Washington -- Under Secretary of State Thomas Pickering was featured on Capital View, a Middle East Broadcasting Center call-in show hosted by James Zogby November 17.

Pickering was asked about the Al Shifa pharmaceutical plant in Sudan and the validity of the evidence which led to the U.S. decision to bomb the facility. He replied:

"There were studies done in the American intelligence community before the bombing that questioned the evidence -- those were in the minds of the individuals who examined the evidence prior to making the decision. And they, on the basis of careful examination of the evidence, and in light of those studies, made the recommendations to the President. The bombing took place. So, when the State Department people came to me and said: 'we have a new study we want to produce,' I said: 'does it contain anything new? Has it changed the scene in any way at all?' And they said: 'no.' And I said that I don't see the utility, but I asked them to pursue new leads with respect to different information that I thought would be helpful to know about, having examined the case very, very thoroughly. And they went to the others in the intelligence community and produced that other information for me.

Now the second question is: do we all have any regrets, those of us who participated in examining the evidence and in making the decision or helping the President make the decision or recommending the decision? And my view of that is 'no.' I believe that the evidence that we have in two or three categories was very, very important. Most important was the fact that a precursor of VX nerve agent, that has no other use, that does not occur naturally, was found in a sample taken 60 feet, about, from the door of the Al Shifa plant in Sudan. Secondly, it was very clear that Usama bin Ladin had very close connections with the Sudanese. He'd lived with them for a long period of time. Thirdly, it was very clear to us that the Sudanese themselves had a great interest in developing these kinds of weapons. They were not prohibited, in the sense that they had not yet joined the Chemical Weapons Convention. And so, looking at all of those, it was in our view, knowing that Usama wanted to strike again after the att acks at Dar es Salaam and Nairobi, it was irresponsible not to take out this particular plant, which had all of this potential. Because not only did he want to attack again, it was very clear to us that he wanted to use weapons of mass destruction."

Pickering was then asked about the treatment of Arab-Americans who visit Israel. He answered as follows:

"At the time I was ambassador (to Israel) and since then all of my successors have taken up this issue constantly and consistently with the Israelis. The consular warning notice that you speak of is in no way a denial of American responsibility for our citizens in Israel, whatever their origins, wherever they may have been born and brought up. And we have on all of these occasions taken it up with the Israeli government. Now we had three people come into the State Department at the end of August and submitted affidavits. We have submitted those to the government; we asked the Israelis in October, formally, to prepare a report on the statements that were given to us about the mistreatment. We continue to take up cases that come up. But the warning is there because we have not yet achieved perfection with the Israelis, unfortunately, in the treatment of Arab-Americans."

The Under Secretary was then asked about diversity and the State Department's efforts to hire Arab-Americans. He said:

"I can assure you that I and my colleagues who make recommendations to the Secretary take this very seriously. I think it (diversity) is essential. Come on. It is extremely important to have people from all backgrounds in America -- males, females, all colors, all groups -- to represent the United States. Because they not only make policy, but they also present policy and talk about policy and this is enormously valuable. And I've had too few, frankly, Arab -American friends who've occupied important jobs in the foreign service. I've helped to try and bring them in.

We are sending officers around now, to speak to universities. Just last week, we had an excellent officer at the University of Michigan, who spoke to the Arab -American students. And frankly, let me say, if there are Arab-Americans out there, Jewish-Americans, any Americans out there, Vietnamese, who want to serve in the foreign service between the ages of 20 and 59, come and join us, take the exam. It's tough, but we're looking for you. We want you."

The next question was about Lebanon. Pickering answered it as follows:

"Lebanon has been the victim of too many tragedies. We hope that those people there, particularly the Lebanese government can maintain the kind of control that it has really begun over the past five years to exercise over its own territory, to prevent those attacks. It is a time for good sense and wisdom to prevail. But obviously there are people who don't like the peace process and who want to use Lebanon as a springboard for shooting it down. This is a tragedy."

Asked whether the United States should be more firm with Israel and set standards for its behavior, Pickering said:

"The United States has not been asked by the parties, nor does it have a role to set so-called minimum standards. Our effort has been to bring the parties together, to get them to focus on the issues and to get them working in the room, together alone whenever that is possible, because out of that comes the kind of white smoke that we all talk about, of agreement at the end of the day.

I think it's also extremely important as we get into the very difficult issues - - Jerusalem, refugees, settlements, land areas -- that the United States should not be out there taking positions on this set of issues. They're both very delicate and secondly, it begins to eclipse the role of the parties to move ahead in the negotiating process... It is American policy to do everything we can to keep the parties moving and the negotiating process going on track and that's what we'll dedicate ourselves to, as a facilitator. ...

We, of course, continue to believe what we have always been saying about the settlements, but we have also now seen, in fact, the negotiations move away from a primary focus on what is happening today to the longer-term reach that we have waited all of these years to see come. So this is very important."

The next question was about Iraq, the U.N. embargo and the no-fly zones. Pickering commented:

"I don't believe the Iraqi people, if they really had a free choice, would ever keep Saddam in power, not with all of the depredations, with the long, terrible war against Iran, with the invasion of Kuwait, with all the destruction that it caused... The United States stands at the forefront of doing everything we can to see that the assistance, the humanitarian help, the needs of the Iraqi people are met, that the assistance gets there...

Of course, the attacks against Iraq by the United States and the British would stop tomorrow if Iraq, Saddam, would stop violating the no-fly-zone, which was put in by the United Nations Security Council. I was there (at the U.N.). It was suggested by the French in order to keep Iraqi airplanes and helicopters from being used to destroy their own people at the time of the end of the Gulf War. Now, of course, every day, Saddam tries to violate the no-fly-zone or shoot down the American patrols that maintain the no-fly-zone and ...

The United States has the right and indeed obligation to make certain that those violations do not continue. The United States has been very careful to limit those attacks to military targets. Obviously, no system is perfect, but those have been the air defense targets that have been used to fire on our pilots and on our planes. They could stop tomorrow. Baghdad -- all it has to do is go back to the way it operated for seven years and respect the no-fly-zones and there would be no such attacks."

Pickering was then asked about Afghanistan and Usama bin Ladin. He said:

"The United States cooperated with many in Afghanistan who wanted to see the end of Soviet rule and that came through the cooperation. We were shocked and surprised that some of those people -- and indeed new people who came into Afghanistan -- suddenly decided that the United States was the next target or should be, in fact, attacked. As you know, a year and a half ago in August in East Africa two of our embassies were destroyed. More than 250 Muslims and others suffered in Kenya. A small, but significant number of those were Americans. We believe that was totally unjustified, totally uncalled for and totally out of keeping with both Islam and the long and, I think, important history we had trying to help the Afghan people free themselves of Soviet rule.

The next caller returned to the subject of U.S. policy toward Iraq. Pickering said:

"Our policy is to continue to keep Saddam contained within the sanctions, so that he doesn't invade his neighbors, rebuild his weapons of mass destruction, recreate the missiles to deliver them, attack the Kurds in the northern part of Iraq. And secondly, we would like to see Saddam gone, quite frankly. I don't know how long it will take. We have been working quietly and carefully. The opposition met recently in New York. I had a chance to talk to them. I was pleased and surprised to see over 300 Iraqis, a number of them came at great cost to themselves from inside Iraq to be part of a group that seeks to get together to try to find ways to work for a better, democratic future for the people of Iraq. I think this is the right attitude; this is the right direction we will go."

The next caller tried to compare Iraq with Israel. Pickering responded:

"I think that it's extremely important to recognize that in Kuwait, an attack took place by Iraq without warning against a peaceful neighbor, an aggression recognized by the international community that took place rapidly and, in our view, without any justification.

The Israeli forces that we have seen, have been part of a long-standing conflict that has taken place over many years. We are now working urgently to find the peaceful settlement to that. Many steps have been made. Peace has been made with Egypt, peace with Jordan. We are now on the threshold, I believe, of the full peace with the Palestinians, which obviously both sides now clearly want, peace with Syria, peace with Lebanon. This is an extremely important and significant effort that I believe needs to take place and I believe is the reason why the U.S. policy has been different, and indeed, the international policy has been different in both areas. The process, the problems at base have been different; the solutions are different."

Asked about Morocco and King Mohammed VI, Pickering said:

"I have a large and deep affection for Morocco. I did two and a half years in the Navy in Morocco and had the pleasure of seeing the King's grandfather, Mohammed V, as well as having opportunities in my career to meet his father, and I would certainly look forward to meeting him (King Mohammed VI). I think he has started well, carefully, where he's shown a sure grasp of his leadership. He's shown a deep sense of the priorities of Morocco, and I think he's reflected that.

The question of the (Western) Sahara has been a long and trying and difficult one. The Secretary General of the United Nations, assisted by former Secretary of State Jim Baker, has been working on this process. They have been working to try to put in place a referendum which both parties appear to want to see happen. That would be a way through a very difficult and trying task. It would lead, I would hope, to a new future for the region. It's slow; it is difficult. Both sides, obviously have deep concerns. But it is something that I believe, with the help of the United Nations, we can find a way through, bring the peace -keepers out, let people go to their homes. Hopefully, there will be a close and warm and abiding relationship between the peoples of the region, who after all, come from a common heritage and in many ways should not be at odds over the future of the territory."

Asked about Jordan and the fate of the Palestinian refugees there, Pickering stated:

"I want to be very careful in talking about elements of the refugee issues relating to the peace process, not to try to prejudice the outcome of what are very difficult negotiations ... Many Arab countries -- I spent a lot of my life in Jordan -- have very large populations of Palestinians who left their homeland as refugees, went to Jordan, have made a new life there. In fact, it depends on where you start counting. People left Nablus in the 1920s to go to Jordan. People left in large numbers after '48 and large numbers are '67. If the Jordanians want to be hospitable -- and I think they do because I know them very well -- they could stay in Jordan if they want to. Some undoubtedly will. Some will want to return home. And that, of course, is the question of negotiation, if where home is, is recognized as a result of the negotiations as Israeli territory. Others will want to go to whatever Palestine emerges and however it emerges, and that will be, of course, up to the people who live there to make t heir decisions. So, these are tough questions and they're very difficult. But there are many ways, obviously, that we can deal with, internationally, refugees, and the international community is certainly prepared to help."

The next questions was about a perceived U.S. double standard in the peace process. Pickering commented:

"Of course, it (the U.S.) must play an even-handed role... the human rights issues are increasingly in the focus of our foreign policy."

Asked about the Kurds, he said:

"Obviously, Turkey's problems with the Kurds, which we believe have calmed immeasurably, but about which we continue to be concerned and express our concerns to the Turks, and our reserve in some areas on our policy -- they are an important part of our policy. (They)stem obviously from Turkish-Kurdish competition over land, over concerns about the Kurdish population, that they're not being treated well, about the fact that, at least, the so-called Turkish Workers Party, the PKK, has taken up arms against the Turks. And there have been a continued series of clashes. I think that has calmed with Ocelan who was the leader of the party, who is now being in Turkey, in jail, tried and condemned to death. In northern Iraq, obviously, the concern that we had, was that it was Saddam who was oppressing the Kurds and had for many, many years, as he had with the Shi'a in the south."

(Distributed by the Office of International Information Programs, U.S. Department of State)