US Department of State Daily Briefing #64:
Thursday: 4/19/91
Boucher
Source: State Department Deputy Spokesman Richard
Boucher
Description: 12:38 PM, Washington, DC
Date: Apr 19, 19914/19/91
Region: MidEast/North Africa, East Asia, Southeast Asia,
E/C Europe, Subsaharan Africa
Country: Iraq, Kuwait, Iran, South Africa, Israel,
Vietnam, China, Albania, Romania
Subject: Regional/Civil Unrest, Development/Relief Aid,
Refugees, POW/MIA Issues, Military Affairs,
Democratization, Human Rights, Arms Control,
Mideast Peace Process
(ON THE RECORD UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED)
MR. BOUCHER: Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen. I
think I'll start off, if I can, with an update on the refugee
crisis and what we're doing about it, and then we can talk a
little bit -- or I'll talk a little bit about the Iraqi letters
that have been delivered to the United Nations yesterday and the
International Atomic Energy Agency in Vienna.
[Iraq: Refugee Crisis]
First, on the refugee crisis: I think we have put out
the A.I.D. update that's much more comprehensive than what I'm
going to give you. I'll try to hit the highlights of what's
new. As for the number of refugees in the area near Turkey, we
now count about 450,000 Iraqi refugees who have entered Turkey
and about 400,000 located near the Turkish-Iraqi border.
Turkey
The Government of Turkey continues to move about 2,000
refugees a day to the new camp at Silopi. Priority is being
given to the most vulnerable groups. That is, people who are
ill, pregnant women, new borns, and the elderly. The number is
now over 6,000 at this facility.
American Embassy personnel report that tremendous
progress in relief efforts is being made, though much, much work
still remains to be done. The Turkish Red Crescent Society, the
United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, and other
international and private voluntary relief organizations are
actively involved in the relief efforts on the Turkish side of
the border. The main problems that still need to be overcome
are potable water supply, sanitation, and organization.
U.S. military reconnaissance teams are working inside
Iraq, assessing areas for possible camps. They are also
identifying the location of displaced civilians. They haven't
yet completed their survey operation.
In addition, the International Committee of the Red
Cross is working in northern Iraq and is delivering relief
supplies to refugees. The ICRC has dispatched to a mountain
pass, near the Turkish border, a convoy which is carrying
blankets, kitchen sets, stoves, tents, and medical supplies; and
the ICRC is setting up a dispensary near that mountain pass.
There's another ICRC group that has gone up to work in
northeastern Iraq.
Iran
On the Iranian side of the border, the numbers are
approximately the same -- nearly 1 million Iraqi refugees,
mostly Kurds, have entered Iran. As many as 500,000 are moving
towards the border.
Yesterday, the EC and the Belgian Government announced
a jointly financed effort to dispatch equipment for a camp of
Iraqi refugees in Iran. Four C-130 plans are scheduled to
depart Brussels this weekend to ferry tents, beds, blankets, and
other relief supplies to Iran.
Southern Iraq
In southern Iraq: There are approximately 24,000
refugees in the area of coalition troops in southern Iraq.
About 7,000 refugees are in the vicinity of Safwan. In addition
to that, the Saudi Arabian military has established a camp for
Iraqi refugees north of Rafha. There are about 17,000 refugees
in that camp.
Allied forces continue to provide protection and
assistance to refugees in need in the demilitarized zone,
including in the town of Safwan. Allied forces are also
providing protection to the 17,000 refugees in the camp run by
the Saudi military near Rafha.
That's about it, as far as new things on refugees. We
can move right into the Iraqi letters, if that's what you want
to do. And if there are any other questions on refugees, I'll
be glad to take them later.
[Iraq: Compliance Letters to the UN]
Iraq has submitted two letters, one on nuclear-related
items submitted to the IAEA in Vienna; and the second, on
chemical, biological weapons, and missiles to the U.N. in New
York. We've seen informal copies. We don't yet have the formal
translations from the Arabic originals.
We note that Iraq has responded on the date required by
the U.N. Security Council Resolution 687. In some areas, the
pledges appear to met the requirements of Resolution 687, though
we, as I said before, don't have an official copy. We will be
studying these letters more thoroughly.
The Declaration, delivered in New York, shows clearly
that the Iraqis have significant stocks of chemical munitions,
ballistic missiles, and warheads for these missiles. But the
responses appear to fall short of reality.
I'd note, for example, the declarations of nuclear,
chemical, and biological weapons and ballistic missiles and
their development, manufacturing and support facilities that we
think fall short.
The Special Commission that is to be created under the
U.N. resolution is entitled to inspect any location in Iraq to
enable them to carry out their mandate. We will assist them in
drawing up a list of sites for on-site inspection.
It is important to us, and I think to the whole world
community, that Iraq not be allowed to evade the obligations set
out for them by the United Nations.
With that, I'd be glad to take your questions.
Q Richard, do you have any information, specifically
regarding numbers, for instance? The Iraqi letter supposedly
says they have 52 Scuds left and 30 CW warheads. Do you know
whether that's correct? Does that fit in with your estimates?
MR. BOUCHER: That's about correct. You mean, in terms
of what's in the letter? That's what's in the letter. The
letters, I understand, have been released in New York. So I was
sort of leaving all the details for you to get up there.
As far as how it corresponds to our estimates, I think
I gave you the general appraisal, that in many respects we
believe that these declarations fall far short of reality. We
are obviously going to study the letters carefully against all
the available information.
Q Richard, you didn't mention -- in your letter
part, you didn't mention the nuclear issue. Does that seem to
satisfy the requirements?
MR. BOUCHER: That was among the things that I cited
after I stated "it falls short." So, no.
Q What is it about that part that falls short?
MR. BOUCHER: We're continuing our analysis of this,
obviously. The letters involve a lot of complicated issues that
have to be compared to the available information and compared to
the resolutions.
On the nuclear side of things, the letter that was
delivered to the IAEA basically says that apart from the
safeguarded material, that they have no other weapons-related
stuff.
Actually, I think I have a better explanation of that.
On the nuclear items, they admit to only having nuclear
material safeguarded by the International Atomic Energy Agency.
They declare no nuclear weapons, nuclear-weapons useable
material, or other related facilities or activities. We don't
think that response is satisfactory. The resolution obligates
Iraq to declare all activities actually or potentially related
to nuclear weapons development.
Once again, I'd say that the Special Commission of the
IAEA are entitled to inspect any locations in Iraq, and we will
assist them in drawing up a list of sites.
Q Does the United States take the position that the
Iraqis should turn over this -- was it 12 kilograms of enriched
uranium?
MR. BOUCHER: The resolution specifies what the IAEA
should do about that. As I said, it's a question of what the
declarations have in them and the information in this
declaration, in particular, but also in some of the other
statements in these letters, we feel fall short of the
information that's generally available.
I think you're aware that we have, in the past, often
expressed our concerns about Iraqi nuclear activities. I can't
get into all of our information, obviously. But you're aware of
such things as the intent to purchase capacitators last year.
Q It sounds strange now, Richard, because during the
war the Pentagon briefings, and General Schwarzkopf, went On the
Record saying that in the early days of the warfare the
coalition forces destroyed nuclear capabilities, most of the
nuclear facilities in Iraq. Those On-the Record briefings gave
us a strong impression that most of the facilities were
destroyed by either the Tomahawk missiles or maybe the
bombardment of air attacks.
What you're saying now, today, is the Iraqi letter
pertaining to this nuclear material is not satisfactory.
Particularly in what field are you talking about, or are you
looking into this Iraqi explanation on this nuclear facilities?
Do you understand what I mean?
MR. BOUCHER: Yes. I understand what you mean. I'm
not prepared -- I don't think I'm able to give you an update on
the exact status of each of the locations where we thought that
nuclear activity might be carried out. That's just something
that, because of the way we get our information, I'm not
prepared to do.
I think we've expressed our concerns about Iraqi
nuclear activities in the past. If they were providing full
information, one would expect that they would have either
reported on the damage at some of those places or reported on
the status of some of the places where we think this activity
might have occurred in the past.
Q We had a list of where all of these activities
were purported to be taking place; right? Presumably, they
became targets. Is that not right?
MR. BOUCHER: I think exactly how the Pentagon drew up
its targeting information, you can refer yourself back to the
various Pentagon briefings. But, yes, we had information and we
targeted places.
Q And since the Iraqis can move things around now,
under cover of dark, I guess, how do they prove what they don't
have?
MR. BOUCHER: Well, the important thing, I think, is
that anywhere that there are suspicions or concerns on our part
on behalf of the IAEA, on behalf of the international community,
the Special Commission and the IAEA, when it comes to nuclear
things, is authorized by the resolution, which Iraq has
accepted, to go and conduct on-site inspections. That's where
the actual, final determinations can be made.
Q So we've given them a list of suspected sites and
suspected facilities that suggest that we have a look?
MR. BOUCHER: We haven't given it yet. We will do
something like that, as the Commission proceeds in its work. The
timetable is laid out in the U.N. resolution.
Q Richard, as long as these numbers fall short of
reality, does that mean that we will oppose a lifting of
sanctions and continue to forbid the sale of Iraqi oil?
[Iraq: Response to Military Sanctions]
MR. BOUCHER: I think you're aware of the general
statements that the Secretary made on our attitude toward
sanctions just the other day in Luxembourg.
The Sanctions Committee is the place where these
exceptions to sanctions get discussed. We understand the
Sanctions Committee is actually meeting now on this request.
I would note, though, in this context that Resolution
687 makes it clear that the prohibition on Iraqi exports will
remain in place until certain conditions have been fulfilled.
These include things like the elimination of the nuclear,
chemical, and biological weapons, and the establishment of a
compensation fund for claims against Iraq. Those conditions are
still a long way from being fulfilled.
The Iraqi Government request refers to Paragraph 23 of
the resolution which allows for an exception to the ban on Iraqi
exports under certain limited circumstances. We're examining
that request, and obviously we'll be discussing it with other
countries in the Sanctions Committee. But we do have a number
of concerns related to the implementation of Resolution 687 and
related to the situation of the Kurds.
Q At the moment, we're not willing to go ahead and
support the lifting of sanctions because of this?
MR. BOUCHER: As I said, I'm not going to give you a
final position because this is under discussion by the Sanctions
Committee right now in New York.
Q So what is the position that we are advocating up
there, or don't we have a position?
MR. BOUCHER: Again, we have the position that I have
expressed to you. We have a number of concerns. This is
something that we have to examine along with the other countries
in the Sanctions Committee.
Q Do the concerns include the welfare of the Iraqi
people and the possibility that what's happening up north and in
the south is, in part, the result of simply a terrible, terrible
economy in Iraq?
MR. BOUCHER: I don't quite know how to answer that. I
don't know who among the refugees has said that they're there
for economic reasons. But the concerns about people in Iraq, I
just cited. One of our concerns is about not only the -- the
two concerns that I cited: one is the implementation of this
resolution and the second is the situation of the Kurds and the
other refugees that are fleeing.
You all know that the resolution itself provides for
the lifting of sanctions, we'll take into account not only the
implementation of the resolution but Iraq's general policies and
practices.
Q But there are a lot of Kurds who have not fled and
are subject to the problems of the Iraqi economy. And, of
course, there are a lot of people who are Kurds or Shi'ites, or
people who have fled, who have -- if we're strangling Iraq,
we're strangling the people who are there.
MR. BOUCHER: I see. You're saying --
Q I'm wondering, to what extent, when you voice your
concerns in the Sanctions Committee about such things as nuclear
capability and whether they're being truthful on these things,
are we balancing it with the concerns about the people of Iraq
with whom we were never at war?
MR. BOUCHER: You're talking about the concerns on the
other side of the ledger. As I said, this Paragraph 23 of the
Resolution does allow for exceptions under certain limited
circumstances. Of course, that is --
Q We're objecting to those exceptions at the moment.
MR. BOUCHER: -- provided in order to permit
consideration of these kinds of requests. But you have to
consider the various factors that go into that. You have to
consider the international relief, and you have to consider
whether permitting such a request would actually effectively get
the food and things like that, whatever is needed, to needy
people. There are a variety of factors that have to be taken
into account. Things like you're citing are obviously part of
the balance.
Q On the nuclear issue, just a quick question. Have
the Iraqis made clear what's happened to this safeguarded
material? Is it safe?
MR. BOUCHER: I haven't seen that. I think that may be
a good question to ask the IAEA. I'm not sure I have the answer
to that.
Q Is that one of your concerns, that you're not sure
that that material is safe and where it is?
MR. BOUCHER: That certainly is one of the things that
under the resolution has to be looked at and has to be taken
care of. That's certainly one of the sites that the Special
Commission would want to go visit.
Q Do you know -- does the United States know what's
happened to that material?
MR. BOUCHER: I do not know at this point. I think
that information would probably come from the IAEA.
Q Is it the understanding of the U.S. Government
that those letters from Iraq are final in their nature, or could
be supplemented somehow by new information and data?
MR. BOUCHER: I really don't know. First of all,
that's a question that would have to be asked of the Iraqi
Government. I think we'd certainly welcome any further
disclosures that the Iraqis might want to make. But the
requirement of the resolution was to provide full disclosure of
all these sorts of activities in stocks and production of
manufacturing facilities by yesterday.
Q Richard, is it your impression that Iraq is trying
to evade the terms of this resolution in the hope of maintaining
some of its missile biological/chemical capabilities -- nuclear
capabilities?
MR. BOUCHER: It's not a determination that I can make
at this time. I think the major next step is the establishment
of the commission and the on-site inspections that will be done,
and those sorts of firmer information will come out of that
process.
Q So you don't anticipate going back to them and
asking them for nuance? You anticipate the inspection teams
going out next and trying to come to an independent assessment?
MR. BOUCHER: The one thing I do anticipate is that the
commission and its inspection teams would continue to proceed
under the resolution. Whether there are further exchanges with
the Iraqis probably depend on discussions with the Secretary
General and discussions with other people in New York.
Q Presumably, the sponsors of this resolution in the
Security Council have the power to send the letter back and say,
"That's not satisfactory; give us a new one."
MR. BOUCHER: Presumably.
Q Is that an option?
MR. BOUCHER: I, at this point, don't know if that's
being considered or not. Frankly, I think that's a matter that
would have to grow out of our common consideration. And as I
said, we're still examining the letter.
Q Do you characterize this as intentional deception
by the Iraqis?
MR. BOUCHER: That's close to the question that Alan
just gave me. I'm not going to try to offer a conclusion on
that at this point.
Q Richard, you said that in some areas the letters
appear to meet the requirements. Other than the date, in what
other areas does it meet the requirements?
MR. BOUCHER: Well, you asked. One of the things that
was required under various paragraphs of the resolution were
pledges by Iraq to meet the standards of certain international
resolutions.
Let me run through those, first noting that one of the
areas where it falls short is that Iraq stated it doesn't have
biological weapons. Some of the things that it does respond to
are: Paragraph 7 of the resolution, in that connection, Iraq
submitted a statement that the Presidency, subject to
ratification, had accepted the provisions of the agreement
banning development, production, and storage of biological
weapons and toxic weapons in 1972.
Also in response to Paragraph 7, Iraq stated it also
reaffirmed its obligations under the 1925 Convention that
relates to chemical weapons.
In response to 9(a), Iraq submitted a list of
locations, quantities, and kinds of chemical and ballistic
missiles, which I noted that there were some questions about
that.
In compliance with Paragraph 10, Iraq pledged
unconditionally not to use, introduce, build, or acquire any
chemical weapons or missiles.
In accordance with Paragraph 11, Iraq said it
unconditionally reaffirmed Iraq's commitments under the 1968
Treaty on Non-Proliferation.
And in accordance with Paragraph 12, Iraq said it
unconditionally agreed not to acquire or produce nuclear weapons
or materials which can be used in nuclear weapons, or to acquire
components or to support research and development on nuclear
weapons, and consented to making all materials which may be used
in nuclear weapons subject to immediate inspection and agreed to
the requirements of Paragraph 13 of U.N. Security Council
Resolution 687.
Q That's a good answer, but given it comes from
Saddam Hussein, is it worth any more than the paper it's written
on?
MR. BOUCHER: Well, this isn't his piece of paper.
That's basically the point we're at, Alan. If I could
characterize these responses in general, I would say that they
were submitted on time. They contained many of the pledges that
were required under the resolution to abide by certain
international conventions.
But in terms of the information provided, we think it
falls short from reality.
Q Do you happen to know when Iraq adhered to the
1925 Geneva Convention on Chemical Weapons?
MR. BOUCHER: No, I don't.
Q Was it before 1988, when they gassed the Kurds?
MR. BOUCHER: I'm pretty sure it was.
Q Do you draw any conclusions from the fact that
they had all of these chemical weapons for Scud missiles but
didn't use them?
MR. BOUCHER: No. I think that's better for the
military people to try to do.
Q Can we go to a related subject: Israel?
Q Can we stay with Iraq? Can you tell us anything
about the meeting between, or the planned meeting today between
U.S. officials and the Iraqis on sites and routes for the
refugee camps?
MR. BOUCHER: You mean the military meetings?
Q Yes.
MR. BOUCHER: No. I just don't have the up-to-date
information on that. I think the Pentagon and Marlin have both
said it was to explain our humanitarian efforts and to talk
about avoiding contact between our military forces. But it was
to take place, I guess, a little while ago. I'm not sure if
they actually got off or not.
Q A related question. Have there been any further
contacts with the Iranians?
MR. BOUCHER: I don't have anything new to report on
the Iranians today.
Q Is Iraq now agreeable to our setting up the
refugee camps?
MR. BOUCHER: I don't think we've seen anything new
from the Iraqis on that specifically.
Q Well, there was a lot of discussion at the White
House about that, about whether or not they agreed at the U.N.,
and are we acting on behalf of the U.N.? I just wonder whether
you've got some language on that.
MR. BOUCHER: I think we've explained that here over
the last couple days, or explained it yesterday. We say that we
see our efforts and the U.N. efforts as complimentary. We have
always said that we expect that our presence will be very
short-term. It will be temporary, and it will be geared to
having the United Nations take over.
I've said there's a lot of cooperation among relief
agencies. In Turkey, they're providing relief in various forms.
I think the only additional thing that I would add is
that our position has always been that Iraq should not interfere
with the conduct of our relief efforts. At this point, I don't
think we have any evidence that they have.
Q Richard, on the U.N. taking over, or some other
international organization taking over, these camps, would that
require more Security Council resolutions, and has anyone at the
United Nations given an indication that they are willing to take
over these camps and the responsibility for protecting Kurdish
refugees?
MR. BOUCHER: We hope that the United Nations will take
over very quickly the administration of the camps. As you know,
these are being established not just by us but by the United
States, the British and the France acting together; and I think
there may be other countries cooperating with the effort.
So, at this point, that is kind of where we stand.
Whether it requires further resolutions to do some of the
things, I think we believe that the basis of Resolution 688
provides a basis for our efforts, provides a basis for the U.N.
effort that is going on inside Iraq, that will go on inside
Iraq.
The President spoke to this the other day, about the
possibility that something like Blue Helmets, the deployment of
Blue Helmets, would require further resolutions. It's really
too early to say whether a further resolution would be required.
If more is needed to deal effectively with the situation, we
would discuss with other Security Council members what the
Security Council might do.
Q Have you asked the U.N. to take over?
MR. BOUCHER: Excuse me?
Q Have you asked the U.N. to take over the camps or
to begin planning?
MR. BOUCHER: We have certainly been talking about it
all along.
Do you mean, is there some formal request that has gone
to the U.N.? It has been a matter of discussion between us and
the United Nations all along, as we have been planning this and
discussing this.
[Iraq: US Contributions]
Q But the response has been, yes, no, maybe? And
can you also say whether you have pledged anything to their
relief effort, of the $520-some million requested?
MR. BOUCHER: We have been contributing to the United
Nations efforts all along. I think I have reported here on
various different contributions. The total U.S. contributions
to the relief effort, going back to last August, are probably
over $70 million -- probably quite a bit over that -- and some
of that money was given directly to the United Nations. Some of
it was given in January to help them set up their infra-
structure that is being used now. Some of it was given in terms
of food through various international programs.
In the President's April 5 announcement, when he
announced the $l0 million then, I think $6 million of that was
for the U.N. High Commissioner for Refugees, $2 million for the
Red Cross. So there have been consistent contributions from the
United States to the U.N. effort that is going on, that will go
on, and I am sure that we will continue to contribute to those
efforts.
Q Richard, is there some way of quantifying how the
information that they have given in those letters falls short of
yours? I mean, is it half of yours? Are their numbers half of
yours?
MR. BOUCHER: No. I'm not in a position to do that. I
have mentioned a few specific things. Let me, rather than
quantify, try to characterize it, but, as I said, with the
caveat that we'll have to continue our analysis of the
information that they have provided.
In the nuclear area, I think I cited some of the
concerns that we have expressed in the past about Iraqi nuclear
activities, and you are aware of a couple cases that involved
potentially nuclear activity.
I said in the biological area they provided no real
information on that, denied that they had any; and of course you
remember from the so-called "baby milk" factory our firm view
that they had a biological weapons program of some sort.
Q It was destroyed, wasn't it? That was destroyed.
MR. BOUCHER: Yes, but the Resolution requires
reporting of all facilities that are related to this, and I
think we assume that that includes whatever state of repair they
happen to be in.
Q Was there any evidence on the ground that that was
biological? I mean, all the evidence from the people who were
there is that it wasn't.
MR. BOUCHER: I refer you back to the multitude of
Pentagon briefings where they described what they knew, so let's
not go back to it. That, I think, was handled.
On the chemical and missile areas, they have provided
some information. We just believe that there is more there than
they reported.
Q Richard, this leaves out something, because if you
expect them to report on a destroyed facility, does the language
of what they are responding to spell out to them that they are
not only to report on facilities that are extant but those that
are no longer there? Because otherwise you can carry on saying
that they are not reporting on things because these things have
already been destroyed.
If we are to believe what the Pentagon told us, which
obviously many of us now don't, that so many targets were fully
destroyed, then surely Iraq wouldn't have to report on things
that are no longer viable.
MR. BOUCHER: Well, I don't think I'm in a position to
give you a precise legal interpretation of all the language in
the resolution. That has to be examined further. But I cited,
I think, the language on the nuclear area where we felt it
provided the need to report actual or potential nuclear
weapons-related activities and facilities, etc. And, one, I
don't think the Pentagon ever made the claim that everything in
these areas was totally destroyed. So that has to lead you to
the conclusion --
Q I didn't say that. I said that there were times
when the Pentagon said that this was destroyed.
MR. BOUCHER: Well, I know. You said "most," at
certain sites. But that would then lead you to the conclusion
that if those kinds of sites existed before the war and if most
of those were destroyed but not all, there would be still sites
extant.
Q How can you possibly prove a negative, however?
MR. BOUCHER: You prove it by having a Special
Commission that goes out for on-site inspection, and that is
precisely why that mechanism was created in the Resolution, so
that we don't rely just on declarations or information that is
obtained by various means. But we actually have a special
commission that can go and investigate and verify and see for
everyone's satisfaction what there is and there is not at
various places.
Q So that if they go to -- the Special Commission
goes to the baby formula factory and finds that it was making
baby formula, you will still insist -- you will take their word
for it. Is that the final word?
MR. BOUCHER: I go back to -- I don't have the
Resolution with me. I think the Special Commission's task is to
report on activities that are currently there.
Q But why then ask that they report on that which is
destroyed if what they are supposed to report on is activities
that are current and therefore a threat?
MR. BOUCHER: If we believe that something was there,
it is important to find out if it is still there now. And
that's the purpose of all this inspection
Q In other words, we are never going to know the
truth about the baby milk.
MR. BOUCHER: I think we do already, frankly. But I'll
rely on the Pentagon for that.
Q Richard, does the United States Government want to
verify what the military intelligence claims to have destroyed
during the war?
MR. BOUCHER: The international community wants to
verify, through the use of the mechanisms established in the
Resolution, what capability Iraq might have in this area and
wants to follow the provisions of the Resolution for the
destruction of those capabilities.
That is the process that is underway. The delivery of
the letter and the declarations is the first step of the
process. The next steps in the process will involve the on-site
inspections.
Q How long does all this take? Do you have any idea
what kind of time period we are looking at?
MR. BOUCHER: It's all laid out in the Resolution, and
I think we have provided you a cheat sheet that I didn't bring
with me with the specific timeframes. Jim?
Q You didn't respond to Dennis' question about the
response at the U.N. in your discussions about whether further
authority is needed or not and whether they were willing to
undertake the administration of the northern areas. I wonder if
you could respond.
MR. BOUCHER: I really have to leave it to the United
Nations to respond, as far as how they are going to proceed in
taking over the camps. You know that we have consistently urged
them to take over very quickly. We have been talking to the
United Nations about this, but they are going to have to give
their response and their plans for themselves.
Q Have you been encouraged in these discussions?
MR. BOUCHER: I really don't have any way of
characterizing it at this point. We'll keep working with the
United Nations and all the other relief officials that were
there.
As you know, the primary focus, the emphasis right now,
is on delivering food, clothing and shelter, medical assistance
to very needy people.
Q Part of the problem that the refugees have been
citing is the blockade at the borders, that they are unable to
move as quickly as they want to get through the borders in
Turkey and through the borders in Iran.
What sort of pressure might the U.S. be trying to apply
to Turkey and to Iran to open up the borders more quickly? And
what else is the U.S. going to do to help the refugees in Iran,
or is it still tied with hostages?
MR. BOUCHER: I think this is something that we have
been talking about for many days.
Q Any more being done?
MR. BOUCHER: The situation at the borders is such that
you have several things going on. One is the immediate air drop
of supplies to people where they are. Two is the organizational
effort to get people to places like the camp being established
in Turkey and then to the camps that will be established by the
coalition military forces inside Iraq, to places where they can
better receive supplies than just sitting on the mountain sides.
As far as the Iranian side of the border, I think I
have reported to you several days now that Iran is operating 29
camps for 250,000 people. There is a long line of people
waiting near the border. There are Iranian Red Crescent and
other efforts to help them. And, finally, I just note that we
have had regular discussions with the Iranians through our
protecting power, the Swiss, about ways that we might be helpful
as well.
Q But the U.S. isn't doing anything more to ease up
the bottleneck, basically, to get them through.
MR. BOUCHER: All these efforts are aimed at taking
care of people, some of whom are in the bottlenecks and the
people that are stuck on the mountainside. All these various
efforts are to bring immediate relief to them and then to move
them to places where we can take care of them even better.
Q Do we have the impression that Iran has agreed, or
is close to agreeing, to accept a great deal more American aid?
MR. BOUCHER: I'll leave it with the way we have
discussed it for the past several days. I really don't have
anything new to discuss on Iran today. We have reported on
these discussions, on Iranian statements, over the course of the
last week, and we can get you that.
Q Has any United Nations official raised the
possibility that under 688, which we have cited as reason for
going in there, we might be violating that provision of 688
which suggests everybody honor the integrity, territorial
integrity, independence of Iraq?
MR. BOUCHER: I don't know if any United Nations
official has --
Q Has anybody raised that issue with us?
MR. BOUCHER: -- ever raised that issue. That is
something that the President and the Secretary and we have
addressed repeatedly. Our effort is a humanitarian one. We do
not support the dismemberment of Iraq or ending of the
territorial integrity of Iraq. Our effort is devoted to
bringing assistance to people where they need it.
Q We don't see that sending l0,000 people, some of
them armed, into northern Iraq as a violation of that particular
provision of 688?
MR. BOUCHER: We think that Resolution 688 provides the
authority, along with previous resolutions, to take care of this
urgent humanitarian problem which is affecting the peace and
security of the area.
Q Can I clarify something? You say that the U.S.,
France and Britain will go into these areas and that is seen as
authorized under 688, but you are not sure whether or not
further United Nations resolutions would be required for the
U.N. to come over there and take over the administration of
those areas?
MR. BOUCHER: No. I think what I was trying to say was
that the Resolution and, as I just said, previous resolutions,
the situation, are ample basis for the efforts
that we are making now to get food to needy people, to help
people where they are now.
We have always stated that our efforts would be
temporary inside Iraq, that we wanted to turn this over to the
United Nations very quickly, and that Resolution 688 provides
the authority for the United Nations to operate these sorts of
facilities inside Iraq.
Whether there are specific aspects of this that might
require some further United Nations action, or whether we find
that what is being done under 688 isn't effective, at that point
we would discuss it further with U.N. Security Council members.
But we think there is ample authority now for the international
relief efforts.
Q Can we go to another subject?
Q Richard, there are Members of Congress who are
saying that countries are not paying what they pledged during
the war and that we will have to ante up more money. Is there
going to be an effort by this government to get the money
pledged by other countries to help pay for the war?
MR. BOUCHER: There has been an effort all along to
work with other countries in meeting the needs of the situation,
including meeting the commitments that were made.
I think there is an Administration report that has to
go to Congress in the next few days. At this point, I don't
have a full list for you, but when that is available, I'll get
it to you.
[South Africa: Establishing a Commission]
Q Richard, on another subject totally unrelated,
President de Klerk of South Africa has put forward an idea of
solving violence in the townships. Do you have a reaction to
that?
MR. BOUCHER: Yes. President de Klerk announced
yesterday that he will appoint a commission of inquiry to
investigate the causes of factional violence in South Africa,
and he also proposed a two-day conference on the issue in late
May.
We welcome any initiatives that could end the violence
and help provide for security in the transition period. We
agree with President de Klerk that it is important for a wide
range of individuals, organizations and parties to meet to
discuss ways of achieving this goal.
We also support the proposal for a standing commission
of inquiry on the violence, but of course the composition and
authority of such a commission will determine its credibility
and effectiveness.
We hope that all parties will give these proposals
serious consideration.
Q In that connection, do you have any comment about
the ANC's plans announced earlier this week to have self-defense
forces in the townships?
MR. BOUCHER: I'll have to get you something later
after the briefing. I forget what it was.
Q All right.
Q It is funny how interchangeable terms can be --
conference, composition, credibility. All that can be applied
to the Middle East international settlement, too.
Secretary Baker and Shamir today, any breakthroughs?
Anything new that you can give us on that?
MR. BOUCHER: That is purely, solely, and totally a
subject for the Secretary to address on the road. I'm sorry, it
is not for me.
Q Okay. Another one. I understand that Yasser
Arafat has named three representatives from the Occupied
Territories to meet with Mr. Baker in Jerusalem and that Mr.
Baker is meeting, or about to meet, with them. Does that imply
a change? Is Mr. Baker going to meet with people named by Mr.
Arafat?
MR. BOUCHER: I'm very sorry, but I am not going to
touch questions that relate to the Secretary's meetings and
trips.
[China: Prison Labor for Exports]
Q Richard, on another subject, has the State
Department seen the report by Asia Watch suggesting that the
Chinese themselves acknowledge that prison slave labor is used
to produce goods that are exported to the United States?
MR. BOUCHER: Yes, we have, Jim. The study contains
some important new reports on the extent of Chinese Government
awareness and approval of prison labor exports. We do intend to
make full use of the contents of this report in our continuing
dialogue with the Chinese Government on this issue.
We have suspected for some time that some Chinese
prison products were making their way to the U.S. market. We
have been cooperating with the Customs Service for over a year
now to investigate the extent of such imports and whether they
violate the Tariff Act of l930.
Should those investigations uncover exports in
violation of U.S. laws, we will take firm steps to enforce those
laws.
Q Would that have any bearing on whether or not
China should get MFN?
MR. BOUCHER: Well, the Administration is still
considering the question of whether to renew China's MFN status.
Under the law the President has until June 3 to make this
decision.
The Jackson-Vanik obligates the President to consider
whether MFN renewal would substantially promote the freedom of
emigration. But in reaching his decision to extend MFN in 1991,
the President will also consider whether extending MFN would
advance the cause of human rights and reform in China as well as
other vital U.S. national interests.
Q Do I translate that correctly to say that if this
report were true, it would then have a bearing on the
President's recommendation?
MR. BOUCHER: You translate this correctly in saying
there are a lot of factors that need to be considered.
Q Richard, just to clarify, do you have any details
of what the Tariff Act of l930 stipulates?
MR. BOUCHER: Not with me, but I am sure it is widely
available.
Q Richard, while we are talking about Asia, there is
a prominent Vietnamese writer, Zum Thu Hung, who has been
arrested, perhaps also with an American citizen taken into
custody. Does the State Department know anything about this
case?
MR. BOUCHER: I hadn't heard about it. I'll have to
check and see if somebody else knows.
Q Thanks.
MR. BOUCHER: Jim?
Q There is a report in the Philippines that there is
a new snag in the negotiations because it is charged the United
States has sub-leased some of the military facilities to third
countries and wishes to continue doing so. Do you have any
guidance on that?
MR. BOUCHER: No.
Q Do you have anything today about Albania?
MR. BOUCHER: What do you want to know about Albania?
[Albania: Situation Update]
Q There is more unrest in Albania. Have you any
response to it?
MR. BOUCHER: Unrest in Albania. Yes, I do.
I think our principal focus is the events that occurred
two days after the March 3l elections where there were four
opposition democratic party members killed and nearly 60 wounded
in Shkoder by gunfire reportedly fired from within the Albanian
Party of Labor headquarters into a group of peaceful
demonstrators.
The Albanian Government appointed a special commission
to look into the shootings. The head of the U.S. team in
Albania has urged the Albanian Government that the investigation
be thorough and that its conclusions be released promptly. To
date, no official report has been released.
Subsequent to that, the Democratic Party of Albania
boycotted the April 15 opening session of the newly elected
parliament to protest the government's delay in naming and
charging those responsible for the violence in Shkoder.
We remain strongly opposed to the use of force against
peaceful demonstrators who are exercising basic human rights,
including the right to peaceful assembly, and we would again
call on the Albanian authorities to investigate these acts of
violence thoroughly and promptly.
Q Richard, to go back to human rights, what can you
say about the Helsinki Watch Report on Romania and the
allegations of increased human rights abuses?
MR. BOUCHER: I can say that I haven't seen it and I'll
have to check.
Q Thank you.
(The briefing concluded at 1:22 p.m.)