US Department of State Daily Briefing #8:
Monday, 1/14/91
Boucher
Source: State Department Deputy Spokesman Richard
Boucher
Description: 1:06 pm; Washington, DC
Date: Jan 14, 19911/14/91
Category: Briefings
Region: Eurasia, E/C Europe, MidEast/North Africa,
East Asia
Country: USSR (former), Latvia, Lithuania, Estonia,
Japan, Yemen, United Arab Emirates, Syria,
Morocco, Algeria, Nigeria
Subject: Travel, Democratization, Military Affairs,
CSCE, Trade/Economics
(ON THE RECORD UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED)
MR. BOUCHER: Good afternoon ladies and gentlemen. I
don't have any statements today, so I'll be glad to take your
questions.
Q Apparently Assistant Secretary Seitz met with
representatives of the Baltics. Can you tell us anything about
that?
[The Baltics: Update]
A Yes. Let me give you a rundown on some of our
meetings concerning the Baltic situation.
Jack Matlock, first of all, our Ambassador at Moscow,
met with the Soviet Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs, Mr.
Kovalev, yesterday. In addition, our Assistant Secretary of
State for European Affairs, Mr. Ray Seitz, this morning met with
the Charges of three Baltic legations in Washington.
This afternoon, Mr. Seitz will meet with Mr. Lippma,
the senior Baltic official who is in the United States at this
time. He is a Minister without Portfolio in the Estonian
government.
Over the past few days we have had numerous other
contacts with Baltic officials. Tomorrow the CSCE, Conference
on Security and Cooperation in Europe, will meet in Valletta,
Malta, to discuss the peaceful settlement of disputes. This
meeting will be attended by all 34 participating states of the
CSCE to develop means that CSCE states can use to resolve
problems peacefully. Given this mandate, we also expect the
situation in the Baltics should be discussed at that meeting.
Q Is the United States taking a lead in this, by any
chance, or presenting some sort of special proposal?
A We do have proposals for the meeting; proposals,
of course, that were developed on the general framework of how
the CSCE can deal with peaceful settlements of disputes.
At this point, we expect that the Baltic situation
would be a subject of discussion by the delegations there since
others as well as ourselves are concerned with the situation of
the Baltics.
Q Given the U.S. position on diplomatic recognition
for the Baltic republics, have you given any new thought to
establishing separate diplomatic relations with them?
A Our policy of non-recognition is well known and
has been expressed many times both publicly and to the Soviets
and the others involved. We do have contacts -- frequent
contacts with the Baltic leaders -- meetings such as the ones
with the Baltic representatives in Washington. We have an
officer from our consulate in Leningrad who is travellng to
Lithuania today. And we have for the past two days had officers
from the consulate in Leningrad in both Latvia and Estonia, and
we're obviously in communication with them about the developing
situation.
Q We understand from the White House that the summit
next month is up in the air. Could you tell us what other
options are under consideration?
A No.
Q I have two questions on the meetings. Mr.
Lozoraitis said after the Seitz meeting that the question of
American sanctions were discussed in fairly concrete terms. Can
you give us your readout of that?
A No, I don't have a readout of that. On the
question of options, sanctions, and things like that, I don't
have any specifics that I'm prepared to go into at this time.
No decision has been made yet on how the events in the Baltics
will affect our relations with the Soviets. We are reviewing
the situation and obviously following the development of events
very closely.
But I would repeat again what the President said
yesterday: "Events like those taking place in the Baltic states
threaten to set back or perhaps even reverse the process of
reform which is so important in the world in the development of
a new international order, and we condemn these acts which could
not but affect our relationship."
Q Are sanctions under consideration?
Q My second question, if I may, still. Ambassador
Matlock is said to have met with Gorbachev along with some other
Western Ambassadors in Moscow today. Can you tell us anything
about that?
A I don't think it was a meeting with Gorbachev. I
think it was a meeting at the Foreign Ministry with Mr. Kovalev
that I reported on.
Q Yesterday, you said. But this morning, I believe
there was one with Gorbachev. You don't have anything?
A I hadn't heard about that. I'll check to make
sure.
Q On that score, was the Ambassador given some
explanation by the Soviets?
A I think Marlin explained it to some extent. I
really have to leave it to the Soviets to express their
position. They explained the events, to some extent, and said
that they were still committed to peaceful change which, of
course, is what we have long supported.
Matlock took the occasion to condemn the action and to
pass on the sentiments in the Secretary's and the President's
statements that you saw over the weekend.
Q Do you have anything on violence now having been
reported in Latvia?
A The latest I have on the situation in Latvia and
Estonia is that the level of violence, or the situation has not
exactly gotten to the point that exists in Lithuania although
there have been disturbing developments in both Latvia and
Estonia. We obviously hope that Moscow and the authorities
subordinate to Moscow will refrain from taking any course of
action in either place.
Q Richard, does the United States hold Gorbachev
responsible for this violence?
A As the President said yesterday, "There's no
justification for the use of force against peaceful and
democratically-elected governments." The President asked Soviet
leaders to refrain from further acts that might lead to more
violence and loss of life.
There have been various reports and quotations from
different Soviet leaders indicating that the Kremlin did not
order the use of force in Lithuania. But I think it's fair to
say that the world is waiting to get a full explanation from the
Soviet government as to the events, the tragic events, that
occurred over the weekend.
Q If Gorbachev is not responsible, who is? Is the
military in control?
A Well, as I said, the President asked the Soviet
leaders. And I just said the Soviet leaders and the authorities
subordinate to them should refrain from further violence, and I
think that's our position.
Q Richard, on CSCE, at what level is it going to be
held tomorrow in Malta?
A We haven't put up the announcement yet of our head
of delegation, but this is one of the so-called CSCE experts
meetings that occur between the higher level meetings of Foreign
Ministers or full conferences.
Q Who will be representing the United States?
A We'll have a -- as with the past experts meetings
that have been held in London and Bulgaria and Paris, and things
like that -- we'll have a head of delegation named to head the
U.S. delegation, particularly for this conference.
Q Richard, two questions. One, are sanctions
against the Soviet Union under consideration at this point?
And, secondly, what is the assessment in this building on
whether the crackdown was ordered from the Kremlin or decided
upon on the ground?
A Well, Mark, on the second question, I think we
have to leave it to the Soviets to explain that. I don't have
any analysis to provide for you. We've seen the statements that
they've made. As I've said, we've called upon the Soviet
leadership and any authorities subordinate to them to refrain
from taking any further actions.
And on the question of sanctions or options, I really
will leave it with what I just said.
Q Richard, have you heard any expression of regret
about the deaths in Lithuania from President Gorbachev or from
the Soviet Foreign Ministry?
A I didn't see the full extent of the comments that
he made this morning, but I'm not aware of anything.
Q Is it your understanding that President Gorbachev
has ample powers under the Presidency to remove any officials
that he finds acted improperly?
Q That's the usual definition of the President of
country. I think you'll have to ask the Soviets if that
requires further explanation about their system.
Q Richard, there have been some questions raised as
to whether Gorbachev is fully in control, this being an example
of how he may not have full power in office. What is the
assessment of the State Department? Is he still fully in
control?
A Again, I was just asked that question. I think
I'd just have to leave it to the Soviets to explain how their
government is operating. They've made some statements about who
ordered this and who didn't order this. Gorbachev is President
of the country. We have called upon Soviet authorities --
Soviet leadership, and Soviet authorities to refrain from
further violence and to seek a peaceful path.
Everyone who leads the country would be responsible, in
our mind, to try to do that.
Q Where does this leave -- the sanctions question
aside -- where does this leave the commodity credit extension,
the aid extension? Where does that stand now?
A Again, I think I said that no decisions have been
taken regarding options or decisions on how the events in the
Baltics might affect the U.S.-Soviet relationship in regard to
those specific items. But the President made clear yesterday
that the events in the Baltics, obviously, would have an
important impact on U.S.-Soviet relations.
Q Is that under review, though? Is the question of
stopping the commodity credit aid under review?
A I just don't want to focus on any specifics at
this point.
Q Richard, why hasn't the U.S. decided whether or
not to take punitive action against the Soviets?
A I really can't answer a question like that. The
answer is that we have no decisions to announce at this point.
I'm not trying to hint at anything that's imminent. We are
following the situation very closely. We have made our views
very clearly known both in public statements such as those by
the President and by the Secretary over the weekend. Some of
these tragic events occurred just yesterday. We're following
the situation closely.
We have in mind the U.S.-Soviet relationship as well,
but I don't have any specific decisions to relay to you now.
Q Is the Gulf crisis tying the U.S. hands?
A The President was asked that yesterday and he said
"no."
Q Richard, when you say that you wait for the
Soviets to explain the events, if they were ordered by the
Central Government or ordered by the local authorities. You
don't say that you are taking it as 100 percent credible?
A I, at this point, have no way of knowing exactly
how the orders were issued and what happened. I think that's
clearly a matter that the Soviets can explain much better than I
can.
Q You mean the United States doesn't have
information enough to judge the situation?
A Again, I've been asked for our analysis of the
exact situation. I've declined to provide one at this point.
Q Richard, the Soviet President has said publicly
that he did not order the crackdown in Lithuania, or at least
the firing in Lithuania. Have you received similar assurances
through the diplomatic channels via Matlock? Did Matlock
receive that same story, and have you directly asked if this was
a Gorbachev order?
A I'm not aware that we've received similar
assurances. I would have to check on that and see if they told
us that privately as well, but you have the man himself saying
it in public. You can analyze it.
Q Richard, Boris Yeltsin has been reported to have
said that he's requesting, or would suggest that the U.N. delay
the deadline in the Gulf in order to take the pressure off in
the Baltics. Would you accept any such proposal, or do you
agree with the logic of that kind of a proposal?
A I hadn't seen that kind of proposal. But I think
if nothing else the Secretary has made abundantly clear over the
past several days in things that he's been saying, that the
deadline is real.
Q Do you see any linkage between the Baltic
situation and the Gulf crisis?
A I'll leave it to how the President answered the
question yesterday. No.
Q Can we go to the Gulf here and give us --
Q No. One more question, please, sir. Eduard
Shevardnadze in an interview with Christian Science Monitor
recently said any kind of an order -- any kind of measures by
the Soviet authorities would be to regain order in the Baltics.
Would you accept -- does the State Department accept that
explanation?
A I'm sorry. I didn't understand what your --
Q Shevardnadze in a recent interview with the
Christian Science Monitor said any kind of measures that will be
taken by the Soviet authorities on the Baltics will be for the
purpose of regaining order. Would the State Department accept
that explanation?
A I hadn't seen that explanation given in recent
days. I think our views of those events over recent days are
very clearly stated by the President and the Secretary.
Pat?
Q Yes. What's your latest assessment of the
prospects for a peaceful resolution over there?
A The same one the Secretary gave this morning in
Ottawa, and I don't have the words here to quote, but I can
assure you that I have nothing different.
Q What about Yemen? Do you know anything more now
about this report of a Yemen peace initiative?
A Again, I'll just leave it where the Secretary left
it this morning.
Q He didn't know anything about it.
A Well, I have nothing to add.
Q They have said that they have the backing of the
United States. Has anybody even seen the initiative? Do they
know what it contains?
A Again, I don't want to go farther than what the
Secretary said.
Q Anybody from the Yemeni Embassy been here to
explain? Do you know the details of the initiative?
A Not that I'm aware of.
Q Are you not aware that you know the details or --
A I'm not aware that anybody from the Yemeni Embassy
has been here. I'll check, if you want me to be more precise on
that.
Q I know. I mean, do you at least know the details
of what they're proposing?
A Some of them have been reported in the press, and
I think we have some idea of what they had in mind. But as far
as our specific view of this, I'd have to leave it to what the
Secretary said and just remind you that he's repeatedly said
that diplomatic initiatives that seek full and complete
implementation of the U.N. Security Council resolutions have our
support.
Q Could you find out whether or not people in this
building are aware of the Yemeni initiative -- if they are, when
it came through to them. Just something to back up whether or
not -- the Yemenis say that you guys know about it. If you
don't know about it in the building, then say so. But they're
saying that you do.
A I'll check and see if we have anything further to
say, Jan.
Q Richard, have you heard that this initiative --
the Yemeni one contains linkage in it for an international
conference?
A Again, she's asking me if I know the details, and
I can't say at this point.
Q Richard, is there any diplomatic activity, either
underway or contemplated in the next 36 hours on the part of the
United States to try to resolve this crisis?
A The diplomatic activity that we've been engaging
in is continuing, and that's diplomatic activity with our
coalition partners. The Secretary has had a whole series of
meetings with coalition partners over the last week or so.
He'll be meeting and the President will be meeting with the
Japanese Foreign Minister this afternoon, and, obviously, we'll
be in very close touch with our coalition partners.
Q Will there be any effort to contact anyone outside
of the coalition -- those who support the U.S. position now?
A I don't know precisely what you're asking. If
you're asking, do we have new proposals for meetings with the
Iraqis, the answer is no.
Q Richard, can you tell us anything at all about Mr.
Eagleburger's trip to Israel, and specifically can you tell us
whether he -- if the reports are true that he asked the Israelis
not to take action on their own in response to an Iraqi attack?
A On Mr. Eagleburger's trip, I don't have anything
to add to the comments that General Scowcroft made over the
weekend on television. Mr. Eagleburger is not back yet, and, of
course, the first thing he'll want to do is report to the
Secretary.
Q Is the U.S. asking non-essential personnel in
Embassies in the Mideast region to leave for fear of any
terrorist attacks?
A We ran down, I think on Friday, the status of
various travel advisories and travel warnings that we have
issued, most of which are based on what we've done with our own
personnel. In some cases it's authorizing departure of
dependents. In some cases it's authorizing departure of
dependents and non-essential personnel. In other cases it's
ordering departure.
Over the weekend, we did one on Syria. We revised the
one on North Africa to note that we were moving to order
departure from Morocco for the reasons stated. We did one on
Mauritania, northern Nigeria and Somalia, and those are all
available in the Press Office. That's what's new since Friday.
Q On Morocco -- the reason given on Morocco was due
to the size and complexity of the mission but not because of
fears of anti-American protests. What do you mean by "due to
the size and complexity of the mission"?
A We issued a North African advisory related to the
unsettled conditions and Iraq's failure to comply with U.N.
resolutions. That applied to Morocco, Algeria and Tunisia. We
have many, many more people and several posts in Morocco. And
reviewing the situation at the end of last week, even after we
issued our first advisory, we decided that in order to move
people out in a timely manner, we should move to order
departure. That was the difference.
Q Morocco's a very popular place for Americans.
What sort of numbers do you have of Americans in Morocco?
A I'll have to try to get those for you.
Q Do you have any --
Q There's a report in The Washington Post about a
planned assassination in Bulgaria of your U.S. Ambassador there,
Kenneth Hill.
Do you have any comment on that? Is that essentially
correct? Is there any security cooperation going on between
American and Bulgarian forces?
A I'm afraid that on Bulgaria there's not much that
I have to say. We felt that it was not a good idea to get in
the habit of providing a detailed readout in relation to reports
that may or may not be true of threats specifically against U.S.
officials. So I'm afraid I don't have anything on that.
Q Richard, about the advisory on North Africa --
A Did you want to ask something else, Sonya?
Q Well, is the report essentially correct?
A I'm not going to --
Q Was your Ambassador recalled, and is he now back
in Bulgaria?
A The Ambassador traveled to Paris for a while over
the Christmas holidays, and about ten days ago he returned to
Sofia.
Q Have any other Ambassadors in East European
countries gone away?
A I think that's exactly the reason we don't feel
it's appropriate for us to be specifying some of the threats
that we have against individual American personnel where they
don't affect the general public. So I'm going to have to
decline on that one.
Q Richard, Libya, which is a North African country,
is not mentioned in the advisory. Is that only because it is
already covered by previous advisories?
A Yes. We have an existing and longstanding travel
advisory as well as various Treasury Department and other
regulations about travel to Libya.
Q Richard, do you have any update today on your
terrorism alert, so to speak, from Friday?
A No. I don't have any further update. The
information is still valid -- remains in effect.
Q I just wondered if you had anything to add to it.
A No, I don't.
Q Have you had any reaction to the Iraqi Parliament
action endorsing Saddam Hussein's decisions and basically
offering to go to war?
A No, I don't.
Q Could we go back up north for a second? You
mentioned an official from the Consulate in Leningrad was going
to Lithuania today?
A That's right.
Q To?
A To talk to people, to meet with people, and to
keep us abreast of developments there.
Q I mean, did he have specific meetings with the
leadership? In other words, was he carrying a message to
Landsbergis? Was there anything --
A I'm not aware of anything specific like that this
time. I think we did have somebody there last week, if I can
check my information.
Yes. We had some officers from Leningrad and Lithuania
on the 10th and the 11th, and they met with President
Landsbergis on the 11th.
Q But nothing today?
A Nothing specific about today's trip, other than
that they want to keep in touch with people and keep us abreast
of developments.
Q Now for something completely different. Angola.
You are concerned about the food deliveries that have been
stopped.
A That's right.
Q Can you be a little bit more explicit than -- it
was a full statement --
A That's correct.
Q But could you put something on the record?
A Our statements are on the record, Jan.
Q I mean --
A I'm sorry. I don't have anything more.
Q You don't have anything more?
A No.
Q Richard, it was reported that Saddam Hussein said
that any initiative now should come from the U.S. Do you have
any comment on that?
A I am not going to respond to every single
statement that's made by Saddam Hussein. Our view is very, very
clear that the decision for peace lies in Saddam Hussein's hands.
The United Nations has made clear what the route is that has to
be taken in order to achieve peace, and our hope is that he will
choose that route.
Q Away from the Gulf again -- on Assistant Secretary
Cohen's meetings with the Chadian officials -- it's going on
now, so you can't give me a readout on it, but would you
describe it as ongoing meetings to get familiar with the new
Administration, and are there other items on the agenda?
A I don't specifically have anything on that
meeting. We have had meetings with the Government in Chad. We
have an official here now who we're meeting with. I'll see if
there's any kind of readout we can provide.
Q Richard, you said before that you had seen reports
in the press concerning this purported Yemeni peace initiative.
Do you have any information on it that didn't come from the
press?
A I was asked to look into it further. I'll see if
there's more I can say.
Q Foreign Minister Raoul Manglapus of the
Philippines this morning said there was a tentative agreement
that the United States would give up Clark Air Base in
September. Do you have anything on that?
A I don't. That was something that we felt that our
negotiators could address adequately. I'll see if there's
anything we can give to you.
Q Richard, do you have any considerations or
reconsiderations of the Syrian position within the coalition
now?
A I don't have anything new to say about Syria at
this point.
Q Do you have anything on the visit by the Japanese
Foreign Minister today?
A I'm not exactly sure. What is it you want?
Obviously, Japan is a close ally, one with whom we have many
interests. There will be a meeting with the President and a
meeting with the Secretary, and then a signing ceremony for the
"host-nation support" agreement that I think we can provide you
some more information on. But that's been discussed previously
by the Defense Department as well.
Q Richard, what is the status of financial
commitments by our alliance partners for ongoing operations in
the Gulf? I guess it ran out January 1 -- the previous
commitments.
A I think you're familiar with the previous
commitments, and familiar with the fact that we have said and
the Secretary has said that he has been discussing and will be
discussing with our allies the continuing support as the
situation in the Gulf goes on.
Beyond that, in a general statement, the people have
been very responsive, and we've had a lot of support from our
allies and expect that to continue. I don't really have any
specifics for you at this moment.
Q Did he do any of that on his -- the trip that he's
just completing?
A I'll leave it to the way he talked about it during
the trip. I can get you that.
Q Richard, does the Administration believe that the
Japanese and the Germans have shouldered their fair share of the
burden?
A The short answer is yes.
Q Has there been any change detected in Iraq's
military readiness in Kuwait?
A That's a Defense Department question.
Q Thank you.
(The briefing concluded at 1:31 p.m.)