Tom Casey, Deputy Spokesman
Washington, DC
August 2, 2007
12:55 p.m. EDT
U.S. State Department Daily Press Briefing: 02 August 2007
INDEX:
LEBANON
Executive Order to Freeze Assets of Those Posing a Threat to Lebanese Government
Treasury Timetable for Actions Taken Against Those Supporting Negative Activity
RUSSIA
Russia Conducting Scientific Expedition by the Sea Bed in the North Pole
Russian Government Pursuing Claim under the Law of the Sea Convention
BELARUS
U.S. Looking for Russia and Belarus to Settle the Gazprom Issue
Settlement Needs to be Made so as not to Call into Question the Viability Gas Supplies
In St. Petersburg, U.S. and Russia Committed to Ensuring Predictable Energy Flows
IRAQ
Fewer Iraqi Refugees Were Admitted Last Month than Previous Months
Several Hundred More Refugees Coming Out in the Next Few Weeks
U.S. to Date has Interviewed Approximately 3,000 Refugees to Come to U.S.
TRANSCRIPT:
12:55 p.m. EDT
MR. CASEY: All right. Well, good afternoon, everybody. Don't have anything to start you out with, so let's go to what
you’ve got.
QUESTION: I don't have any questions.
MR. CASEY: You don't have anything? Oh.
QUESTION: Can you amplify or expand upon this order that came out of the White House on freezing assets of those accused
of harassing Lebanon?
MR. CASEY: Well, I can talk a little bit about this and this comes out of our desire to make sure that we're doing what
we can to support the forces of democracy in Lebanon, including Prime Minister Siniora and his government.
And what this order that the President has announced does is makes it clear that there is now a vehicle, basically
through the Treasury Department, to be able to freeze and seize property and other assets that are owned or controlled
or in the hands of those individuals that are actively seeking to undermine Lebanon's democratic government and/or try
and re-promote Syrian influence and domination of the country. And this is building on existing tools that are out there
and that we've used against terrorist groups and other kinds of individuals, but what this does is expands the
President's authority to be able to do this specifically to focus on those who pose a direct challenge or a direct
threat to democracy in Lebanon.
Now in terms of -- you'll note that the order was put out without an annex listing any individual names. That's
something, though, that I know the Treasury Department is speaking to and I suspect you'll see some designations under
this order in a fairly short amount of time. But that is something that will come directly out of the Treasury
Department as this is primarily their responsibility to enforce.
QUESTION: You mean today?
MR. CASEY: I don't have a timetable for you, Matt. I'd refer to them in terms of exactly when they would look to do
this, but I know that they are actively looking at individuals and entities in light of the executive order today and I
suspect you'll see something from them very shortly.
QUESTION: In light of the order today, meaning they weren't -- they didn't have anyone in mind when the President signed
this (inaudible).
MR. CASEY: I would never imply that.
QUESTION: But --
MR. CASEY: It has now been issued and so now it's formally --
QUESTION: Right.
MR. CASEY: -- there on the books for people.
QUESTION: In the last, I think, month, the President signed two -- this is second of the (inaudible) one that had to do
with Iraq as well.
MR. CASEY: Yeah, there was previously -- which was enabling people to take -- Treasury to take similar kinds of actions
against, again, individuals or entities that were involved in promoting violence or trying to subvert the political
process there.
QUESTION: Both of these seem to be aimed at Iran and Syria. Would you quibble with that?
MR. CASEY: Well, they're aimed at trying to help solve a serious problem for both those countries. What's certainly --
Iran and Syria are the principle sponsors, I would say, of both efforts to undermine the government in Lebanon and
efforts to promote militia violence, EFP networks, and the other things we've talked about in Iraq. So to the extent
that those countries are engaged in supporting those kinds of negative activities, then yes, it's very much directed
against them and their --
QUESTION: Well, is there --
MR. CASEY: -- unhelpful efforts.
QUESTION: So -- okay.
MR. CASEY: Yeah.
QUESTION: So if they are directed against those countries and those unhelpful efforts, is there some thinking in the
U.S. Government that there are entities and people in Iran who -- or Syria who would not be covered by both of these,
and so you need to have the --
MR. CASEY: Well, again, Matt, I think there are certainly -- there's an overlapping and existing series of executive
orders out there, some of which deal specifically with terrorist groups, some of which are sanctions that are applied
directly to the Iranian Government, related to proliferation matters, related to other kinds of things.
What we're trying to do with both of these executive orders is make sure we have as many tools in the toolbox as
possible to be able to comprehensively deal with the threats that are out there. And I think the feeling was that by
putting orders out that specifically focus on, for example, militia violence and negative activities in Iraq, or those
that are seeking to subvert democracy in Lebanon, that we were going to make sure that in a comprehensive way, we'd be
able to deal with any individuals or groups out there.
So it wouldn't surprise me that some of the people who might be determined to be eligible under this executive order
might be eligible under other kinds of orders as well. But what we do, again, want to make sure of, is that we can
specifically go after those people who are playing this kind of negative role irregardless of what other kinds of things
they might be involved in.
Yeah, Nina.
QUESTION: A different topic. The Russians have planted their flag at the North Pole in a seabed. What do you make of
this?
MR. CASEY: Well, what I think you're referring to is that the Russians are conducting a scientific expedition in the
seabed area by the North Pole. My understanding is back in 2001, they submitted to a technical body, under the Law of
the Sea Convention, a claim to try and extend their continental shelf under the terms of the Law of Sea Convention,
beyond the, sort of, 200 nautical miles that's generally traditional. There are some fairly technical arguments that
they've made in that. I believe that in 2003, the committee determined that there wasn't sufficient material available
to support that claim or to make a technical ruling on it, so the Russian expedition is designed to help conduct
research in support of that claim.
One thing I would note about this, of course, is that the Russian Government is pursuing a claim under their right to do
so as members of the Law of the Sea Convention. This is something that unfortunately, the United States is not in a
position to do because we have yet to ratify that convention and it's one of the reasons why we are interested and
supportive of having that treaty be ratified by the U.S. Senate and certainly hopeful that when Congress comes back in
session, they'll give it due consideration.
But this is a long, ongoing issue for the Russian Government. It's a technical one. We certainly are skeptical about the
claims made and did have an opportunity in 2002 to present a comment to this technical commission that basically called
into question the claims the Russians were making. Now they have submitted additional evidence since that time and this
expedition is designed to look at it as well, but again, since we're not members of the Law of the Sea convention and
can't have a member on that commission, we've not yet had an opportunity to look at that technical data which is, of
course, another reason why we'd like to be engaged and be fully represented on these kinds of bodies.
QUESTION: Well, wouldn't it -- I mean, they've sent a couple of mini subs down there and they've planted a metal flag --
the Russian flag. Don't you think this is -- they're making a symbolic claim? Isn't this kind of really stirring things
up?
MR. CASEY: Look, you know, we cooperate regularly with the Russians on all kinds of scientific matters. I'm not sure
whether they've -- you know, put a metal flag, a rubber flag, or a bed sheet on the ocean floor. Either way, it doesn't
have any legal standing or effect on this claim. This is a claim that I understand that is based on their attempt to
prove that certain underwater ridges really represent the outline of their continental shelf. It's an issue that's going
to be decided based on those technical merits, not on any kind of particular markers laid down.
And again, this is an issue that's been going on since 2001, but I'd again point out that one of the important things to
take from this is that the Russians are doing this because they're members of a treaty that allows them to do so in an
international regime that sets up a process for adjudicating those claims. And we unfortunately aren't in that ballgame
because we haven't ratified the treaty yet.
QUESTION: On this?
MR. CASEY: Yeah.
QUESTION: It sounds suspiciously like the guidance that I got yesterday on this that was dated July 31st, I think. Do
you know -- since the flags have actually been put down, do you have anything to --
MR. CASEY: No, but again, I --
QUESTION: Has anything changed in your mind?
MR. CASEY: No, not as far as I'm aware, Matt. And again, the claim that the Russians are making is based on a scientific
argument. I don't think that under the Law of the Sea Treaty and certainly, not under the commission that's reviewing
this, you know, whether they went and spray-painted a flag of Russia on those particular ridges is going to make one
iota of difference in terms of the technical evaluation. It certainly, to us, doesn't represent any kind of substantive
claim, and I certainly haven't heard anyone else make the argument that it does.
QUESTION: Belarus and Gazprom?
MR. CASEY: Belarus and Gazprom. Yeah, you asked about that this morning. There is some conflicting information that's
out there on this. But basically, what we'd like to see happen is the Russians and the Belarusian Government work out a
reasonable settlement of this issue; to do so in a way that doesn't call into question the viability of the supplies of
gas, whether to Belarus or to any of the other countries that are further on down the pipeline.
Part of what the Russians committed themselves to and what we committed ourselves to at the G-8 back in St. Petersburg
was to help ensure predictable flows of energy. And, again, we also want to make sure that any of these disputes, of
course, are resolved in keeping with market principles, because this is not an area where we'd like to see energy
resources or other kinds of vital supplies being subject to political considerations rather than basic economic ones.
Matt.
QUESTION: Do you have any better idea about why the number of Iraqi refugees admitted to the United States dropped last
month --
MR. CASEY: Well --
QUESTION: -- instead of going up, as you guys had been trying to ensure?
MR. CASEY: Well, Matt -- look, I think, as you know, this is a pretty complicated process. It's one that involves a lot
of different agencies and compliance with some fairly strict requirements under U.S. law. Bottom line is: We basically
admitted several fewer refugees this past month than the month before. Part of the issues with that not only involve the
screening process that we've talked about but also some of the issues with other countries, including the problems and
some technical issues, in terms of getting exit permits and visas for some of the refugees to leave the countries where
they have found themselves. In many cases, particularly in Syria, but even to a lesser extent in Jordan, there really
wasn't a strong infrastructure available to be able to process these cases either.
And, certainly, we'd like to move this faster, and we're working to do so. We expect there'll be several hundred more
refugees that will be coming out in the next few weeks, including many from Turkey, where the latest group just came
from and where there had been some technical questions that had come up. We've interviewed, to date, as I understand it,
approximately 300 -- or sorry, 3,000 Iraqi refugees. And basically, I think we've approved almost all of those
preliminarily to come to the United States. But it is going to take time to have them go through the security and health
screening processes that are part of U.S. law and also to make sure that they've met whatever requirements there are in
the countries where they find themselves.
So we are trying to move on this. I certainly expect that we will have, again, many hundreds brought in, in the next few
weeks. But the numbers are what they are and we all understand that we need to do what we can to meet our commitments to
the UNHCR as well as to those Iraqi refugees that need resettlement.
QUESTION: Thank you.
MR. CASEY: Thank you.
(This briefing concluded at 1:09 p.m.)
ENDS