    [Weekly Compilation of Presidential Documents Volume 36, Number 22 (Monday, June 5, 2000)]
    [Pages 1249-1257]
    [Online from the Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]

    <R04>
    The President's News Conference With European Union Leaders in Lisbon

    May 31, 2000

        Prime Minister Antonio Guterres. Ladies and gentlemen, good
    afternoon. A few words in English before making my statement in
    Portuguese.
        First of all, let me say that this was not a business-as-usual
    summit. It was a strategic summit: Strategic in the way we discussed the
    diplomatic and security problems of our hemisphere, the new common
    security and defense policy of the European Union, its

    [[Page 1250]]

    relationship with NATO, our relations with Russia and the Ukraine, our
    commitment to the protection of the values of all civilization in the
    Balkans; strategic in our approach, bringing confidence to multilateral
    way of dealing with trade issues, our commitment to relaunch this year
    the new round of World Trade Organization, and to solve in a case-by-
    case situation our disputes based on the WTO rules; but especially
    strategic because we concentrated on the new global problems that
    represent today the main threats to our planet--infectious diseases like
    tuberculosis, malaria, or AIDS, the digital divide, the difficulties to
    make the new economy a truly inclusive economy; and strategic because we
    decided to work together, the United States and European Union, to
    promote a global effort to match this challenge and to win this
    challenge, aiming at the next G-8 organization summit and working
    together in all relevant international fora.
        Ladies and gentlemen, this has indeed been a meeting in which
    questions of global strategy have been a major element. Firstly, on this
    level of diplomacy and security, I think that we have fully understood
    the importance of our common European security and defense policy and
    the interrelations between this policy and the instruments within it and
    NATO and in perfect accord with the relations between these two
    organizations.
        We also discussed in a very consensual manner the efforts that the
    United States and the European Union are going to be making in their
    relations with Russia and the Ukraine, considering this an essential
    triangle for the stability of our continent.
        And we were able to reiterate our firm commitment to what we are
    doing in the western Balkans and our conviction that what we are
    concerned with here are essential values of civilization--in Bosnia and
    Kosovo, as to the possibility there of establishing a real multiethnic
    community in this territory, and a commitment to transform Yugoslavia
    into a truly democratic country, commitment to guaranteeing or to trying
    to guarantee stability in such complicated areas as Montenegro, and to
    offer support to all the countries in the region in their development to
    offer a long-term prospect which is truly European for the whole Balkan
    region.
        In our discussion, we attached great importance to the
    transformation of the new economy, the knowledge-based economy, not
    simply to be a privilege for the richest countries and for people and
    organizations with the greatest power in society but also, particularly
    in the United States and Europe, for all our citizens, for all our
    businesses, for all our organizations, and at the same time to establish
    a very strong interlinkage in our efforts with the objective of
    promoting a broadband link between our education information services on
    either side of the Atlantic.
        We want to develop our common efforts to combat separation between
    rich and poor countries in this area, since we believe that this new
    economy is a basic and fundamental opportunity for the poorer countries
    to be able to press forward, to leap forward, and come closer to the
    living conditions of the more developed world.
        But we can't talk about this without recognizing the drama which
    exists today in the world, given the series of infectious diseases
    leading to suffering and death for so many, such as AIDS, tuberculosis,
    and malaria. And we need to work together, seriously cooperating to
    promote global action to combat effectively these diseases and to
    develop in the next meeting of the G-8 an approach on this subject and
    to involve the whole international community and all international
    organizations, with the support of the European Union and the United
    States of America, in being catalysts in our efforts in this area. Given
    the global responsibilities we have, we must also meet these challenges
    of our times.
        We also discussed many other questions--foreign policy, for
    instance--and of course, one point that the Portuguese Government cannot
    fail to mention: We talked about the transition of East Timor to
    democracy and independence.
        President Clinton.
        President Clinton. Thank you very much. First, I would like to thank
    Prime Minister Guterres for his outstanding leadership in his tenure as
    EU President. I thank President Prodi, Commissioner Patten, High
    Representative Solana, for their strong leadership and the work they
    have done for transatlantic cooperation, and especially in Kosovo and in
    the Balkans in these last few months.

    [[Page 1251]]

        I would like to just take one minute to put this meeting into some
    historical perspective. We've come quite a long way since Portugal's
    first EU Presidency 8 years ago. At that time, many were predicting that
    Europe's new democracies would falter, that Russia would turn inward and
    reactionary, that NATO had lost its reason for being, that Europe's
    project for a common currency and foreign policy would founder, and that
    the United States and Europe would go their own separate ways.
        Eight years later Europe's new democracies are joining the
    transatlantic mainstream. Russia, for all its problems, has completed
    the first democratic power transfer in its entire history. We have
    preserved and strengthened NATO. The EU has brought monetary union into
    being and made a fast start at a common foreign and security policy, a
    development the United States strongly supports. And far from moving
    apart, the United States and Europe today complete the 14th U.S.-EU
    Summit of my Presidency. So I thank all of those who have supported
    those developments.
        Today we talked a lot about security in Kosovo, the Balkans,
    southeastern Europe. We talked about the European Security Defense
    Initiative, which the United States strongly supports, in cooperation
    with NATO. And we talked about a number of other issues, including
    Russia, at some length. We discussed the need to support democracy and
    economic reform in Russia and the continued need for a political
    solution in Chechnya.
        I'd also like to thank the European Union for something else, which
    is on my mind today because of the work I've been doing in the Middle
    East. I welcome the efforts that the EU has led to give Israel an
    invitation to join the Western Europe and others group in the United
    Nations. This is a very good development, and I think it will contribute
    to the negotiating atmosphere that is so important at this difficult and
    pivotal time in the Middle East.
        Just two other issues briefly. We did talk, as Prime Minister
    Guterres said, a lot about the new economy, about how to maximize its
    spread within our countries and how to bridge the digital divide both
    within and beyond our borders, and we talked about the importance of
    dealing with other common challenges. I'll just mention two. I talked at
    some length about the climate change/global warming challenge, and we
    have made a joint commitment to do more to try to help developing
    nations deal with AIDS, malaria, and TB. And I am very grateful for the
    leadership and the energy of the EU in that regard.
        So, in closing, I think it's been a good meeting. I think it
    demonstrated the vitality and importance of our partnership. I'd like to
    thank the business leaders who are here, who also have been meeting, and
    the environmental leaders and just say the from my point of view, all
    these exchanges have been very much worth the effort and are leading us
    into a better future.
        Thank you.
        Prime Minister Guterres. Senor Prodi.
        President Romano Prodi. Well, I am most pleased to be here today
    with Antonio to discuss with our common friend, the President of the
    United States, the relationship between the European Union and the
    United States.
        But before anything, I want to pay tribute to the support of
    President Clinton to the European Union. You always supported European
    Union, without any doubt. And this is the reason why our transatlantic
    ties are so good now and so strong. And I think that--you will go to
    Aachen to receive the Charlemagne Prize--I think you deserve it because
    this is the prize that is given to the Europeans.
        Your predecessor, President Kennedy, was a Berliner. You now, you
    are not a Berliner, but a European, I'd say, because I think that you
    belong to our family, really. The United States helped Europe, even at
    the most difficult point, even when Europe was becoming more and more
    powerful, like making up a euro in the last building of our new Europe.
        Now we are 375 million people; we shall arrive to 500 million people
    with enlargement. And we discussed enlargement this morning, and we
    discussed how enlargement can be performed quickly, well, in a peaceful
    way, not harming anybody, and being accepted also by Russia. This almost
    was a photo op of the meeting that I had with the Russian President
    Putin just the day before yesterday,

    [[Page 1252]]

    discussing how enlargement would be done and the aim, the goals of
    enlargement.
        Concerning the point you didn't touch in our relation, we discussed
    frankly about trade. And of course, conflicts between the two biggest
    trade powers in the world are always possible. We are the largest trade
    in the world, and we represent more than 40 percent of world trade.
        We are committed, and we decided to be committed today to a more
    territorial trade system, and all trade disputes will be settled case by
    case under WTO rules. This was clear. There was a clear commitment. And
    we decided also that megaphone diplomacy will be replaced by telephone
    diplomacy. It is more constructive, even less sexy. [Laughter]
        I am pleased that we have already two results of this cooperation.
    After 3 years of discussion, we are finally able to come today with a
    solution to settle our difference on that of protection, which is a very
    delicate issue. And then we developed jointly the safe harbor concept.
    And so we shall have, together, high data protection standards and free
    information flows.
        This deal has been approved today by our member states and so will
    not be reviewed by the European Parliament. It's done. WTO accession of
    China will take place very soon, I hope--we hope. We are working for
    that, and we are, the two teams, the American, U.S. team and the
    European Union teams, are really working together for that.
        And we launch today the biotechnology consultative forum to foster
    public debate and create more common understanding. I remember that this
    forum, which I proposed in October last year at my first meeting with
    you, Bill, is made of outstanding and independent individuals from
    outside the government. It's a very independent body. And I do expect
    that this forum will meet in July.
        And so we agreed also to go together to the G-8 with a strong agenda
    on the tragic problem of sickness in the world. We shall elaborate this
    strategy for tuberculosis, malaria, and AIDS fighting over all the
    world. This is the agreement that we have today in a very good
    friendship environment.
        And also, I want to add as the last reflection that--you talked
    about the Balkans--we know that together with the action, with the
    Stability Pact, with the progress that you are doing day by day, we must
    find a long-term solution in the idea of European Union spirit, in the
    European Union environment in order to give a long-lasting solution to
    the Balkan problems.
        Thank you.

    U.S. Missile Defense System

        Q. Prime Minister Guterres and President Prodi, in a few months
    President Clinton will make a decision about a national missile defense
    system for the United States. For an American audience, can you explain
    any European concerns about deploying such a system, and whether, in
    your just-completed trip to Moscow, President Putin expressed any
    flexibility about amending the ABM to allow such a system?
        And President Clinton, in the system that you envision, would that
    allow for the missile protection system to protect Europe and our NATO
    Allies, as Governor Bush has suggested?
        Thank you.
        Prime Minister Guterres. Well, President Clinton was kind enough to
    inform us about what he thinks about the matter. I think he'll express
    that better than myself. I'd like to say that this is a matter in which
    the European Union has not an official position, but we have--I'll say
    all of us--a main concern. We live in the Northern Hemisphere where from
    bearing to bearing we want to have a strong security situation. We
    believe we have built a lot on the process to create that. And we
    believe that every new move to strengthen these must be as comprehensive
    as possible, as agreed by everybody as possible, and as corresponding as
    possible to everyone's concerns and to everyone's preoccupations in this
    matter.
        President Prodi. Well, I have to add also that President Clinton--
    there was no yet precise proposal done. But we discussed it on the
    general principle that there was no decoupling, that there is no
    division between the two sides of the Atlantic. We are still, and we are
    more and more joined together in our defense purpose, not only in our
    economic purposes. And so the spirit in which

    [[Page 1253]]

    we judge the program--we didn't go into the details--was a constructive
    and friendly talk.
        Q. And the Russian President?
        President Prodi. No, the Russian President didn't touch the problem
    2 days ago. The program was not on the agenda, and we didn't make any
    head to that.
        President Clinton. First, let me just very briefly reiterate the
    criteria that I have set out for making a decision. First of all, is
    there a threat which is new and different? The answer to that, it seems
    to me, is plainly, yes. There is, and there will be one. That is the
    danger that states that are not part of the international arms control
    and nonproliferation regime would acquire nuclear weapons and the
    missiles to deliver them and that they might make them available to
    rogue elements, not part of nation states but allied with them.
    Secondly, is the technology available to meet the threat? Thirdly, what
    does it cost? Fourthly, what is the impact of deploying a different
    system on our overall security interests, included but not limited to
    arms control? So that is the context in which this decision must be made
    and why I have worked so hard to try to preserve the international
    framework of arms agreements.
        Now, I have always said that I thought that if the United States had
    such technology, and if the purpose of the technology is to provide
    protection against irresponsible new nuclear powers and their possible
    alliances with terrorists and other groups, then every country that is
    part of a responsible international arms control and nonproliferation
    regime should have the benefit of this protection. That's always been my
    position.
        So I think that we've done a lot of information sharing already with
    the Russians. We have offered to do more, and we would continue to. I
    don't think that we could ever advance the notion that we have this
    technology designed to protect us against a new threat, a threat which
    was also a threat to other civilized nations who might or might not be
    nuclear powers, but were completely in harness with us on a
    nonproliferation regime, and not make it available to them. I think it
    would be unethical not to do so. That's always been my position, and I
    think that is the position of everyone in this administration.

    NATO Enlargement

        Q. Mr. President, for Portuguese Public Television, my name is
    Carlos Pena. In the middle of this month, in Lithuania, nine countries
    met, and they expressed their will to be part of NATO, and they want to
    work together. Did you address the question of further NATO enlargement
    and how you all see this kind of new ``big bang''?
        President Clinton. Well, the short answer to your question is, we
    didn't talk about further NATO enlargement. But we have worked hard to
    try to make NATO relevant to the 21st century. We've taken in new
    members. We have had partnerships with dozens of new democracies,
    stretching all the way to central Asia. We have specific agreements with
    Ukraine and Russia. And I think we will have to continue to modernize
    the structure of NATO as we go along.
        And I think more and more, the countries against whom NATO was once
    organized--that is, Russia and other members of part of the former
    Soviet bloc--will see NATO as a partner, not a former adversary, and you
    will see further integration and further cooperation. That's what I
    believe will happen.

    European Union

        Q. Yes, I'll start with Mr. President. Now that you are formally a
    European, considering Mr. Prodi has given you the qualification, I just
    wanted to ask you how do you feel about the position that's been
    expressed by some members of your administration that there is really
    not an adequate counterpart when they have to deal, for example, on
    economic and financial matters? That there is a Europe, but there are no
    ministers. Every 6 months you meet a different President of the European
    Union. Do you feel that it would be better for Europe as a whole to move
    further ahead into further integration, expressing better and with more
    determination their position?
        And the same question is for Mr. Prodi and for Mr. Guterres. Mr.
    Prodi, I know you've been attacked and some people have been saying that
    Europe is really moving back into some kind of national environment, a
    national policy. Isn't that a negative development?
        Thank you.

    [[Page 1254]]

        President Clinton. Well, first, I think it's entirely a question for
    Europeans to determine, how they should organize themselves and at what
    pace this integration should proceed. But if you look at the roles now
    occupied, for example, by Mr. Solana and Mr. Patten, if you look at the
    work that the EU has done to get our common endeavors energized in
    Kosovo, for example, just in the last few months, I think you have to
    say that the European Union is growing stronger, not weaker, and that
    it's growing more effective.
        How you should proceed from here depends upon, I think, both the
    attitudes of the leaders as well as popular opinion and will be
    determined in no small measure by what the specific circumstances are
    confronting Europe in the next 4, 5 to 10 years.
        But as an outsider, let me just say, I think that whenever something
    is in the process of being born, being formed, maturing, and you want to
    understand it and then explain it to other people, which is what your
    job is--since you're in the media, you have to first understand it and
    explain it to other people--there is always the tendency to see in any
    specific event evidence of a pattern which shows either that there's
    backsliding or accelerating, going forward. I think you have to resist
    that a little bit now because, really, history has no predicate for the
    European Union. Even the formation of the United States out of the
    various States is not the same thing. And we had quite a period of time
    before we had a National Government, when we were sort of a nation and
    we sort of weren't, when we were sort of together and we sort of
    weren't, in a much simpler time, when the States had nothing like the
    history all the nations of Europe have.
        So I think that we all have to have a little humility here and let
    this thing sort of unfold as history, popular opinion, and the vision of
    the leaders dictate. But I take it, from my point of view as an
    American, I think that so far all the developments on balance are very
    positive. I believe we want a strong and united Europe that is
    democratic and secure and a partner with us for dealing with the world's
    challenges of the future. So I think it's going in the right direction,
    and I think it's a very good thing.
        President Prodi. Well, on my side, the answer is very simple. You
    know that the rotation of power is as ancient as ancient Rome, you know,
    and Rome became Rome and it began with the rotation of 6 months, as we
    are doing now. [Laughter] But I can also add there is a rotation of the
    President's Council, but there is no rotation of the President of the
    Commission. And so there is some stability in this, on this power.
        But I will tell you something more, just a hint, joining what Bill
    Clinton told now--look, let's stay on the path. Let's stick on the
    facts. The enlargement, resting on the facts, never happened in history
    to put together 11 currencies, you know. Let's stick on the facts--never
    happen in history to enlarge this democratic process as we are doing
    now.
        I'm touring every day in the new applying countries. And to see 12
    parliaments working day and night to apply the new legislation, to
    conform to the European legislation, is something that it makes
    different with history. This is what is happening now. And so I am not
    only confident that Europe is strong, but Europe will be the real new
    event of the democracy of the 21st century.
        Prime Minister Guterres. If I may add something. I think we have
    achieved a lot, but we are not satisfied. We are going on. We have an
    intergovernmental conference taking place now to improve our efficiency
    in decisionmaking, our democracy, our transparency, and to make sure
    we'll be able to cope with enlargement and, at the same time, to deepen
    our integration.
        And if one looks back at the recent Lisbon extraordinary summit, I
    have to recognize that I, myself, was not expecting the European Union
    to be able to take so many policy decisions in so many relevant matters
    in such a quick frame of time, which proves that when we want--when we
    have the political will to do that, we really can have good decisions,
    quick decisions, and can find the right path.
        So I'm very optimistic about the future of Europe, and I think my
    optimism is shared by all those that want to join the European Union at
    this moment.

    [[Page 1255]]

    Middle East Peace Process

        Q. Mr. President, it's been a very busy couple of weeks in the
    Middle East, as you know. I'm wondering whether what's happened there
    recently has created any new opportunities for the peace process, what
    dangers it might have raised, and whether anything that's happened there
    has given you new hope that the September 13th deadline for a
    Palestinian-Israeli agreement will be reached?
        President Clinton. Well, I think the decision of Prime Minister
    Barak to withdraw the Israeli troops from southern Lebanon, in
    accordance with the United Nations resolution, was, first of all, a
    daring one which creates both new challenges and new opportunities. It
    changed the landscape. And from my point of view, it imposes on--it
    should impose, at least, on all parties a greater sense of urgency,
    because things are up in the air again. So there is an opportunity, to
    use a much overworked phrase, to create a new order, to fashion a new
    peaceful order out of the principles of the Oslo accord and all that's
    been done in the year since.
        But from my point of view, it also imposes a much greater sense of
    urgency. I think the consequences of inaction are now likely to be more
    difficult because of this move. And so--for example, you have now--just
    for example, you talked about the Palestinians. I think this will
    heighten the anxieties of the Palestinians in Lebanon. Does this mean
    that there is going to be a peace and, therefore, they will be able to
    have a better life, either going home or going to some third country,
    going to Europe, going to the United States? Or does this mean that this
    is it, and there is sort of a new freezing of the situation? So there is
    anxiety in that community. You see that in every little aspect of this.
        I think on balance it's good, because I believe they are going to
    reach an agreement. But it both turns the tension up in all camps and
    increases the overall price of not reaching an agreement fairly soon and
    the overall reward of reaching an agreement fairly soon. It changes
    everything in a way that both increases the pluses and increases the
    potential minuses. That's my analysis.
        Q. President Clinton, sir, can you confirm if it's true that
    tomorrow you will meet in Lisbon with Prime Minister from Israel, Ehud
    Barak?
        President Clinton. Yes. I will, and I'm going to talk to Mr. Arafat
    before that, sometime today.
        Yes.

    Indonesia

        Q. Mr. President, I'm from Indonesia. Since in the senior level
    group it was mentioned the coordinated support for the President, Wahid,
    and Indonesian Government, how do you feel the political and economic
    development in Indonesia?
        Thank you.
        President Clinton. Well, first, I think it's worth pointing out that
    it's the largest Muslim country in the world, one of the handful of
    nations which will determine much of the shape of the 21st century the
    next 30 or 40 years by whether it does well or does poorly. So I think
    that everything that has been done to try to stabilize the country
    politically and get back to economic growth is a plus.
        And I suppose, like any outsider, my only wish is that more could be
    done more quickly, because so many people within Indonesia's lives are
    at stake, and the rest of us, we really need you to succeed.
        Prime Minister Guterres. If I may say something that might sound
    surprising to you--probably before this press conference ends, our
    Minister of Foreign Affairs will fly to Jakarta. And under the
    Portuguese Presidency of the European Union, it will be held, the first
    political dialog between Indonesia and the European Union. And that also
    shows the attachment we have in the European Union for democracy, peace,
    and stability in Indonesia.

    Russia

        Q. The New York Times. Mr. Prime Minister, Mr. President, could you
    share with us your impressions of President Putin and the extent to
    which you see any prospects for some flexibility on a political solution
    in Chechnya? And President Clinton, could you kindly expand a bit on
    your discussions today about Russia? And on the eve of your trip to
    Russia, do you foresee any progress on any bilateral issue, including
    arms control, Chechnya, corruption?

    [[Page 1256]]

        Prime Minister Guterres. Well, in our last meeting in Moscow, I must
    say that I was quite impressed by President Putin's determination in
    creating in Russia a democratic state based on the market economy and
    rule of law. It was also clear, from our point of view, that even if our
    views about Chechnya are different, he said--and he said publicly--that
    he was committed to a political solution. And he also announced his firm
    support to the inquiries to be made by an independent committee, his
    will to see the OSC back, and to give better support to international
    organizations involved in humanitarian help. And he even stressed in the
    press conference that there would be people prosecuted for violations of
    human rights in Chechnya.
        So even if this does not correspond entirely to what we think, it
    really shows a move and a step which I believe is in a positive
    direction.
        President Prodi. I confirm that there was a precise engagement on
    concrete decision to make inspections and transparency more visible in
    Chechnya for the immediate weeks, for the time that is in front of us.
        Last question.
        President Clinton. Wait, she asked me a question. Let me just say
    this, to start with a negative and end with a positive, I would be
    surprised if we bridge all of our differences on Chechnya, and I would
    be surprised if we resolved all of our differences on the question of
    missile defense, although we might make more headway than most people
    expect. I'm just not sure yet.
        However, I do expect that there will be two or three other areas
    where we will have truly meaningful announcements that I think will make
    a real difference--one of them, in particular, we're working on it. If
    we get it done, it will be very, very important.
        So I think the trip is well worth it, and even in the areas where we
    may not have an agreement, in some ways that may be the most important
    reason for the trip of all. We shouldn't only do these trips and these
    dialogs when we know we've got a guaranteed outcome. Sometimes it's most
    important to be talking when there's still unresolved differences.

    Upcoming Meeting With Prime Minister Ehud Barak of Israel

        Q. Mr. President, can you please explain the timing and reasoning
    behind your visit tomorrow with Barak and tell us what you hope to
    accomplish?
        President Clinton. Yes. They have--first of all, all the balls are
    up in the air as I just explained, and so there is both greater
    potential for something happening and also greater tension in the
    atmosphere, which is causing a ripple effect in the relationship between
    the Israelis and the Palestinians.
        Secondly, Mr. Barak and Mr. Arafat have set for themselves an
    earlier timetable, as you know, to reach a framework agreement--not a
    final agreement; that's supposed to be done in September--but an earlier
    one. And there are lots of things that need to be gone through that we
    need to go through if we're even going to reach the framework agreement,
    because a lot of the toughest things have to be--they'll have to come to
    grips with those just to reach the framework agreement.
        So I have been looking for an opportunity to meet with Prime
    Minister Barak. As you know, he was supposed to come to the United
    States a few days ago, and because of developments in the region, he
    could not come. Then he was going to come to Germany and participate in
    an event to which he was invited anyway, and we were going to talk, and
    then he couldn't do that because of a holiday in Israel. So this was the
    only shot we had to do it and still have enough time to meet the
    deadline that both he and Mr. Arafat are trying to meet.
        There's no--you shouldn't overread this. It's not like there's some
    bombshell out there. But we just really needed to have a face-to-face
    meeting, and we needed to do it in this time frame. He couldn't come
    last week to the United States. Then he couldn't come to Berlin to the
    meeting to which he was also invited. So we're doing the best we can
    with a difficult situation.
        Prime Minister Guterres. Ladies and gentlemen, I must confess I have
    enjoyed sometime ago very much a picture called ``NeverEnding Story,''
    but I don't think we can repeat that picture and transform this press
    conference in a new version. So, thank you very much, all of you.

    [[Page 1257]]

    Note: The President's 190th news conference began at 2:49 p.m. at the
    Palacio Nacional de Queluz. The President met with Prime Minister
    Antonio Guterres of Portugal in his capacity as President of the
    European Council and President Romano Prodi of the European Commission.
    A portion of Prime Minister Guterres' remarks were in Portuguese and
    were translated by an interpreter. In the news conference, the following
    people were referred to: Commissioner Christopher Patten of the European
    Commission; High Representative for the Common Foreign and Security
    Policy Javier Solana of the European Council; President Vladimir Putin
    of Russia; Chairman Yasser Arafat of the Palestinian Authority; Minister
    of Foreign Affairs Jaime Gama of Portugal; and President Abdurrahman
    Wahid of Indonesia.