Boucher Says Israeli Action Does Not Contribute to Peace

(Says U.S. government deeply regrets loss of civilian lives in Gaza)


(2616)





State Department spokesman Richard Boucher said the "heavy-handed"


Israeli military action that killed innocent civilians in Gaza does


not contribute to peace between Israelis and Palestinians. Boucher


made that statement in response to question about an Israeli missile


strike in Gaza that killed a Hamas leader and 14 civilians, including


children.





"[W]e very deeply regret the loss of life of innocent civilians,


including the children who were hurt and killed in last night's


Israeli action. As the White House said earlier today, President Bush


believes that the heavy-handed action in Gaza last night, carried out


in a residential area and resulting in civilian casualties, does not


contribute to peace," Boucher said at the daily State Department


briefing July 23.





Boucher said the U.S. government has made its views about the attack


known to the Israeli government. The spokesman added that the U.S.


government opposes targeted killings and use of heavy weapons in


densely populated areas. He said the U.S. government believes that


Hamas bears a lot of responsibility for the overall climate of


violence that has been created by terrorist attacks.





Boucher said the Arms Export Control Act requires the U.S. government


to file a report if U.S. arms are not used for legitimate


self-defense. The spokesman said the U.S. government has not filed a


report regarding Israeli actions.





Boucher said that both Israelis and Palestinians have responsibilities


in the search for peace. He said the United States is pressing for


peace using a three-track formula involving security cooperation,


humanitarian assistance for the Palestinian people and a resumption of


political dialogue.





The following excerpt contains Boucher's comments about the


Israeli-Palestinian conflict:








(begin excerpt)





QUESTION: Change of subject, the Middle East? Has the Secretary talked


to Prime Minister Sharon about the missile strike in Gaza? And in the


State Department's view, is this an act of self-defense in terms of


the use of American weapons?





MR. BOUCHER: Let me say a couple things. First, we very deeply regret


the loss of life of innocent civilians, including the children who


were hurt and killed in last night's Israeli action. As the White


House said earlier today, President Bush believes that the


heavy-handed action in Gaza last night, carried out in a residential


area and resulting in civilian casualties, does not contribute to


peace. We have conveyed this view to the Israeli Government through


our Embassy, through our Ambassador in Israel. And I think it's been


stated quite clearly, both here and at the White House.





QUESTION:  How about the use of American weapons?  





MR. BOUCHER: As you know, the Arms Export Control Act requires us to


do a report if we believe that US weaponry was not used -- or if


there's a substantial violation of the terms of an agreement governing


the use of US-origin defense articles; that is, if they're not being


used for legitimate self-defense or internal security. As we've said


before, we've not made such a report regarding Israel's actions.





QUESTION: Can we confer from that that you believe that the strike,


then, was in legitimate self-defense?





MR. BOUCHER:  As I say, we've not made such a report.





QUESTION: You haven't made such a report, but is there discussion


about preparing to do so?





MR. BOUCHER: All we've ever really answered in response to these


questions is to note that we have not made such a report, and should


we do so we'll tell you. At this point we haven't.





QUESTION:  You will?  





MR. BOUCHER:  Maybe.  





(Laughter.)





QUESTION: Is there a review event by event of whether this meets --





MR. BOUCHER: It's an ongoing issue that gets raised from time to time


about the use of US weaponry.





QUESTION:  Well, was it raised -- 





MR. BOUCHER: If there are specific events or allegations or


circumstances that lead people to look more closely, they will. But


I've made quite clear, I think, what our view is of this action. It


fits -- as we've said before, we've made repeatedly clear that we


oppose targeted killings. We have repeatedly criticized the use of


heavy weaponry in densely populated areas because of these kind of


dangers of large numbers of innocent civilians being killed.





QUESTION: But you touched on it when you say it doesn't -- or you


reminded us that the White House says this doesn't contribute to


peace. But the attack was almost coincident with four or five, some


folks would say, positive developments. Hamas, for instance, had said


it considered calling off attacks if Israel pulled out. Peres is


speaking of pulling out of Hebron and I forgot where else.





Is it the State Department's judgment that this will have a negative


impact on such gestures and maybe cause a reversal?





MR. BOUCHER: I don't think you can make that kind of sweeping judgment


at this point. Certainly we continue to believe that it's important to


move forward on all three tracks on the area of security, on the area


of economic and humanitarian assistance, and on the political track as


well.





We had good, productive and useful discussions with an Israeli team


that came yesterday to talk to Secretary Powell and other officials,


including Condi Rice. We have reviewed progress with them on the


discussions that the Quartet and the Arab foreign ministers had last


week, and we talked about how to advance on all these different areas.





So we continue the work to establish a situation which will be safe


and secure for Palestinians and Israelis alike, where economic


development and humanitarian assistance can go through, and where all


the people in the region can have a prospect of a political


settlement.





QUESTION: It's a little early to ask, but more specifically have you


heard anything from Palestinians or whoever that this will have an


impact on peacemaking?





MR. BOUCHER: I have not. No, not that I've heard of -- not that I know


that we've heard anything particular on that at this point.





Ben.





QUESTION: Two questions. First of all, do you believe that Hamas has


some responsibility for this event by, you know, sending out suicide


bombers into Israel and then essentially hiding within populated


areas? Do you believe that they have some responsibility for this?





MR. BOUCHER: We certainly believe that Hamas has a lot of


responsibility for the violence and the overall climate of violence


that's been created by the terrorist attacks that they have carried


out. There's no question in our minds that Hamas is responsible for


many of these attacks. They have claimed -- admitted responsibility to


many of them. They have killed many innocents.


It's important, though, I think, to remember that we all need to


respond to these attacks in a way that gets at the problem, and that


does contribute to ending the violence and not in a way that, as the


President's -- as the White House has made clear doesn't really


contribute to peace.





QUESTION: And let me just follow up on that. Regardless of the fact


that you feel that Hamas has a lot of responsibility for violence, do


you believe that the Israeli attack is going to end up damaging


Israel's international reputation and going to encourage criticism by


critics in Europe and the United Nations and around the world?





MR. BOUCHER: That's a prediction that you can make; you don't need me


to make it. I'm not -- the basis for our policy is what we believe is


in the best interest of Israel, and what's in the best interest of the


cause of peace, and that's why we're saying this.





Howard.





QUESTION: I have this question of the use of US weapons. I'm not


clear; maybe you can explain it. What is it exactly that triggers a


review? Is it just the random inclination of the State Department that


they feel something should be looked into? Is there a requirement that


you review things after a certain time? I mean, there's been extended


Israeli use of American military hardware over the past few months in


a lot of these incursions. At what point is there a critical mass at


which you feel it's necessary to review?





MR. BOUCHER: I think the only thing I can really say it's an object of


constant attention. It's an object of ongoing review, that because it


is a legal responsibility that we have that we take seriously, we do


look at these events as they unfold, and should we determine that the


terms and conditions of sale, that the terms and conditions of the act


have been exceeded, then we would make the report.





But it is -- there's not a regular period. There's not a regular


report. There's a not a particular timetable for this. It's something


that we have to keep in mind because it's part of our legal


responsibility.





QUESTION: So the discussion rests with the State Department to decide


whether or not it needs to look at the question?





MR. BOUCHER: The responsibility rests with the State Department to


carry out this law, and we do that diligently every day.





QUESTION:  Can I give it another try?  (Laughter.)





MR. BOUCHER:  Then let's go to him.  (Laughter.)





QUESTION: No, you have a US (inaudible) plane hitting a civilian


neighborhood, killing a lot of children. How many of number of


Palestinian children has to die -- 25, 30, more, less -- for this to


trigger a law or a review?





MR. BOUCHER: No. I mean, that's absolutely not the case. We've been


quite clear on these kind of events. We've been quite clear our


opposition to the use of this kind of force in heavily populated


areas. We've been quite concerned about the loss of civilian life,


especially children. I think the United States position on this has


been stated quite clearly.





As far as the legal aspects of this, it's governed by a US law, it's


governed by a US law that we take seriously, that we implement.





QUESTION: But to what extent -- I'm sorry, just a quick follow-up --


to what extent the political, domestic considerations (inaudible) in


the arms of the law in this case?





MR. BOUCHER:  The law is the law, and we implement it fairly.





QUESTION: Richard, I don't think I'm alone in seeing a pattern here;


this has happened before, when -- for example, when Hamas has


indicated it might be willing to stop bombings when things seem to be


moving ahead. Then we see Israelis attacking, assassinating people in


Gaza.





Do you see a pattern here, and does this lead you to any conclusions


about the good will of Prime Minister Sharon?





MR. BOUCHER: If you want to ask if there's a pattern, ask the Israelis


the reasons for their actions. We certainly follow these events


closely. We express our concerns and our views when it's appropriate.


But I don't have any broad judgments to make.





QUESTION: Can I just follow up on slightly a different matter? You


spoke about the talks with the Israelis yesterday. Did that meeting


lead to any conclusions about US security plan, and is there any


progress on how you might present that to the Palestinian side?





MR. BOUCHER: Well, as I mentioned yesterday, these talks covered a


number of areas, and as I said, they covered security; they talked


about the humanitarian situation, economics, a need for access and


opening up; they covered how to make progress on the political track.


We found our discussions with the Israelis to be useful and


productive, and we expect to have similar discussions with


working-level Palestinian officials as we move forward. But no, I


don't have anything scheduled at this point.





......





QUESTION: This administration has been very supportive of Prime


Minister Sharon. The President has met with him six or seven times.


The administration agrees with his policies on security first, a new


Palestinian leadership. You're not suggesting by your criticism of


this act that there's any sort of broader change of policy towards the


Sharon government or reviewing policy?





MR. BOUCHER: Fundamentally, the United States and Israel have a long


relationship based on our support for Israel and its security and its


democracy. The President has made clear in all his statements that


Israel has obligations too, that all the parties have obligations. As


we look for Palestinian reforms, we look for Palestinians to take


responsibility for security by reforming their security services. We


also look to Israel to take reciprocal steps, like easing the


closures, handing over tax revenue, facilitating movement of


humanitarian goods and services. These things remain part of the


equation.





The President has made clear again and again all parties have


responsibilities, and we look to all parties to carry out their


responsibility to create an environment where we can move forward,


where we can move forward to achieve real security for Israelis and


Palestinians alike. I think the statements we're making today about


these actions fit within that context.








(end excerpt)