and reconstruction.
Q - Yesterday the UN secretary-general presented his report to the Security Council after the weeklong long visit by a mission and his representative, saying grosso modo that elections can’t be held satisfactorily until the end of 2004 or early 2005 but that the transfer of sovereignty should still take place by June 30 as planned. Does France have any comment on this report?
We noted with interest the secretary-general’s report which is to be discussed in the Security Council in the next few days.
As you know, we’ve advocated all along that the UN should play a full role, take a full part in the process to restore peace and security in Iraq. You also know what our position is on the substance—that it’s necessary to restore Iraq’s sovereignty, in other words put the people in charge of their future.
Q - Now that you’re sure there won’t be elections for appointing a representative and legitimate government, and that the method of choosing such a government through what the Americans call caucuses was rejected and virtually abandoned, what in your view would be the best mechanism for establishing a government that is legitimate and representative of the Iraqi people?
Q - Is France going to update its former proposals on enlarging what there is now?
All this is being discussed with the Iraqis and at the United Nations to decide what formula will give the greatest legitimacy, as you say, to make the Iraqi provisional government more acceptable. In our view, one of the key elements, and we’ve said this all along, is inclusiveness, i.e. giving the greatest possible number of Iraqi parties and groups, all those who reject violence in short, the possibility of contributing to this phase which will be important.
Q - One member of the current Governing Council in Iraq said that Iraq currently proposes to recover certain Jordanian and Kuwaiti territories? Do you have any comment?
In our view, clearly, we are committed to the integrity of Iraq’s borders just as we are committed to the integrity of the borders of all the countries in the region.
Q - About the International Court of Justice and the hearings now being held on the wall of separation. France was supposed to be presenting a memorandum in the form of a written document. When is it going to do this? What are the main lines of the French comments, aside from the fact obviously that the court wasn’t the best place but that if it declared itself competent, you agreed?
We submitted it about two weeks ago as did a number of other countries. That was the procedure since there was a deadline for filing a memorandum.
As to its context, I’ve already summed it up but I’ll be glad to go back over it again. It’s a legal document which addresses two main points: procedure, i. e. the question of the Court’s competence, and the substance of the dossier.
Regarding the competence of the court: we propose to rely on the court’s wisdom, i.e. it is up to the ICJ itself to decide whether or not it is competent in this matter. You will understand perfectly well that the court comprises a large enough number of distinguished jurists for us to have confidence in their judgment on this point.
As to the substance of the matter—and here I refer you obviously to what has been said by the various French authorities (president, foreign minister) in the past few weeks—our position is very clear. We do not contest the principle of the wall of separation since, after all, everyone is entitled to decide what measures may be dictated by security constraints. And we know that this is a very important aspect in the Israeli government’s position. However, we consider that the path of the wall is illegal, that is to say, that this path encroaches in many places, often rather substantially, on international lines, on the 1967 line. The route not only amounts to an encroachment but also in addition prejudges one of the important points in the roadmap—the negotiation on the borders that will have to be defined between Israel and Palestine.
That’s the substance of the French position which is stated in the memorandum. We’re now going to follow procedure. I understand there are three days of hearings—yesterday, today and tomorrow. Then I suppose that the IJC will have to consider all the aspects that have been submitted.
Q - The minister said this morning that it wasn’t so much a legal question as a political issue which had to be negotiated. I agree with him, but the Israelis don’t want to negotiate. They’re not willing to accept anything. What can the Palestinians do in that case?
Right from the beginning, and we said this when the draft resolution submitted by the Arab group was presented to the UN General Assembly last November, we’ve said, along with our European partners, that the issue is far more political than legal and that in the circumstances it probably wasn’t opportune to refer it to the Court, which is a legal body. That’s the reason we abstained, with our EU partners, on the draft resolution in the General Assembly. As it turns out, the draft was voted and the resolution adopted, and now the Court has the matter before it. But that doesn’t detract from our basic analysis. The issue is indeed primarily political.
Q - There were two statements yesterday, one by the Israeli prime minister, and the other by the secretary-general of the Arab league. Mr. Moussa says that the Arab League is ready again to make peace with Israel if the Hebrew state respects its commitments. Mr. Sharon says that the government of Abou Ala is a government that murders and lies; that it is impossible to reach an agreement with a government like that. Do you have any comment on to these two statements?
My only comment is to note that, even so, a document exists which was accepted by the two parties, called the roadmap; that the roadmap requires a number of commitments to be observed on both sides (they’re listed). Our objective continues to be the implementation of the roadmap because there is no alternative to this perspective for a solution to the crisis and a settlement to the conflict in the Middle East.
Q - Do you have any reaction to the message attributed to the no. 2 in Al Qaeda condemning the French law banning religious signs, which he attributes to hate on the part of western crusaders, and in which he refers to agents of Zionist crusaders in Egypt, Turkey and Tunisia?
No. The statements attributed to Mr. Zawahri do not require comment on my part. Moreover, the authenticity of the tape has still to be established./.
Embassy of France, February 25, 2004
|
