Briefing from the Prime Minister’s Official Spokesman on: Schroeder, Northern Ireland, Israel/Palestinian Conference, Iraq and North Korea.
Schroeder
Asked about the Prime Minister’s meeting tomorrow with Chancellor Schroeder in Germany, the Prime Minister’s Official Spokesman (PMOS) said that it was a private meeting. Asked the purpose of it, the PMOS said that the Prime Minister and Chancellor met from time to time in a private capacity. Questioned as to whether they would discuss political issues, the PMOS said he had no doubt they would discuss a whole range of matters, as they normally did. Put to him that it was the third time the two had met since the German elections last October, the PMOS repeated that they kept in regular contact. Challenged that this was more than regular, the PMOS advised journalists not to read any more significance into the meeting than the fact that that they kept in frequent touch.
Northern Ireland
Asked to confirm reports of a ’summit’ between the Prime Minister and the Taoiseach, the PMOS said that he had seen it described as an ‘emergency summit’ in some of today’s papers. Since the Prime Minister and Taoiseach met on a regular basis he would have thought that this was a slight overstatement. Assuming that diaries could be co-ordinated, it was quite possible they would get together before the end of the month. Asked if they might meet next week, the PMOS said not as far as he was aware.
Israel/Palestinian Conference
Asked for an update on the proposed Palestinian conference, the PMOS said that the details were still being finalised. Part of the reason for the delay in announcing the format was because the Foreign Secretary was currently travelling around the Far East and the time difference had slowed things down. The FCO would make an announcement shortly. Asked if the Quartet delegates were still intending to come to London next week, the PMOS said that people should wait for the announcement, but the Israeli Government had indicated to us yesterday that they would not change their position regarding their travel ban on Palestinian delegates. Obviously we would be taking that into account.
Questioned as to whether the British Ambassador to Israel, Sherard Cowper-Coles, had met with Prime Minister Sharon, the PMOS said that as he had pointed out yesterday, the meeting was likely to take place at some point over the weekend as a result of Mr Sharon’s busy schedule due, understandably, to the impending Israeli elections. Asked why it was taking so long to set up a meeting between the British Ambassador and Prime Minister Sharon, the PMOS pointed out that the pace of the Israeli election campaign had been quite frenetic over the last few days. As Prime Minister Sharon’s Office had indicated, he wanted to see the Ambassador personally to explain the Israeli Government’s position.
Iraq
Asked if Britain agreed with the US’s view that Saddam Hussein’s declaration was a material breach and a deliberate attempt to deceive, the PMOS said that we had set out our own view of Saddam’s declaration before Christmas. More important, however, was Hans Blix’s statement yesterday, echoed by his colleague, Mohammed El-Baradei, in which he had asserted that Saddam’s declaration, regrettably, had failed to answer a great many questions.
Asked if we agreed with the US’s assessment that they knew ‘for a fact’ that Saddam was in possession of weapons of mass destruction (WMD), the PMOS reminded journalists that we had published a dossier last year dealing with precise issue. It had outlined what we knew and suspected about Saddam’s possession of WMD. Asked if he was saying that we knew ‘for a fact’ that he had WMD, the PMOS pointed out that the UN itself had stated that this was so when the weapons inspectors had left Iraq in the late 1990s.
Asked if we would accede to the inspectors’ request for further intelligence information, the PMOS said that it was not our policy to comment on intelligence issues. That said, he would disagree with the premise of the question. We were satisfied that the inspections team had the necessary staff and resources to do their job properly. Asked if the UK and US would provide the inspectors with further intelligence information, the PMOS pointed out that Hans Blix had indicated yesterday that his team was now in a better position than they had been previously to carry out their work. Asked if Saddam would be considered in material breach of Resolution 1441 if he failed to co-operate proactively with the inspectors, the PMOS said that as the inspectors themselves had underlined yesterday, Resolution 1441 laid a clear burden on Saddam to co-operate proactively with them in order to clarify the outstanding questions - and it was the Resolution itself which set the criteria for judging whether he was doing so or not.
Asked whether we supported the idea to interview Iraqi scientists in a different country in the light of Hans Blix’s complaint yesterday that the inspectors were unable to question the scientists without the presence of a minder, the PMOS said that the inspectors had underlined yesterday that they wanted to interview the scientists in private but that had not yet been possible. That was clearly a problem and we therefore believed the inspectors should do whatever was necessary since it was, in the end, a matter for them. This was an important process which everyone should take seriously - not least Saddam himself as he had a duty to co-operate under the terms of Resolution 1441. Put to him that taking the scientists out of the country might put them and their families in danger, the PMOS said that operational issues were a matter for the inspectors. However, it was important to remember that 1441 made provision for scientists and their families to be taken out of Iraq.
Asked if the UK and the US continued to occupy common ground regarding the issue of Iraq in the light of the different language used yesterday, the PMOS said that he would leave the interpretation of language for others to judge. Anyone who had heard the remarks yesterday by the British Ambassador to the UN, Sir Jeremy Greenstock, would be in no doubt that our bottom line remained the same as that of the US - Saddam had to disarm or be disarmed.
North Korea
Asked if we were concerned about North Korea’s announcement that it was withdrawing from the nuclear weapons Non-Proliferation Treaty, the PMOS said that we condemned the decision and believed it was wrong. He pointed out that North Korea had to give the UN Security Council three months’ notice of its intention to withdraw. It would be a matter for the Security Council to discuss and that would be the next step in the process. Asked if we considered the problem with North Korea to be worse now than it was twenty-four hours ago, the PMOS said that it was obviously a matter for international concern. That was why the Security Council was the right place in which to discuss the issue.
delicious
digg
facebook
