[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.