| TERRORISM | |
| 1-6 | Status of Investigation of the Attack at Khobar |
| 1-3,4-7 | Contact with Iran |
| 3-5 | Saudi Arabia Cooperation with FBI |
| 5,9-10 | Justice Department's Decision to Remove Hani El-Sayegh |
| 9 | State Department's Issuance of Worldwide Caution |
............
QUESTION: Several stories today about the Khobar bombing. Could you tell us what you know about alleged involvement of Iranian officials and a possible Iranian role in harboring Saudi suspects?
MR. RUBIN: Yes. First of all, let me say the Khobar bombing is being investigated as a criminal matter and that investigation is ongoing. Several people have been arrested and are pending trial in Saudi Arabia. The US investigation of the attack at Khobar is ongoing but we are investigating information concerning the involvement of Saudi nationals, Iranian Government officials, and others. We have not reached a conclusion regarding whether the attack was directed by the government of Iran. We cannot comment on the specifics without jeopardizing future courses of action.
But relatedly, with respect to the question of diplomatic contact with Iran that some of you have asked me about, let me say this: The United States has for many years sent messages to the government of Iran on a periodic basis; often, those messages are focused on terrorism. Iran has denied any involvement in the bombing and is not cooperating in the investigation.
We have made clear to Iran that there cannot be a lifting of the sanctions we have imposed or an improvement in relations until Iran cooperates in the fight against terrorism. Cooperation in this investigation would be a first and important step in that direction, and as I have said before, we remain open to an authoritative dialogue with Iran on this and other matters.
There is information that some of the suspects traveled to Iran after the bombing. We do not know their current locations. We have not made - contrary to some of the reports - specific requests of the government of Iran. We have, however, sought a commitment from the government of Iran to support bringing those responsible to justice. As I said earlier, Iran has denied involvement in the bombing and is not cooperating in the investigation.
Let me emphasize with respect to the issue of Iranian Government officials, we are investigating - and this is a key word - information that Iranian Government officials were involved. I can't comment on specific individuals, but let me emphasize we have not finished our investigation and have not reached conclusions about the actions of particular individuals. It is important to underscore that we are dealing with a variety of pieces of information, including second and third-hand accounts and intelligence reports. We are evaluating this information carefully and as quickly as possible.
QUESTION: When you stress the word information, what's the significance of that - that you don't have proof?
MR. RUBIN: Right. As I said just at the end of that, we have not finished our investigation and have not reached conclusions about the actions of particular individuals.
QUESTION: Could you sort of explain why the US has decided now to sort of publicize that it's looking into information about the involvement - the possible involvement of Iranian officials, where in the past the US has not explicitly said that it was doing so? What's the reason for the timing of this?
MR. RUBIN: I don't know the answer to why. My job here is often to try to get as much information as possible available to you; that's what I do in my discussion with other officials in this government. And when people believe that it is possible to be as forthcoming as possible, we try to do so.
We do have specific information with respect to the involvement of Iranian Government officials and that information has come to light and we are making clear - I hope in the last day or so - our determination to pursue this investigation rigorously and vigorously.
As we have demonstrated on a number of occasions, the United States has responded to terrorism in a number of ways, but our record is clear. We will do what it takes to get to the bottom of these incidents, whether it was maintaining sanctions on Libya for many, many years and now, 11 years later after the Pan Am 103 bombing, two suspects are in custody awaiting trial. We spent four years working to apprehend the individual responsible for killing staff members of the CIA. We spent approximately two years tracking down some of those responsible for the World Trade Center bombing.
So we pursue these investigations rigorously and we have the patience and the determination to see them through, and as information comes to light and we think it's appropriate to make that information public without causing damage to our investigation, we do so. That is the judgment of those involved in the investigation that this information is not making - confirming it publicly won't hamper the pursuit of justice.
QUESTION: If I may follow up, you raised Libya and while you did bring some suspects from Libya to an international - to a court, but a previous administration also launched a military strike against Libya as a consequence of a terrorist attack. Are you suggesting that military action is one of the possibilities if you all were to come to a conclusion about possible Iranian Government involvement in Khobar?
MR. RUBIN: I don't want to speculate on what we do when we are able to complete the picture for a full investigation, but let me be clear the United States has used a variety of means to respond to terrorism in the past. We have used economic and diplomatic sanctions, as in the case of the Libyan involvement in the Pan Am 103. We have employed military force consistent with international law when we believed it was necessary in self-defense to prevent further attacks.
We will choose to act against terrorism at times and in ways that is in the best interest of the United States. We will continue to make our judgment about what is in our best interest, and when we judge that our best interest requires a military action we have not hesitated to use military force.
QUESTION: Then if I could, does the United States suspect - or can you say - that the highest levels of the Iranian intelligence apparatus were involved in the Khobar bombing, or can you say?
MR. RUBIN: What I can say is that we are working to answer the question of whether this was a case of state sponsorship of terrorism. This investigation is not over. We have information regarding the involvement of Iranian Government officials and we are continuing to investigate and we are determined to get to the bottom of this. In a case like this, we will continue to work on it and in similar cases we have shown an extraordinary patience, and determination and there are suspects who are now in prison or are now awaiting trial who know that our patience is long when it comes to responding to terrorist cases like this.
QUESTION: Just to follow on that point, for those who are waiting for trial in Saudi Arabia, the United States has not been able to interview - our FBI people have tried and been refused. Is there any progress in that regard of access to the prisoners to our investigators?
MR. RUBIN: Let me say that our assessment at this point is that the FBI has reported and told us that it has recently received good cooperation from Saudi authorities in this investigation. It is true that there were some initial differences but these have been overcome and the United States and Saudi Arabia have a long history of successful strategic cooperation, including on the important issue of protecting American forces and the cooperation is more than satisfactory. Clearly in the initial phase, as the two investigating teams were getting to know each other, there was a rough start. But we believe we've been getting - and we're satisfied about the cooperation we've received from Saudi Arabia.
QUESTION: But, specifically, have FBI agents actually had access to interview those people arrested and detained for Khobar?
MR. RUBIN: Now you've been to this briefing a lot. I would say that in response to your question, I gave you about as forthcoming an answer as I've ever given on this subject and you'll have to draw your own conclusions about what I said.
QUESTION: You said - this is an information question - you said there's information that some suspects traveled to Iran after the bombing and also you have specific information on involvement of Iranian officials. The information is pretty vague. Can you say is this good information, reliable information? Do you believe this information?
MR. RUBIN: We think it's information that is sufficiently credible to state it - that there is such information. We get a whole variety of rumors and data in this business and this government and there are various levels. Credible evidence we did not say it was. That is a phrase that one has heard me use. Information is another phrase and rumors is a third phrase. So you should draw your own conclusions about that.
QUESTION: In Iran's contacts with the US, they supposedly have brought up the issue of the shoot-down of the Iranian passenger plane in 1988 by an American ship in the Persian Gulf. Is that true and what relevance does it have to this particular case?
MR. RUBIN: Without answering the question directly as to what they've said in a diplomatic exchange, we do not think that's relevant. A number of steps were taken after that tragic incident and I will get for the record for you the steps that we took. But regardless, we think that Iran should cooperate in our investigation to get to the bottom of this act of terrorism.
QUESTION: It has been widely said over the years that the Saudi authorities deliberately avoided any suggestion that Iran had a role in the bombing for diplomatic reasons. Has something changed in that? Are the Saudi authorities now open to allowing you to go public with possible accusations of Iranian involvement?
MR. RUBIN: We don't need Saudi Arabia's permission to make information public. Let me say that you've described one strain of reporting about Saudi Arabia's motivation in not wanting to name Iran. There has been another strain of reporting that suggested that they have wanted to name Iran. So there is often different strains of reporting. Whether that reflects different strains of opinion, you can make your own judgment about that.
But we have been receiving satisfactory cooperation, as I indicated in response to one of your colleague's questions. We believe the information is of a sufficient credibility to mention it publicly but, at the same time - and I hope as you all decide how you will write about this or cover this - that you also take into account that we have said, and I have said over and over again, that we have not reached a conclusion about the specific individuals or about the question of whether this incident was - this terrorism was sponsored by Iran itself.
QUESTION: Is the Administration offering Iran anything in exchange for cooperating in this investigation?
MR. RUBIN: I think it's fair to say that we have told Iran that we - certainly Secretary Albright did, I think in probably the most clear way - that we would like to develop a road map to normal relations. Normal relations has a lot of meaning, including not having sanctions in place, including having a number of more normal diplomatic relations, and that the obstacles to those more normal relations are primarily in three areas: the important cooperation and the rejection of terrorism; the change in the opposition to the Middle East peace process; and the question of the pursuit of weapons of mass destruction and ballistic missiles.
Those are the three areas that we have said we would like to talk to Iran about. They could raise issues that they might want to discuss in a dialogue that we have offered. Obviously, if there was an improvement in that area there would be an improvement on the key question of our sanctions. We have made clear to Iran that there cannot be a lifting of sanctions and an improvement of relations unless and until Iran cooperates in the fight against terrorism. Cooperation in this investigation would be a first and significant step towards that end.
QUESTION: That was the Secretary's speech back a year and a half ago, though. If I could just follow up, that was the speech that she first gave a year and a half ago. But in this latest move that we've just made in returning that Saudi national - or moving to return him to Saudi Arabia, has the US or President Clinton in his letter made any additional reference to this road map for normalization?
MR. RUBIN: Again, I wouldn't be in a position to comment on any specific words used in any specific message. We have certainly had a number of diplomatic exchanges in the form of messages to the Iranian Government over time. These messages have often focused on terrorism. Iran has denied any involvement in the bombing and is not cooperating in this investigation. That is the current state of play: They are denying involvement and not cooperating in this investigation.
I have said that cooperation in this investigation would be a step in the direction of cooperating in the fight against terrorism. As I also said and I'll preview the answer to the next question, there are other issues of concern to the United States, including the question of ballistic missiles and weapons of mass destruction, including the opposition in substantial ways to the Middle East peace process.
So those are all issues that we would raise and they are all issues at the top of our agenda with Iran, and it wouldn't be possible to lift sanctions or have a substantial improvement in relations until Iran cooperates in the fight against terrorism. Obviously the other issues would also be taken into account.
QUESTION: It sounds like you're softening your position.
MR. RUBIN: I wasn't intending to.
QUESTION: Question about terrorism.
MR. RUBIN: On Iran?
QUESTION: Well, no, not Iran.
MR. RUBIN: Let's stay with that, okay?
QUESTION: Do you know if the US has indicted or sought the indictment of any individuals in Iran in connection with Khobar?
MR. RUBIN: I don't do indictments from here.
.....................
QUESTION: Regarding the worldwide caution released today regarding Mr. El-Sayegh.
MR. RUBIN: Yes.
QUESTION: Is there a deadline on his cooperation? I've seen a deadline of Wednesday and I've also seen a the word "soon" used - that he should cooperate soon before he's --
MR. RUBIN: This is really an FBI matter and I'm not the right person to ask this question to. He has presumably certain legal remedies that he can pursue and we'd expect that he would pursue them. What course they ultimately choose is up to El-Sayegh and his lawyers and it's really the Department of Justice that has been working on the legal steps here and would be in a better position to tell you what the various options are.
QUESTION: Has the State Department or anybody else within the US Government received information since the Justice Department made its announcement yesterday that would cause the State Department to issue this worldwide caution?
MR. RUBIN: No. When we make statements on matters like this, we make a judgment as to when information becomes public what potential impact it could have on American citizens around the world. This worldwide caution specifically references the announcement by Deputy Attorney General Holder and the fact that we are investigating information concerning the involvement of Saudi nationals and Iranian Government officials, and then goes on to say - given these facts - the potential exists for retaliatory actions.
So this worldwide caution is part of what we think is a prudent measure to alert people around the world to the potential risks as a result of the announcement of El-Sayegh being returned to Saudi Arabia or removed to Saudi Arabia and the fact that we're investigating information with respect to Iranian Government involvement.
QUESTION: What is the distinction between removing him, deporting him?
MR. RUBIN: Extradition would require an extradition treaty, as I understand it, and there isn't such. So removal is a more English word than extradition which is a more legal word, I think. But the lawyers probably will have trouble with that basic, common sense answer.
...........
(The briefing concluded at 1:55 P.M.)
[end of document]