J. ADAM ERELI HOLDS STATE DEPARTMENT REGULAR NEWS BRIEFING.

Publication: Political/Congressional Transcript Wire

Bookmark this article Print this article Link to this article Email this article Digg It! Add to del.icio.us RSS

COPYRIGHT 2006 Congressional Quarterly, Inc.

Original Source: Political Transcript Wire

STATE DEPARTMENT REGULAR NEWS BRIEFING

FEBRUARY 28, 2006

SPEAKER: J. ADAM ERELI, STATE DEPARTMENT DEPUTY SPOKESMAN

[*] ERELI: Hello, everybody. I'd be happy to start with your questions.

QUESTION: Adam, today the Taiwan authorities actually made official, I guess, their abolition of this body providing guidelines for reunification. The Chinese are being very bellicose about this. Does the United States really think that this is business as usual?

ERELI: All of that's news to me. As far as we're aware, where we were yesterday is where we are today, which is that the Taiwanese have made it clear that this body is not being abolished, that they have reaffirmed their commitment not to take unilateral steps to alter the status quo, and to honor the inaugural pledges.

And so as far as we're aware, there's no change to the situation as it was yesterday.

QUESTION: Well, the Chinese seem to think that there is a change in the situation. Are you worried about their rather aggressive statements?

ERELI: The United States is concerned generally about any actions that heighten tension across the straits, and that's why we continue to emphasize, number one, our consistent policy with regard to this issue based on the three communiques and the Taiwan Relations Act, as well as the need for dialogue, and call on both sides to take concrete steps in that direction.

QUESTION: Are there any plans for any contacts with the Taiwan authorities or with the Chinese or anybody on this issue?

ERELI: We have regular and ongoing contacts with both countries...

(CROSSTALK)

We have regular and ongoing contacts with both sides on the issue urging them to, again, refrain from unilateral acts, reminding them of our position with regard to the importance of dialogue, and our preference for an approach that avoids provocative steps or avoids unilateral actions.

QUESTION: Just one last one, if I may. Reading the transcript yesterday -- I'm sorry I wasn't there -- but there seemed to be confusion exactly what the Taiwan authorities have done, with the Chinese word and the words that you were using.

Is anybody actually reaching out to the Taiwan authorities to try to get clarity from them what their intentions are in this move?

ERELI: I don't think there's confusion on our part. Again, our understanding is that President Chen did not abolish the National Unification Council.

QUESTION: Even though Chinese President Hu said something yesterday, but as lot of observers have said so far China has reacted relatively calmly...

ERELI: That's not what your colleague said.

QUESTION: Well, anyway. I'm just wondering what's your interpretation of China's calmness. And also, the spokesperson of China's Foreign Ministry pointed out yesterday that the U.S. and China has been communicating on this subject.

So my question is, has this incident actually increased understanding between Beijing and the U.S. when it comes to Taiwan?

ERELI: The United States has a regular and good dialogue with China on a full range of issues, including the issue of Taiwan. So that's a regular feature of our bilateral dialogue.

And as far as Chinese reaction to these latest moves, I don't have any characterization of that, other than to restate for you what our position is, which I think you know very well, and to reiterate for you that we think it's important that both sides take steps to enhance dialogue and certainly to refrain from unilateral actions.

QUESTION: During your conversation with Beijing, have you reassured them that the U.S. is firmly on those one-China policy, things like that?

ERELI: In our private discussions, we make the same points that I'm making publicly. And I think we make clear, again, our policy, that we do not support Taiwanese independence and we oppose unilateral actions.

QUESTION: On Sudan, the A.U. has postponed its meeting until March the 10th to discuss the rehatting of the force in Sudan. And this is apparently to allow the Sudanese and others to get there in time. There were some logistical problems.

Do you think that they're dragging their feet on getting a rehatting of the forces and that these are sort of tactics to prevent a new force from taking over for a while? Are you disappointed that there's a delay?

ERELI: The A.U. clearly has an important role to play in this effort. They've been a leader in bringing a degree of peace and stability to Darfur, although, obviously, the situation is not satisfactory. That's not, frankly, through any fault of the A.U. It's because there continues to be a political conflict that we need to get to the root of.

So the question before us is how do we prevent further escalation of violence? How do we create an environment in Darfur that allows humanitarian needs to be met, that rolls back the violence and that provides an environment that is conducive to a political settlement between the parties to the conflict.

ERELI: As I said before, the A.U. has been instrumental in that effort to date, and they will continue to be an indispensable partner in the diplomacy and in the ultimate solution.

To that end, it's important that the A.U. meet and discuss and we would hope endorse the re-hatting. They've done that already in terms of the A.U. Peace and Security Council. That's what it's called, Peace and Security Council.

It was expected that there will be a further formal endorsement of that. We're still looking forward to that.

The question of scheduling, I'd leave it to the A.U. to comment on. Obviously, from our point of view, the sooner we can move forward on this the better, because, as we keep reiterating, people are dying in Darfur and the need for action is now.

QUESTION: And not only are people dying in Darfur, but in the Chad, in that region there, things are really deteriorating.

ERELI: Yes. And that's been, again, an area of concern for us for some time. The situation in Darfur as a whole is obviously...

Read the full article for free courtesy of your local library.