TRANSCRIPT: ALBRIGHT INTERVIEW WITH NATIONAL PUBLIC RADIO
USIA
USIS Washington File
15 January 1998
TRANSCRIPT: ALBRIGHT INTERVIEW WITH NATIONAL PUBLIC RADIO
(SecState discusses Iraq, Middle East 1/14/98) (1820)
New York -- Diplomacy backed by the threat of force is the approach
the United States will use to deal with Saddam Hussein's latest
refusal to allow an American-led U.N. inspection team access to
suspected weapons sites, according to Secretary of State Albright.
"We have believed that it is important to have a combination of a
diplomatic strategy, backed by the threat of the use of force,"
Albright said during a January 14 interview on National Public Radio's
"All Things Considered" program.
"We will pursue trying to make sure that Saddam Hussein lives up to
his obligations," she said, but noted that the United States will wait
and see what results Richard Butler, the chairman of the United
Nations Special Commission (UNSCOM) on Iraq, gets after his trip to
Baghdad at the end of next week.
The Iraqis have been trying to keep American experts off the
inspection teams, and have accused one American of being a spy.
Albright emphasized that "UNSCOM is composed of experts, who are not
selected by their nationality, but by their expertise. We count on
them to fulfill their professional responsibilities, and it is not up
to Saddam Hussein or Tariq Aziz to say who should be on UNSCOM; it is
up to Chairman Butler to make that decision."
Albright was asked about the Israeli Cabinet's declaration that in a
final settlement with the Palestinians, Israel would keep large
portions of the West Bank.
"I think that it is premature to make those kinds of statements at
this stage," Albright responded. She called for progress on further
Israeli troop withdrawals and the fulfillment of obligations under the
interim Israeli-Palestinian agreements dealing with opening airports
and safe passage. "I think the final status issues should be reserved
for final status negotiations," she added.
Albright declined to speculate on whether the Palestinians would be
politically able to meet the conditions demanded of them by the
Israeli Cabinet before Israeli troops will be withdrawn from the West
Bank. She pointed out that the Oslo process is based on "mutual
recognition, on reciprocity, on mutual respect as partners."
Albright said that she believes that despite the "gaps" in viewpoints,
both the Israelis and Palestinians have a desire for peace. The United
States is willing to play an important role in bringing about peace,
Albright said. "But frankly," she added, "the leaders themselves are
the ones that have to make the hard decisions in order to make the
peace process work."
Following is the State Department transcript:
(begin transcript)
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE
Office of the Spokesman
For Immediate Release
January 15, 1998
INTERVIEW OF SECRETARY OF STATE MADELEINE ALBRIGHT ON NPR'S "ALL
THINGS CONSIDERED"
New York, New York
January 14, 1998
QUESTION: Secretary Albright, welcome, once again, to the program.
ALBRIGHT: Hi. Good to be with you.
Q: We've been listening to news of Iraq, and news from the United
Nations, as well. Iraq has now prevented an UNSCOM team from
conducting inspections for two days. If that situation persists, does
it, in your view, warrant a military response?
ALBRIGHT: Well, I think that it's very important for the Security
Council and us to continue to be resolute in trying to make sure that
Saddam Hussein fulfills the obligations that he has that were imposed
by the Security Council.
Chairman Butler is on his way to Baghdad at the end of the week. He
will be reporting to the Security Council next week, and I think that
we need to see what he is able to accomplish. We have believed that it
is important to have a combination of a diplomatic strategy, backed by
the threat of the use of force. We will pursue trying to make sure
that Saddam Hussein lives up to his obligations.
Q: Is there some point at which preventing inspections ceases merely
to be a delay, and actually thwarts the purpose of the United Nations
resolution?
ALBRIGHT: Well, there is a time, I think, where -- first of all, let
me just make something clear. UNSCOM, the United Nations operation, is
basically the eyes and ears of the international community, trying to
determine what Saddam Hussein had and what he has and what he might be
able to acquire, in terms of developing weapons of mass destruction.
I think if it goes too long in terms of trying to make sure that the
baseline that we have been trying to keep established in terms of
knowing what he has had, we want to make sure that the time is not so
long that we lose track of what has been going on.
But I think we need to keep in mind that having UNSCOM on the ground,
being able to have unfettered inspections is very important to us; and
that what we ought to be pursuing is trying to make sure that they can
continue to do their work.
Q: Well, the Iraqi Foreign Minister, Tariq Aziz, said today that if
the inspection teams were composed of other nationalities -- more
balanced, he says -- in terms of who's on the Security Council, they
might conclude by now that Iraq has disposed of its weapons of mass
destruction, and therefore, the job is done. As you describe it, it
sounds as long as Saddam Hussein is in power and has an interest in
achieving such weapons, it sounds like there should permanently be
such a U.N. mission there.
ALBRIGHT: Well, no, I think that if UNSCOM can determine that he has
in fact fulfilled his obligations, then there will not be a reason.
There will be a reason, obviously, to monitor, but not to continue to
do intrusive verifications.
But the thing that I think is important to remember is UNSCOM is
composed of experts, who are not selected by their nationality, but by
their expertise. We count on them to fulfill their professional
responsibilities, and it is not up to Saddam Hussein or Tariq Aziz to
say who should be on UNSCOM; it is up to Chairman Butler to make that
decision.
Q: Turning to the visits to Washington next week of Benjamin Netanyahu
and Yasser Arafat, the Israeli Cabinet today declared that, in a final
settlement, as they see it, with the Palestinians, Israel would have
to retain large portions of the West Bank. What's your response to
that?
ALBRIGHT: Well, I think that these are the kinds of issues, obviously,
that will be discussed when we get to final settlement issues. I think
that it is premature to make those kinds of statements at this stage.
It is important for us to move forward on these further redeployments,
and to fulfill some of the obligations of the interim agreements that
has to do with opening airports and safe passage. And I think the
final status issues should be reserved for final status negotiations.
Q: But considering that declaration by the Cabinet and also the
conditions that the Israeli Cabinet has said the Palestinians should
meet before Israel commits to further withdrawals, or actually does
withdraw, do you think that the Israelis are putting together
conditions that are simply beyond the political capacity of the
Palestinians to comply with?
ALBRIGHT: I don't want to make that judgment now. What I think is
important is to understand the basis of the Oslo process, which is
that they are based on reciprocal -- on mutual recognition, on
reciprocity, on mutual respect as partners. Both sides have
obligations under those agreements to be able -- so that the other
side can fulfill its obligations. It is reciprocal in that way. I
think we are going to have to study carefully what various conditions
are, but it is important that there be this mutuality.
Q: Well, do you find, say, the notion of conditions that were approved
by the Israeli Cabinet this week for the Palestinians to hand over 34
prisoners to the Israelis -- does that square with your notion of
reciprocity, or is that a prior condition that goes beyond
reciprocity?
ALBRIGHT: Well, I think that clearly the Israelis have an interest in
making sure that there is not a revolving door when people that are
accused of various crimes against them are arrested. But I think that
these are issues that we have been talking about for some time. They
are not preconditions. It's important that there be a sense of mutual
confidence and reciprocity. I think that both sides need to learn to
respect each other's rights and obligations.
Q: Do you think both sides right now are committed to actually
fulfilling the Oslo accords?
ALBRIGHT: I do think that there is a desire for peace on both sides.
But there are gaps that still exist between them. And what we've been
trying to do is to narrow those gaps. But we are down now to very
serious issues -- very difficult ones for both sides. It is up to --
the U.S. can play a very important role. But frankly, the leaders
themselves are the ones that have to make the hard decisions in order
to make the peace process work.
I do think that both of them want to have peace, because this is what
their people want. But the gaps are there, and we have to try to
narrow them.
Q: One of the Israeli papers noted today that achieving peace in the
Middle East was not one of the four areas in which you said the U.S.
would be judged in its foreign policy performance in the coming year.
Why not?
ALBRIGHT: Well, the areas that I was talking about were those that
Congress had to be involved in. Those were the ones that were outlined
in that speech. But clearly, the Middle East peace process is one of
the areas that we all spend a great deal of time on. 1997 was not a
good year for the peace process; we hope that 1998 will be a good
year.
Q: Do you think that next week's meetings will be successful?
ALBRIGHT: I think that they're very important. We are looking for
Prime Minister Netanyahu to come with a credible and serious offer on
the further redeployment. We are looking for Chairman Arafat to commit
himself to security issues so that the process can go forward.
Q: And, for example, on the Israeli side, would a credible and serious
offer be consistent with the position now that a final agreement must
include Israeli retention of large portions of the West Bank?
ALBRIGHT: Well, I think that it's a matter of description. I don't
want to -- I haven't seen the details of all this, so I don't want to
comment on that.
Q: Well, Secretary of State Albright, thank you very much for talking
with us today.
ALBRIGHT: Thank you.
(end transcript)