Daily Press Briefing
Statements made by
the Ministry of Foreign Affairs Spokesperson
(excerpts)
(Paris, August 21, 2006)
[Please note that only the original French text issued by the French Ministry of Foreign Affairs may be considered official.]
MIDEAST
Let me read you Saturday’s communiqué concerning the arrest of the Palestinian deputy prime minister:
“We were concerned to learn of the Israeli army’s arrest this evening of the Palestinian deputy prime minister, Nasser Shaer.
We reiterate our condemnation of the arrests of Palestinian Authority members. Only a political process based on dialogue can put an end to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.”
Since then, we also noted with concern yesterday’s arrest of the secretary-general of the Palestinian Parliament, Mahmoud al-Rahmi.
Q - Has France initiated contacts with a view to the release of the Palestinian deputy prime minister and the other MPs and leaders arrested by Israel? Have you followed the unfolding of the trial of the president of the Palestinian parliament, Aziz Doweik, before an Israeli court? Do you consider that court to be legal? In other words, does Israel have the right to try a Palestinian elected official?
The EU expressed itself on July 3 on the first arrests of Palestinian ministers and MPs in late June. It notably emphasized that detainees had to be able to fully exercise their rights. Mr. Doweik’s arrest, unfortunately, follows the same logic, and the observations made at the time apply to this case.
Together with our European partners, we will examine the kind of follow-up that must be given to these arrests.
In the context of its humanitarian aid for Lebanon, France decided to send 15 Bailey bridges supplied by the Ministry of Transport and Infrastructure. These bridges were transported to Marseille and shipped on Wednesday to Beirut. They will be assembled on site by members of the French army’s engineering corps, will help reestablish the main travel arteries within Lebanon and thus will facilitate the return of displaced people.
Let me remind you once again of the two toll-free numbers set up at Foreign Minister Douste-Blazy’s behest—one to support the Lebanese population (0 800 22 22 22) and the other to support the Israeli population of Northern Israel (0 800 480 480).
These numbers serve to collect donations from individuals, local communities and companies that will help support different humanitarian projects.
Q - On Sunday, Iran, which is to reply formally to an offer by the major powers in exchange for the suspension of its uranium enrichment, has already ruled out giving in to this demand. What’s your reaction? What would the immediate consequences be for Iran if it does indeed reject this offer on Tuesday?
Iran indicated that it wants to respond formally tomorrow, August 22, to the offer presented to it on June 6 by Germany, China, the United States, France, the United Kingdom and Russia.
Like the UN secretary-general, we hope, as Foreign Minister Douste-Blazy has said numerous times, that Iran will embrace this proposal.
It is premature to speculate as to what the response will be.
Q - The Iranian supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, announced on Monday that Iran would strongly pursue its nuclear program. What’s your reaction?
I have nothing to add to my previous answer.
Q - The Israeli prime minister said on Sunday that his country is opposed to the multinational contingent containing troops from countries with which it doesn’t have relations. Is France, which considers the participation of those countries to be crucial, calling on Israel to allow them to contribute to a bolstered UNIFIL?
It is up to the UN secretary-general to confirm, in cooperation with all parties concerned, the various proposals he receives regarding participation in a bolstered UNIFIL.
Let me remind you that the composition of a bolstered UNIFIL has not been definitively decided and that consultations are continuing.
Q - The Jewish State asked Italy to play a “primordial role” in the multinational force in Lebanon, UNIFIL. How should one interpret this request? Why Italy and not France, for example?
As I just said, it’s up to the UN to decide on contributions to the force.
Moreover, as you already know, we are in contact with our European partners, including Italy, on the question of reinforcing UNIFIL.
Foreign Minister Douste-Blazy asked his Finnish counterpart, Erkki Tuomojia, who is exercising the presidency of the European Union, to organize a meeting in Brussels to take stock of the situation in Lebanon on the political, military and humanitarian fronts. It’s up to the Finnish presidency to confirm the holding of that meeting, its date and composition.
[…]
Q - How do you explain the gap between the expectations of Israel and the UN, notably, and the French proposals on participating in UNIFIL? At what point do you think there might have been a misunderstanding? Do we know when the European meeting requested by Mr. Douste-Blazy will take place? What’s the status of the negotiations at the UN on UNIFIL’s conditions for intervention?
I don’t see how there could be a misunderstanding. The various statements made by the French authorities duly underscored the importance of what we’re already doing to respond, on an emergency basis, to the need to accompany the deployment of the Lebanese army in southern Lebanon.
Beyond that emergency response, which we were the first to provide, we also emphasized that a certain number of clarifications were expected with respect to the missions that a bolstered UNIFIL should carry out, as well as on the rules of engagement and the chain of command. President Chirac reiterated these points on Saturday during his telephone conversations with the prime ministers of Finland, Italy and Turkey, as did Foreign Minister Douste-Blazy.
[…]
Q - France hasn’t yet reacted to the Israeli operation west of Baalbek that Kofi Annan called a violation of SCR 1701. Do you consider that operation to be a violation? And what comment would you make on the Israeli minister’s threat of a “second round” against Lebanon?
We took note of an initial report by the UN secretary-general on the implementation of SCR 1701 as well as his communiqué on the Baalbek raid. We call on all the parties to exercise restraint and respect the obligations incumbent on them pursuant to the terms of SCR 1701.
[…]
Q - Do you share the point of view of prosecutor Carla del Ponte, who considers that the absence of Radovan Karadzic and Ratko Mladic from the Srebrenica trial in The Hague is scandalous? Who is responsible for that, according to France? Do you think Belgrade is doing enough to apprehend war criminals, and what can the international community do to render justice to the 7,000 dead of Srebrenica?
We’ve always said that we expect the Belgrade authorities to cooperate fully with the ICTY to bring about the arrest of Mr. Mladic and Mr. Karadzic.
Let me remind you, furthermore, of the conclusions of the General Affairs Council and External Relations of May 15, regretting that Serbia and Montenegro are still not fully cooperating with the ICTY.
Embassy of France, August 21, 2006