US Department of State Daily Briefing #13:
Friday, 1/24/92
Tutwiler
Source: State Department Deputy Spokesman Margaret
Tutwiler
Description: Washington, DC
Date: Jan, 24 19921/24/92
Category: Briefings
Region: MidEast/North Africa, Eurasia, Central America,
Caribbean, South America
Country: Algeria, Peru, Cuba, El Salvador, Saudi Arabia,
USSR (former), Russia, Israel
Subject: Development/Relief Aid, Arms Control,
Nuclear Nonproliferation, Security Assistance and Sales,
Mideast Peace Process, Human Rights, International Law,
Terrorism, State Department
12:16 P.M.
(ON THE RECORD UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED)
MS. TUTWILER: I don't have any statements or
announcements. I'll be happy to try and answer any questions
you may have.
Q Has any decision been made about the Israeli loan
guarantees? What is the latest development?
MS. TUTWILER: No. As you know, the Administration, I
believe we have said, has had internal discussions. We,
obviously, have been internally developing our thinking. But at
this point, I would characterize it as preliminary.
And, as you know, the Israeli Ambassador has requested
to see the Secretary this afternoon. I'm assuming -- I don't
know for a fact -- that it will be to discuss this subject. So
that, in itself, reinforces that it would be foolish for us to
take a decision, not having had the benefit -- if that indeed is
what he is coming to discuss -- of their thinking along these
lines.
Q What time is he coming here?
MS. TUTWILER: 3:45 p.m.
Q Can you give us a readout of Under Secretary
Bartholomew's trip?
MS. TUTWILER: One that you won't be satisfied with.
But the reason I think is valid. The Secretary of State did not
finish here last night until after 9:00 p.m. Reggie and his
team came back, I believe it was late yesterday afternoon.
The Secretary had an opportunity to briefly have a
quick de-brief on the phone last night. He began this morning
at 7:00 a.m. at the White House -- the Secretary -- and has just
been going all day.
I spoke to Reggie briefly this morning myself. He
characterized it to me as his mission was very useful; that good
work was gone, very in-depth work in all of the areas you're
familiar with in all four capitals. But I want to indulge -- if
you'll indulge me and let him do his thorough de-briefing, which
is not scheduled until later today with the Secretary of State,
prior to my publicly stating any conclusions or specifics
concerning his mission.
I would tell you that I asked your question, which I
believe you're going to ask me, "What are our next steps?" The
most logical one, as you know, the Secretary is leaving Sunday.
While in Russia, he will meet with the Defense Minister of the
CIS.
One part of Reggie's team -- nuclear weapons
specialists -- stayed in Moscow when Reggie and the team went to
the other three capitals. They are still in Moscow doing
detailed, in-depth work. He believes that they will be
returning this weekend. So that, too, will be part of the brief
the Secretary will have before we leave on Sunday.
One more part. Reggie has, and his team have, some
preliminary thinking about possible proposals that they would
recommend to the Secretary and Secretary Cheney and others, but
there are no firm decisions on that. So it's just early for me
today.
Q These nuclear specialists that stayed in Moscow,
can you be more specific about what they're looking at? Are
they working on the U.S. initiative to try to dismantle and
destroy some of the nuclear -- or all the nuclear weapons?
MS. TUTWILER: I don't know. I know that they went
over with Reggie; that they have a special expertise. I just
don't know the gentlemen's names, and I apologize this morning.
I just didn't get into it at that depth. The only thing he told
me is that they left them in Moscow to continue their work, and
he thinks they're coming back this weekend.
But I do know that, in a preliminary paper that I have
tried to briefly read this morning before the briefing, they
were very thorough discussions, very detailed discussions in all
four capitals. The overall characterization from Reggie is that
it was a very good mission.
Q Did you get any sense at all about how fast the
United States could move on that $400 million that Congress
appropriated to dismantle?
MS. TUTWILER: How fast we could move?
Q Yes. You might be ready to begin -- next week,
next month?
MS. TUTWILER: Well, that will get into what specific
proposals that they're going to be. One, I know, they have
proposals they have in mind to recommend to the senior levels of
our Government. Which ones, indeed, will be adopted, I don't
know.
I don't know the dollar figures associated with some of
the proposals that I've seen. So I don't have an answer to
that, to be honest with you. I don't know yet. There's no
reluctance once a decision is made on these various proposals
that are being discussed now in the principal buildings -- at
the Pentagon, the Joint Chiefs of Staff, here. There's no
reluctance on moving. They just have to make these decisions.
Q Yesterday, Baker alluded to the "brain gain," or
the day before in his speech.
MS. TUTWILER: Right.
Q The "brain gain." In other words, trying to
figure out a way to keep Soviet nuclear scientists and
technicians employed. Genscher was also obviously interested in
that kind of proposal.
Supposedly, at an interagency level within our
Government, there are proposals now to try to hire as many as
1,000 or 2,000 Soviet scientists in various ways; some to be in
the U.S. apparently, some to be employed over there. Are you
aware of that? Can you flesh that out at all in terms of where
the thinking is?
MS. TUTWILER: This will probably be as forthcoming as
my response to Carol. Number one, I'm aware of the Los Angeles
Times story this morning. We cannot find the proposal -- the
Los Angeles Times, which I have not read yet but I've been told
about, says specifically 2,000 nuclear scientists.
If there's a proposal in here specifically saying that,
we couldn't find it this morning.
Having said that, you all know that the Secretary of
State addressed this in his December speech at Princeton. This
is something that the Secretary, Director Gates, and others have
frequently emphasized. We are fully aware of the problem. We
take it very seriously, and we are examining what would be the
appropriate steps that we should take to deal with it.
We are actively looking at a number of proposals to
deal with our concerns. We are considering the broader context
of controlling the spread of weapons of mass destruction and
their technology.
There is nothing specific that I can tell you
concerning the proposals today, but it is something that I asked
Reggie this morning, "Is this one of the things that he
discussed in his latest trip and his mission?" He said, "Yes,
that it was something that was on the agenda that they
discussed."
Q The idea of hiring or the U.S. paying for nuclear
scientists?
MS. TUTWILER: Not a specific idea. Our concern, which
is, to be honest, the Secretary raised when he was in these four
capitals in December.
Q So it has not moved into the specifics as far as
you know although there are proposals floating in the
Government?
MS. TUTWILER: There are definitely proposals that are
floating, that are being generated. There is a lot of serious
thinking going on on this subject. But that there is an
interagency single proposal or competing proposals or one that
has been forwarded to the White House for approval, we're not at
that point yet.
Q On a related question. Was there any discussion
in Moscow, when Bartholomew was there, of Russia's intention to
sell submarines and planes to Iran? And is this a question that
would be raised by the Secretary in Moscow, too?
MS. TUTWILER: I can't imagine -- I did not ask Reggie
that specific question -- that that subject did not come up
since it came up in Secretary Baker's December trip. It is a
subject, as you know, we are also very concerned about.
Reggie's mission discussed every aspect that you can
think of concerning all of the concerns in this area that we all
have. But specifically submarines, I can't tell you whether he
specifically said "submarines." But our concern, as you know --
we've expressed it many times publicly -- about the potential,
possible sale of things to Iran and to other places.
So far, to date, there is no validation that we have,
or our own independent proof, of any of the sales of things that
have been speculated and rumored about in the press that we've
seen from time to time.
Q Just one further fact. There are reports from
various republic press -- Governments have [inaudible] it, too
-- that some 700 Iranian sailors are being trained by the former
Soviet military.
MS. TUTWILER: It's the first time I've heard of that
specific report. I'll be happy, as we have with all the others,
to take it and have them look at it.
Q Margaret, can you tell us anything about the sale
of F-15s to Saudi Arabia?
MS. TUTWILER: I can tell you for starters that there
is no formal Saudi Arabian Government request here for the sale
of F-15s. I'm aware of the story that was in one of our
newspapers this morning.
Having said that, it is no secret that we have had a
long-standing security relationship with Saudi Arabia. Since
the end of the Gulf war, we have been consulting closely with
the Saudis and other Gulf Arab states with the aim of
maintaining stability in the region and helping them, where we
can, to meet their legitimate security needs.
We are still in the discussion stage on many aspects of
our security partnership with Saudi Arabia, including possible
arms sales.
Q So therefore the Secretary is unlikely to approve
a sale today?
MS. TUTWILER: We can't approve a sale if a request
doesn't exist.
Q On another subject. The United Nations is making
it known that it is, to put it mildly, disgruntled at not having
been invited to the multilaterals in Moscow. What's the
thinking behind that?
MS. TUTWILER: I believe that the United Nations is
invited, as it was to Madrid, as an observer.
Q Margaret, can you run down who else is invited,
who's going to be there? Have you heard from the Palestinians?
Will there be a north African representative?
MS. TUTWILER: There is no formal Palestinian decision
that I'm aware of as of this morning. I checked both with
Ambassador Ross and Ambassador Djerejian. As we did not prior
to the conference we just hosted here on humanitarian
assistance, I'm not today going to be in a position to release
for you the names of those countries that have all formally
accepted. We'll do that there in Moscow when we get to the
conference.
Q Margaret, could you give us more details of the
meeting this afternoon? For instance, what time is it? Is it
3:45? Is he meeting with Congressional leaders, and are you
likely to discuss the possibility of the approval of the sale of
the F-15s even though there has been no formal request?
MS. TUTWILER: Your third question is an obvious
speculative, hypothetical, you know that I'm not going to
answer.
Two, I answered earlier -- I recognize you came in late
-- that the meeting with Ambassador Shoval is at 3:45. What's
your first question?
Q Are they meeting with Congressional leaders, too?
Can you give us a little --
MS. TUTWILER: I can't speak for the Ambassador of
Israel. You would have to check with his office. The Secretary
of State has had meetings with the leadership, individual
meetings with the Foreign Operations Subcommittees of the
Appropriations Committees. He will continue those meetings.
It's no different than any other occasion when the
Secretary stays in close consultation with the Congressional
leadership and with the Hill.
Q Margaret, can I ask on this also, can you tell us
if the decision about the loan guarantees -- although you say it
hasn't been taken yet -- would be affected by acts or statements
that are coming out of Israel, because there are reports that
the Secretary and the President are pretty annoyed with what
they are reading from Israel. Can you give us any sense on
that?
MS. TUTWILER: I'm not exactly sure how it is that your
question is really coming at me, to be honest with you. I mean,
the President and the Secretary of State will make their
decision when they determine they will make decision. You know
the United States has a longstanding, and this Administration's,
support for absorption.
You know that in September this Administration, in
conjunction with the Congress, said that concerning the loan
guarantees, that, yes, we would have to work out terms and
conditions. We have never in any specificity said what those
terms and conditions would be.
Right now, which is when we said we would turn to this,
soon -- the Congress is not even back -- there is an exchange of
ideas that is going on, and I have expressed for the
Administration as of today that the only thinking that we have
is preliminary thinking. And that the Secretary of State this
afternoon was requested -- the Israeli Ambassador requested to
see him, and the Secretary, of course, would, as he always does,
and he will be, as has been described, in a listening mode.
Q Margaret, can you tell when the four-month delay
will expire exactly?
MS. TUTWILER: No. Because we never -- we said it was
approximately 120 days. We've said, since we returned, that
obviously Congress had to be back in session. I believe that is
next week. But we've never put a time on the 120 days.
Q So there is no time limit for the --
MS. TUTWILER: Yes. There's 120 days, but we never pin
down it starts on September 4, September 7 or September 11, so
that you could count up. It just didn't kind of work that way.
Q Margaret, on what I asked you, are you in a
position to tell us how the Secretary feels about statements
from the Israeli Prime Minister, because there are reports, as
you must be aware, that he is not very happy and annoyed. Is it
something that you want to talk to us?
MS. TUTWILER: I haven't seen any reports that say that
the Secretary is unhappy and annoyed.
Q Margaret, do you expect the Secretary to come
downstairs, by any chance, afterwards with the Israeli
Ambassador? I know that's not usual, but --
MS. TUTWILER: That's not how we routinely handle
meetings with Ambassadors, so I would not envision that he
would.
Q New area?
MS. TUTWILER: Yes.
Q No. One more question: Yesterday, CIS conference
has prepared both short and long-range aid program to CIS, and
what level of the living standard or economic standard of the
CIS should be or could be levered up by the aid in order to see
the CIS countries unharmful to the world peace? I mean, to the
level of the United States or China or Korea?
MS. TUTWILER: The purpose -- I've never heard anyone,
sir, say that there's a certain standard that's being sought
right now. What we're seeking is to help the elderly, the
people who are ill, young people. This is a humanitarian effort
-- an emergency humanitarian effort. That is what the
conference addressed itself to. It was the purpose of the
conference. It's what the follow-on work will be addressing
itself to.
In the long term, a generic statement, we would
obviously hope that peoples around the world -- not only in the
new 12 Independent States would have a higher standard of
living. If you're talking material things, there would be no
bread lines, they would have milk for their children.
Obviously, that would be our wish for all people.
Q Margaret, do you have anything on amnesty in El
Salvador?
MS. TUTWILER: Amnesty in El Salvador? A little bit.
My understanding is that this amnesty was foreseen in
the peace accords signed last December 31. Its unanimous
passage in the National Assembly late last night is another step
on the road to peace in El Salvador. We note that the amnesty
does not extend to those convicted by civilian tribunals, such
as the killers of the Jesuits; those who committed crimes after
December 31, 1991; and other unspecific cases to be determined
by an independent commission.
Q Margaret, do you have anything on Cuba today,
particularly with reference to the U.S. position on preventing
exiles from launching attacks on Cuba?
MS. TUTWILER: We condemn any efforts to use the
territory of the United States to prepare or promote violence in
Cuba. The Neutrality Act is the law of the land with regard to
Cuba or any other country. It expressly forbids any individual
from participation in any military or naval expedition or
enterprise to be carried out against a foreign nation from U.S.
territory. Those who violate this or other statutes will be
vigorously pursued and duly prosecuted.
Q Have any been prosecuted?
MS. TUTWILER: Recently or in the history?
Q Well --
MS. TUTWILER: I don't know, George. I'll have the
experts look it up for you.
Q Margaret, do you have anything on Eagleburger's
meeting with the Bulgarian Foreign Minister today?
MS. TUTWILER: No, I don't. I wasn't aware that the
Deputy Secretary was. I am aware that any number of Foreign
Ministers who were here for the conference have had other
meetings here with officials in our Department and throughout
the government, so I'm assuming that he just took advantage
while he was here to have a meeting.
Q Could we get something on that?
MS. TUTWILER: I'll ask Larry's office, sure.
Q Margaret, Sendero Luminoso says that they shot the
helicopter --
MS. TUTWILER: I'm sorry. What?
Q Sendero Luminoso in Peru, the guerrilla group --
Q Shining Path.
Q Shining Path, excuse me. Thank you. They say
that they shot down with surface-to-air missiles this helicopter
on which three Americans involved in the anti-drug effort were
traveling, and they were killed. Do you have anything on that
claim?
MS. TUTWILER: We did last week, and I'll be honest
with you, in the last three days it's not something I have
stayed up to speed on. I'll be happy to see if anything's
changed from when we last addressed this.
Q Margaret, do you have any reaction on the Israeli
and China restoration of diplomatic relations and any thoughts
as to whether the U.S. would want to see China become part of
the Middle East peace negotiations?
MS. TUTWILER: My understanding is that they have said
that they are going to be at the multilateral talks. I would
refer you to their government. And, yes, we have long said --
it's our public policy -- we would welcome the establishment of
relations, and it's my understanding they have done just that.
Q Margaret, is the U.S. Government trying to
convince Syria to rethink their decision to be absent from the
Moscow multilateral talks?
MS. TUTWILER: As you're aware, when the Secretary of
State made his last trip and visit with President Assad, he said
publicly -- and Syria's Foreign Minister stated publicly -- that
we have an honest difference of opinion on the importance of
multilaterals. To my knowledge, that honest difference has not
changed, and it's my understanding that Syria has said they will
not be attending.
Q Margaret, how disappointed would the United States
be if the Palestinians did not come to the multilateral peace
conference?
MS. TUTWILER: The United States thinks that the
multilaterals are very important. We think that they will
contribute to peace; that they will contribute to people talking
about subjects -- like Palestinian refugees, the environment,
arms control, proliferation, water -- that are important to the
people in the region.
I don't want to pre-empt -- as you know, these
discussions are ongoing right now with the Palestinians. We do
not have a formal response for them, but we obviously think it's
important. But it's not up to us to dictate to them, and they
have to make their own decisions.
Q But you would still have a conference without the
Palestinians? You could still have a conference, couldn't you,
or could you not?
MS. TUTWILER: I haven't heard anyone express an
opinion of cancelling a conference, should such a decision be
made.
Q Would it be safe to say that the U.S. is strongly
urging the Palestinians to attend this conference or --
MS. TUTWILER: Sure. Just as we have strongly, in the
form of the Secretary of State, discussed this subject many
times with President Assad. In the case of Syria, we
acknowledged openly we have an honest difference of opinion
concerning the importance and what can be accomplished in these
multilaterals.
So, of course, we think it's important. But again it's
not for us to dictate to any of them whether they do or do not
come.
Q Margaret, on background --
Q Don't you see an opportunity through the Arab
Islamic conference that's held in Marakesh, Morocco--
MS. TUTWILER: What?
Q There is a conference now between Arab and Islamic
states in Morocco that could somehow put pressure on Syria to
attend the Moscow talks. You are not doing anything through
such a conference to convince the Syrians to attend?
MS. TUTWILER: Number one, I'm not personally aware of
that conference. Number two, the Syrians are very well aware of
our opinion concerning the multilaterals. The most recent
opportunity the Secretary of State had to express this was to
the Syrian head of their delegation that was here for the
bilateral talks just last week. It's an honest difference of
opinion.
Q Margaret, a couple questions on Algeria. First of
all, do you have any comment on the arrests, including of the
interim leader of FIS?
MS. TUTWILER: I don't have any additional comments
from the ones that were made, I believe, day before yesterday.
I'd just refer you to the record.
Q And also Algeria has said that it no longer wishes
to represent Iran's interests in the United States. Have you
been notified of that?
MS. TUTWILER: I'm not aware of that. I'll have to
look into it. I hadn't heard a thing about it.
Q Margaret, the arrest of the Algerian leader
actually occurred just yesterday.
MS. TUTWILER: And we have a full statement is my
understanding that we put out, right?
STAFF: (Inaudible)
MS. TUTWILER: Right.
Q Sorry. What?
Q Margaret, going back to the Mideast talks for one
second, Baker this afternoon. Exactly one week ago today
Ambassador Shoval held a news conference to say that they were
marking the anniversary of the Scud attacks and to again say
that they would not change their position on Israeli settlements
in the Occupied Territories, saying that they would
continue to have settlements there, and that he would press that
in his talks with Baker today. I think what we're trying to get
is the U.S. position. If that is what he's going to say, what
would be the U.S. response?
MS. TUTWILER: That's a very nice try. You know that I
am not going to answer, especially since I have just come out
here and said that our thinking -- U.S. thinking is preliminary.
We have had internal discussions -- I have acknowledged that --
but our thinking at this stage, the Administration's, is
preliminary. And it would be in my opinion foolish to have a
decision without ever having had discussions with the Israeli
Government. It's my understanding -- and I said earlier please
check with their Embassy -- that that is the reason the
Ambassador is coming to see the Secretary. So those talks are
beginning.
Q Thank you.
MS. TUTWILER: Thanks, Frank.
(The briefing concluded at 12:40 p.m.)