February, 1992
US Department of State Daily Briefing #18:
Monday, 2/3/92
Tutwiler
Source: State Department Spokesman Margaret Tutwiler
Description: Washington, DC
Date: Feb, 3 19922/3/92
Category: Briefings
Region: Eurasia, East Asia, MidEast/North Africa, Europe,
Caribbean
Country: United States, USSR (former), Japan, Libya, France,
Iraq, Israel, Haiti, Cuba
Subject: State Department, Arms Control, Terrorism,
Military Affairs, Development/Relief Aid,
Cultural Exchange, United Nations, Mideast Peace Process,
Refugees
12:21 P.M.
(ON THE RECORD UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED)
[Announcements: Testimony and Travel by the Secretary]
MS. TUTWILER: I have two things I'd like to do,
please. One is, I believe you're aware, the Secretary has two
testimonies this week. The first is on Wednesday, February 5,
at 10:00 a.m. It is before the Senate Foreign Relations
Committee. My understanding is the room is 419 Dirksen. The
subject will be the FY-93 budget request.
On Thursday, the Secretary will appear at 10:00 a.m.
before the House Foreign Affairs Committee on the same subject.
My understanding, the room is 2172 Rayburn. As you know, on
days that he testifies, we do not do State Department briefings.
Future travel: I will give you what I can. I cannot
fill in all the blanks for you. I'm not going to be able to
after the briefing. We've been working on this all weekend, and
we just don't have all the answers for you. But anticipating
that you all need what information I can give you, I'm going to
take a stab at it.
As many of you know, we're leaving Sunday morning for
Frankfurt, Germany. On Monday morning, the Secretary will have
a meeting with German Foreign Minister Genscher, and then the
Secretary will observe, along with the Foreign Minister of
Germany, the first U.S. flights to take off from Rhine-Main Air
Force Base as part of the United States previously announced
humanitarian assistance to the former republics of the Soviet
Union.
We will have for you there on the ground -- not before
-- fact sheets on where these flights are going, what they are
carrying and where the cargo will be distributed.
Monday, after this ceremony, the Secretary will head
for some of the Central Asian republics of the former Soviet
Union. As I said, I'm not in a position to pin all this down
for you as of this briefing. As soon as I have it, I will make
it available in the Press Office. We're in the process of
working out many of these stops. Right now, what we're looking
at is visiting those three Central Asian republics that the
Secretary has not yet had an opportunity to meet with the top
leadership of those three -- that would be Uzbekistan,
Turkmenistan, and Tajikistan.
We are thinking about arriving in Moscow on Thursday
evening -- that would be February 13. February 14 may be spent
in Moscow. We are working right now with the Russians to
arrange for a time for the follow-up meeting that President Bush
announced in his meeting with President Yeltsin at Camp David
concerning the Secretary.
In our view right now, these meetings will probably be
on Saturday, February 15. If that holds up, then I would
envision that we would return to the United States sometime on
Sunday, February 16.
Let me state again so that you know that I am trying to
be forthcoming -- there's no reason to call me immediately after
the briefing -- I do not have all these answers. This is
tentative and it is very subject to change.
A sign-up sheet, however, for those of you all who want
to roll with it, will be posted this afternoon after this
briefing and will be taken down tomorrow at 5:00 p.m.
Q Do you, by any chance -- will you be able to
provide us with the names of one or two of the places where aid
is going to be going in before --
MS. TUTWILER: In advance?
Q Yes.
MS. TUTWILER: I'll try. I'm going to meet this
afternoon with Mr. Armitage. I've talked to him twice this
morning. He obviously has an enormous task in front of him of
54 American sorties. We'll try.
Q We need to anticipate at least some of the places
they're going.
MS. TUTWILER: I understand. Some planes, for
instance, which will be in your fact sheet -- at least, one that
I know of -- will probably have already departed Monday morning
prior to us getting to the airfield. I understand your needs.
We've also been working closely with Pete Williams'
office to put film crews and press on these flights. I haven't
had a chance since I've been back in town to check where we are
on that. Pete had told me there would be absolutely no problem.
So, yes, I will try to keep feeding that, as much as I can, to
you in advance. But, in fairness to Rich (Armitage), I had said
that I really have to have it that morning, this fact sheet
which he's working on.
Q But that's the complete fact sheet.
MS. TUTWILER: Of everything; right.
Q Obviously, he knows some of the target places that
are pretty much locked in at this point?
MS. TUTWILER: Oh, sure.
Q What about Armenia -- Azerbaijan, Moldova, and
Georgia, and places like that?
MS. TUTWILER: On this particular trip, due to
scheduling, we decided that this is what the schedule would
accommodate. As you know, we have already been -- in fact,
twice -- to Kazakhstan, to two of the Central Asian republics,
and the Secretary felt on this particular trip that it would be
useful, and something he had wanted to do in the past, and the
schedule didn't accommodate it -- to visit the other three.
Q Which is the farthest east of those? I assume
you're still planning to go out as far east as possible and work
your way back?
MS. TUTWILER: That's getting me to a level of detail
and decisions that, honestly, just aren't made. I understand
your needs. They were pointed out to me on the plane coming
home.
We are trying desperately, as you know, in many of
these places -- I would say in all three of these -- we have no
staff; we have no phone communications. So it's difficult for
us -- and we're really trying. I just don't know for you yet,
which I believe is your question, about overnights. I don't
have that yet.
Q What's the possibility of some add-ons after
Moscow?
MS. TUTWILER: Anything is always possible.
Q As of right now, there is nothing?
MS. TUTWILER: Well, I don't ever like to say that.
Who knows? Let's just take this one day at a time.
Q Does the Secretary anticipate that when he's at
each of these Central Asian republics, he'll be there at the
same time the flights will be arriving? Or is the opportunity
with the Secretary and flights going to be in Germany and then
you're going to be doing other things?
MS. TUTWILER: If we've gotten at that, we'll
coordinate it. I'm unaware of it. It did not go into his
thinking concerning where he is going and the reasons that he is
going to these three Asian republics. I will be happy to check
with Mr. Armitage to see if, indeed, we know what days we're
going to be where; if, indeed, one of the flights that's taking
place over the two weeks would, indeed, be there.
As you know, we are doing 54 sorties over, we said, a
week to two-week period. And that safety permitting, especially
with relationship to Georgia, we anticipated sending at least a
flight to all of the former republics.
Q So if it's not flights, per se, what would you
say, loosely speaking, the agendas are for his talks with the
leaders of those three Central Asian republics? What's on his
mind?
MS. TUTWILER: Loosely speaking, I just don't want to
do that for you today. He has a whole host of things to discuss
with these leaders, but I'm not in a position today to go
through for you in any detail his proposed agenda.
Q Margaret, can you tell us something about the
Moscow talks? Is it -- what are you going to try to do in the
Moscow talks? Is it envisioned that there will be some sort of
treaty coming out of this or a communique, or something, as to
how the two sides are going to proceed with arms control?
MS. TUTWILER: I haven't heard mentioned, John, this
morning of either a treaty or a communique. We are discussing
internally, as you can well imagine -- an interagency -- at the
highest levels of our government, as the President said that we
would be doing -- how we are going to proceed on following up on
the proposals that President Yeltsin made.
President Bush stated any number of times Saturday, in
his press conference, that Secretary Baker would be going, and
the other experts, to discuss this in quite some detail. I
don't have the detail yet to give you of what the U.S.
delegation, headed by the Secretary, will be in a position to
discuss or not to discuss.
Q Does the U.S. have a preference as to how to
proceed with this?
MS. TUTWILER: If we did, I certainly wouldn't reveal
it here.
Q I'm simply asking you if you do have one, or if
you're simply open to whatever they want to suggest?
MS. TUTWILER: They've already made a suggestion. Part
of this, as you know, is the United States' reaction to that
suggestion. The President gave his initial reaction at Camp
David on Saturday. Secretary Cheney spoke to you all, or to an
American network, on Saturday saying what parts of this
he thought were very interesting and needed to be discussed.
That is the Administration's attitude, that this is definitely
something we want to follow up on; that the experts, again,
headed by the Secretary of State, will be in Moscow in two
weeks, and they will be following up in detail on these
proposals that were made just -- when was it? -- Thursday or
Friday.
Q Margaret, there's another round of treaty
negotiations a la START II. Is that one of the options? Is
that one of the possibilities?
MS. TUTWILER: I haven't heard that mentioned. But,
again, I think it would be highly unusual to assume that over
the weekend the Administration -- these are, after all, bold
proposals the President made in his State of the Union; there
are bold proposals that President Yeltsin has made -- that this
Administration has spent all weekend long and has a nice, neat,
little package of -- here is every single thing we're going to
do. It just doesn't exist yet.
Q I just want to find out -- since we're looking for
a mechanism -- whether the mechanism has to be treaty
negotiations which can be extended, or if reciprocal actions --
MS. TUTWILER: Or you could have unilateral actions.
These were two unilateral statements.
Q But I'm trying to find out whether treaty
negotiations is one of the options?
MS. TUTWILER: The Secretary of State has had one
meeting this morning concerning this subject with his senior
level experts. I heard no mention, in that particular meeting,
of treaty language, but I'm sure there will be many, many other
meetings prior to his meeting in Moscow.
Q Margaret, to follow up on Saul's question, do you
think we're looking at the start of a many-year process here of
negotiations? Or do you think we're talking about something
that's moving much more dramatically and much faster toward
trying to reconcile these two proposals? What's your sense of
this?
MS. TUTWILER: I'm not exactly sure, Mary, that I
understand what you're asking me.
Q In other words, are we about to start long,
detailed, intricate negotiations that you anticipate -- or is it
anticipated they are going to go on for many years, ultimately
resulting in some sort of treaty? Or are you talking about more
dramatic and faster action than that?
MS. TUTWILER: I think over the last seven days you see
pretty dramatic, fast action by the two heads of state in their
proposals that they have made.
I can't answer for you -- many of the proposals that
are made, when you work out the detail, take quite a bit of time
to implement. Are you talking about implementation or are you
talking about arms control as usual in Geneva? I'm not in a
position to answer that. But I would steer you towards, it is
not arms control as normal, in my opinion, when you look at the
very bold statements that both Presidents in the last span of
seven or eight days have made concerning the arms control
agenda.
I would point you to that in less than two weeks the
Secretary of State will be back in Moscow following up on that.
That is not Geneva.
Q It's just that at the same time as these proposals
were depicted as "bold," the President sort of made no
commitment on them and the Secretary of Defense, according to
the papers this morning, has sort of dismissed them as
unrealistic. This sounds like the beginning of a negotiation.
The last negotiation on this subject took ten years.
MS. TUTWILER: I'm aware of that. I don't agree with
your characterization of Secretary Cheney's comments. I would,
again, steer you back to President Bush, just Saturday -- I
believe it was at 2:00 p.m. -- concluded a meeting with
President Yeltsin.
President Bush's statements, that I've read of the
transcript, said: These are very interesting, this is something
we want to pursue; I am asking Jim Baker to return to Moscow
within two weeks; this is something that we have to look at in
detail.
Nothing has changed yesterday -- with Sunday -- or this
morning. The Administration -- I can at least speak for the
State Department; I'm sure it's true at the Pentagon and the
White House -- are very seriously engaged in looking at details
of these proposals. That's where it is this morning.
[Japan: Prime Minister's Comments on US Work Ethic]
Q Margaret, do you have any comment on the Japanese
Prime Minister's description of U.S. work ethics?
MS. TUTWILER: I would only refer you to -- the
Japanese Government has issued a clarifying statement this
morning emphasizing that Prime Minister Miyazawa regrets any
misunderstanding concerning American workers but was trying to
make a general point about his economic philosophy.
The statement also says that the Prime Minister had no
intention of criticizing American workers. Marlin (Fitzwater)
has addressed himself to this this morning, and I would refer
you to his transcript. He obviously pointed out that the
achievements and dedication of the American worker are well
known and speak for themselves.
Q But don't you think -- you don't have to be a
Freudian expert to realize, at least, slips seem to happen very
often and may be buried somewhere deep in the Japanese
unconsciousness -- subconscious -- these uncharitable thoughts
about the United States. Isn't that something that you worry
about?
MS. TUTWILER: I have given you what I'm going to have
to say concerning this. The Japanese Embassy has delivered over
here a copy of the statement that I believe the Prime Minister's
spokesman made, and I'll be happy to give that to you at the
conclusion of this briefing.
Q Did they deliver also an apology, or a statement
of regret to the State Department as well?
MS. TUTWILER: You would like me to read it to you?
Q Yes.
MS. TUTWILER: This is a comment of the Press
Secretary, the thrust of what the Prime Minister said in the
Diet.
"Interpretation was in recognition of the excesses of
Japan's bubble economy to stress, as a part of his economic
philosophy, the importance of producing things and creating
values by the sweat of our brow in an approach to work. The
phrase 'work ethic' was used to explain such philosophy of work
and the Prime Minister regrets any misunderstanding which may
have been caused. The Prime Minister had no intention
whatsoever of criticizing American workers."
That is their statement of this morning.
Q It's an apology?
MS. TUTWILER: That's their statement.
Q Margaret, do you have any comment on Qadhafi's
statements to the Washington Post?
MS. TUTWILER: Yes. Basically, we see nothing new in
this interview. Qadhafi simply repeats Libya's position which
he has taken since indictments were handed down.
The U.N. Security Council unanimously adopted
Resolution 731 on January 21, and Libya must comply fully with
the requirements of that resolution. So we don't see any change
or anything new or significant in it.
Q There's no room for compromise which he seems to
call for?
MS. TUTWILER: Again, we didn't see anything new. He's
used this phraseology previously. So in our interpretation,
there's nothing new here.
Q Do you maintain your moot stance with regard to
France and the George Habash situation?
MS. TUTWILER: Yes, we do.
Q There's no comment at all on the fact that Mr.
Habash has now managed to walk away without even being
interrogated?
MS. TUTWILER: No.
Q And the U.S. had no desire to interrogate Mr.
Habash and did not feel that its ally ought to interrogate him?
MS. TUTWILER: We have nothing to say concerning this
situation. The only thing that I'm aware of, it's my
understanding, is that Mr. Habash -- I believe it was on
Saturday -- is now in Tunis.
Q Margaret, the same area of the region: Do you
have anything today on that U.S. News ∧ World Report story about
the Scud missiles in Iraq?
MS. TUTWILER: I'm not aware of that report.
Q Could you look into it and take it?
MS. TUTWILER: Sure. What is it -- something today?
Q It was yesterday, and Cheney dodged it also. It
claims that --
MS. TUTWILER: I really don't know anything about it. I
don't get my U.S. News ∧ World Report on Sundays at home.
Q It claims that they've manufactured up to 800 Scud
missiles and that they still are producing them everyday. I
think I got it right. Correct me if --
MS. TUTWILER: I'll be happy to look at the report. I
don't know anything about it.
Q Margaret, going back to Qadhafi, one of the points
that he made in the interview is that it's difficult to
communicate with the United States now since the representing
power has given up its duties. Is there any thought of either,
one, choosing a new representing power, or dealing directly with
the Libyans?
MS. TUTWILER: My understanding is that the Belgian
Government still represents our interests and that they have
been since 1980. If that's changed, then I have misinformation.
Q What Qadhafi said is that he wanted direct ties
with the United States.
MS. TUTWILER: I'm aware of what he said.
Q What do you think of that?
MS. TUTWILER: But I thought Jim was saying to me that
our third party interest doesn't exist anymore. I'm not aware
of that. I believe it's the Belgian Government. Our thoughts
on it are that the way we communicate with the Government of
Libya is through our protecting power, the Belgians.
Q And you don't want to upgrade that?
MS. TUTWILER: No.
Q Margaret, has the Secretary scheduled a follow-up
meeting with Israeli Ambassador Shoval, and, if he has not, does
he plan to before he departs on his trip next week?
MS. TUTWILER: Yes and yes. He will in all likelihood,
as he told you last week, be meeting with Ambassador Shoval
prior to departing on this trip on Sunday, and no time has been
set.
I would look toward the end of the week rather than
early this week for that meeting to take place, but, again,
nothing has been scheduled.
Q Margaret, the IAEA reports that Libya is willing
to have inspectors come in to look at its nuclear program. Do
you have anything on that?
MS. TUTWILER: No. I'll be happy, though, to take that
question. It's just something that I'm not aware of, and it
deserves an answer. If indeed that's true, I just don't know
about it.
Q Can we return to Shoval just a moment again?
MS. TUTWILER: Sure.
Q Has the Administration made a decision on the loan
guarantee issue? Has it established a posture on how it's going
to proceed?
MS. TUTWILER: The United States is still in the
position of discussing this with the Israeli Government through,
as you know, the person they have designated, Ambassador Shoval,
and those discussions will continue probably later this week.
Q So the Administration has formed internally a
position which it hadn't about a week ago, you maintain?
MS. TUTWILER: I maintained a week ago that these were
preliminary discussions, and that Secretary Baker was in a
listening mode. That is true. He did a little bit more than
listen on Friday, to be perfectly honest with you. But that
there is a final, finite, ironclad United States decision -- I
can't say that for you.
These are discussions. They're ongoing. Ambassador
Shoval said to you all here outside the State Department, I
believe, that he wanted to get back in touch with his
government, which is certainly understandable. And I don't
know, because there has not been, at Secretary Baker's level,
any communication since then, and they will get together this
week.
Q When they get together, it will not be in a
listening mode this time? It will be in an active negotiation
mode?
MS. TUTWILER: I said, to be perfectly honest, that
Friday turned into a little bit more than listening, so I'm
being straightforward with you. So since that happened on last
Friday, this week they will continue their discussions. But,
no, I'm not aware, number one, what Ambassador Shoval and the
Israeli Government have decided and what he would be coming back
in here with, if anything. They may well have further questions
from the United States. I just don't know. This is something
that is in a state of play.
Q Margaret, on that point, did you ever confirm that
the Secretary asked Israel to freeze the new construction?
MS. TUTWILER: Did I confirm that?
Q Has it ever been confirmed? Are you ready to
confirm that now?
MS. TUTWILER: I'm not aware that the Secretary said
that.
Q Can you give us any idea --
MS. TUTWILER: Of what he did say? No.
Q Margaret, do you have a definitive date yet for
the resumption of the next round of bilaterals?
MS. TUTWILER: No. But I saw one wire copy briefly
before I came here, and I think it was -- I can't remember --
either an unnamed official -- I think I saw Hanan (Ashrawi)
mentioning some dates. I'm not aware, and to be honest with
you, I just didn't check. I know they're all working on it, and
I know they're looking towards some time in February. But let
me just check with Djerejian.
[Haiti: US Support for Restoring Aristide Government/Update]
Q Margaret, on Haiti, I wanted to ask you if U.S.
policy now reflects a sort of resignation that Aristide is not
going to be restored to power, and that the United States
Government has to take certain actions that flow from that
presumption?
MS. TUTWILER: I'm not aware that the United States
Government has a presumption that President Aristide would not
be returned to the constitutional government there in Haiti.
I'm not aware of that, and I don't know what you mean by
"certain actions the United States may have to take."
Q Well, the return of these exiles -- do you have
any --
MS. TUTWILER: That's standard U.S. law and policy.
That doesn't, to be honest with you, have anything to do with
the situation as evolved. But President Aristide and our
support of him -- this is, as I've said before -- and I can
restate it for you -- U.S. immigration policy.
Q Do you have an estimate on how many Haitians will
be repatriated, and how many will have a plausible claim to
refugee status?
MS. TUTWILER: Let me do this for you, since we haven't
done it -- or I haven't in awhile -- and bear with me, because
there are a lot of numbers. Let me go through with you the
numbers that we have, prefacing it by saying that these numbers
are approximate numbers. They change, as you know, and
fluctuate on us.
Following action by the Supreme Court and the 11th
Circuit Court of Appeals on Friday to stay the injunction
banning the repatriation of Haitians not found to have a
plausible claim to asylum, 162 Haitians boarded a Coast Guard
cutter on Saturday evening, February 1, to be repatriated to
Haiti. A further 219 Haitians left Guantanamo on another cutter
yesterday, on Sunday.
The first cutter with 162 Haitians aboard arrived in
Port-au-Prince this morning around 9:00 and off-loaded without
incident. The other cutter is scheduled to arrive in
Port-au-Prince this afternoon around one o'clock. The standard
procedure is for Embassy officials and the Haitian Red Cross to
be present during the off-loading.
It is my understanding that more Haitians will be
embarked on a cutter today for repatriation, and I don't have
any details right now of that timing.
Haitians picked up over the weekend: 611 Haitians were
picked up over this past weekend -- 587 on Friday, 24 on
Saturday and none yesterday. This brings the total number of
Haitian boat people picked up since the coup to 15,054.
On those who have been flown to Miami, it's my
understanding that 1,402 Haitians have been flown from
Guantanamo to the United States -- Miami -- to pursue their
claim to asylum.
To date, 3,609 Haitians have been found to have a
plausible claim to asylum. 594 Haitians have returned
voluntarily to Haiti. That breakout is 177 from third-country
safehavens and 417 from Guantanamo.
Approximately 10,860 Haitians are ashore at the U.S.
Naval facility at Guantanamo Bay. This number includes those
who have been screened in, and who are awaiting transportation
to the United States.
Some 1,483 Haitians are on board Coast Guard cutters.
This number includes the 381 Haitians who are being repatriated
to Haiti today. 27 Haitians remain in temporary safehaven
facilities in Venezuela. 146 remain in temporary safehaven
facilities in Honduras. Two have been medically evacuated to
the United States, and 538 were repatriated to Haiti in
November.
That's all the numbers that I have.
Q Margaret, do you still intend to process political
refugee applications in Haiti as you stated earlier from this
podium?
MS. TUTWILER: Yes. In fact, I'm not sure that I
stated it earlier. I said that we were looking at what's called
an "in-processing facility." That is very current. It's not
set up yet. It's something that we are discussing with the
Haitian Government and with, obviously, our Embassy, and it's my
understanding that there are only three other places in the
world where we have set up such a service -- I believe I'm
correct -- Vietnam, Cuba and Moscow.
Q Do you have a response to the criticism from the
U.N. High Commissioner for Refugees about the forced
repatriation policy?
MS. TUTWILER: Not really. My understanding is that
she has said that she regretted the decision. I would point out
that we have consulted closely with the UNHCR from the beginning
of the Haitian boat people situation in November, particularly
on finding other countries in the region willing to take
Haitians. And, as you all know, the regional solution produced
very little.
The United States has followed, and continues to
follow, careful screening procedures to ensure that no Haitian
with a plausible claim to asylum is returned.
Q Margaret, what about reprisals?
MS. TUTWILER: Can I give you one other fact that I did
not know but learned this morning? This concerns our
immigration policies. During the past five years, the United
States has given permanent resident status to over 95,000
Haitians.
Q Margaret, I'm just curious, what assurances have
we had from the government there that when these people go back,
they will be treated okay, and what kind of warnings have we
given the government that's there to handle these people with
care?
MS. TUTWILER: Number one, let me give you a fact that
I was given this morning. I believe that it is in -- if you
look at the history of repatriation from Haiti, which has gone
on for 11 years -- there is no evidence, it's my understanding,
not a single case, in which a Haitian who was repatriated was
targeted for persecution by the regime.
This was true in the period when there was enormous
political violence under Duvalier, under the successor regimes,
and under this de facto regime that has taken power after the
coup. So we just don't have any evidence of it.
Q Margaret, the State Department Report of Human
Rights on Haiti appears to me to be equally critical of the
Aristide Government and the de facto regime.
Is the State Department prepared to acknowledge that
human rights have deteriorated under the coup plotters?
MS. TUTWILER: One, I have not had an opportunity to
read this year's Human Rights Report, but I understand or know
that Ambassador Schifter gave a very thorough briefing on this
subject on Friday -- I wasn't here.
Q (Inaudible)
MS. TUTWILER: Yes, he did.
Q Yes. He did give a briefing.
MS. TUTWILER: Oh. You're quibbling with my
characterization.
Q Just the adjective.
MS. TUTWILER: Right, I understand.
Q A nice briefing.
MS. TUTWILER: So I really, to be honest with you, I'd
rather, because I'm not familiar with what the report says -- I
just haven't had an opportunity to read it -- refer you to
Ambassador Schifter's office and see if they can help clarify it
for you.
Q Do you have anything on --
Q Margaret, the second part of --
MS. TUTWILER: What was it, I'm sorry?
Q -- diplomatic warnings that we might have issued
to those in power?
MS. TUTWILER: I can't imagine that they need a
diplomatic warning. The whole world through the media is
focused on this. You cannot help but see it and be aware of it
and know.
I would also point out that from our information and
our records in 11 years of repatriation, we do not know of an
incident. But we have Embassy employees there at
Port-au-Prince, we have Haitian Red Cross officials, and we are
obviously watching this very, very closely and will continue to.
Q Margaret, what effect would you expect this to
have on further refugees leaving Haiti?
MS. TUTWILER: We hope the same effect that we've been
hoping for for weeks which is that people will not take to these
dangerous boats and go out into open sea and risk their lives to
try to leave Haiti. That has been our concern. We don't know
how many people have been lost at sea, and we would certainly
hope that people would get the message: Don't risk your life
and your family's life to go out into the open sea in these less
than navigable boats.
Q Is Ambassador Adams still in the United States?
MS. TUTWILER: Yes.
Q Are there any plans for him to return to Haiti,
and can you tell us under what circumstances he would return?
MS. TUTWILER: There are none that I know of -- there's
no decision on that -- and he's here on consultations, and, as
you know, he was recalled. But I'm not aware of a decision that
has or has not been made concerning when he would return.
[Cuba: US Policy on At∧T Replacement of Telephone Cable/
Allocation of Revenues]
Q Margaret, on Cuba, do you have anything on this
report of improved phone service with Cuba?
MS. TUTWILER: Yes, I do. The story that I read today
said that the United States is relaxing our embargo. We are not
relaxing the embargo, and the facts are as follows:
In 1987, the undersea telephone cable that linked Cuba
and the United States wore out. Since then, as a temporary
measure a radio-telephone link established in 1959 has been used
for telephone service. AT∧T was authorized to replace the
undersea cable and install the replacement cable in 1989.
Last December, AT∧T received permission to propose to
the Cubans a formula for paying Cuba a share of the revenues
from the phone calls carried on the cable. AT∧T is now engaged
in talks with Cuba on this issue, and, if these talks succeed,
the replacement cable can be turned on.
Our policy on this, George, is that we support free
flow of information between the United States and Cuba.
Replacing a worn out telephone cable will permit greater
communication between the Cuban-American community and their
relatives on the island. The license review process ensures
that the Cuban Government will not earn excessive revenues as a
result.
How it's been handled in the past is payments to Cuba
have been authorized for the operation and maintenance of
telecommunication lines. Cuba's share of revenues for the
current radio-telephone link and for the previous undersea cable
are paid into a blocked account to which the Cuban Government
has no access.
Given the value of maintaining communications links
with Cuba, we judged it appropriate to allow Cuba to receive a
limited share of the revenues from the replacement cable.
Q So is that cable there physically? And you said
something about if those talks are successful, then you would
turn the cable on. Is it on? Has it been laid?
MS. TUTWILER: The new one? I just learned a lot about
this this morning.
[TO STAFF] My understanding is that it is, right?
MR. BOUCHER: Yes.
MS. TUTWILER: But it hasn't been turned on, and we're
still using this worn out cable, it's my understanding --
limited understanding of this -- that's been in place since
1959, right?
Q The radio link.
MS. TUTWILER: The radio link. I don't know.
Q It's also not clear, at least to me, whether the
revenues which would be generated from the new cable would also
be paid into the blocked account or whether they would be --
MS. TUTWILER: Let me steer you toward -- we judged it
appropriate to allow Cuba to receive a limited share of the
revenues from the replacement cable.
Q "Receive" means directly and unencumbered?
MS. TUTWILER: I don't know about "unencumbered and
received directly," but in my understanding of this, that would
not be as has been handled in the past --
Q Thank you.
MS. TUTWILER: -- under the block system.
Q This is a softening of the past tradition,
correct?
MS. TUTWILER: Those are your words, as we are not
relaxing our embargo. And, yes, we have now, in our effort to
support the free flow of information between the United States
and Cuba, have judged that this limited share of the revenues
would be allowed.
Q But you're saying that you're not going "soft" on
Cuba? (Laughter)
MS. TUTWILER: No.
Q No. Heavens, no. But you are going to allow them
for the first time since you have imposed the embargo to receive
a certain amount of revenue from one of these enterprises.
MS. TUTWILER: A limited share.
Q Sounds awfully soft to me, Margaret.
MS. TUTWILER: I don't know what the percentages are
going to be. I just learned all about this this morning.
Q Could you take the question as to what a "limited
share" means --
MS. TUTWILER: What is going to be worked out?
Q -- in terms of dollars and cents, roughly?
MS. TUTWILER: Right. I'm not sure, to be honest with
you, if I can do that, because, as I said, AT∧T is now engaged
in talks with the Cubans. So I don't know if I can say that
this afternoon for you, but the Administration made a judgment
that they would be allowed to receive this limited share of the
revenues.
Q This is the first time in your opinion --
MS. TUTWILER: In my tenure?
Q -- that the United States would permit Cuba to
have access to dollars through an enterprise operated and owned
by an American company?
MS. TUTWILER: My understanding is that is correct, but
let me again check with the experts to make sure there is no
other example.
Q Margaret, are you aware of any other instances
where we've changed policy to promote the free flow of
information between Cuba and the Cuban-American community here?
MS. TUTWILER: No. But again I'm not -- as many of you
can point out, and especially George -- I'm not an expert on
this. This is something that came to my attention this morning.
I've tried to gather as much information as I could for you.
I'll be happy to look into it.
Q Margaret, is the "limited share" -- is that up to
AT∧T and Cuba to negotiate, and then the U.S. Government says,
"Fine," or is there some sort of cap that the U.S. Government
has said, "No more than this."
MS. TUTWILER: I said I did not know the percentages --
I don't -- and I'll be happy to look at your question as part of
the whole big package.
Q Do you have anything on South Africa accepting an
interim multi-party -- multi-racial government?
MS. TUTWILER: No.
Q Could you take that, too, please?
MS. TUTWILER: I'll look at it.
Q Thank you.
(The briefing concluded at 12:55 p.m.)