02 February 2001

Excerpt: State Dept Spokesman on Iraq

(Explains U.S. policy of backing Iraqi National Congress)

State Department spokesman Richard Boucher said the U.S. government is disbursing $4 million to the opposition Iraqi National Congress (INC) to fund its public information programs and other activities.

Briefing reporters in Washington February 2, Boucher said the Clinton administration announced the U.S. policy of funding the INC last October. He said the decision by the office of Foreign Assets Control in the Treasury Department to issue a license that allows the Iraqi opposition to carry out those activities inside Iraq with U.S. government money is a continuation of established policy.

"The Iraqi opposition gather information inside Iraq to help build the case against the Iraqi leadership for crimes against humanity," Boucher said. "That is what we discussed in our October 2nd statement. This license is the technical license that allows them to do that using this U.S. government money. So it's a continuation. It's the implementation, in a very detailed sense, of a policy that was decided and announced last fall," Boucher said.

Boucher said the U.S. government has a process to make sure that the INC uses the U.S. grant money for its intended purposes.

Responding to a question dealing with Turkey's decision to send an ambassador to Baghdad, Boucher expressed regret at the Turkish action, but said it would be an opportunity for Turkey to raise the issue of Iraq living up to its obligations to the international community.

Following is the excerpt from Boucher's briefing relating to Iraq:
(begin excerpt)

Q: On a serious note, the new and/or revised policy toward Iraq. In addition to the money that is being freed up by the Administration, are there any military assistance programs considered or under way, such as with US special forces in-country to train the opposition to Saddam Hussein?

MR. BOUCHER: I am not going to try to go forward in this circumstance. Obviously the Secretary and the Administration are looking at Iraq policy. He has talked to the press directly yesterday and at his confirmation hearings about the thrust of that policy to control Iraq's ability to threaten people within his own country, to control Iraq's ability to threaten people in the region. It is clear that the policy is being looked at, and as far as where it goes in terms of the kind of speculation that you are engaging in, I am just not going to do.

Now, I can tell you what is going on with the Iraqi opposition, and I am afraid I have to start out by reminding you of a statement that we issued on October 2nd of the year 2000 -- Philip T. Reeker, the Deputy Spokesman, actually issued it -- that described how we were going to proceed with $4 million of funding to advance the Iraqi National Congress's ongoing operations and to establish new ones.

In that statement we talked about public information programs and other programs that the Iraqi National Congress would be carrying out. That is the policy decision made months ago that is being carried out through what you might call the technical approval of the license for the Office of Foreign Assets Control in Treasury that allows the Iraqi opposition to carry out those activities inside Iraq with US Government money.

So you all know journalists have been going in and out of the north of Iraq to collect information and bring it back and report on things. The Iraqi opposition gather information inside Iraq to help build the case against the Iraqi leadership for crimes against humanity. That is what we discussed in our October 2nd statement. This license is the technical license that allows them to do that using this US Government money. So it's a continuation. It's the implementation in a very detailed sense of the policy that was decided and announced last fall.

Q: We know that --

MR. BOUCHER: Let me finish on this. The license application was submitted to the Office of Foreign Assets Control late last year to spend this money inside Iraq. It was approved, I guess, this week by the Office of Foreign Assets Control. And just say that since the passage of the Iraqi Liberation Act of 1998 we have worked hard to improve the capabilities of the Iraqi opposition, and this is just one of the steps in that process.

Q: Is one of the main thrusts now to enable us to improve our HUMINT, or human intelligence, which, as we all know, is a major problem in that part of the world?

MR. BOUCHER: Well, as I can say, we don't talk about intelligence in public. I have to say, the Secretary has described the policy in his hearings. The Secretary has described the policy in talking to you. We don't have any new announcements to make at this stage. This step that is being reported is an implementation of the policy decided some time ago.

Obviously one of the things that we have been doing, and that the Iraq opposition is better able to do by this license to use US money in doing it, is to collect information that would substantiate a case against the Iraqi leadership for crimes against humanity. But that has been ongoing project and this allows it to continue with US funds.

Q: Does the INC actually have this money in hand to spend? I know they have permission now to spend it. Do they actually have it?

MR. BOUCHER: It should be. I mean, have we cut the check?

Q: Yeah.

MR. BOUCHER: I'm not completely sure, but the money was appropriated in 1999. It's 1999 funds. And we concluded the agreement to give it to them on September 29th, so I assume that they have the funds in hand by now. This just allows them to spend it in northern Iraq.

Q: Richard, a couple of questions on this. First of all, could you tell us in brief what the Secretary thinks of the INC as an organization? And if support for the Iraqi opposition is going to be a key element in policy towards Iraq, why is there no meeting yet set up between the Secretary and the visiting members of the INC leadership? And thirdly, what details need to be negotiated with the $25 million package?

MR. BOUCHER: A lot of interesting questions. I don't have any announcements to make about the Iraq policy and how the Secretary wants to pursue it in its different forms. Clearly he has talked to you about the need to control Iraq's ability to threaten its people and threaten its neighbors. That is what he has spoken of, and I don't have any further announcements or statements to make on other aspects of the policy.

In terms of the 25 million, I'll have to check on the procedures for that. I just don't know.

There's just nothing set up. I don't want people to start drawing conclusions about policy because we have or have not met with various groups around the world. There is 180 countries, thousands of groups. The Secretary is seeing many of them, and I'm just not going to draw any conclusions at this point.

Q: He said that Iraq was one of -- he listed it as one of the top two, second in his list of things that he had to deal with. It seems very strange that he would not be meeting at all with the INC when they're in town, because they're not in town all the time.

MR. BOUCHER: Again, I'm not aware --

Q: Is he considering a meeting?

MR. BOUCHER: I will double-check and see if there are any meetings. I'm not aware that there was any request. It's just not on the schedule at this point.

Q: What about within the Administration? You know, the not very new notion of having interagency groups meet, but you guys put some new emphasis on it. And, you know, rightly or wrongly, this continuation of Clinton Administration policy is being projected as a new initiative of a new administration.

But just to stick to facts, have the key players sat down and talked about Iraq together yet?

MR. BOUCHER: Well, I would invite you to stick to the facts.

(Laughter.)

Q: Would you invite any in specific to stick to the facts? Prominent newspapers?

MR. BOUCHER: Let me put it this way. I know everybody is looking for new and different policies and announcements of new and different policies, particularly on a subject as important to all of us as Iraq. This ain't it. So we'll make the announcements at the proper time.

In terms of meetings and discussion, certainly there have been discussions at various levels within the Administration as the Secretary in particular looks at this area that he himself has said to you is important to him.

Can we change?

Q: No, I want to stay on this. I just want to ask you one thing.

MR. BOUCHER: Okay.

Q: The INC can now, without jumping through any more hoops or going through any more red tape, spend this $4 million however they want it within the confines of the gathering information of possible war crimes and whatever else you had mentioned? There is no more approval process; they can do that?

MR. BOUCHER: Yes, within the confines. I mean, this money is appropriated -- allocated for programs that have a specific purpose.

Q: Right. But if they want to buy --

MR. BOUCHER: This is part of the public information programs that we described last fall.

Q: Right, exactly. But if they want to buy --

MR. BOUCHER: They now are getting the money to go do that. They have been doing that, in fact, with their own money.

Q: I understand.

MR. BOUCHER: What is now different is they can use US money to do that.

Q: I know that. But, Richard, what I am asking -- if they want to buy a ream of paper to put out some newsletter or ask for -- or put up some flyer, do they have to now submit a request -- you know, say, look, this is what we want to do with this money, give it to someone in the US Government, and then they stamp "okay" on it, you can use this money to buy that ream of paper.

MR. BOUCHER: No, they don't. The money as allocated has been granted to them to carry out these functions. Obviously, part of how we work with them in terms of recipient of US Government grant money is to work with them on an ongoing basis to make sure the funds are being spent on things that they were designed for. There is audits, there is consultations and constant discussions.

But no, it is within their purview now to decide how to conduct these programs and using our money to do it. We know what they are doing. We are funding what they are doing essentially, though. It is not like they are walking -- they have a bunch of change on the table and say, now what are we going to do with it? They have been carrying out these programs using their own money, and now our money is going to help them do it.

Q: But suppose they say, "Wow, we've got $4 million here. We're going to go out and buy a tank," or something like that. I mean, you could stop it, couldn't you?

MR. BOUCHER: Yeah. That would not be one of the purposes for which the money was allocated --

Q: So you could -- so it could be stopped. So they still don't have --

MR. BOUCHER: That is why your original question is -- the answer is yes, within the confines of what this money is for.

Q: Have there been any meetings regarding exactly how to spend the money in this process in the last week or week and a half?

MR. BOUCHER: I don't know. I assume -- you know, we talk to the Iraqi opposition all the time. We have people whose job it is to do that. I assume that they have talked quite a bit about this as they got the grant and as they go through the implementation.

Q: So just to clarify, when they get the grant that was appropriated by the Congress and there is an agreement on generally how to spend it; still, for specifics, there used to be an audit process, or the State Department would approve specific expenditures?

MR. BOUCHER: No, we just answered that question the other way a minute ago, that we don't necessarily approve every ream of paper.

Q: You don't approve every -- but what do you --

MR. BOUCHER: But we do have a process to make sure the money is used for the purposes intended. That is standard in all our aid things.

All right, we're losing our shadows, so let there be light.

Q: One more?

MR. BOUCHER: One more on this?

Q: You called it a technical approval of the license in the Treasury Department. How senior a technician had to approve it? The Post article implied that it was the President and the national security team and the Administration making a decision to grant this approval.

Can you tell us who issued that decision, or did it require the White House or the Secretary?

MR. BOUCHER: My understanding is it didn't go to that level, that it was circulated within the bureaus, in various agencies, as these normally are. I suppose different bureaus may have bucked it up higher and lower, but that it was done at the expert or policy level, but not the senior policy levels.

Q: But there was a State Department official quoted in the article as saying that this is a major step, and you are saying that it isn't.

MR. BOUCHER: Well, don't know who it was, but it is not a new policy. The policy was announced in September. It is being implemented now, and that's the facts.

Q: Well, if you are not --

Q: Richard, do you have any reaction against Turkey's appointment of the new ambassador to Baghdad?

MR. BOUCHER: Obviously we don't think it is a good idea to send envoys of that level to Baghdad, and we regret that the Turkish Government has decided to do this. At the same time, we think it is very important for people to be telling Iraq to live up to its obligations to the international community, and we would hope that the Turks would take this opportunity to make that point to Iraq.

(end excerpt)