US Department of State Daily Briefing #45:
Wednesday, 3/20/91
Boucher
Source: State Department Deputy Spokesman Richard
Boucher
Description: 12:44 PM, Washington, DC
Date: Mar 20, 19913/20/91
Category: Briefings
Region: MidEast/North Africa, Central America, Eurasia,
Europe
Country: United States, Jordan, Iraq, Kuwait,
Lebanon, Egypt, USSR (former), Moldova,
Azerbaijan, Georgia, Ukraine
Subject: Mideast Peace Process, Terrorism, Refugees,
Regional/Civil Unrest, International Law,
Human Rights, Democratization, United Nations,
State Department
(ON THE RECORD UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED)
MR. BOUCHER: Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen. I
don't have any particular statements or updates. I'd be glad to
take your questions.
Q Richard, can I try you on the fact that on the way
home the Secretary was saying that mid-week -- and here we are
right at mid-week -- he'd be on the telephone talking to Mideast
leaders and trying them out on some concrete ideas and
suggestions. Has that process begun yet, do you know?
MR. BOUCHER: I don't think he said mid-week. I think
he said during the course of the week, or some phrase like that.
But in any case, as far as I'm aware, he hasn't started burning
the telephone lines again.
Q Well, has he touched them at all?
MR. BOUCHER: He's been working within the
Administration. He's been consulting, thinking, and developing
ideas. At this point, I don't think we've started any new
campaign.
Q He did make it very clear that he was going to be
looking for some answers this week.
MR. BOUCHER: That's right. And the President made
clear that we wanted to follow up rather quickly -- as quickly
as we thought we could on this. Today is not the day.
Q Well, the week is slipping away.
MR. BOUCHER: That it is, Bill.
Q Does the State Department have an assessment of
how deeply involved Iran is? I realize that you are being asked
that question on an almost daily basis. New evidence continues
to surface, and what are your views are on their involvement in
what's happening in Iraq?
MR. BOUCHER: Let me start off by saying that the
evidence is inconclusive. We do know that Iran has been
providing political and moral support to Shi'a dissidents in
Iraq for some time -- for many years.
Regarding the question of material support, the
situation is less clear. Some material, including arms, is
undoubtedly crossing the border, but I really can't provide you
any conclusions on the amounts or the effect of that support.
Q What about Rev Guard -- Revolutionary Guard units
fighting inside the Iraqi border, presumably against the
People's Mujahedin?
MR. BOUCHER: I don't have anything on that. You mean
against the Iranian People's Mujahedin?
Q That's correct.
MR. BOUCHER: That question did come up before, and we
said we had no information on that.
Q And you still have no information on that?
MR. BOUCHER: That's my understanding.
Q What about Iraqis who went to Iran? Have they
been brought back? Is that a different sort of question?
MR. BOUCHER: This gets into the area where we have to
say that the situation is not clear enough for us to be able to
confirm or give you anything additional on that.
Q As long as we're on that track, is there any
evidence that the Iraqis have tried to move any of their
aircraft out of Iran?
MR. BOUCHER: You'd probably be better off asking the
Pentagon that. I'm not aware of --
Q They might have passed it along to you.
MR. BOUCHER: I'm not aware of any.
Q Do you have anything on additional helicopter use
or additional fixed-wing planes other than the one that got
zapped?
[Iraq: Update on Civil Unrest]
MR. BOUCHER: No, I don't have anything specific on
that today. I can give you the general update on the situation.
Heavy fighting between government forces and dissidents
continues in the north in several areas. Fighting was taking
place early today in the immediate vicinity of the city of
Kirkuk and possibly inside the city itself. The government has
been sending re-enforcements to the north.
Fighting continues in the south, but the overall
situation there is not sufficiently clear to characterize.
Fighting was continuing early today in the vicinity of the Shi'a
holy city of Najaf.
[Iraq: US Support for Territorial Integrity]
Q Richard, the United States has repeatedly said
that it wants to see Iraq's territorial integrity maintained.
But the Kurds apparently are claiming that they've seized
control of Kurdistan. What happens? What would the United
States do if, in fact, the Kurds in Iraq decided to secede?
What if Iran seized a piece of territory?
MR. BOUCHER: The President made very clear our
attitude towards outside powers seizing pieces of territory,
particularly with regard to Iran. So I think that question has
been answered.
The other questions are really hypothetical at this
point. Our strong view, reiterated many times, is that we
cannot support the dismemberment of Iraq. We support the
continued territorial integrity of Iraq. That has been our
position, and it remains our position.
Q But isn't that clearly what's happening,
particularly in the north where the Kurds are, according to some
accounts, operating what amounts to a separate state on the
Turkish border?
MR. BOUCHER: At this point, Bill, I think the only
assessment that I can give you is the one I just gave you, that
the fighting continues in these areas; and I don't have any
further assessment.
Q Do you see a trend in the fighting? Ten days ago
or so the Administration believed that the rebel forces were
being put down. Then there was a period where it appeared that
they seemed to be gaining momentum. Where are you on the
various roller-coaster curves at this point?
MR. BOUCHER: We described it last week, I think, as a
see-saw effect in some places where the government appeared to
be regaining control and then clashes appeared again. It's
difficult to describe other than to say every day what we see
the situation as. It's not something that we can draw a trend
from or predict. It's just that the unrest is widespread. The
unrest continues. The fighting continues, particularly in the
north. It's a reflection of the widespread discontent with the
Iraqi regime, a justifiable discontent. But at this point,
we're not in a position to make some kind of predictions or draw
a line that would lead to some final conclusion.
Q Is it a surprise to the Administration that the
Resistance continued with the ferocity that it has over these
many days, especially when ten days ago it was pretty much
pronounced dead?
MR. BOUCHER: Well, I don't think we ever pretty much
pronounced it's dead, first of all.
Q Pretty close.
MR. BOUCHER: You can make your judgments on that. We
used the words that we used to describe it.
On the question of "sort of surprised by developments,"
we're following the situation closely. We're watching what's
going on. I think we're all aware of the widespread grievances
and the reasons why people will be upset with the Iraqi regime
and terrible hardships that the Iraqi regime has brought on the
people there. So it's no surprise that people are rising up
against the regime.
As far as any further military assessment of trends,
I've just tried to say that we have tried not to predict where
it was going, and therefore I can't say that it is going
contrary to any predictions.
Q Do you want to characterize any of the insurgents?
The government keeps criticizing the Iraqi regime, but it
doesn't have anything to say about some of the people and the
potential trouble they might be. Iranian-oriented Shi'ites --
they're not operating out of just hardship? Aren't they
operating out of some sense that they want a fundamentalist
government back, something about 15th Century in orientation?
You keep slamming Saddam Hussein. I can understand
that. But these aren't good guys, are they, that are trying to
bring him down?
MR. BOUCHER: The answer to that, Barry, just has to be
that we've said repeatedly, it's for the Iraqi people to decide
what their future leadership is going to be.
Q I could ask you if you thought the Iranian people
decided on Khomeni all by themselves or he just sort of swept
them, and you may have a repeat of that. The President was very
relaxed about it the other day. Whoever asked the question of
him, he said, "Well, you're just taking a very pessimistic view,
and so on, about the Shi'ites who are coming to power."
MR. BOUCHER: We're watching the situation. We're
following it, and we'll see how it turns out.
Q Richard, there's sort of a discrepancy. Number 1,
you say the Iraqi people have to decide; and on the second, you
have no opinion on what's happening with the Kurds. The Kurds,
whether you like it or not, are Iraqis, and they seem to be
deciding very much for themselves what they want to do. So can
you characterize that?
MR. BOUCHER: I don't see what the contradiction is.
The Kurds are fighting against the government as other groups
are inside Iraq. They're taking a certain amount of power in
their own hands, and we believe that the ultimate --
Q But you're saying that you believe in the
territorial integrity of Iraq; and yet if the Kurds are in a
situation where they're virtually forming their own state, you
still say that there's got to be the territorial integrity of
Iraq. You can't have it both ways, Richard. You seem to be
wanting --
MR. BOUCHER: I'm not trying to have it both ways, Jan.
First of all, you're drawing assessments of what the Kurds are
doing, and those are not assessments that I have drawn. You're
saying they're virtually doing this or almost doing that. They
appear to be doing this. Those are not assessments that I have
drawn, first of all.
Second of all, the situation is such that there are
various groups inside Iraq that have various grievances. Some
of them are ethnic. Many of them are just based on the terrible
hardships and terrible things that the regime has done to them.
These groups are rising up against the government
there. They are fighting now. We're watching the fighting
closely. We're following what's going on, but it's not for us
to choose alternates. It's not for us to say these guys are
good and those guys are bad. These are people that have
grievances that are rising up with arms, and it's a situation
that we're following.
Q Let me just follow up a minute and ask you, do you
have any more reports? Have you been watching the situation
closely? Have you gotten any more reports, Number 1, of more
damage to the holy sites? You had reports of Karbala. What
about Najaf? And also do you have anything yet on the use of
CW?
MR. BOUCHER: I don't have anything specific on the
holy sites of Najaf, but I think I just told you that fighting
was continuing early today in the vicinity of the holy city of
Najaf. There's always the possibility of more damage, or damage
to the holy sites there.
On CW, again, as yesterday, we can't confirm that that
has occurred.
[Iraq: Update on Refugees and Displaced Persons]
Q Do you have anything on the thousands of Iraqis
who are living in the U.S. enclave in Iraq -- you know, their
living conditions?
MR. BOUCHER: The people down by the border?
Q That's right.
MR. BOUCHER: Our Embassy in Kuwait reports that a
number of refugees and displaced persons are in the Safwan area
both in Iraq and Kuwait. The number is approximately 1,000, but
I have to caution you that the numbers change daily as there is
a steady stream of new arrivals and at the same time others are
departing the area. There have been Kuwaitis admitted home back
to Kuwait; Egyptians who have been repatriated by their own
government.
In addition to these Kuwaitis and Iraqis who are
showing up there, the border population includes a number of
other nationalities such as the Egyptians, Sudanese, Yemenis,
and Palestinians.
These refugees and displaced persons in the area are
being assisted with food and medical care by the Kuwaiti Red
Crescent and by U.S. military forces. There were some initial
health and nutrition problems among the border population. My
understanding is that these have largely been solved.
There are continued concerns about the potential for
sanitation problems if the population continues to increase.
[Kuwait: Resignation of Cabinet]
Q Richard, do you have any comment on the apparent
fall of the Kuwaiti Prime Minister's government?
MR. BOUCHER: I guess the first thing to say, I think
most of you have seen Skip Gnehm -- Ambassador Gnehm -- on
television this morning who said it was not unexpected, that it
had been discussed in Taif even before the return of the
government to Kuwait.
I think it's important that we note that Kuwait is a
sovereign state which makes its own decisions, and they did not
consult us in advance of this particular decision.
The Kuwaiti Government spokesmen have explained the
government's resignation as based on public dissatisfaction with
the pace of reconstruction and the restoration of basic
services.
Q Was Secretary Baker among those with whom the
change of government had been discussed when he visited with the
Prime Minister only a week ago?
MR. BOUCHER: I don't know.
Q Richard, what is the U.S. Government's attitude
towards aid given by any outside country to the rebels in Iraq?
There is a report in a column in the New York Times today that
not only is Iran supporting and helping the rebels but so is
Turkey, so is Syria, and so is Saudi Arabia. Is the report
accurate, and what is your attitude to such aid?
MR. BOUCHER: As I said, the only area that I have
information on is Iran. I gave you what information I could and
said that the extent of the support and the effect is
inconclusive. Our attitude is what we've said before, and
that's other states should refrain from interfering in Iraq's
internal affairs.
Q And just if I could follow up. Is the U.S.
supplying any assistance of any kind to any of the rebels in
Iraq?
MR. BOUCHER: Didn't we answer that question the other
day?
Q You didn't answer the question. You heard the
question.
MR. BOUCHER: I will look into it and, again, see if we
can get you a well-crafted answer.
Q If the U.S. won't tolerate the partition of Iraq,
then at what point is it willing to intervene as this process
continues?
MR. BOUCHER: Bill, that remains a hypothetical
question at this point. I think you're all aware of the
incident this morning. Marlin said that we were not
re-engaging; we were not starting up hostilities again. That
remains the situation.
Q So we'll tolerate the unrest inside until Saddam
is overthrown and then we'll stop it? What do we do here?
MR. BOUCHER: Those all remain very hypothetical and
speculative. We can't predict the course of events at this
point.
Q Richard, in his testimony this morning --
Q But you seem to be trying to influence them.
You're preventing Saddam from taking certain actions and you're
not -- well, we don't know whether the United States Government
is participating in any of the aid to the rebels. You do seem
to be unclear as to what the U.S. position is on assistance, or
the steps that Saddam can use -- the extent to which Saddam can
go to control events in his own country?
[Iraq: Arms Embargo]
MR. BOUCHER: I think I would differ with that in two
respects. The first, the extent to which he can go in using
fixed-wing aircraft has been laid out very, very clearly. Iraq
violated those rules that were laid down and they got an
aircraft shot down this morning. That had been clearly laid
out.
The U.S. policy is that other states should refrain
from interfering in Iraq's internal affairs. Outside countries
should refrain from doing this. So while I don't have a precise
and formal answer to David's question, I can give you the policy
that is involved.
Q Richard, also on Iraq. In his testimony this
morning, Assistant Secretary Kelly appeared to have gone a bit
further on an arms embargo against Iraq when he said, "Iraq must
not have access to the instruments of war." He says this
unconditionally without the presence or lack of presence of
Saddam Hussein. Is that now the policy, that whatever happens to
Saddam Hussein, the United States will favor a total embargo of
all arms? Not only weapons of mass destruction?
MR. BOUCHER: I'll have to check if that's what was
meant by that sentence. I didn't read that portion of the
testimony carefully. I don't remember what the context was.
Q It's Page 5.
MR. BOUCHER: OK.
[Jordan: Arms Embargo]
Q Richard, is the Senate moving to cut off aid to
Jordan? Is that going to beat your investigation or your
review? Maybe you don't have to have the review.
MR. BOUCHER: Let me start off by saying that I think
the President and the Secretary have both made it repeatedly
clear that we were disappointed by the stance, the support for
Iraq expressed by the Jordanian Government during the crisis.
They made several references to that. Mr. Kelly was noting on
the Hill this morning that they have generally observed the
sanctions against Iraq at the same time.
We are strongly opposed to legislation that would
prohibit U.S. assistance to Jordan. We believe that we need to
maintain maximum flexibility in the post-war period. We have to
have flexibility to respond to possible Jordanian efforts to
improve relations and to play a constructive role in the region.
We believe that we shouldn't let our disappointment of Jordan's
behavior during the Gulf War unncessarily constrain our post-war
diplomacy.
Q What is the state of the review by the
Administration?
MR. BOUCHER: The overall aid program remains under
review.
Q The overall aid program to Jordan?
MR. BOUCHER: Yes.
Q What's the purpose? The overall aid program to
Jordan had been under review all of last year in order that a
new program could be developed for this year's budget. Jordan
took certain actions and the U.S. then said it was now again
under review. What's the purpose of the extended nature of this
review? Is it actually being reviewed, or is it frozen?
MR. BOUCHER: Well, we have suspended all aid while
completing a review of our security assistance programs. That's
the best explanation I can give you at this point.
Q But all the aid is gone for this year; no?
MR. BOUCHER: No.
Q Most of it? Hasn't most of it gone out?
MR. BOUCHER: I don't think so.
[Iraq: Response to UN Resolutions]
Q Also, what is the state of play with the U.N. at
this point, Security Council or otherwise, with the Secretary
General? Is the United States negotiating tougher conditions
against Iraq among members of the U.N. Security Council?
MR. BOUCHER: We're considering a number of ideas for
the U.N. at this point. This, of course, is based on the
consultations that the President and the Secretary have just
had. There's nothing formal before the Security Council at this
point.
I'd also note in this context that Iraq has not yet
provided a report to the United Nations on its compliance with
the last resolution, Resolution 686.
Marlin Fitzwater described yesterday what we're looking
for in the resolution. We expect the resolution would deal with
a permanent ceasefire, specific recognition of the 1963 border
between Kuwait and Iraq, a U.N. observer force along the border
of Iraq and Kuwait, the question of sanctions, the elimination
of weapons of mass destruction and the payment of reparations.
Q Why are you going back to the '63 borders as
opposed to the '90 borders?
MR. BOUCHER: I guess I don't know precisely. My
understanding is that those are the borders --
Q There's a difference. The borders, as they stood
before the war began, are significantly different than the '63
borders, as I understand it, and the '63 borders would require
Iraq to give up more land to Iran, in particular, than would,
say, the July borders of 1990.
MR. BOUCHER: This has been a matter of consultation
between us and other governments. I guess the only best answer
I can give you at this point is that those are the borders that
we feel are --
Q And it sticks it to Iraq a little bit harder --
MR. BOUCHER: -- operative.
Q -- right? I mean, that's --
MR. BOUCHER: Those are the borders that we feel should
be recognized.
Q Does the U.S. still support the idea that Iraq and
Kuwait, post-war, should begin negotiations promptly on the
subject of border delineation?
MR. BOUCHER: We always felt that was a question for
the restored and legitimate Government of Kuwait to determine
and leave it to that to -- you can ask them what they intend to
do.
Q Richard --
MR. BOUCHER: As I said here --
Q Which government, yesterday's or today's?
MR. BOUCHER: There is an interim government that will
continue until a new government is formed, and that's my
understanding of it.
Q You said that Iraq hadn't reported yet to the U.N.
MR. BOUCHER: That's right.
Q But has it not delivered a list. It said it was
going to. I don't know if it has yet. Has it delivered a list
of the -- remember, it said that "quantities of gold" and other
vague things -- has it yet been more specific in a list form
what it's going to return?
MR. BOUCHER: It's provided a couple letters on
different subjects -- things like art objects. Airplanes, I
think they sent a letter on. The general letter on returning
quantities of gold and quantities of other things and airplanes.
What we're looking for is to get from Iraq information on their
compliance with all the aspects of the resolution.
Q Coming back to the U.N. question for just a
second, how does the U.S. envision this process taking place?
Does Secretary Baker plan to convene a ministerial-level meeting
of the Security Council to deal with this? Does he plan to talk
with the Secretary General? Has he?
MR. BOUCHER: I'm not aware of any particular plans
like that, Ralph. At this point, our delegations are consulting
with other members up in New York, and we're discussing the
elements of the resolution.
Q Richard, in light of the report of the Special
Envoy of the United Nations Secretary General to Iraq which came
with a very sad situation about the conditions -- the sanitary
and health and food conditions -- inside Iraq. What is the
United States planning to do to alleviate some of the suffering
of the Iraqi people?
MR. BOUCHER: Well, there's a couple things, I think,
that are being done. There's been the envoy from the United
Nations. The Secretary General has been out there. The
Sanctions Committee has been meeting to look at various kinds of
shipments at food supplies in particular and some sanitation
equipment, I think, and things like that, and has been approving
various shipments of food in particular.
As you know, medicines were always exempt from the
embargo to begin with, so there have been shipments of medicines
that have gone in. So that's the situation at this point: the
Sanctions Committee is looking at anything that needs to be
approved. The U.N. is continuing to investigate, and there are,
as I understand it, shipments of food and medicine that have
been delivered.
Q When will the Sanctions Committee finish its
deliberation, or is this an ongoing --
MR. BOUCHER: It's an ongoing process.
Q Ongoing process.
MR. BOUCHER: People present proposals, and they look
at them and approve them if they're appropriate.
[Desert Storm Supplemental: US Legislation to Block Arms
Sales]
Q Do you have anything on the vote yesterday in the
Senate concerning possible suspension of arms sales to countries
who do not fulfill their financial pledges?
MR. BOUCHER: Yes, I do. There were three sections of
the Desert Shield/Desert Storm supplemental appropriations act
that were passed yesterday by the Senate that we are strongly
opposed to. Also, Sections 105, 106 and 107 of HR 1282 raise
serious policy and constitutional concerns.
On this legislation, we expect to continue to work with
the House and Senate to improve the bill as it moves through
Congress. You can ask OMB for the complete statement of
Administration concerns. Let me highlight two of them that
particularly raise strong exception in this building.
Section 105(e) that would prohibit the transfer of
Operation Desert Storm equipment, supplies and materiel to any
foreign country in the Middle East without prior notification to
Congress and specific authorization of the transfer by law and
joint resolution. This provision creates an unnecessary burden
on the ability of the Executive Branch to conduct foreign
affairs activities that are already subject to significant
congressional oversight in legislation such as the Arms Export
Control Act.
Q Would you hold it there? You've checked into both
things? The prior notification as well as the transfer. You
want the freedom to transfer, but you also don't like having to
tell Congress about it, or is it -- what part -- do you object
to both things they did?
MR. BOUCHER: I think, first of all, to note that these
kinds of transfers are already governed by legislation, governed
by the Arms Export Control Act in particular, and our objection
is to the adding of unnecessary burdens on top of that.
Q Gotcha.
MR. BOUCHER: The legislation both requires
notification and requires specific authorization. And then the
second section that I wanted to highlight was the one that I was
just asked about. Section 107 places unnecessary and
inappropriate constraints on the ability to provide sales
credits or guarantees for military equipment or services to
allied countries. Delays in full payment by these countries on
Desert Storm financial commitments can be caused by U.S. action
or inaction in determining costs and billing. We think it would
be unreasonable to forego the opportunity to conduct business
with these countries while awaiting full payment of commitments.
Q Wait a minute. So what you mean by that is
because the U.S. Government hasn't sent a bill out yet, it's not
reasonable for Congress to expect payments to be received? Is
that right?
MR. BOUCHER: I think you also have to look at this in
context with what I said yesterday -- that countries are meeting
their commitments; that payments are coming in. There are
technical processes that we go through with other countries in
arranging transfers. Sometimes U.S. inaction could affect those
processes. We think that countries are meeting their
commitments. This is not an area that requires legislation, and
therefore we don't support this legislation. In fact, we're
opposed to it.
Q A good-faith effort to meet their commitments.
Under the legislation would they still be prohibited from
getting it?
MR. BOUCHER: It's such an absolute prohibition that if
you did have technical glitches or questions of billing that
arose where there was inaction on the U.S. side, that countries
would be penalized in any case.
Q Richard, there's a report in Al Aqbar, the
Egyptian newspaper, that there's to be a regional peace
conference in Cairo next month, and that the United States has
been consulted about what Palestinians should be invited to it.
Can you confirm that or deny it?
MR. BOUCHER: I'm afraid I hadn't seen anything about
that before.
[Lebanon: Terrorist Bombing; Christians Join
Cabinet]
Q Do you have any commentary on the terrorist attack
this morning against the Lebanese Minister of Defense, and a
commentary about the visit of Mr. Poos here and discussions with
the Secretary?
MR. BOUCHER: The visit of Mr. Poos is in his capacity
as Luxembourg being the presidency country of the EC. I don't
have any further details on the visit at this point.
On the Lebanon bombing, we strongly condemn this
senseless act of violence and the loss of innocent life. By now
all Lebanese factions should realize that dialogue, not
violence, is the best way to reconcile their differences.
Q Do you mean it's a Lebanese attack?
MR. BOUCHER: I don't think we know at this point
exactly who carried it out. I would say also that we see the
agreement today of the Christian militia groups, "Kataeb" and
"Lebanese Forces," to join the Cabinet as a positive sign. This
will strengthen the Lebanese government and its ability to
extend its authority and implement fully the Taif Agreement.
[USSR: Internal Structure and Borders]
Q The President said a few days ago on ABC, I
believe, that the United States favors the territorial integrity
of the Soviet Union, with the exception of the Baltic states. I
have two questions. One, does that mean that the United States
is opposed to the independence aspirations of Armenia, Georgia
and Moldova?
MR. BOUCHER: We have always said that the internal
structure of the Soviet Union is something for the people there
to work out. We've always encouraged people to work that out in
terms of a democratic dialogue which allows people to fulfill
their aspirations.
At the same time, the Soviet Union that we recognized
in 1933 had certain borders, and those are the borders that we
recognize.
Q All right. I'd like to follow that. At the same
time the United States Government is talking openly to
government representatives of those republics that are
proclaiming their secessionist intentions.
At the same time, the United States refuses to speak to
representatives of the Kurds in Iraq on the ground that they
pose a danger to the territorial integrity of the state.
I suppose that the United States is also in favor --
and correct me if I'm wrong -- of the territorial integrity of
Ethiopia. Yet it is talking openly to representatives of the
Eritrean guerrillas.
Why is it that a double standard -- to use a popular
phrase -- is applied so consistently only to the Kurds?
MR. BOUCHER: The point here, I think, is in several
respects. First, around the world we meet with leaders and
representatives of different groups in countries. We meet with
opposition figures. We meet with local legislators in any
country.
Q Exactly. So why are the Kurds the exception?
MR. BOUCHER: The question of the Kurds -- I believe we
said only a few weeks ago that we had met with Kurdish
representatives here.
Q Well, that is not the case.
MR. BOUCHER: Well, that is the case, because we met
with them.
Q Yes. Two officials of the Human Rights Bureau who
confined themselves by an open statement of the Near East Bureau
only to humanitarian issues, and yet no political issues would
be discussed. Now, that doesn't apply insofar as I know to
representatives of Moldova, Georgia or Armenia who have visited
this town. So why are the Kurds so different from all the
others?
MR. BOUCHER: The answer is that we meet with different
people, and we discuss different things with different people,
depending on the situations in those areas.
Q Richard, in the last three days, Ariel Sharon,
Israeli Minister of Housing and Development, has been making
statements about the Golan Heights as an integral part of
Israel, and today in the papers in Israel he was calling for
building more Jewish settlements and are locating more funds,
intensifying the building, doubling the size and, you know, the
number of residential units in the Occupied Territories,
including East Jerusalem. What is the State Department comment
on such statements from Israeli officials?
MR. BOUCHER: The comment is the one I made yesterday,
and I'm not aware of any change since then.
Q But today there were reports that he was --
already the Minister of Housing reiterated that, and he called
on the Settlers Council to intensify and build more settlements.
You know, in the last three days there have been statements.
MR. BOUCHER: As I remember it, that was the news
yesterday as well, so my comment stands.
[Latin America: US Aid]
Q Richard, if we can briefly shift to Walesa's
visit, the President announced today a reduction of 70 percent
of the Polish debt and $470 million in additional help, as well
as other initiatives.
Alfredo Cesar was here last week. The Nicaraguans and
the Panamanians are growing increasingly frustrated with the
lack of funds reaching them. Is there concern that -- from the
State Department on how Nicaragua and Panama and all the Latin
American nations will be viewed -- you decide Eastern Europe
versus aid to Latin America?
MR. BOUCHER: Well, I don't have the specifics with me
today. I think we can get those for you afterwards, but there
is a lot of aid that has been allocated for Panama and
Nicaragua. There is a lot of aid and programs that are being
disbursed -- things that are going forward -- and I think we can
view that with a certain amount of satisfaction that we are
providing the assistance that those countries need.
[Lebanon: Hostages]
Q Richard, back on Lebanon for just a second. Have
any of the U.S. Government's recent contacts with the Lebanese,
Israeli, Iranian, Syrian governments, given the U.S. any reason
to believe that you're closer to a hostage release now than you
were two, three weeks ago, six weeks ago, six months ago?
MR. BOUCHER: I'm afraid the only thing I'm about to do
on that is to quote exactly what the Secretary said when people
asked him that question during this trip, and that was, "I do
not want to do anything that would in any way damage whatever
possibilities and chances there might be for improvement on the
hostage issue." So I'm just not going to say anything further
about those contacts.
[Iraq: Testimony of Ambassador Glaspie]
Q Richard, one question on April's (Glaspie)
appearance on the Hill this afternoon, was this just a straight
request? Did she have to be subpoenaed? What's the story?
They just asked her, and she went, because I thought Ambassadors
didn't testify except at their confirmation hearings.
MR. BOUCHER: There is a general policy that we have
that Ambassadors don't testify. Given the interest in this
case, we offered her testimony to the House and to the Senate as
a one-time deal basically. She's appearing before the Senate
Foreign Relations Committee this afternoon. She'll be in front
of the House Foreign Affairs Committee tomorrow. We've made
clear that policy. But the testimony was offered, and the dates
and times were arranged.
Q You've made clear which policy -- the one that
it's a one-time deal?
MR. BOUCHER: Yes.
Q There is a first statement on this?
MR. BOUCHER: I'm not sure at this point. I think it
will be available on the Hill if there is one.
Q Has the State Department got anything to say
publicly, sort of standing behind April and the way that she
conducted her job and carried out her brief in Iraq up until the
time of the invasion? I mean, there are detractors.
MR. BOUCHER: Those things have been said before. I
didn't bring them with me today, but those things have been said
before. I think April will explain and answer any question that
the committees might have.
Q Will she be returning as Ambassador to Iraq?
MR. BOUCHER: Iraq has broken relations with us, and
we've been in the process of establishing a protecting power
arrangement for the Iraqis here. So I'd have to say that that's
a pretty hypothetical question at this point.
Q What is the status of that, by the way?
MR. BOUCHER: It's still something that's under
discussion between us and the Iraqis and the protecting power
that's not finalized yet.
Q The State Department seemed to be playing with the
times when Glaspie was going to testify. Originally, she was
supposed to be a morning appearance. The State Department tried
to make it late in the afternoon, and the Committee interprets
that as an attempt to downplay the coverage of it, and finally a
compromise was reached after the Chairman apparently threatened
the State Department.
Are you aware of those negotiations, and what was the
State Department trying to do by trying to push it until late in
the afternoon?
MR. BOUCHER: John, that's not the version that I got.
I'll give you my understanding of it, that we offered her
testimony to both the House and the Senate Committees. That the
House came back and said, "Yes, we'd like her on Thursday," and
we set up a time with them.
The Senate came back and said, "We'd like her on
Wednesday." We said yes. They proposed a time. We agreed to
it. They then got back to us and said that in the interests of
getting the full membership there or at least as many members as
possible, that they would like a different time, and we agreed
to that as well.
Q What time is it?
MR. BOUCHER: Two o'clock.
Q There were two different times. There was the
morning. Then it was 4:00 o'clock, and now there's 2:00. It
sounds like a negotiation to me. This isn't --
MR. BOUCHER: I looked into this question this morning,
Bill, and I was told clearly that the decisions on timing were
made by the Committee in the interests of having -- as
scheduling for the members.
Q And there was no attempt by the State Department
--
MR. BOUCHER: And that when they proposed times, we
agreed.
Q There was no attempt by the State Department to
bury her testimony late in the day to make it more difficult for
coverage.
MR. BOUCHER: It's at 2:00 o'clock, John.
Q I know. But there was no attempt during the
course of this negotiation --
MR. BOUCHER: My understanding is that the changes in
the times were solely the result of decisions made by the
Committee and request by the Committee, to which we readily and
rapidly and willingly agreed.
Q Richard, will you tell us whether Ambassador
Glaspie has met with Secretary of State Baker since she left
Iraq? And, if so, has she met with him recently to discuss her
testimony?
MR. BOUCHER: I don't know.
Q Could you take that question?
MR. BOUCHER: I know she met with the President around
the time of the videotape, right? When he made his videotape.
She was part of that meeting. I assume the Secretary was there
too. I'm not aware of --
Q Could you take the question of whether she has met
with the Secretary to discuss her testimony -- to discuss what
she would -- yes, her testimony? Leave it at that.
MR. BOUCHER: Let me give you the answer that I don't
believe she has. She's familiar with the issues. We haven't
provided her with any special instructions or directions. She's
very familiar with the policy and the issues, and I'm sure she
will explain things and answer questions on the Hill this
afternoon and tomorrow.
Q After this hearing, will she be available or
permitted to talk to the media here or outside this building?
MR. BOUCHER: Margaret explained, I think, several
weeks ago that she was free to talk to any member of the media
who she wished. She has a number of requests from you all that
have been passed on to her, but the decisions on what she wants
to do in terms of press appearances and meetings and interviews
with people in the press is solely her decision, and we're not
about to force anyone to do appearances.
Q Richard, one more question: Did she discuss her
testimony with any other senior U.S. official besides the
Secretary in advance of today's appearance?
MR. BOUCHER: I know that we -- you know, the
appearance was discussed with her in terms of logistics, and
that people have discussed with her the current policies, and
we've given her copies of other testimony, and things like that.
So I'm sure she's up to speed.
Q So the answer is yes.
MR. BOUCHER: So, yes, she is. Obviously, any
Administration witness that goes up there has meetings around
the building and talks to people to make sure that they're up to
speed on all the policy issues. But, as I said, she's very
familiar with these issues.
Q But on normal policy, your testimony gets approved
at many different levels. Has that happened in this traditional
way with her testimony?
MR. BOUCHER: It depends on the testimony, John.
There's no absolute procedure, and, as I said, I'm not aware at
this point whether there's a written statement or not. If there
was, I'm sure it would be approved in the usual fashion.
Q Can you be specific, though, with whom she spoke
about this appearance?
MR. BOUCHER: No. I can't really. I mean, she's been
working in the Near East Bureau, and she's been working out of
the Office of Gulf Affairs there, and she's been working as part
of the building and as part of the Bureau all along. So she's
meeting with people all the time.
Q Richard, on Don Oberdorfer's article Sunday in The
Washington Post, it says that 80 percent of what the Iraqis
published from the transcript of the interview or the talk with
Saddam Hussein -- the meeting with Saddam Hussein -- was true or
accurate, or something.
Is the State Department going to be putting this
special document out in the open and according to the
recollection of the Embassy and Ms. Glaspie in the open?
MR. BOUCHER: We don't have any plans to do so, but I'm
sure if April is asked questions like that this afternoon,
she'll be in a position to explain things.
Q Thank you.
(The briefing concluded at 1:24 p.m.)
(###)