US Department of State Daily Press Briefing #75:
Monday, 5/6/91
Boucher
Source: State Department Deputy Spokesman Richard
Boucher
Description: 12:11 PM, Washington, DC
Date: May 6, 19915/6/91
Category: Briefings
Region: MidEast/North Africa, South Asia
Country: Iraq, Kuwait, Turkey, Israel, Iran, Bangladesh
Subject: Regional/Civil Unrest, Development/Relief Aid,
Refugees, State Department, Travel,
Democratization, United Nations,
International Organizations
(ON THE RECORD UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED)
MR. BOUCHER: Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen. I
thought I would start off by giving you a few bits of update on the
refugee crisis in Iraq and tell you everything I know about the
Secretary's travel, so that you won't ask me any further questions
after that.
[Iraq: Refugee Update]
On the refugee crisis: The relief officials now report
that there's a total refugee population inside Turkey or along the
border of about 321,000. You will note that this number is
considerably down from the numbers reported in this area earlier.
There are another 200,000-300,000 displaced people receiving
relief in Iraq north of the 36th parallel. What this results from is
the flow of people back to their homes and back to the towns and
cities that they came from.
The delivery of relief supplies by fixed-wing aircraft has
been suspended now indefinitely. Relief supplies are now being
delivered by helicopters and land transport. This was a trend that
started last week when we started to deliver things on demand to
camp populations, and I think if you see in the situation report --
and we have a new one for you today -- that there are stocks at the
various camps of three- to ten-day supplies. So things are being
supplemented by truck and helicopter as necessary.
The security zone now extends about 25 miles eastward from
Zakhu to Sirsenk near al-Amadiyah. The security zone includes all
territory within 30 kilometers of this line, and to the south the
zone extends to a ridge line north of the City of Dohuk. We
understand from coalition military forces that Iraqi forces in the
Dohuk area are withdrawing.
Near al-Amadiyah, coalition forces are building a forward
logistics base to facilitate future operations, but at this point no
determination has been made concerning the need for a second
temporary refugee village.
In Zakhu itself, there are now 4,384 refugees located at
the temporary relief site. There has been a constant stream of
refugees coming down from the mountains, by automobile or other
means, and heading for their homes in Zakhu. We believe that many
of the refugees are using Zakhu as a way station as they continue
homeward.
That's about it for the update. Oh, let me do southern
Iraq. It's also noteworthy that we've completed the transfer of
displaced persons from the Safwan area to the temporary refugee
camp in Saudi Arabia. U.S. forces moved over 8,000 displaced
persons to the Saudi-administered camp, and the population of
that camp is now about 12,300 people.
And with that, let me stop the update.
Q What about Iran?
MR. BOUCHER: The Iranian side of things: There's just
nothing particularly new to report. You will see that covered
in more detail in the situation report which we'll get you.
Q But there's just that one relief flight to Iran?
MR. BOUCHER: That's right.
Q You indicated there would be more.
MR. BOUCHER: Let me tell you where that flight --
arrangements for a second flight, this time of medical supplies,
have not yet been finalized. We will provide you information on
the flight once it's complete.
Q Is that lack of finalization perhaps the result of
Iranian dissatisfaction with the first shipment?
MR. BOUCHER: We are still working out the details of
this particular flight. I think you've seen various reports
about blankets. There were some press reports quoting Iranian
officials to the effect that the blankets donated by the U.S.
humanitarian organizations and shipped to Iran were somehow old,
worn or unusable. These claims are just not true. The blankets
shipped to Iran, as far as the U.S. humanitarian effort goes,
were new.
Q Is there a pressing need for medical equipment and
supplies, and so on, in the Iranian sector of the refugee
situation?
MR. BOUCHER: The Iranians, I think, have indicated to
international organizations, as well as to us, that there were a
large number of things that they needed. They're getting a lot
of them from various countries, and one of the things that they
needed was medical supplies. I can't tell you exactly how much
more pressing that is, but I think donors are trying to come
forth with whatever they have available, and whatever they can
make available within Iran's needs.
Q Richard, do you have any evidence that the
refugees who are in Iran are starting to go back to their homes?
MR. BOUCHER: I don't.
Q So as far as you know, the only ones who are
streaming down the mountains are the ones from Turkey.
MR. BOUCHER: It's been from the border down into the
zone and onward to people's homes -- on the Turkish side of the
border, yes.
Q And from Iran?
MR. BOUCHER: I just don't have any information like
that from Iran. I can't tell you yes or no.
Q Richard, I don't think you quite answered Jim's
question on whether there was any connection at all between the
complaints out of Iran and the delay in the second flight.
MR. BOUCHER: That's a question you really have to ask
the Iranians. For our part, we're trying to work out the
details of this particular flight, to make the detailed
arrangements that are necessary for the flight, and we haven't
agreed on that yet.
Q I have a question on your statement about Iraqi
forces withdrawing from the Dohuk area. Have they withdrawn
from Dohuk as well? From the city?
MR. BOUCHER: I'm told that Iraqi military units in
Dohuk are moving out of the area.
Q Do allied forces --
MR. BOUCHER: I think the answer is yes.
[Iraq: Security for Kurds]
Q Do allied forces intend to use Dohuk as part of
the safe zone that they're establishing?
MR. BOUCHER: That's something that I don't think
decisions have been made on that I can give you any answer on at
this point. Questions about whether we will extend the zone
further south in order to provide the relief services that are
necessary, I can't really answer at this point.
Q So the question there is if the Iraqi forces are
withdrawing, is it the U.S. view that the Dohuk area from which
they are withdrawing is safe enough for the refugees to return
there, or are you advising the refugees to hold off until the
decision by the allies whether to extend the safe zone is made?
MR. BOUCHER: I don't think, Ralph, we're advising
people one way or the other. We're extending security where we
need it for relief operations to make sure there's no
interference. You remember that was called for under the U.N.
resolution, and people are making their own decisions about
where they want to go and if they want to go home.
Q With every passing day, it appears that the United
States has carved off a new chunk of northern Iraq, and I know
that you don't care to put it in those terms, but that's what
appears to be happening. The line creeps further south.
Do you have any notion as to how far south you're going
to go? Are you going to go to the suburbs of Baghdad? I mean,
where are you headed with this line as it goes south?
MR. BOUCHER: John, I certainly wouldn't characterize
it the way you have, and I remember over the weekend the
President, on Saturday, said very clearly once again, "We're not
interested in a dismembered or a fractionated Iraq."
The point, I think, has been that we have all along
said that we would deliver relief to people where they needed
it. As people move, as they need way stations, housing,
temporary facilities, if we're in a position to provide that to
them in a safe area, we are doing that.
You're also aware that the United Nations has an
agreement with the Iraqis to operate throughout the country in
Iraq, and they will be doing that as well. I can, I think, tell
you briefly that our request to Iraq to withdraw from an area
around each camp is done to assure that the Iraqi military not
interfere with relief operations, and we think it's necessary
for the humanitarian purposes of these operations.
We're not taking over the civil administration in these
places, nor are we trying to set up any sort of enclaves. And
we intend to hand over our operations to the United Nations and
to withdraw our troops from these areas as soon as possible.
Q But the U.N. is not stepping forward here. They
appear to be doing a lot of meeting and very little beyond that
in terms of assuming responsibility.
MR. BOUCHER: That's not true. I got a report on that
today. The U.N., I think as you're aware, has set up a presence
outside the camp in Zakhu. In addition, although they haven't
taken over the operation of the camp, they have taken over
responsibility for the food distribution system. So they are
operating there to distribute the food that we're able to get in
there.
The system appears to be working well based on the
reports we get back from relief officials, and there's been no
apparent problems with Iraqi officials.
Q If I could just follow on John's and the Dohuk
question, did the U.S. request Iraqi forces to withdraw from the
City of and the area around Dohuk? Or, I mean, not just the
U.S., but did the allied forces?
MR. BOUCHER: Yes. Ralph, I have to stick with exactly
the way I described it at the beginning, that there is a line.
We've asked them to withdraw from 30 kilometers around that
line, and that that line extends to a ridge north of the town of
Dohuk. And as far as any further comments on southward
extension of that zone, I just don't have anything for you.
Q How are you communicating with the Iraqis? Is the
Iraqi Interests Section here now officially set up?
MR. BOUCHER: Let me check on that and see. We have
been talking to their senior diplomat in Washington. We have
been talking to them at the United Nations, and, of course,
you're aware that the United Nations has had discussions with
them in Baghdad as well.
Q (Inaudible) -- but I want to get at this
technicality, because I think it may have to do with policy.
Some of your statements about the Dohuk area seem inconsistent.
On the one hand, you say you've asked them to withdraw from a
ridge north of Dohuk. On the other, you say they are
withdrawing in response to U.S. requests from -- not U.S. --
allied requests.
MR. BOUCHER: I didn't --
Q The question is, are you implying by your
statement today that the Iraqis are voluntarily, of their own
accord and without any relation to expansion of the allied safe
zone, pulling out of Dohuk city?
MR. BOUCHER: Ralph, I think the distinction that I
would make is that we have told them that there is a zone within
30 kilometers of the line that we consider a safety zone for
relief operations, where we want to be able to operate
unimpeded, and where they shouldn't have any forces.
In addition to that, we have observed -- coalition
forces have observed that they are pulling out from Dohuk. And
I presume that they are doing that in order to avoid any
possible interference or encounters with the relief operations.
But at this point, as far as what we consider the safe area for
relief operations, we have not extended it southward from that
ridge overlooking Dohuk.
Q Richard, given that many refugees are bypassing
the camps and returning to their homes if they believe an area
to be secure, is there any point in setting up additional tents
except as the most temporary of way stations when you do secure
an area?
MR. BOUCHER: That's an excellent question, Mark, and
that's why I said that no determination has been made on the
need for a second temporary village. If we determine that there
is a need for a second temporary refugee community, it
will be established near that logistics base near al-Amadiyah
once the logistics can support it. But we have not decided that
a second camp is absolutely necessary.
You see from the numbers of people in Zakhu, how
they've gone up and down with people coming in and moving out.
The total number of people in the Zakhu camp is at -- what did I
say? -- some 4,000, although the camp is certainly set up
already to take many more than that. That's the question which
does arise now, and we will be providing assistance to people in
a variety of ways, both in terms of camps for those who want to
settle, who want to stop for awhile, as well as way stations and
food distribution systems.
Q A follow-up on that: In the absence of camps,
what is it that the United Nations is supposed to take over, and
how would they provide continued security in the area now
occupied by allied forces?
MR. BOUCHER: Those are really two questions. The
question of what is it the U.N. is supposed to take over, I
think, is just basically the relief operations. Some of those
things that we're doing now in these areas are described more as
"way stations" than as "camps." I really don't have a complete
description, but that's a distribution point for the supplies
that people need as they move along the road.
That kind of operation, as you know, is also envisaged
in the memorandum of understanding that the United Nations
signed with the Iraqis. So the point is that we would hope that
the United Nations would act to quickly take over the relief
operations in northern Iraq. As far as the security component
of that, I don't have anything new on that.
Q The idea of the police force was to provide
protection within the camps, and, if you're not going to have
camps, can you have any kind of a U.N. police force? And, if
so, where would it be located?
MR. BOUCHER: That's a question, I think, that really
needs to be examined as the United Nations takes over these
sites. Whatever relief operations there are, we would assume
that the guarantees of safety of people using those services
would be maintained.
Q Which government is in charge of this area? You
said we're not interfering with the civil administration. Who
is in charge of this area?
MR. BOUCHER: I'm sure it varies from place to place.
There are still local authorities in these towns. I think
you'll remember in Zakhu we said that --
Q Is the Iraqi government in charge?
MR. BOUCHER: There are Iraqis who are in charge of
these areas. Yes. They have an administration. They have
local officials.
Q Does the authority of Baghdad extend to these
areas, and do we recognize that Baghdad is in charge in these
areas?
MR. BOUCHER: We have not questioned, for example, the
maintaining of some 50 police in Zakhu --
Q That's Zakhu. How about --
MR. BOUCHER: So in terms of these areas --
Q How about --
MR. BOUCHER: -- I don't know which local officials are
on the ground and how they receive instructions or don't receive
instructions from Baghdad. But we are not trying to challenge
the Iraqi civil administration of these areas. We are setting
up relief operations, and we are doing what it takes to
facilitate those operations.
Q But any government, if it's really in charge of a
place, also has the right to enforce its laws with police or
with the military. They don't have the right to do that.
MR. BOUCHER: I think we have just been talking about
their maintaining local police forces in the town of Zakhu,
which is where the U.S. presence has started, and where we're
most heavy.
Q Is the United States encouraging autonomy talks
between the Kurds and the government of Baghdad?
MR. BOUCHER: We've been following what's going on.
Certainly, anything that can be agreed to that's a step toward
greater respect for human rights and democracy, we would
certainly welcome.
Q Is that something that the United States used as a
way to have the Kurds come out of this in a better situation and
also extricate the United States from its current involvement?
MR. BOUCHER: We have described a number of things:
The U.N. process under Resolution 688 to take over the
operations of relief supplies; the expansion of the U.N.
presence, as outlined in their memorandum of understanding; and
potentially, if it serves to provide people with greater
assurance, something coming out of these talks the Kurds have
had. All of these things are intended to deliver relief to
people who need it and to give them a kind of assurance of their
safety that they will need if they're going to return home.
Q One more question on that, though, at least one of
the rebel groups -- the Kurdish group -- is advocating some sort
of international guarantee if they were able to work out some
sort of political agreement with Baghdad. Is this something
that the United States would support?
MR. BOUCHER: I think we've described many times our
efforts as humanitarians. We've described many times our
presence as being a temporary one. We are interested in making
sure that the people get the relief that they need, and I think
we've talked also about the network -- the web of various things
that are being done that would provide assurances to people that
they need to go home.
So I don't have anything particular on that point, but
the overall operation and the way we're working with the United
Nations and others is designed to provide the assurance that
people will need if they are to decide to go home.
Q Richard, just a follow-up to Carol's question.
Could you give us, again the official definition of the State
Department about the refugees at this time?
Some people, as Mark said, are coming down from the
mountains to their homes. Some of them are asking for
assurances that they will not be subject to harassment and
intimidation or even threat of life after the coalition forces
withdraw.
Do you consider these people as possible refugees in
the event your Government has considered that all refugee
operations have been completed and you're able to pull out your
troops, but these people have fears? Do you consider them as
possible refugees?
MR. BOUCHER: I think the term that we're using most
often -- and I know we use "refugees" a lot -- but the more
accurate term that we're using is "displaced persons." We're
concentrating -- our primary focus now is to deliver relief to
people who need it, where they need it.
You'll remember a few weeks ago the President described
our goals as not so much resettlement but to make it possible
for people to go back to their homes. That remains the goals of
the operation that we're setting up, that we're engaged in.
That is the goal of the things that others are doing, the United
Nations and others. If there is some need, if any, for a
resettlement effort afterwards, that's something that really
hasn't been addressed at this point.
[MIddle East: Secretary Baker to Return]
Q What can you tell us about the Secretary's trip to
the Middle East?
MR. BOUCHER: This is everything I know. The
Secretary, as you all just heard out in the lobby, is heading
back to the Middle East.
The present plans -- and I must emphasize that these
plans are still tentative -- is that he would leave late Friday.
We don't have a schedule at this point, and I don't really
expect to have one for you today. We are working on stops in
Egypt, Syria, Jordan, and Israel. These are the places he would
like to visit. I think he said in the lobby he'll be going back
to the places he visited before.
The staff now is working out a detailed schedule,
trying to work out a schedule that gets him to all these places.
We're also putting up a sign-up sheet as of this briefing. In
the interest of making everything easier for everyone who is
working on the trip and going on the trip, we would ask that you
sign up by 5:00 p.m. today.
Q He went to Saudi Arabia the last time, and that's
noticeably absent from your list. Is there a cause-and-effect?
MR. BOUCHER: I really have to say that we're working
on the schedule at this point. I don't want to draw any major
conclusions about it because it's still being worked.
Q Where will he meet with Bessmertnykh?
MR. BOUCHER: That is not defined. They're trying to
work out a location. We don't have a location or a timetable.
Q Do you have a projected return date?
MR. BOUCHER: Sometime next week.
Q Will Bessmertnykh occur in the region or perhaps
someplace else?
MR. BOUCHER: That's right. I think the Secretary
described it as looking forward to trying to get together with
Bessmertnyk in the region.
Q Is there an arms control component possibly to
that meeting as well? Obviously, they're going to be talking
about the Middle East.
MR. BOUCHER: I'm not advanced to the point of agendas
at this point. I think the last time they got together, they
discussed not only the peace process but also various other
issues on the U.S.-Soviet agenda. If the schedule and time
permit, I'm sure they would like to do that again.
Q Can we anticipate that in Israel he will also meet
with Palestinians?
MR. BOUCHER: At this point, I really don't have
anything that specific on a schedule to anticipate.
Q There was at least one prominent Palestinian in
Washington last week. Did anybody from the Department meet with
her -- Hanna Siniora?
MR. BOUCHER: I don't know. If you give us the name,
I'll be glad to look at it for you.
[Israel: Arab League Boycott of Israel]
Q Richard, do you have a reaction to the decision by
the Arab boycott office to remove Coca Cola from its list and
add 110 other companies?
MR. BOUCHER: The position of the United States against
the boycott has been firm and unyielding. As we've said many
times, the Arabs should end their boycott and end their
challenges to Israel's legitimacy.
You also are well aware of the fact that we have
legislation in place which reflects our strong stand against the
boycott.
Q Does this constitute a confidence-building measure
minus 110?
MR. BOUCHER: I really don't have any characterization
of it. We have often and long held that the boycott should end.
Q Richard, in the middle of the peace process, don't
you have any characterization at all? It's presumed that you've
been asking for confidence-building measures and now you have
110 new companies listed. Isn't this going in the opposite
direction to what you would have hoped? You have no reaction to
this whatsoever?
MR. BOUCHER: Mary, I'm not going to try to
characterize it. I think you'll remember the Secretary has said
that we're not going to get in the game of playing who comes
first as far as confidence-building measures.
Q How would you call --
MR. BOUCHER: He's also --
Q Would you call it an obstacle to peace?
MR. BOUCHER: I would call it a boycott to which the
United States has long been opposed.
Q And you have no further comment despite the fact
that the Secretary has been engaged in an effort to bring
together the participants in this boycott with Israel for the
last 6 weeks and is going back again? This raises no red flags?
This Department chooses not to make an issue when it is
possibly the most single significant thing that's happened in
the peace process?
MR. BOUCHER: Bill, I have to reject your
characterization that we choose not to make an issue of it. If
we stand up here and we say that we are firmly and unyieldingly
opposed to this boycott, I think that states very clearly what
our view is and often and long has been.
I think you'll also remember -- you've been along on
the trips. You remember that every time something happened in
the region, the Secretary did not characterize it as a positive
or a negative.
Q Yes, he did. When he was in Damascus, he made a
point of volunteering criticism of Israel.
MR. BOUCHER: He made a point of our views on
settlements. That's true. But he did not comment on every
single step that was taken along the way.
Q (Inaudible) in the category of every single step.
Q But is this not as dire as settlements to the
peace process?
MR. BOUCHER: I am not going to try to characterize it
as a plus or a minus of the Secretary's efforts on the peace
process.
Q You wouldn't characterize it as a plus or a minus?
It's a neutral action?
MR. BOUCHER: I told you what our position is on the
boycott. It is a strongly held position that we've stated many,
many times. But I'm not going to try to tie every event into
the Secretary's effort with the peace process.
Q It seems like a major event.
Q Since the old boycott, they are expanding the
boycott. That has no --
MR. BOUCHER: And we remain firmly and unyieldingly
opposed to the boycott itself.
Q It has no significance to the peace process?
MR. BOUCHER: I didn't say that, Bill. I said I'm not
going to try to characterize it. We've said that
confidence-building is not a game of who goes first. It's not
an end in itself. It's a way of moving --
Q (Inaudible)
MR. BOUCHER: Well, Alan, I'll answer the questions if
you want me to, but let me answer it.
Q Why would you call new Israeli settlements an
obstacle to peace and this is not? I think that's a fair
question.
MR. BOUCHER: Carol, the easy way is to say we don't do
comparisons. But I think the answer is that when the Secretary
has chosen to do so, he has characterized different events. But
by and large, as various things have happened, whether good or
bad, we have not tried to link these to the peace process. We
have tried to talk about getting the process going. We said
that specific confidence-building steps aren't an end in
themselves but rather they are something to move the process
forward. We're focused on whether we can move that process
forward. You had the Secretary talk about that issue again
today.
Q Yes. But the reason it raises eyebrows is that
the Secretary has chosen to characterize events as unhelpful
with regard to Israel but not in the case of the Arab world
where there appear to have been a couple of interesting
developments recently: Saudi Arabia's unwillingness to
participate in direct talks, and now this, and not a word from
this Department.
MR. BOUCHER: Bill, I'm afraid I've really said, I
think, everything I have to say on the subject. I will go back
and see if anybody chooses to characterize this event one way or
the other.
Q Is Coca Cola a more important thing on balance
than the hundred new items? They're rather minor?
MR. BOUCHER: That's the kind of characterization that
I'm not about to get into.
Q Richard, could you tell us whether the Arab League
notified the Department of this, and whether we've had -- aside
from what you're saying here -- any communications with the Arab
League or with any of the members of the Arab League on this
issue?
MR. BOUCHER: On this specific step?
Q On this specific step.
MR. BOUCHER: On this issue, we have.
Q No, on this specific subject.
MR. BOUCHER: The Secretary has discussed it in public.
He's discussed it during his meetings. I'll have to check if
we were notified of this and if we had any --
Q We had communications specifically with Israel on
those specific steps of the settlements. I'm trying to find out
whether there were any communications with the Arab League on
this specific step?
MR. BOUCHER: On this specific step, with regard to the
boycott, it's something I'll have to check.
Q On two different occasions over the last 6 weeks,
the Secretary has made reference to events occurring in Israel
by saying that it's easier to obstruct peace than it is to
foster it. Would you use that characterization in response to a
question about the Arab boycott expansion?
MR. BOUCHER: I'll see if anybody wants to do that.
Q Over the weekend, the Israeli Ambassador said that
the Israelis are going to put in a request for $10 billion in
housing loan guarantees soon. Have they been bouncing it off
you so far?
MR. BOUCHER: You'll remember, I think, Jim, in March,
when we agreed on the $650 million supplemental aid for Israel,
that we also agreed that the discussion of loan guarantees for
Soviet Jewish absorption would be addressed after Labor Day. So
at this point, I don't have any further comment on that.
Q Have they talked to you about that specific
figure, $10 billion?
MR. BOUCHER: As I said, you remember that this was in
the air in the past but we agreed in March that it would be a
subject of discussion after Labor Day. So at this point, I
really don't have anything further.
Q What's the magic significance of Labor Day?
Q It puts it off. (Laughter)
Q It's after Baker gives up the peace process.
MR. BOUCHER: Without trying to characterize it the way
you have, I would just say that that's what we agreed to.
Q Our Labor Day or theirs?
Q On the Gulf Cooperation Council countries saying
that Iran should have a role to play in regional security, does
the United States have any views on that?
MR. BOUCHER: We have said before -- I think you'll
remember the Secretary saying on the Hill, where he outlined his
views in early February, first of all, that we would expect the
states of the Gulf and regional organizations such as the Gulf
Cooperation Council to take the lead in building a
re-enforcing network of new and strengthened security ties. He
also said at the time that Iran could have an important
contribution to make as a major power in the Gulf.
Q Do you view it as a good sign that they're asking
Iran to be involved?
MR. BOUCHER: I think I'd just have to say that we
think that Iran has an important contribution to make. It's up
to the states to discuss the roles, and we hope that all
countries will take a responsible role in this.
Q In the case of the previous aid requests from
Israel -- when the request had not yet been made formally, the
State Department said when the request come through, it would be
given full consideration. Can you say the same thing about what
the Ambassador mentioned last night?
MR. BOUCHER: I think I said that any discussions of
this would take place after Labor Day. That was what was
agreed, so that's the time at which we would discuss it.
Q Richard, back to the boycott. It's well known
that some Arab countries observe this much more than others.
The north African countries, for instance, largely disregard it.
Kuwait and Saudi Arabia, particularly, are rigorous in applying
it.
Does the United States have any information on
compliance with this boycott by the various Arab states?
MR. BOUCHER: I'll have to check on that. I don't
know.
Q Would the United States be interested in finding
out which states are more rigorous in applying this boycott than
others?
MR. BOUCHER: I'm sure we would be, Alan. As you know,
we have legislation that prevents companies from complying with
the boycott.
Q Just to follow up on that. The U.S. now has a lot
of companies which are dealing with the Government of Kuwait to
rebuild the country. Has the U.S. Government taken any position
with Kuwait regarding whether those requests for American
assistance -- private assistance -- ignore or avoid any
reference to the boycott?
MR. BOUCHER: I'll just have to refer you back to what
I've just said, and that's that this position against the
boycott has been discussed both in public and in private during
the course of the Secretary's visit.
Q Richard, which, if any, countries in the Middle
East requested Secretary of State Baker's visit?
MR. BOUCHER: Excuse me?
Q Did any -- I guess none, huh?
Q Did they say, "Please come back . . ."
Q Is the Secretary going at the request --
MR. BOUCHER: At the request of specific countries? I
don't know. I just don't know to what extent a return visit was
discussed during the last trip or subsequently.
Q Is that list you gave us necessarily
chronological?
MR. BOUCHER: No. The whole schedule is being worked
on.
Q Do you know when a decision was made? The
Secretary said he discussed it with the President as late as
yesterday. Is that when they decided to go, or was it last
Thursday?
MR. BOUCHER: I don't know for sure. If he's been
discussing it up until yesterday, I assume that there was still
something for him to discuss with the President. So a final
decision was therefore made after that.
Q They're using the arrhythmia method.
Q Do you have any statement of goals or anything
that you can make about the Secretary's trip? His statement --
MR. BOUCHER: Just what he said out there. Nothing
more.
Q That as long as there's even a slightest
itsy-bitsy chance, we've got to keep working at it? That's
basically --
MR. BOUCHER: I'll refer you back to his exact words.
Q Talking of trips, what can you tell us about
Kimmitt's visit to China?
MR. BOUCHER: Kimmitt is in China. I really don't have
any readout of his discussions at this point. We'll see if we
can get you something.
Q Did he make any toasts?
MR. BOUCHER: Not that I'm aware of, Bill.
Q Has he met with any senior officials yet? Do we
know?
MR. BOUCHER: He should have by now, but I don't have
an instant readout of it.
[Bangladesh: Update on Cyclone/Relief Efforts]
Q One other thing, on a totally different issue. Is
the United States planning to send any heavy equipment to
Bangladesh to help with the relief efforts?
MR. BOUCHER: I'll give you the rundown of aid to
Bangladesh. We also now have the excellent A.I.D. situation
reports. They're starting a series on Bangladesh.
The status now is that we've received the assessment of
relief requirements from our mission in Bangladesh based on
reports of the U.S. A.I.D. team sent to the cyclone-affected
areas of Bangladesh. We are now reviewing on an urgent basis
our disaster relief assistance and how best to deliver it.
Rail and road lines to the region are now reopened.
Large numbers of motorized barges, trawlers, and naval vessels
are responding to the crisis. Food stocks in the country appear
to be adequate for the near term. We are focusing on how best
to deliver drinking water, dry food, and shelter materials to
the flood victims.
Helicopters are still an option for emergency
operations while the flood waters remain over coastal areas,
particularly offshore islands, but other options may be more
effective. That's one of the things we're still looking at.
We are making full use of the extensive network of aid
resources we have in the country. We're funding locally
established and international organizations which have many
years experience in dealing with this kind of disaster and which
are already actively providing relief.
Our assessment at this point is that disaster
prepardedness apparently saved millions of lives.
We're reviewing an assistance package which focuses
first on meeting the immediate needs of water and food
distributed by non-governmental organizations but which would
also address the long-term issues of rehabilitation and
reconstruction.
Within the past 3 months, $14 million of U.S.-donated
food and commodities arrived at the Port of Chittagong, and they
are available in warehouses for the Government of Bangladesh to
distribute throughout the country. While distribution to the
isolated victims on the offshore islands continues to be of the
utmost urgency, having sufficient food in the country,
historically a critical problem in Bangladesh, is apparently not
a critical problem in this current disaster.
That's where we stand. As I said, we have a more
detailed update available.
Q Is there any chance the Secretary of State might
go to assess the needs of the Bangladesh people while he's --
MR. BOUCHER: I'm not aware of such plans at this
point, Ralph.
Q Thank you.
(Press briefing concluded at 12:45 p.m.)