US Department of State Daily Briefing #32:
Wednesday, 2/27/91
Tutwiler
Source: State Department Spokesman Margaret Tutwiler
Description: 12:29 PM, Washington, DC
Date: Feb 27, 19912/27/91
Category: Briefings
Region: MidEast/North Africa, Eurasia, Europe,
Subsaharan Africa
Country: Syria, Ethiopia, USSR (former), Iraq, Kuwait,
France, Germany, United Kingdom
Subject: Military Affairs, NATO, United Nations,
State Department, Human Rights, Democratization,
Terrorism, Development/Relief Aid
(ON THE RECORD UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED)
MS. TUTWILER: With your indulgence, what I'd like to
do -- I have a number of things that a number of you have been
asking me since yesterday and last night, that I have answers
to, so I'd like to go through some of them which is information
you've all been requesting.
[Iraq: UN Activity on Iraqi Cease-Fire Proposal]
The first, which I know is foremost on your minds, is
what is going on at the United Nations. It is my understanding
that right now there may be a Permanent Five meeting. I do know
that a 12:30 informal session of the Council had been called.
It was called by the President of the Security Council. I just
cannot tell you -- obviously, as you know, sometimes at the U.N.
things get a little behind -- if it's going to happen exactly at
12:30.
This morning -- I don't have a time on it -- the United
Nations representative from Iraq did meet with the Secretary
General. We have heard that he has a letter from Tariq Aziz to
the Chairman, or President of the current Security Council and
to Secretary General de Cuellar.
As you know, the White House has already given our
initial response to what we know that's contained in the letter
and what we've obviously seen that is on Baghdad Radio. We have
noted that at long last they have accepted or appear to have
accepted two of the United Nations resolutions. That would
bring the total that they have accepted to three. This still
falls short. In our view, this is a conditional acceptance. As
you know, the policy of the coalition and the international
community is that a conditional and/or partial acceptance of the
12 United Nations resolutions is just not acceptable.
Can I go on and do my other subjects and then do
questions? Is that OK?
Q Yes.
[Kuwait: Return of Government]
MS. TUTWILER: Many of you all have been asking when
the Amir and the legitimate Government of Kuwait would be
returned. There are still some uncertainties regarding the
degree to which it is safe for senior levels of the Kuwait
government and representative of the foreign embassies to
return.
The decision in this connection will be made by
appropriate military commanders in consultation, obviously, with
the Kuwaiti authorities. Elements of the Kuwaiti authorities
are already on the scene there in Kuwait City and are assisting
military commanders in re-establishing order and consulting with
the Amir and his senior people. So I don't have a time specific
for you, but it is obviously something that they're very engaged
in at this moment.
[Kuwait: Return of US Ambassador]
Concerning when our Ambassador, Skip Gnehm, would go
back: Of course, we will be sending our United States
Ambassador back, and we are planning to be able to return to our
Embassy Skip Gnehm as early as tomorrow. I would remind you
that it is nighttime there in Kuwait City right now.
As far as who all will be going in with the Ambassador,
he has assembled what we refer to, as you know, a country team.
It is made up of representatives of several different agencies
who have been with him working. As many of you know, he's
working in Taif and in Riyadh. They have been working for some
time with their counterparts and appropriate Kuwaiti Ministers
and other Kuwaiti government agencies.
The exact composition of the initial team that will be
going in with the Ambassador depends to a certain extent on the
Kuwaiti government having their Ministers back and their
government back. But we would anticipate that the American team
will initially be several dozen individuals. They will
obviously get the Embassy up and running and the Embassy will be
equipped to handle basic operations. Those, as you know,
include political, economic, consular, public affairs, and
administrative type of functions.
We do not have for you a thorough readout or overview
of exactly what shape the Embassy is in, but we do not have any
information to tell us that it has been destroyed or anything
like that.
[Kuwait: US Assistance]
Yesterday, I got a number of questions on what the
United States Government was doing in coordination with the
Kuwaiti government to help them. As you know, our basic aim is
to provide whatever technical support and advice the government
of Kuwait asks of us. To do that, Ambassador Gnehm has held
frequent high-level discussions with Kuwaiti officials over the
past several months.
As part of our support, a task force of approximately
50 U.S. Civil Affairs specialists belonging to the 352nd Civil
Affairs Command has been consulting with the Government of
Kuwait and offering technical advice. The task force is working
with military commanders to restore emergency services and will
continue its efforts in support of the Government of Kuwait once
its senior leadership is back in place.
In addition, the Corps of Engineers has signed a
contract with the Government of Kuwait to perform emergency
services and repairs in Kuwait for transportation facilities and
public infrastructure. The 352nd Civil Affairs Command is
offering advice and technical assistance but is not involved in
the actual negotiation of contracts.
The Corps of Engineers group has been subcontracting
under the terms of their contract with the Government of Kuwait.
Contracts, it is my understanding, are negotiated and let by
the Government of Kuwait. U.S. Civil Affairs advisors have not
been involved, as I've said, with negotiations or contracts.
The Corps of Engineers have solicited bids on their subcontracts
from a number of international firms.
I am aware that the Government of Kuwait has signed a
large number of contracts, and I understand that a majority are
with American firms but that a large number are also with
non-American firms.
AID: Several of you had asked me yesterday -- there
was some report that AID was preparing to send food to Kuwait.
That is not a correct report. AID has been preparing
contingency plans with its Office of Foreign Disaster Assistance
for dealing with emergency civilian needs in the Gulf after the
fighting has ceased.
The projected areas of need include sanitation, public
health, medical care, temporary shelter, and other basic
services. The full extent of these needs will obviously not be
known until the war has ended and assessment teams are able to
determine what type of assistance would be appropriate.
On food: AID's Office of Food for Peace has also
donated 29,000 metric tons of food to the United Nations World
Food Program to assist the refugees and displaced who have fled
to Jordan and Saudi Arabia. The value of this food aid is at
$12.1 million.
[Iraq: War Crimes/POWs]
On another subject that we had talked about yesterday
-- POWs. I'd like to direct your attention to a press release
that the International Committee of the Red Cross issued
yesterday in Geneva. I will be happy to make it available to
you afterwards, but I would like to highlight some of the things
that it says.
It says the ICRC is sending additional staff to its
delegation in Saudi Arabia to handle -- as you know, we have
thousands upon thousands of POWs. The ICRC visits to prisoners
of war are taking place in accordance with the provisions of
the Third Geneva Convention relative to the treatment of
prisoners of war. However, the ICRC has still not received any
information concerning the prisoners of war captured by the
Iraqi forces since August 2, 1990, and in the military
operations underway since January 17, 1991.
In spite of its numerous approaches, the ICRC has still
not been notified by the Iraqi authorities of the identity of
Kuwaiti prisoners and members of the coalition armed forces in
their hands, nor has it been authorized to visit those prisoners
in compliance with international humanitarian law.
The ICRC hereby appeals to the authorities of the
Republic of Iraq to take immediate action to remedy this serious
situation, which constitutes a grave lack of respect of the
Third Geneva Convention.
[Iraq: US Contacts with Coalition Partners]
The last thing I will mention, since several of you all
have asked, the purpose of Secretary Baker's meeting this
afternoon with Foreign Minister Hurd, his meeting tomorrow with
Foreign Dumas and Friday's meeting with Foreign Minister
Gencher.
Basically, it is as I stated yesterday: They will
obviously be discussing the progress of the war, war termination
issues, and they will obviously be beginning their consultative
process on post-crisis issues. Those four baskets, as you know,
were laid out in quite some specifics by the Secretary of State
in his testimony. The four baskets are security arrangements in
the region, arms control and proliferation, Arab-Israeli issues,
and economic cooperation in the region. Thanks. That's it.
Q Can we take a filling break?
MS. TUTWILER: If you want. Sure.
Q What was that fourth one, again?
MS. TUTWILER: Fourth one -- economic cooperation in
the region. Those are the ones he laid out in testimony.
Remember?
Q On a note reportedly delivered to the United
Nations --
MS. TUTWILER: I'm sorry -- on the U.N.?
Q Yes, on the note delivered. There seems to be
some confusion about what exactly is being said in that note.
The Iraqi Ambassador says to reporters that Iraq accepts all of
the resolutions.
MS. TUTWILER: That's the first I've ever heard that,
Jim.
Q Well, that's what he told reporters at the United
Nations this morning.
MS. TUTWILER: I cannot respond to that because it's
literally the first I've heard of it. I've read the Baghdad
Radio report. We have a fairly good brief of what is contained
in the letter. Of my knowledge of those two things, I cannot
say that that is contained in those two documents. I don't have
a reaction to "If the Iraqi government has accepted all 12
United Nations resolutions." I've never heard that before.
Nor, I might add, had the White House, who I talked to right
before I came out here, nor the Secretary of State before he
went to the funeral of a friend and colleague. So I know
nothing about it.
Q One other question. That note, you say, is signed
by Tariq Aziz. As far as the U.S. Government is concerned,
would a note signed with Tariq Aziz' authority be sufficient, or
does it have to be a public announcement and proclamation by
Saddam Hussein?
MS. TUTWILER: Our conditions have not changed, but I
would note that what we know about this letter, Jim, without
getting into too much detail, the substance of it is still
conditional.
Q Can you address Jim's question directly?
MS. TUTWILER: I did.
Q If Tariq Aziz accepts unconditionally, is that
sufficient? Or does it have to be Saddam Hussein?
MS. TUTWILER: I would like to obviously check this at
the White House. That would be a Presidential decision. But I
am positive that the 12 United Nations resolutions are still a
condition as are, as we stated, the terms that the President and
the coalition laid out on February 22. If the letter, that I am
fairly familiar with, does not say -- be it from Tariq Aziz or
anybody else -- we accept, unconditionally, all United Nations
resolutions, if that indeed came across the transom, would the
President then accept that? That would be, in my mind, a
Presidential decision and determination.
Q Just to step back from the question of what
today's note is or anything, can we just ask, does the United
States consider Tariq Aziz to be an "authoritative"
representative of the Iraqi government? And, likewise, does
the United States consider the Iraqi Ambassador to the United
Nations to be an "authoritative" representative?
MS. TUTWILER: Sure, on both of those. Of course, they
are.
Q So the U.S. would consider, in compliance with
President Bush's statement of "authoritative," anything stated
by the Iraqi Ambassador to the United Nations as being
authoritative?
MS. TUTWILER: I just tried to answer this for Jim, I
think, twice, on a hypothetical -- I am, Ralph. I did answer
it. If the Foreign Minister of Iraq, or the United Nations
representative of Iraq came in -- this is totally hypothetical
-- and said, "We accept all 12 United Nations resolutions, we
accept all of the terms the coalition laid down on February 22."
The question you were asking me is, "Would the President accept
that?"
I am saying, I do not think it would be appropriate for
me to say whether the President would or would not. That is the
part of the question I don't feel it would be appropriate for me
to answer. But I am certainly acknowledging that both of those
individuals that you have mentioned are authoritative members of
the Iraqi government.
Q Leaving aside the "authoritative," who, actually,
would sign a letter, or who would be speaking? Let's go to the
conditions one more time.
If Iraq suddenly said, without condition, that they
agree to abide by all U.N. resolutions, does that mean the
fighting stops?
MS. TUTWILER: Well, we also have, as you know, the
February 22 terms.
Q So the fighting doesn't stop even if they meet all
the U.N. resolutions, clean and unconditional, they must meet
all the additional things that the United States has laid down;
is that correct?
MS. TUTWILER: The United States and the coalition. I
haven't seen anyone who says they do not agree with, for
instance, the situation concerning prisoners of war.
Q OK. If they meet the conditions that the U.S. has
laid down, such as laying down your arms, etc., then the U.S.
will agree to a ceasefire and only then?
MS. TUTWILER: Again, you're asking me things that are
very hypothetical. I understand why you are. But, again, those
are going to be Presidential and coalition decisions.
Q It's not only hard for Saddam Hussein to anticipate
what it is he's got to do, it's hard for anybody else to figure
out.
MS. TUTWILER: We have said that our war aims would be
met if the legitimate Government of Iraq was restored --
Q Kuwait.
MS. TUTWILER: I'm sorry; I'm sorry -- Kuwait. And
that the last Iraqi soldier has left Kuwait or has been
captured. Those have not changed -- military aims. OK?
Q Margaret, there's more than that, though.
MS. TUTWILER: He asked me when the fighting was going
to stop.
Q I know. You said that our war aims will be
satisfied, basically, if the fighting stops and if the Iraqi
military leaves or is captured. What about the February 22
terms?
MS. TUTWILER: Those terms -- I also said to him --
must be, as we have said, and the coalition has said, addressed.
POWs is the one that comes first and foremost to my mind.
Q Therefore stopping the fighting and returning the
Iraqi army to Iraq, or capturing it, is not enough?
MS. TUTWILER: Well, these all get me into decisions
that are obviously made, Bill, at a higher pay grade than my
own, and decisions that will obviously be made in very close
consultation, as the President has done throughout, with the
heads of other countries. Those are decisions that they will be
making.
I'm restating what our -- which has been restated for
the last 5 or 6 days -- military aims and objectives are. They
have not changed. I'm also saying at the same time that 12
United Nations resolutions and the terms of the February 22
statement -- also have been stated by the coalition, by everyone
that I'm aware of -- must be met.
Q How is Saddam Hussein supposed to know? As Jack
points out --
MS. TUTWILER: We've been telling you. What do you
mean?
Q The United States has a hundred thousand -- or the
coalition has nearly a hundred thousand troops inside Iraqi
territory now. So even if the fighting stops in Kuwait, that
doesn't mean it stops in Iraq. The United States has made it
very clear that one of its unstated aims is to demolish Saddam
Hussein's military.
MS. TUTWILER: What none of you have acknowledged this
morning is that there is fighting still going on; this war is
not over; there is fighting that is going on in Kuwait; there
is fighting that is going on in Iraq. So I'm dealing with the
real world. I understand everyone would like to know, "What
happens in the future?" But they are still fighting. That is
why our troops are fighting back, obviously, in Iraq and in
Kuwait.
You have had a military briefing yesterday afternoon
that said there was very, very heavy fighting at the airport in
Kuwait City. You're going to have a military briefing in 12
minutes by General Schwarzkopf. I'm sure that he will then, on
the military side of this, give everybody information concerning
the fighting that is continuing to go on in Kuwait and in Iraq.
Q Margaret, I'm just curious as to why you keep
referring to 12 U.N. resolutions. Is that a kind of shorthand
on your part? There are really only two resolutions which
require acceptance by Iraq, and that is the one on annexation of
Kuwait; the other is on reparations. The others are basically
technical amendments which have to do with humanitarian
assistance and setting up a committee to -- the embargo is
something for the Allies to impose; not for the Iraqis to
accept.
MS. TUTWILER: The reason we continue to do it, John,
is because we've done it for, I believe, 7 months now. Each
time you've added one -- that he must accept, he must comply.
We have also acknowledged and said that we recognize fully some
of these are not for Iraq to do.
For instance, one of them -- one day, I believe it was
Ralph -- said, "Margaret, isn't it irrelevant now concerning
hostages?" We said, no, because there are Kuwaitis who are
still being held against their will in Iraq. So in our minds
that one is still very relevant.
Q Does the United States plan to keep an economic
embargo against Iraq?
MS. TUTWILER: I have never heard that mentioned. As
you know, what we have said, and many of the coalition partners
have said, is, if Saddam Hussein should still be in power, which
is a decision for the Iraqi people, that the international
community would obviously have to look quite seriously at some
type of arms embargo. In fact, we told that to Tariq Aziz when
we were in the meeting in Geneva.
Q There was a newspaper report this morning which
indicated that one of the goals of the Administration after the
war is to continue to keep an economic embargo, to make it
difficult for Iraq to restore itself by barring markets for its
oil and to bring Saddam Hussein down after the war by continuing
to isolate him in every way possible.
MS. TUTWILER: I saw that report. I have checked in
this building and I have checked at the White House. I don't
know who that unnamed U.S. official was or officials. I am not
aware of a United States decision to keep an economic embargo.
But let me remind you, I think that it is fair to interpret much
of what he said yesterday in his Radio Baghdad broadcast is very
threatening to Kuwait. After all, he basically was saying, "We
will be back."
I don't know what the world will decide to do if he is
there, if he is still issuing these bellicose and threatening
statements against a neighbor. I don't know. But I do know, of
my knowledge this morning, there is no such decision. It is
obviously something that will have to be discussed within the
coalition as many of these other issues are.
When Secretary Baker has addressed the arms enbargo, he
has just said this is something that the coalition and the
people in the region would obviously have to look at. I will
tell you, I know of no decision but I don't know what will
eventually happen.
Q Returning to the previous point, just a technical
point. You say that the release of Kuwaitis who have been taken
prisoners is another thing. The resolution doesn't refer to
Kuwaitis. It refers to third-state nationals. Are you now
including Kuwaitis in your --
MS. TUTWILER: I'm just saying that's an example when,
days ago, Ralph had said one of the resolutions would appear to
be null and void because all of the hostages are out and the
human shields. Remember, we went through five months of that.
There are reasons to believe that they are holding in Iraq
Kuwaitis. They are third-party nationals, unless you accept
that Kuwait is the 19th province of Iraq, which we don't. Those
people are still being held against their will. So that
particular resolution, yes, we do still think is very relevant.
Another example is the 4 CBS newsmen that are being
held. I might point out -- and I'm sure Bill (Plante), being
with CBS knows -- that our Deputy Assistant Secretary called in
the Iraqi Charge yesterday to make a formal protest and plea
concerning the 4 CBS employees that they refuse to tell anyone
anything about.
Q Margaret, is there going to continue to be --
would there be any humanitarian assistance to Iraq in compliance
with one of the U.N. resolutions which allows for that? If the
settlement is reached, if the Iraqis agree to all this, would
the U.S. contemplate humanitarian assistance to Iraq?
MS. TUTWILER: I haven't heard that we are or we
aren't.
Q Margaret, didn't you say in your opening
statement, or did I misunderstand that AID wouldn't send food,
but it has contingency plans to deal with emergency civil needs
in the Gulf?
MS. TUTWILER: In the Gulf.
Q Would that include Iraq?
MS. TUTWILER: That is something that will have to be
addressed. As you know, we do not have relations with Iraq.
They broke relations with us. So I can't say that we would be
sending in United States personnel since they broke relations
with us.
Q Margaret, could you please --
MS. TUTWILER: They don't recognize us. Remember?
Q Margaret, can you --
MS. TUTWILER: We have never done it. We have not
broken them. They still have three employees here. But they
broke relations with us, as you remember, and with many other
Western nations.
Q Are you fudging? Are you saying that --
MS. TUTWILER: I'm not fudging.
Q -- that we would not help them in terms of
sanitation, public health, food, and so forth?
MS. TUTWILER: Since they have broken relations with
us, I would have to assume you would not be sending United
States Government personnel into a country that does not
recognize you. That would be the first substance of this. The
second would, obviously, be safety of any individuals that are
going in there, whether they're American or other nationalities,
and that's the situation that we are in.
Q There's a precedent --
Q Margaret, you've got a full mechanized infantry --
or a full mechanized corps of United States personnel in Iraq
now.
MS. TUTWILER: They are quite different, Norm, than the
types of individuals that would be going in to help with food
and medical supplies there.
Q On that very point, there are precedents for
sending U.S. assistance to countries with which we do not have
diplomatic relations. An example is Angola.
Could you tell us the name of the Deputy Assistant
Secretary who met with the Iraqis?
MS. TUTWILER: David Mack.
Q Margaret, can you please tell us what the U.S.
Government position is right now on this whole question of war
crimes trials, and will the meetings that the Secretary is
having with Hurd and Dumas and Genscher address this issue of
war crimes trials? Are there active discussions going on within
the coalition about their position on war crimes trials?
MS. TUTWILER: Not that I'm aware of. It may be at a
level that's below the Secretary of State. I have mentioned
what the Secretary of State will be addressing himself to, and
concerning the general situation, Mary, on war crimes, nothing's
changed. All options are open.
We, as you know, have been collecting data throughout
this crisis. The Defense Department is the place where this
data is kept, and there are absolutely no decisions that have
been made, and I do not have answers for you on what type of
mechanism or process would be used.
Q Is it thought that -- just to follow that up, is
it thought that that decision will need to be made soon?
MS. TUTWILER: I haven't heard anyone saying that
there's an urgency to making that type of decision. I just
haven't been privy to that.
Q I wanted to ask you about the POWs. There's some
early reporting that some of them are afraid to give their names
to the Red Cross for fear of retaliation against their families,
and I just wondered if the United States has been talking to the
Saudis at all about the prospect of some of them seeking
political asylum or --
MS. TUTWILER: If they have, Johanna, I'm not familiar
with it. I've seen that report. I can't remember where I saw
it this morning. It was in someone's report.
Q Would we turn them back regardless of their
wishes?
MS. TUTWILER: Those are all questions that will be
worked out, will be addressed. I don't have answers for you
this morning on that.
Q Margaret, an end-game question. This is really
picky, but I think you said a few moments ago our war aims will
have been met if the legitimate government is restored and the
last Iraqi has left Kuwait or been captured. Are you making a
distinction between fulfillment of war aims and the conditions
necessary to end the fighting?
MS. TUTWILER: Secretary Baker did this himself on
Sunday. So has the President. So has the Secretary of Defense.
These are the war aims. They have always been. They have not
changed.
Also, on the political side, political objectives are
the 12 United Nations resolutions and the terms that the
coalition laid down the other day. They are quite different.
John's first question to me -- McWethy -- was, "Well, when do
you stop shooting?" And so I said, "Here are when your military
objectives, your war aims, would have been met."
Q Margaret, could you tell us what the process is by
which the war would stop? Does there have to be a U.N.
resolution? Would President Bush simply call off the fighting?
Would it have to be a coalition action? Do you know what the
process is?
MS. TUTWILER: I know what the process is. The process
is this continues to be discussed at the highest political
levels among the coalition leaders, and today is not the day
that I'm in a position -- or I think anyone is -- to flesh out
for you what the details would be. And so I could just tell you
that discussions have been going on since the very beginning of
this crisis. They are continuing these discussions. But I do
not have answers for all of your questions on that.
Q But if Iraq stops shooting at coalition forces,
that does not necessarily mean, in the view of the United
States, that the war is over.
MS. TUTWILER: Well, John, as you pointed out or as
someone pointed out, there are X number of United States troops
that are in Iraq. Although my knowledge of military history is
limited, it is my understanding that there are any number of
times when a war has been formally declared and then ended, that
you could have horrible things happen to troops who are leaving;
you could have Scuds fired at them. Am I going to tell you that
they would not fire back? No, I can't say that.
So I cannot tell you when the absolute moment is that
the very last shot is fired. Now, maybe General Schwarzkopf can
address himself to this, as the military part of this.
Q It sounds like you need a formal cease-fire and
disengagement agreement, the sort of thing which can be
negotiated between the warring parties and/or through a body
like the United Nations. It sounds to me like you need a formal
document of some kind to disengage the forces.
MS. TUTWILER: I didn't say that.
Q But have you ever said that you wouldn't?
MS. TUTWILER: No. I've said that that's a decision
for the political leaders of the coalition to determine if they
want a document, if they want a meeting. "How they terminate
the war" will obviously be part of ongoing discussions among the
highest levels of the political leadership of the coalition, and
I just do not have for you those types of details or those types
of answers.
Q Margaret, one technical point: Is the Secretary's
appearance tomorrow scrapped?
MS. TUTWILER: It's been postponed. He had a
conversation yesterday with Congressman Obey, and it was agreed
that in light of everything that is going on here -- as you see
today at 12 noon we're dealing with yet another Iraqi situation
at the U.N. And just as Secretary Cheney, it's my
understanding, postponed his two testimonies -- I believe one
was today, one's for tomorrow -- Secretary Baker has postponed
his. Thanks for reminding me to tell you.
Q Could I go back to the U.N. for just one second to
clear up a detail: Does the United States have a -- has the
United States been presented by the U.N. with any kind of
document from Iraq at this point containing these alleged
statements that were made on Iraqi Radio?
MS. TUTWILER: I'd rather leave it that we are familiar
with the contents of any such document.
Q Would being familiar with the contents of a
document be considered adequate by the United States for, I
don't know, accepting it or --
MS. TUTWILER: No. It's conditional.
Q No. I don't mean this particular document. I
guess what I'm trying to get at again is the process here. Does
the -- do the Iraqis have to somehow put in writing and present
to the U.N., which then somehow puts in writing or presents to
the United States, some kind of document? Or would it be
adequate for the United States to be familiar, in your phrase,
with some document given to the U.N.?
MS. TUTWILER: We have never, to my knowledge, said
that something must be put in writing as a condition. I'm not
aware of that.
Q But you did say that a letter has been given to
the U.N. this morning, right?
MS. TUTWILER: I said that it is my understanding, and
that we believed -- we're not in the meeting with the Iraqi
Permanent Rep and the Secretary General of the United Nations,
nor are we present in the meeting with the President of the
Security Council and the Iraqi U.N. representative.
I said that we believe that he will either read or hand
over, or something, a letter from Tariq Aziz to those two
gentlemen.
Q One question: There have been reports yesterday
on NBC and today in The Washington Post and from dependable
sources as well that with the collapse of the Iraqi army there
is an increase in danger for the "Lebanonization of Iraq,"
namely by Turkey, Syria and Iran. What will the U.S. do to
secure the implementation of its stated policy for the post-war
territorial integrity of Iraq?
MS. TUTWILER: We have said throughout this crisis that
the United States and its allies have no territorial designs on
Iraq. As we have said all along, we support the territorial
integrity of Iraq. Territorial integrity is in part what this
conflict is all about. It's a fundamental principle. It is not
a bargaining chip -- as someone had, I believe, asked me
yesterday if that's what we were doing with it.
I would also point out that in General Kelly's briefing
yesterday at the Pentagon, he said, "We have not taken a portion
of Iraqi territory to hold. We are simply maneuvering on Iraqi
territory, because our mission was to drive the Iraqi army out
of Kuwait," and he said, "Our mission has not changed."
Q Margaret --
MS. TUTWILER: Yes, Alan.
Q -- has the Secretary had any conversations with
the Syrian Foreign Minister or anyone else in the Syrian
government in recent days?
MS. TUTWILER: Since Saturday night? No.
Q When was the last one?
MS. TUTWILER: Saturday night.
Q And what was that about?
MS. TUTWILER: That was the night, Alan, that, as we
told you, he spoke to, I think, it was close to 20 Foreign
Ministers around the world, and they were basically --
Q Beginning of the ground war.
MS. TUTWILER: Right.
Q Margaret, an historical question: You were there
at the meeting in Geneva. How closely did what the Secretary
tell Tariz Aziz would happen to Iraq if they didn't accept the
U.N. Security Council resolutions, how closely has the action on
the ground actually paralleled what the Secretary told the
Iraqis? How accurate a reflection did that prove to be?
MS. TUTWILER: I would say incredibly accurate.
Q They knew to a level of great detail exactly what
we've seen happening?
MS. TUTWILER: Mary, when the Secretary of State -- and
he has said this, and I refer to his I think it was close to
40-minute press conference at the conclusion of that meeting --
said to the Foreign Minister, "You understand that if there is a
conflict, if you have to go that route, this will be quite
different than fighting previous battles that you have fought."
The Foreign Minister of Iraq made it perfectly clear
that he was under no misperceptions or had any lack of
information concerning what would be involved.
Q Margaret, just to follow up on the contacts
question, has the U.S. had any direct contact with the
Government of Iraq since -- in the last few days?
MS. TUTWILER: Yes. Yesterday when the Charge was
brought in specifically concerning the CBS --
Q Was there any other discussion during the course
of that meeting on a subject other than the CBS personnel?
MS. TUTWILER: The Iraqi Charge asked us if we had made
a decision concerning their protective power and interests
section, and we said it was still under review.
Q Any other subject?
MS. TUTWILER: No.
Q Also, has there been any contact with the -- has
there been any consultation -- you're engaged in consultations
today and tomorrow and the next day with some of the allied
coalition members and the military coalition members. Will
there be similar consultations with the Soviets who are also
members of the coalition?
MS. TUTWILER: Does he have meetings planned?
Q Well, I'll prefer to ask it the way I prefer to
ask it.
MS. TUTWILER: Are there any conversations going on
between the United States and the Soviet Union?
Q Will there be similar consultations -- the
Secretary of State is meeting with the Foreign Ministers of
three members of the coalition.
MS. TUTWILER: Correct.
Q Will there be similar consultations with other
members of the U.N. Security Council Permanent Five or other
members of the coalition who include China and the Soviet Union?
MS. TUTWILER: Not by the Secretary of State, Ralph,
that I am personally aware of. I certainly know that he has no
meetings scheduled, but I am not ruling out -- I cannot -- that
other meetings get put on. I can't rule out that the Foreign
Minister might call him this afternoon -- of China or the Soviet
Union -- but there's nothing planned at his level that I know
anything about.
Q Has there been any contact over the phone since
the Saturday night messages went out?
MS. TUTWILER: At the Secretary's level?
Q Yes.
MS. TUTWILER: No.
Q Do you have anything on --
MS. TUTWILER: Well, other, Ralph, than you know --
Q Since the messages that went out on Saturday
night, which were not done by the Secretary.
MS. TUTWILER: The Soviet Charge -- no. The Soviet
Charge talked to the Secretary briefly --
(TO STAFF) Was it Monday night? I can't remember.
What is today?
MS. HOGGARD: Wednesday.
MS. TUTWILER: Wednesday. Monday -- right.
Q I guess I was trying to determine, you've
indicated today that the U.S. is consulting with France, Germany
and Britain on -- you gave a list of things that they would
consult on. I'm trying to determine whether the U.S. is
consulting similarly with the Soviet Union on those subjects,
and I'm drawing the conclusion from what you're saying that the
answer is no.
MS. TUTWILER: But, Ralph, there are any number of
people that we will continue to be consulting with. Marlin put
out this morning that the President of the United States called
three coalition heads of state yesterday. Does that mean he
left out the others? No.
There is going to be an enormous amount of ongoing
consultations continuing with these three countries and with
other countries. So I would not read anything into that at all.
Q Can you offer some explanation as to why Germany
would be considered one of the first nations with whom the U.S.
would want to consult on post-war issues at this point?
MS. TUTWILER: As I believe that I mentioned yesterday
-- as we have any number of times -- we have requests from other
governments to come to the United States. I, to be honest with
you, do not have the agenda that Foreign Minister Genscher is
bringing with him, and I also said yesterday that in any of
these meetings, there are going to be other bilateral issues
that are discussed.
Q Is it fair for us to -- you gave us a description
of the talks with Hurd, Dumas and Genscher. It sounds to me
more like that's the agenda with Hurd and Dumas, as opposed to
being the agenda for Hurd, Dumas and Genscher. Is that --
MS. TUTWILER: Ralph, I would find it very hard to
believe, since I believe the German government is, what, for
this year, for responsibility sharing -- is it $3.5 billion? I
believe they have just sent -- didn't they send $165 million to
the Israeli government? I believe they have helped on Patriots
for Turkey. They are very much a part of this coalition and
have been lock, stock and barrel involved and supportive of what
the international community is trying to do.
I did not limit myself, either in the Hurd meeting or
the Dumas meeting or the Genscher meeting -- I had done it
yesterday. I didn't think you wanted me to get into a bunch of
bilateral issues that they will be discussing. They have an
enormous lot that they always discuss among themselves in those
meetings. It is not just limited to this. I was trying to be
helpful, since you had asked yesterday for me to flesh out more
for you concerning post-crisis issues, would I please try to get
a better fix for you on the specifics and elaborate more in that
particular part of their conversations what they would be
discussing.
Q Margaret, there's been some concerns expressed in
Congress that now that the war will end, maybe the coalition
partners won't come through with the pledges of money that
they've pledged for their part.
Can you update us on exactly how much of the money is
still in the pipeline, and how much of it has actually been paid
over, and are there any concerns here at State about that?
MS. TUTWILER: There are no concerns that I know of,
Mary, and I'd refer you to OMB. They are the lead on this. I
believe that Mr. Darman testified, I believe it was over five
hours yesterday. A large portion of this, I believe, dealt with
that, and I'd just say OMB is the lead on it.
Q Margaret, a slight detour to another region. You
can come back to this afterwards. There were peace talks on
Ethiopia here last week and, hey, presto, the rebels have
launched a major offensive two days later. Do you have a
reaction?
MS. TUTWILER: I cannot confirm that they have or have
not. We've seen press reports that they have. You're correct.
We had two days of meetings here. I believe they were last
Thursday and Friday. At the conclusion of those meetings, we
posted by the Bureau here and by the Assistant Secretary that we
hoped that we would continue these meetings, and we just don't
have yet whether or not these reports are true.
Q An AID organization -- a warning of a major, major
famine looming very fast in that area. Millions and millions of
people could be at risk. Do you have an assessment? I mean,
obviously, if there's fighting, that's not going to help
matters.
MS. TUTWILER: Obviously, it wouldn't. And, as you
know, the Soviet Union and the United States have been
discussing over, I guess, it's close to a year now on how to
cooperate and how to get food into these destitute and very
needy areas. And we have not so far been able to accomplish our
mission, and it is something that we continue to work on.
Q Margaret, do you have an update on what's
happening with U.S. Embassies in the Middle East now? In the
last couple of days as the ground war has progressed, have there
been more street demonstrations or any further problems or any
sign of widespread unrest?
MS. TUTWILER: No.
Q Is there any consideration being given to sending
back the employees who were withdrawn before January 15 from
various countries in, I guess, the Middle East and Africa --
MS. TUTWILER: Who will compose the country team?
Q No, no.
Q The drawdown.
Q Yes. There was a drawdown.
MS. TUTWILER: Oh, have those decisions been made yet?
I don't know, George. I doubt it, to be honest with you.
After all, I must remind you, we are still at war, and so I have
not even heard that being raised yet.
Q Margaret, do you have an update on terrorist
incidents in the last few days?
MS. TUTWILER: Yes. As you know, the last time we gave
you numbers, I believe we said it was approximately 150. I
could tell you now that it's basically around 160. There have
not been, as I answered Mary's previous question, any
noticeable, enormous demonstrations in front of any of our
Embassies, and there have not been any notable incidents, Norm,
to be honest with you. I'll be happy to post them.
There was one, I believe, in Berlin. An unidentified
man threw a hand grenade and fired an automatic weapon in the
lobby of a hotel. It's those types of things. There again the
vast majority, we have said, have been since the outbreak of the
hostilities, property related, and there have been
approximately, as I said, approximately 160. And there's been
no appreciable change in the level of incidents since the ground
fighting began, either demonstrations, Mary, or terrorism.
Q Do you mean demonstrations at Embassies, because,
of course, there was a big demonstration on a university campus
in Cairo.
MS. TUTWILER: There was that. Yes. I'm talking about
massive demonstrations against the United States Embassy. As I
said, I can't remember. Some time this week, for instance, the
demonstration in front of our Embassy in Jordan had 150 women
there.
Q Margaret, can I go back to something on the
contracting at the beginning again? It's probably because I'm
not familiar --
MS. TUTWILER: I'm not either, Ralph.
Q -- with this subject. O.K. It seems to me as
though you made two contradictory statements --
MS. TUTWILER: I hope not.
Q -- but I may not have all the words here. On the
one hand, it seemed as though you said, "U.S. officials are not
involved in contracting." I think that is an accurate
paraphrase. And then right afterwards you said, "The Corps of
Engineers is soliciting contracts."
Does it mean that the United States is asking for
bidders, but then somebody else is negotiating with them or --
MS. TUTWILER: To be honest with you, Ralph, I have not
had an opportunity this morning, in trying to do other things,
to get to that level of detail. I will happily do it for you,
though.
Q Can we have a copy of that statement on
contracting, and so on, to look at?
MS. TUTWILER: Sure. Absolutely.
Q Thank you, Margaret,
MS. TUTWILER: Thank you all.
(The briefing concluded at 1:12 p.m.)