Source: http://www.un.int/usa/06_078.htm http://www.un.int/usa/06_078.htm
Date: April 17, 2006

United States Mission to the United Nations
USUN PRESS RELEASE # 78 (06) 
April 17, 2006

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Remarks by Ambassador Bolton on Sudan, the Capital Master Plan and other matters at the Security Council Stakeout, April 17, 2006
Reporter:  Ambassador, we understand that Russia and China are objecting to the imposition of sanctions on Sudan.  How serious a setback is this for the Security Council’s strategy on dealing with the Darfur issue?
Ambassador Bolton:  We’ve been advised informally that those delegations will object under the procedures of the sanctions committee and in light of that, I’ve asked for a meeting of the Council this afternoon, if in fact silence is broken, to take up the sanctions issue.  We’ve been trying to get this process in gear for a year and we think that the list of four names that was submitted by a number of delegations last week is a solid list.  It’s a down payment; it’s certainly not the end of the sanctions process.  The larger list was considered at great length.  We have carefully examined the four names we’ve submitted.  We think the list is, as I say, is a down payment and we’re prepared to proceed.  So, we’ll see what happens if in fact silence is broken by 4 o’clock.  But as I said earlier, just a few minutes ago, I asked for a meeting this afternoon of the Council, in any event, to consider what to do next.
Reporter:  Will you bring a proposal to the table?
Ambassador Bolton:  Yeah, we will…we are preparing a resolution for the full Council to adopt that would impose the sanctions.  In other words, if the procedure in the sanctions committee doesn’t work, the next step is for the full Council to consider it and we would be prepared to consider circulating that this afternoon.
Reporter:  The resolution would name the four in the text?
Ambassador Bolton:  Precisely, yes.  
Reporter:  It would be just the four?
Ambassador Bolton:  Right, the four on the list.  Now, we’ve just learned really a few hours ago, that there would be objection at all, so, you know, we’re going to have lunch today with the Secretary-General, we’ll consult with others then.  But that’s why I asked for a meeting of the Council this afternoon, so we’d be in a position to circulate a resolution, if in fact the silence procedure is broken.
Reporter:  Will the U.S. also be circulating any kind of text for the Security Council to consider a reaction to the Tel Aviv bombing?
Ambassador Bolton:  Yes, I announced, again a few minutes ago, we will circulate a draft press statement.  In fact, a staff level meeting should take place here within an hour or so on that.  We hope to have that adopted this afternoon as well.  I think you’ve heard from the White House.  This is a horrible tragedy and an inexplicable terrorist attack - no excuse for it whatever and we think it’s appropriate for the Council to speak to it - if we can get agreement, obviously.  
Reporter:  Ambassador, aren’t you concerned that in light of what happened last week on the other statement, there will be demands for a balanced statement in this case as well?
Ambassador Bolton:  I think speaking the truth shouldn’t be that hard for the Security Council to do, so we’ll see what happens.
Reporter:  Ambassador, just back to Sudan if I may.  How, if you could just say in your words, how important is it that the Council adopt these four names and why?
Ambassador Bolton:  We have felt for sometime that the sanctions procedure was an important aspect of our policy, American policy toward Sudan, and Darfur in particular, and an important element of the Council’s policy as well.  So this will be, in effect, the test of the Council to see if the sanctions procedure is going to work at all and we have moved slowly, unfortunately slowly, but we’ve certainly come to the point where it’s time for a decision.  
Reporter:  Ambassador, by going with a resolution route on this thing on sanctions, the idea just to sort of get the objections out in the open for someone to actually cast a veto as opposed to just the objection raise.  What …?
Ambassador Bolton:  I think the purpose is to move quickly.  Now that we have heard there is going to be objection to find out how serious the objection is and to see what we need to do to overcome it and we are prepared to move quickly. 
Reporter:  Mr. Ambassador, we heard a briefing this morning from Fritz Reuter, from the Head of the CMP, and he essentially acknowledged that in the 5th Committee, the United States was holding up efforts to get the next $100 million approved to go ahead with the CMP.  What’s your stance on this and what’s the holdup in the U.S.?  Is it Congress or the Administration?  Would you like to see this $100 Million come through as quickly as possible?
Ambassador Bolton:  Well, we have said we’re prepared to agree right now to $23.5 million for the work on the Capital Master Plan to proceed and that we don’t see the need to give commitment authority for the rest of it.  Where 23.5 million is not the sacred figure, we can consider a little bit more than that, we have been open to other figures but until there is an overall decision on the nature of this plan, we don’t want to find ourselves committed to a substantial amount of money when we don’t have agreement on what the strategy is here in New York for example, the General Assembly has not agreed on the strategy.  But we don’t want to slow anything down and we’ve made that very clear and that is why, as I say, we’re prepared to agree to $23.5 million or perhaps even a little bit more. 
Reporter:  Have they agreed to that?  Are the CMP people opposing that idea of $23.5 (million)? 
Ambassador Bolton:  Yes I think we’ve been open to compromise, they apparently have not been.  We’re still seeking to see if there’s not a reasonable ground in between.  
Reporter:  But they say that in order to approve that they need the $100 (million) for the next stage.
Ambassador Bolton:  Well we are proposing $23 million, how long will it take them to spend that?  So if they are going to churn through that so quickly then we will be prepared to consider the next amount.  But I don’t think the justification has been made yet on the full $100 million.  But as I say, we are looking for a number in between and we are prepared to deal on that basis.  
Reporter:  Is that 23 million number a number based on a calculation that that would take them to a certain point?  I mean is that a phase that the United States has decided upon that is different than his $100 million phase?
Ambassador Bolton:  No, we are certainly not trying to do anything to slow this down but we want to proceed in a careful and prudent fashion.  We, the United States, thinks $23.5 million is a lot of money and we think it should carry a pretty good distance until we can have decisions by the General Assembly on some of the other critical questions like what strategy the organization wants to follow.
Reporter:  Mr. Ambassador, on Charles Taylor, is there any movement?  How are the negotiations going?  (inaudible) talking about this week? 
Ambassador Bolton:  I don’t have anything new for you on that.  As I said last week, there was another prediction I made about timing in the Security Council that turned out to be wrong.  But I don’t have anything new on that point.  
Reporter: What do you think of the clause to wait until 30th of April to give the Abuja, the talks a chance?
Ambassador Bolton:  Well certainly we hope the talks will produce a result by the 30th but our view is that these Sanctions proceedings have been pending for a while.  The Sanctions Committee has done an exhaustive investigation, people have known this sanctions option was out there for quite some time and we don’t see any reason to delay it.  But as I said earlier we'll talk this afternoon, talk at the lunch, talk at the meeting this afternoon and see where we go from there.  
Okay, thanks very much.