2:10 pm (EST)

Real Audio of Briefing

MR. DENIG: Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen, and welcome to the Foreign Press Center here in Washington. And also a warm welcome to journalists assembled in the Foreign Press Center in New York.

This afternoon we'll have a briefing on the 2002 Annual Report on Human Rights, and I'm delighted to welcome for this briefing, Mr. Scott Carpenter, the Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Democracy, Human Rights and Labor. When you ask your questions I will ask you to use the microphone and introduce yourself and your news agency, please.

And let me just point out that Mr. Carpenter has brought with him a number of the editors of the Human Rights Report. When there are some detailed questions, he may refer to them, they'll give him the answer, but please, view only the things that Mr. Carpenter says as being on the record. Thank you for that. Well, there's no opening statement today, so I will turn it over to Mr. Carpenter right away for your questions.

Scott.

MR. CARPENTER: Thank you very much. I'm very happy to be here. For opening statements I would simply refer you to the Secretary's opening statement yesterday, which you can find on the State Department website, as you can also find Mr. Craner's, my boss, who answered questions yesterday over at State.

I really didn't want to have a formal opening statement so that we could maximize the time for questions and answers. As was mentioned, I will do my best to answer them myself. However, there are a lot of countries out there and there's a lot of detail in these reports as you well know, and so there may be some answers that I will try to get for you quickly from some of our senior editors.

There may yet be questions that we don't collectively have the answers to at this exact moment, but if you give me your cards, I will get back to you as quickly as I can with whatever information we have. So with that and welcoming the folks from New York, let me open it up to questions.

QUESTION: Radio Sawa. Did you have the time to get reaction to report of today? It was published yesterday and most of the press in the Middle East and other countries published, like, summaries of the reports. Were you able to assess the reaction, especially in countries that abuses human rights?

MR. CARPENTER: You know, that's an excellent question. I haven't personally seen the clippings from around the world on the reports. I have looked very carefully at our own reporting because I think that many in our own communities are very critical of the reports in ensuring that they have the highest degree of accuracy.

I have not seen published accounts of how the foreign press already is treating the reports. In general, the reaction is, "Wow, the U.S. is being very tough on some of its allies, even on [during] the global war on terror," which I think is a message that we want to send, that we are -- even with our allies -- we talk tough when we need to.

MR. DENIG: Okay, next question. Yes, please. In the front here.

QUESTION: Amal Chmouny from Al Anwar in Lebanon. I would like to ask why the report doesn't -- you don't find in it the violation of human right in the United States and especially toward the Arabs and Arab-American?

MR. CARPENTER: Okay, as many of you probably know, the history of the reports is that they are required of us by the U.S. Congress, that we report each year on these countries. And they started off being countries that receive foreign military assistance. And now it has expanded to all countries in the world.

QUESTION: Except the United States.

MR. CARPENTER: We do not receive foreign military assistance from ourselves. Not yet, anyway. So the issue really is not one of avoiding. This is something that, by law, the State Department, which interacts with foreign governments, basically is required to produce the reports. However, we welcome reports on the United States.

We know, for instance, that the Peoples' Republic of China has seen fit to put out a Human Rights Report on the United States from time to time. I invite you to read it and make your own determinations. In addition, human rights organizations like Human Rights Watch do report on the United States. We take those reports very seriously.

In terms of Arab-Americans, I would simply say that the President has made very clear that we are Americans, not Arab-Americans, not British-Americans, not Iraqi-Americans, we are Americans and that as a nation we stand or fall. I have some personal experience with Assistant Attorney General Ralph Boyd, who is the person in charge of civil rights at the Justice Department, and I think he would disagree vehemently with the notion that Arab-Americans are persecuted against. But I will refer you to him.

MR. DENIG: Okay. Other questions. It's a lot to digest. Could we get you to the microphone up here?

QUESTION: Radio Sawa. I didn't have much time to read many countries, you know, but did you find any improvement in countries in the way they practice, their practices toward human rights from the past years, and anything that got your attention or in your findings?

MR. CARPENTER: Well, I guess how I would summarize that is to say that we found progress where we didn't expect some. In other places we saw a worsening or deterioration of the human rights situation where we, quite frankly, did expect to see it [actually worsen].

There have been places even that get a lot of attention, even countries like Saudi Arabia, for instance, where there have been some modicum of openings in these areas welcoming the creation of human rights commissions, one governmental, one non-governmental; establishing new criminal procedure, laws, et cetera.

So even in some countries where there's been a lot of criticism in the past, there is the beginnings, cracks of daylight in places like Central Asia where we have come under a lot of scrutiny as the United States Government for our cooperation in Central Asia. The fact is that our presence in those countries is actually having a positive impact in some areas.

So I wouldn't say that we could globally categorize whether things are improving or deteriorating overall, we have to look at each country. But the fact is that the picture is mixed.

QUESTION: Yes, my name is Ben Bangoura, Guinea News Washington correspondent. I was wondering if Guinea, particularly if Guinea in West Africa is one of those worsening case when it comes to human right abuses?

MR. CARPENTER: Well, you'll be shocked to learn that I don't have a one-pager on Guinea. What I can say about Guinea is that it is a country that we are very, very concerned with and we have paid a great deal of attention to Guinea and are going to pay an increasing amount of attention to Guinea. So yes, it is a country where things have gotten worse and we are very much concerned about the situation there in Guinea.

QUESTION: Yeah, any specific case [in Guinea] that is a problem to you?

MR. CARPENTER: I'm afraid I'm going to have to use a phrase here that I would rather not use, but the report speaks for itself, which you can find on our website. But as with all of these reports, it is very comprehensive, some people say too comprehensive, but very comprehensive reporting and I would think and hope that when you read the report you would say, "Yes. This accurately reflects the situation in my country as I know it."

MR. DENIG: Yes.

QUESTION: I'm Ming Nguyen from the Vietnam News Agency. And my question is about the human right records this year in Vietnam, Laos and Cambodia and what's your comments on the -- any kind of improvements that those countries have last year?

MR. CARPENTER: Improvements? The situation in all three countries remains very bad, and I, for one, have not seen a tremendous amount of improvement and would be unable to characterize what's happening in those three countries as anything but a very poor situation that in some cases is further deteriorating. I think there are areas where one can point to a less bad situation, but overall, one would have to characterize the situation in all three countries as poor and remaining so.

QUESTION: What can you tell us about the radio project you mapped out last year for Guinea in the light of November 2000 referendum, which give the current President of Guinea Lasana Conte to stay in power forever? There was a project putting together for -- by your administration here calling for opposition leaders and civil societies to be included in the democratic process. How has this project been going on the current? Are there any follow-up?

MR. CARPENTER: I can't comment on the specifics because I simply don't know about the specific projects that are ongoing. I think broadly speaking the United States Government remains very concerned about the situation in Guinea, would like to see a pluralistic government come to power, be able to give voice to many of the disparate groups within Guinea rather than -- and will continue to work toward that end.

MR. DENIG: Front row again.

QUESTION: Radio Sawa. How do you see the information about the Middle East in the report comparing to the report of last year? How do you see it? Is there any progress?

MR. CARPENTER: Overall? Again, I wouldn't want to characterize huge regions in one way or the other. I think that there are clearly some countries in North Africa, like Morocco, in Bahrain, Qatar, a number of others, where you see some real democratic openings and progress. I would have to say that there are other countries where that type of progress has not been seen, although it has been highly encouraged.

I think, for instance, that there are a number of areas where we would like to see more progress, in countries like Egypt, where we would like to see a broadening, opening of the NGO law or the ability of new political parties to be able to be creative and compete.

So again, it only goes to show that when governments have the political will to effect change within their societies that they are open to the pressure that is building from below for political change and openness, that when they choose to respond they can and that they are recognized in the reports.

QUESTION: Scott, would you have any particular comment on Lebanon?

MR. CARPENTER: No. (Laughter.) Do I? Do I have any particular comment on Lebanon?

QUESTION: (Inaudible.)

MR. CARPENTER: Do you have any comment on Lebanon?

(Laughter.)

MR. DENIG: All right, let's take the gentleman right here, please. If you can introduce yourself.

QUESTION: I'm sorry. El-Bashir from Sudan. I just walked in so I am sorry in advance if I am going to raise something that has been raised.

Now that Sudan is going through this critical period of peace negotiations, what is the impact, what is the situation of human rights and how could it help in getting peace and also the food, access to humanitarian help? Thank you.

MR. CARPENTER: Well, you know, the situation in Sudan has been so bad for so long that we've explained it (inaudible) ways that it has declined. But in the report you can see the human rights record continues to be characterized as extremely poor, although there were some improvements in some areas.

We are discussing even now with the government about their continued obstruction of the flow of humanitarian assistance into the country and their ongoing progress, or lack of progress, in coordinating with UN-sponsored relief operations.

The report characterizes both as being poor. Obviously, in the case of Sudan, hope springs eternal, and we continue to work with both sides to move the process forward, but recognizing that there's still a long way to go.

QUESTION: Just a follow-up. Do you think that both parties are violating human rights, or is it just them?

MR. CARPENTER: As you'll see in the report, we do have a section, Section 1G, which covers internal conflicts, but we do report on actions on both sides, the violations in internal conflicts, so the report does talk about that.

QUESTION: A quick question on Zimbabwe --

MR. CARPENTER: Excellent.

(Laughter.)

QUESTION: You referred before on human rights situation in Africa. Do you have any comments on Zimbabwe?

MR. CARPENTER: We are very concerned with the situation in Zimbabwe. We have worked with regional actors like South Africa, NEPAD governments, Nigeria, others, to try to bring pressure in a meaningful way to produce and encourage President Mugabe to move forward with either new elections or new, more intensified negotiations with the MDC [Movement for Democratic Change] but we fail to see that his regime is in any way open to those types of meaningful dialogue. The situation continues to be troubling, and troubling mostly for the people in Zimbabwe who are suffering the consequences of economic policies, which have ravaged the land and threatened vast portions of the population in Zimbabwe with starvation.

QUESTION: Why do you think the result of that election giving hope was invalid when overwhelming majority of people in Zimbabwe voted for Mugabe? Do you think otherwise?

MR. CARPENTER: What we know is that especially clever dictators have understood that they can have an election day, which is technically correct but where the entire framework for those elections is so fatally flawed that it's impossible to produce a legitimate result. The government was very clever in how they limited the numbers of polling places, for instance, in Harare, so that people had to line up for days in order to vote and they arbitrarily ended the election day because, well, the law said it has to end by a certain time. So many of the people were effectively disenfranchised.

I think that all political opinion polling that was undertaken indicated in the days shortly before the election that change was in the air and that the vote was clearly going to the MDC in those elections; that in the end it did not turn out that way makes it clear that there were problems. And I would refer you to the SADC parliamentary group report on those elections, which essentially condemned them for being the farce that they were.

MR. DENIG: Any other follow-ups?

(Laughter.)

QUESTION: Still on Zimbabwe --

MR. CARPENTER: Excellent.

QUESTION: You said you have been urging the Mugabe's Government to take steps to correct -- do that business like you said. Have you been in touch with him? What has been saying about your concerns?

MR. CARPENTER: He has not returned my phone calls recently. (Laughter.) But no, the Government of the United States, either through the government, through our embassies or through other governments, President Mbeki, [has been working] to try to convey messages to the President of Zimbabwe that this type of policy is not sustainable and is dangerous for regional stability in southern Africa. This, quite frankly, is not fundamentally or ultimately a problem for the United States to solve on its own. African partners in the region have a responsibility to involve themselves in what could become a humanitarian nightmare for the region.

QUESTION: Does Congress require the State Department to treat countries that is known to abuse, like human rights, not to receive any U.S. aid?

MR. CARPENTER: Certain countries have legislation requirements that either ask the State Department to certify that human rights issues in the countries, countries that we're working with, are sufficient to allow aid be provided, for training to take place; second, in some instances when it is not certified, and we have to say human rights performance is pretty poor, then oftentimes either the Secretary of State or the President of the United States has a waiver authority on areas of national security, waiver authority in situations where national security would be at risk.

So you can see that there is a balance that we're trying to achieve where we recognize that promotion of human rights and democracy is in the national interest of the United States, but it's not the only national interest of the United States, so in countries like Colombia where we do provide a tremendous amount of assistance, the State Department requires twice a year a report on whether or not the Colombian Government is complying, and there are certain consequences, not a complete cut-off of all aid, but there are consequences.

And so the Congress just tries to give the Executive Branch tools to help us encourage these countries to make steps that they might otherwise be hesitant to make. There are a number of such legislations. Something called CTR, which is Comprehensive Threat -- Certified Threat Reduction, where we have to make these cases on a number of different cases and we have to submit these reports to Congress or the Secretary or the President, depending on who has the authority, can use his waiver. And that also has to be notified to the Congress.

QUESTION: Sorry. What does the State Department do like to -- what kind of tools you use, like with U.S. allies, to improve human rights practices?

MR. CARPENTER: Well, there are a variety of ways that we work with individual countries. We have, within my bureau, for instance, we have the Human Rights and Democracy Fund and we use that fund to support projects, usually with NGOs, not with the governments themselves, but to democracy or human rights groups within their countries. We will provide experts to consult on various laws. We'll bring people over to meet with jurists about how to improve the situation in their own countries. There are many, many ways that we interact with governments around the world, both governments that really wish to work with us and [in countries with] governments that don't. We still look for ways to cooperate or to promote these objectives with peoples who are looking to improve their country's democratic or human rights performance.

MR. DENIG: Two last questions. We'll take Hiro and we'll take the front again.

QUESTION: I'm Hiro Aida with Japan's Kyodo News. My question is about North Korean human rights situation. It seems to be very nightmarish and, but the U.S. doesn't have any diplomatic ties with that country and most of the, you know, U.S. allies in East Asia, except well, the China, don't have any ties. Is there any way for U.S. and its allies to prod or encourage Pyongyang to make some kind of improvement in the human rights situation? If there is any, what is that?

MR. CARPENTER: Well, I hate to be a -- you know, by nature, I am an extreme optimist and look for ways to make any situation better. But in the case of North Korea, I don't think that any amount of "dialogue" is going to produce real results there. Quite frankly, the regime is bent on preserving the system that sustains it. And that system is one of the most repressive, horrific, in the world. Again, the comparison can only be to Iraq. It has the most extensive prison system. It has -- I could go on and on and on about the situation in North Korea. The issues there are so fundamental that it's very difficult for me to see how we in the United States can work to improve the situations within North Korea unilaterally. I mean it is clear that we have to work with especially China, Japan and South Korea to develop a strategy to ameliorate the conditions.

I would say, however, that we should do what we can where we can, and I would say that there is a lot to be done, for instance, for the North Koreans who have come across the Chinese borders and to try to improve the situation that they face in China.

MR. DENIG: We'll take one last quick question.

QUESTION: It's a follow-up on some new questions. I would like to ask you, does Israel meet the conditions of the human rights?

MR. CARPENTER: Well, you'll see in the report on Israel and the occupied territories that we are pretty tough on the Israelis. I think that if you read the report, I think you will see that it is a pretty unjaded look at what is taking place within the occupied territories.

The question as to, for instance, whether or not there are Congressional requirements that we must certify to, if that's the question, the answer is no, other than the Leahy Amendment, which requires that we vet units that receive U.S. training or assistance. And that is an ongoing process, which we take very, very seriously. So yes, it applies to all governments around the world that we interact with in a military sense.

MR. DENIG: Thank you very much, Mr. Carpenter. Thank you, ladies and gentlemen.