US Department of State Daily Briefing #46
Thursday, 3/26/92
Tutwiler
Source: State Department Spokesman Margaret Tutwiler
Description: Washington, DC
Date: Mar, 26 19923/26/92
Category: Briefings
Region: MidEast/North Africa, Eurasia, Subsaharan Africa,
Caribbean
Country: Iraq, Israel, USSR (former), Iran, Zaire, Congo, Angola,
Russia, Haiti, Turkey, Syria
Subject: Military Affairs, Mideast Peace Process, Travel,
State Department, Development/Relief Aid,
Nuclear Nonproliferation, Regional/Civil Unrest,
Trade/Economics
12:19 P. M.
(ON THE RECORD UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED)
MS. TUTWILER: I don't have anything. I'll be happy to
try to answer any of your questions.
Q Margaret --
MS. TUTWILER: Yes, Barry.
[Israel: US Policy on Meeting with Israeli Officials]
Q -- is there some sort of a policy, or at least an
admonition, coming from the Secretary's office about who might
have contacts with varying visiting Israeli officials?
MS. TUTWILER: No. It's absolutely false. There's
been a report -- if you're referring to the report concerning
the Vice President of the United States -- it is 100 percent,
categorically, absolutely false.
Q I'm not even sure what the report specifically
said.
MS. TUTWILER: I am.
Q In more general terms, I guess my question is,
without, you know, making it necessarily a negative or a
positive thing, is there some feeling in the building or some
attempt in the building to have only counterparts meet?
MS. TUTWILER: No.
Q To not have health ministers meet with housing
ministers, or whatever?
MS. TUTWILER: There's no such policy. I am very
familiar with this report this morning. The report specifically
deals with a scheduling matter in the Vice President's office.
You can check with his office. He meets with Israeli officials
all the time.
This was nothing more than a scheduling matter. It's
just not true. And on the broad general policy of: "Is this
some kind of directive from the State Department?" It just
doesn't exist.
Q I remember there was one case last year regarding
the Housing Minister --
MS. TUTWILER: I remember that case.
[Iran: US Condemns Iranian Government's Death Decree of Rushdie]
Q Can we move right along from that. I'd like to
ask about the Rushdie case again.
MS. TUTWILER: You would? O.K.
Q Yes. What do you say to criticisms that the
United States is basically not standing up properly for freedom
of speech and against state terrorism by refusing to have
officials meet with Rushdie? And I note in this context the New
York Times' editorial criticizing the "feeble response," in its
words.
MS. TUTWILER: I, obviously, don't agree with you, nor
do I agree, to be honest with you, with the editorial. The
United States Government has and continued to -- yesterday from
this podium and from the White House podium -- state
unequivocally what our policy has been since the first day that
this death threat was issued. We have done that consistently.
We took the occasion to do it again yesterday.
Let me point out that a number of press reports
yesterday said -- by unnamed officials -- that the
Administration had pressured the Hill not to meet with Mr.
Rushdie. It's interesting to note that today on the record many
members of Congress are saying that that is not the case. It's
interesting to note today what Mr. Rushdie's own -- what they
call themselves -- handlers have said on the record. They had
not understood this correctly, or maybe they misunderstood, that
there is no request to meet us, as I said yesterday, to my
knowledge, with the Administration, the Executive Branch.
So I think that in fairness to this Administration that
we have -- I would be happy again today to state what I stated
yesterday: That we condemn unequivocally the death decree and
call upon the Government of Iran to rescind both the death
threat and the related bounty offers.
No country that puts out such decrees can be accepted
as part of the civilized community of nations. We have publicly
reiterated this position, and the Government of Iran is well
aware of our position.
[Zaire/Congo: Eviction of UN Missions for Not Paying Rent/
Expulsion of Diplomats]
Q Could I ask you about some evictions up at the
U.N. for failure to pay rent? I understand Zaire and other
countries may be involved.
MS. TUTWILER: Correct. It's Zaire and the Congo. The
Zaire Mission to the United Nations owes a significant sum --
it's over $400,000 -- to a New York realtor for back rent.
The U.S. District Court ruled on Tuesday that the Zaireans
should be evicted from the premises.
Because, George, this is a matter before the courts, I
am not going to -- and there's an appeal, it's my understanding,
that's already in motion -- I am not going to be able to get
into any detail with you on the court matter. I will be happy
to ask the lawyers if they will make a further attempt to do so.
But I should let you know that the United States and
the U.N., in Kinshasa and in New York, have been pressing hard
for months the Zaireans to get their financial house in order.
The Zairean Mission acknowledges its debts, but has been unable
to get money from Kinshasa to pay them.
Finally, in the precedent-setting decision, the United
States Government has given Zaire thirty days to pay its just
debts in New York or face expulsion of two diplomats for an
"abuse of privilege of residence" in the United States.
The United States has also notified the Congo Mission
to the U.N. that it must satisfy its debts in New York or we
will expel two diplomats from the Congo Mission.
I was unable to get for you this morning the size of
the Congo Mission in New York, but the approximate size of the
Zairean Mission is seven officers and ten support staff. So on
our first quick look this morning, it's about 17 people.
Q Does this 30-day deadline apply also to the Congo
Mission?
MS. TUTWILER: It's my understanding, yes.
Q Those are the only two countries affected?
MS. TUTWILER: It's the only two countries, you know,
as of today. I mean, there may be others that may be getting in
this kind of shape, but these are the only two.
[Angola: Reports of Human Rights Abuses by UNITA/
Disappearance of Two Officials]
Q Margaret, on Africa: Do you have anything on
UNITA today -- the allegations of human rights abuses and
disappearance of the top members?
MS. TUTWILER: Yes, I do. Over the years, there have
been persistent reports about human rights problems with UNITA.
We have included this issue as part of our ongoing dialogue with
UNITA officials. We welcome UNITA's apparent decision to begin
to address these allegations in an open and public manner.
At the same time, we are concerned that this issue not
derail the ongoing implementation of the peace accords. The
full implementation of the peace accords leading to a democratic
election next September represents the best hope for all
Angolans for peace, stability and economic recovery.
We are confident that both UNITA and the Angolan
Government have the capacity and the will to fulfill their
commitments. Specifically, Connie, on these two individuals, we
are not able to confirm independently that these two prominent
and well-known UNITA officials have been killed.*
However, recent reports about the deaths of these
individuals appear increasingly credible. We have raised the
issue of their welfare and whereabouts with UNITA regularly over
the past six to eight months and have urged UNITA to address
this question forthrightly.
We call upon UNITA either to produce these individuals
publicly or to provide a detailed explanation of the
circumstances surrounding their reported disappearances.
Q How will this affect U.S. relations with UNITA?
MS. TUTWILER: I've just said that this is something
that we have discussed over the years with UNITA -- human
rights, etc. -- and that this is something that we have called
for through diplomatic channels and publicly for their two
individuals to be either shown publicly or for an explanation to
be given.
---------------------------
* Former UNITA representatives to the U.S. and Portugal, Tito
Chingunji and Wilson dos Santos, respectively.
---------------------------
[Iran: More on Salman Rushdie]
Q Can I go back to Salman Rushdie? There was a
report that Lee Hamilton, Congressman from Indiana, consulted
with the State Department or called the State Department when
the invitation was sent to him to meet with Salman Rushdie. Was
there such a contact between Mr. Hamilton and the State
Department on this issue?
MS. TUTWILER: I don't have a Congressional list. We
acknowledged yesterday that, as is routinely done in many, many
instances and including in this one, Senators and Congressmen
call the State Department to ask the State Department's views on
a potential request they have. Sometimes they are saying, "We
have heard that X, Y, Z is going to be in town. Is that indeed
true or not?"
I said yesterday that when asked by the Congressional
offices, we gave our view. That is quite different, I said
yesterday, from telling members not to do something, which I
said we did not do. And many members have indeed -- reading the
papers briefly this morning -- said on the record that wasn't
the case.
[Former Soviet Union:Status of Nuclear Weapons Transfer from Ukraine
to Russia]
Q Margaret, a question on Ukraine: A story in the
Wall Street Journal today indicates that Ukraine has changed its
policy toward continuing to ship Russian -- former Soviet Union
nuclear materials back to Russia.
Do you know if that change has taken place, in fact?
Can you confirm that? And, secondly --
MS. TUTWILER: That shipments are now going?
Q No, that a change has taken place and that the
shipments have stopped; that Ukraine has decided not to continue
shipping them there.
MS. TUTWILER: They announced that on March 12 -- the
President of Ukraine did. Remember? And he suggested this --
the president -- on March 12, the possibility of seeking to
eliminate the remainder of the tactical nuclear weapons in
Ukraine at a facility to be built in Ukraine specifically for
this purpose.
The Defense Minister's statement of yesterday that the
state had dropped plans to build a nuclear weapon dismantling
facility suggests this possibility is no longer being
considered.
We have urged all parties concerned to meet the July 1
date for withdrawal of tactical nuclear weapons to Russia for
dismantling, but there has been no announcement that withdrawals
have resumed.
Q The thrust of the story was that Ukraine was going
to keep them and not destroy them --
MS. TUTWILER: I understand that.
Q -- so that they continue to be a nuclear power.
MS. TUTWILER: I understand that.
Q Do you know if that policy is now their operative
policy?
MS. TUTWILER: I have not seen the Ukraine Government
publicly say anything other than they intend to make the July 1
deadline. We're all aware that after the March 20 meeting in
Kiev that they were unable to come to agreement on a number of
areas. They have all publicly said they're continuing to work
this issue and others in the arms control area. We believe that
they are. We are in contact with the Ukrainian Government about
this, and I don't have anything definitive that I know that has
changed their policy and their position on nuclear weapons in
Ukraine.
Q What's the status of the shipments right now? Are
they shipping weapons to Russia, or have shipments stopped?
MS. TUTWILER: As I've said, that there has been no
announcement since March 12 that withdrawals have resumed.
Q And do we know that independently, that
withdrawals have not resumed?
MS. TUTWILER: We are in very close contact with the
Ukrainian Government. This is something that we watch,
obviously, very closely -- not only in Ukraine, but in other
areas -- and there's just been no announcement by the Ukrainian
Government that those withdrawals have resumed.
Q Could I follow that up? After the initial
announcement that withdrawals were going to be suspended, the
United States said again that it was in close contact, and that
it had received assurances that the July deadline would be met.
MS. TUTWILER: Right.
Q Is that still the case? Do you still feel
reassured that this July deadline will be met?
MS. TUTWILER: Yes.
[Former Soviet Union: US Ambassadors]
Q Margaret, the President has not yet nominated, I
understand, an Ambassador to Ukraine.
MS. TUTWILER: Not publicly.
Q No.
MS. TUTWILER: There's one that's there, but he hasn't
been publicly announced by the White House.
Q An Ambassador is actually there?
MS. TUTWILER: No.
Q He's not there yet.
MS. TUTWILER: No. There's one that's -- it's in the
system, it's in the paperwork. It just hasn't been announced.
Q I understand that. My question is who's in charge
there at the moment, and how many diplomats does the United
States have in Kiev?
MS. TUTWILER: I think the last time I asked, somewhere
between five and ten. We said when we opened all these missions
-- as you know, we're the first of any country in the world to
do so in all of these countries; we're now in 11 -- and by April
15, we'll be in all 12 -- this will be in Georgia.
Our Charge, who was our Consular Officer there -- Mr.
Gundersen -- was named the charge, and he is there on the ground
actively working.
Q And is it a matter of urgency to actually name the
individual whose name has been --
MS. TUTWILER: Urgency?
Q Yes. And to get him there -- to get the hearings
done, to get him confirmed, and to get him out there. What's
holding things up?
MS. TUTWILER: Mr. Gundersen is a very capable senior
Foreign Service Officer, Alan. The United States is represented
there in the Ukraine. We have been, in fact, prior to the coup.
We had a Consular Office there, which, I think, has three to
five people. So I can't characterize it as "urgent" that you
have a different individual with a different title. After all,
the United States is there.
Having said that, this Department has moved with
lightning speed to get people recommended to the White House,
White House approval, and get this paperwork, as you say, up to
the Hill for the confirmation proceedings -- not only on the
Ukraine but on all of these areas.
Q Do you have a target date to get this particular
one up to the Hill?
MS. TUTWILER: I don't have a -- that's not how it
works, to be honest with you. You don't give the White House a
target date. The White House is working on the same assumptions
that we are. We want to get these gentlemen and potentially
women announced. They have to have their -- as you know, it is
law -- an FBI full investigation. Those things take time.
But, again, whether your Ambassador gets there or not,
we are right now on the ground with Foreign Service Officers in
11 of the Republics. In approximately two and a half weeks, we
will have United States' presence on the ground in the 12th and
final one -- Georgia.
We've had a number of missions, as you know, by
Ambassador Salgo. We have identified space. We have now in
many instances permanent Embassy space. As you know, many
places they were operating on a temporary basis out of hotels.
So I'm not sure that I think we could have, to be honest with
you, moved any faster.
Q Is anybody putting a hold on any of the names that
you'd suggested to the Hill?
MS. TUTWILER: Not that I've heard of. I haven't
checked, but I haven't heard of a single hold. So that I'm
totally, literally, correct with you, that they have not
identified, Alan, for every one of these, who the State
Department's recommendation to the White House will be. Over
half have been.
Q Are you waiting to do these as a package?
MS. TUTWILER: No. We're really not. They're in
clearance.
Q You prefer to do them individually?
MS. TUTWILER: I mean, they're going to handle them as
they handle all Ambassadors to countries. I'm not aware of a
package approach. I've never heard that. Different people are
in different clearance processes right now -- just the normal
routine steps you have to go through in order to have your
papers sent forward from the White House to the Hill.
Q Is part of what's holding it up the agrement of
the U.S. Government to the Ambassadors from these new states?
MS. TUTWILER: I'm not aware there's a hold-up. I
mean, maybe you know something I don't know, but I'm not aware
there's any kind of hold-up. There's not a hold on the Hill,
that I know of. I'm not aware of a hold-up here. It's just --
look at what -- you know, rightly or wrongly, the amount of time
it takes for a person who occupies my job or an Ambassador's job
to get through the system with all of the various hundreds of
things -- financial disclosure statements, FBI investigations,
State Department security investigations. I mean, it's just,
you know, a lot of paperwork.
And I have said we're moving these through. Even
choosing them -- there's a whole layer of steps you go through
in choosing individuals for ambassadorial posts. We're moving,
for the State Department, under normal routine times, at
lightning speed.
[Former Soviet Union: Travel Advisories]
Q Margaret, one of the other things that the State
Department has done with lightning speed after installing the
Embassies in these places is issue a flurry of updated travel
advisories --
MS. TUTWILER: Correct.
Q -- about virtually all of the former republics.
MS. TUTWILER: That's right.
Q Are those advisories in keeping with the
Administration's desire to increase U.S. investment and business
opportunities in these former republics -- republics of the
former Soviet Union?
MS. TUTWILER: What these advisories are are exactly
what they are -- advisories. And, if you read them -- which we
have thoroughly done, and it has gone through a vetting process
here, as you can imagine -- that you will note that it is
informative for either an American businessman or an American
traveler. To know, for instance, Ralph -- you just went
through a number of these with us -- the water situation,
currency situations, electricity situations. There are, as we
all acknowledge -- take Nagorno-Karabakh. There is a legitimate
reason to warn Americans about that particular region. So there
are specific little areas.
But, having said that, I will tell you that also Deputy
Secretary Eagleburger is right now conducting a review of the
entire program of travel warnings, travel advisories, to make
sure that we have the best possible system, which the object of
is to warn Americans. And there is an active, right now, review
of how -- the criteria used for whether it's a warning or an
advisory, etc.
So I take your question very well. It has already been
anticipated by the Department. We are looking at it. But until
you've finished your thorough review and don't have another
system in place, we have an obligation to Americans who do call
in -- the public -- to say, "Could you please tell us whether
it's safe to go to so and so, or what is the situation in X, Y,
Z country." So that's where we are.
Q I guess the thrust of my question really was
intended to sort of illustrate -- you keep talking about how
quickly the U.S. has moved to represent itself in these places,
but then virtually the first thing it does is put up yellow
flags to stick with the caution thing, and they say, "Hey, don't
come over here right now. You can't get medical care. You'll
be a day away from U.S. Embassy assistance. There's no good
food and water. There's problems with pickpocketing and theft
and all that."
MS. TUTWILER: We knew all that and we went. And we
have an obligation --
Q Well, it's a little different for the U.S.
Secretary of State when he goes --
MS. TUTWILER: All of you all asked many of those
similar questions that American citizens will ask. And so
versus taking 64 hours to call them back and figure it out --
Q I'm talking about the political and diplomatic
impact of it, not --
MS. TUTWILER: I know exactly what you're talking
about, and I think you're going to find that this building is
going to move at lightning speed in this review process that
Deputy Secretary Eagleburger is currently working on to look at
this particular situation, so that we are ensured that our
warnings -- when we put out warnings -- are very, very, you
know, credible.
I think, for instance, right now you have over 90
countries that have advisories that are currently up. So I
don't think that commerce and tourism has come to a screeching
halt because of these 90 advisories. So it's something that a
number of individuals here, at very senior levels, are taking a
very active look at.
A A follow-up on that. You mentioned
Nagorno-Karabakh. But the travel advisories issued yesterday
don't include Azerbaijan or Armenia --
MS. TUTWILER: They're probably coming. I think only
nine got out yesterday.
Q There's no special reason for why those three were
not included?
MS. TUTWILER: I'd chalk it up to the bureaucracy.
They're coming. Believe me.
Q Little less than lightening speed, Margaret?
[Laughter].
MS. TUTWILER: A little less than lightening. They'll
be around the corner soon.
Q If you have a ticket for Nagorno-Karabakh, hold
off for a day or two until the advisory comes out. [Laughter].
MS. TUTWILER: Right. Wait for that advisory.
Q Margaret, back to the Ambassador for one second.
MS. TUTWILER: Which Ambassador? Where are we -- the
Ukraine?
Q Yes. Has the State Department and the White House
-- you speak for the State Department -- consulted with
Ukrainian-Americans in this appointment?
MS. TUTWILER: Ukrainian-Americans? That's not
normally how it's done.
Q Americans of Ukrainian origin or descent?
MS. TUTWILER: I can't speak to whether we have or have
not. I'm not familiar that any ambassadorial appointments, to
be honest with you, are vetted with particularly interested
groups here in America. I don't know. I'm answering honestly,
I don't know. If someone's done that, I don't know.
I can't talk about the individual the White House has
not yet announced.
Q Nobody has mentioned his name? I haven't
mentioned his name.
MS. TUTWILER: That's right, and I appreciate that.
The White House, I'm sure, is moving with lightening speed to
get him announced, and I'm sure that Boyden's (Gray) office is
moving fast.
Q You're alarming some of us with all this talk of
lightening speed. I don't know if we'll be able --
MS. TUTWILER: We're trying.
Q -- to keep up with the pace of it.
MS. TUTWILER: It's a big building.
Q Can I go back on another area?
MS. TUTWILER: Yes.
[Iraq: UN Inspectors Report Missiles Destruction]
Q Do you have any comment on the United Nations
report that Iraq destroyed Scuds and other things?
MS. TUTWILER: I have some new information, if I can
find it. Wait a second. Yes. The U.N. Special Commission has
announced that the ballistic missile team now in Iraq witnessed
the start of the destruction of Iraq's ballistic missile and
production facilities on March 25.
The team verified the complete destruction of some of
the nine items that the Iraqi authorities had refused to destroy
during the previous inspection. Destruction and verification
activities are scheduled to continue.
Q If I can take you to another area, which is close
by --
Q Can I just follow up on that question?
MS. TUTWILER: Yes.
Q You said some of the items on the list --
MS. TUTWILER: Some of the nine items.
Q Some of the nine items. What's the status of
that? Do we anticipate that the rest of them will be destroyed,
or has there been a problem with the rest? Why was it only some
of the items? Do you know?
MS. TUTWILER: I don't know. Maybe the U.N. Special
Commission could tell you. I did say that our current
information is that destruction and verification activities are
scheduled to continue.
[Israel: Reported Transfer of US Patroit Technology/
US Team/Investigation]
Q Israeli paper said that the U.S. team -- investigation team --
finished its work of investigating --
MS. TUTWILER: Patriots?
Q Yeah.
MS. TUTWILER: I envision that that team will be back
sometime this weekend.
Q And Mr. Harrop, the U.S. Ambassador in Tel Aviv
made several statements to Israeli newspapers, Israeli
television, and this morning on ABC reflecting and possibly, if
you might say, a thaw in the tension, or whatever, or retreat
from the strident position which has been mutual between the
United States and Israel in the last few weeks.
Do you have anything to offer? It looks like there is
some compromise coming out in the making. The Israelis might
ask for an official apology from the United States. Do you have
anything to add to --
MS. TUTWILER: I do not having anything official that
the Israelis would ask the United States for an apology. I have
briefly scanned this morning what the Ambassador had to say. I
believe it's an interview on Israeli television. And I believe
if you read it closely, you will see that it was in the first
person of what his recommendations would be.
As I've stated here before, our view on this is, the
United States Government did not do this. Someone, we've
characterized as an irresponsible leaker, did. That person is
the person who owes an apology to us and to Israel.
Q And if I might continue on this. Sherman Funk,
who is the Inspector of the State Department, he was interviewed
last week in one of the weekly newspapers here. He said almost,
in a variable degree of statements, that there are serial
numbers and other things of the report that he's planning to put
out, or the State Department will put out. Can you address what
Mr. Funk has said in public?
MS. TUTWILER: No. I've heard that he gave such an
interview. I haven't read it. We don't have any comment prior
to the public release of this report, which I said yesterday.
The latest word I have from Mr. Funk's office is that he was
looking towards a release for the end of the month. In my mind,
that's Tuesday, March 31. But in fairness to him, he has not
specifically told me March 31, so I don't have a time yet for it
to be released.
Q How will the world know what the result of the
Patriot team's investigation is? You seem to foreshadow it just
now when you said that an individual in the Department owes an
apology --
MS. TUTWILER: No, I didn't say the "Department." If I
did, I didn't mean to.
Q An individual in the government owes the United
States Government and Israel an apology. Does that mean that
the government has concluded, prior to the return of the team,
that there was no truth to the report?
MS. TUTWILER: No, that's not my intention.
Q In what way does anyone owe anybody an apology?
MS. TUTWILER: The question came at me, there have been
reports -- or I believe he didn't use the word "reports." There
are claims that the Israeli Government was seeking an official
apology from the United States Government.
I responded by saying, I have not officially seen that.
I'm not aware of an official Israeli Government request for
such an apology. However, our view of an apology, in light of
what our Ambassador last night said on Israeli TV, which he was
speaking in the first person, I stated what our views would be
on an "apology." That's why I believe there is no Israeli
Government request for a United States Government apology.
The United States Government didn't do this.
Q But the question still stands: You said somebody
owed an apology. If someone -- if, in your view --
MS. TUTWILER: If you're going to go the apology route,
which is what started all this line of questioning, it isn't the
United States Government. We didn't do this, which we've said
numbers of times. If anybody owes anybody an apology, when this
is all concluded, in my mind, you'll never see one because we'll
never know who leaked this -- either one person or several
individuals; I have no earthly idea -- the leakers are the
people who caused all of this who owe the apologies, in our
view.
Q The status of things now is that the United States
Government does not know whether the allegations are true or
false of that technology --
MS. TUTWILER: The team's not back.
Q -- transfer, is that correct?
MS. TUTWILER: Yes, the team is not back.
Q So the United States Government doesn't know
whether the allegations are true or false?
MS. TUTWILER: The United States Government team has
not returned. What I answered new today was the team is coming
back --
Q That doesn't answer the question.
MS. TUTWILER: How can I know their conclusions when
they're still there working?
Q As you frequently point out, there are plenty of
methods of communication between the U.S. Government officials
--
MS. TUTWILER: Right. But I'm not going to do this
piecemeal. Sure. Have our experts been in touch -- keep in
mind, this is a two-department, at least that I'm aware of,
team; 17 people. Am I going to sit here and say that our
experts have not been in contact with those experts? Of course,
they have.
But until the team returns with the team's conclusions
or findings, or whatever they're going to call it, no, I'm not
going to do anything piecemeal.
Q Are you precluding the possibility that maybe the
Israeli Government owes the United States an apology?
MS. TUTWILER: I don't think the Israeli Government
owes the United States Government an apology.
Q If it's violating its contractual obligations, it
would seem to.
MS. TUTWILER: We're going to wait for the team to get
back this weekend. I have said everyday, I think, from this
podium for five days that at that time we will have something to
say. I have said I do not know how this team report is coming
back in here; if it's coming back in here classified, if it's
coming back in here in written form, who it's going to in this
Department -- I do not have the answer for you on what it is
that we will be saying. I have said we are going to be saying
something.
My guess would be now, since we have an arrival time
back here -- sometime this weekend -- probably Monday or
Tuesday. But I don't know if they're getting back at midnight
Sunday night.
Q There have been a few reports lately in the
American press saying that Israel's strategic value to the
United States has diminished, mainly as a result of the end of
the Cold War. What is your position about it? Is there, in
fact, a diminishing of Israel's strategic value to the States?
MS. TUTWILER: I answered that earlier this week. Our
policy, our relationship, our friendship, etc., has not
diminished with the Government of Israel. The President of the
United States has articulated that, the Secretary of State has,
I have, hundreds of officials in this government have.
I've read various, to be honest with you, people's
opinions that have been written. That's fine. It's a free
country here. But we have stated over and over again what our
relationship is with Israel. It has not changed.
Q I'm not asking about the relationship, though.
I'm asking about the strategic value?
MS. TUTWILER: What?
Q The strategic value. Has the strategic value
diminished; not the relationship or the friendship? Only the
strategic value of Israel.
MS. TUTWILER: Our commitment to Israel and Israel's
security has not changed.
Q That doesn't answer the question, though.
MS. TUTWILER: That's how I'm going to continue to
answer it. Our relationship with Israel is built on many, many
factors and it is, as you know, an unbelievably close,
unshakeable relationship between two nations that is built on
many, many factors.
Q Margaret, how is the work going on a new --
MS. TUTWILER: How is the what?
Q How is the work going on a new resolution against
Libya?
MS. TUTWILER: Libya?
Q Is it near completion?
MS. TUTWILER: Well, the President of the Security
Council has indicated that the Council may vote on Friday, which
is tomorrow.
Q Does he have all the pieces in place now? All the
sanctions, apart from the Libyan Airlines embargo?
MS. TUTWILER: You know I'm kind of reluctant to do
predictions. It's something that we are still working on. This
is what the President of the Security Council has said. As you
know, you've covered this a lot longer than I have. Sometimes
U.N. deadlines slip. So I don't know if they'll, indeed, do
this tomorrow or not. But it is something that we have not let
go of.
Contrary to reports earlier this week that somehow
there was a stall or delay, we haven't been.
Q I haven't heard of that.
MS. TUTWILER: I have.
Q Are you able to deal with a possible provision
asking for the expulsion of Libyan diplomats all over the world?
MS. TUTWILER: All over the world?
Q Well, in various places.
MS. TUTWILER: I haven't heard that.
Q On the same topic, Margaret. Can you comment on
reports out of the World Court that Libya has offered now to
turn those suspects over to the United Nations?
MS. TUTWILER: I think there's one report this morning
that I saw on a wire copy to that effect. To be honest with
you, what is this? -- about the sixth or seventh various
scenario we've seen over the last several weeks, many of which
don't bear fruit. We don't put anymore credence in this one
than the other ones.
[Turkey: Reported Turkish Air Strikes on PKK]
Q Margaret, can I follow up on your statement
yesterday on the Kurds, the Turkish Kurds, and your condemnation
of the PKK?
MS. TUTWILER: Yes.
Q Your commendation of Turkey for its restraint:
Are you still as delighted with Turkish restraint today as you
were yesterday, given as they've now bombed targets in Iraq and
there are reports that innocent Iraqi Kurds have been affected?
MS. TUTWILER: Our policy hasn't changed since
yesterday, Alan. This is not the first time, as you're aware,
that there have been air strikes.
I don't know what else you would like me to tell you.
The policy just has not changed. It's my understanding that
Turkish forces have entered northern Iraq over the past several
months to pursue PKK guerrillas who have engaged in terrorist
operations in southeastern Turkey.
The Turks have also carried out air strikes against PKK
camps in an effort to forestall future terrorist acts. We have
consistently expressed our condemnation of terrorist groups like
the PKK, and our hope that Turkish cross-border operations
against them would be concluded quickly and avoid the death or
injury of innocent civilians.
Q Margaret, in other places when terrorist actions
are followed by air strikes, you usually refer to it: "A
regrettable cycle of violence." Would that be an apt
characteristic in this case?
MS. TUTWILER: If you want to put that characterization
on it. The one that I'm most familiar with, where we use the
"regrettable cycle of violence," to be honest with you, is in an
area where this has gone on for decades. I'm not sure -- maybe
it's the lack of knowledge on my part -- that air strikes and
this type of thing have been going on for decades.
Q Would it be accurate for us to say that -- since
you said the policy hasn't changed since yesterday -- the U.S.,
today, still says that it welcomes the Turkish restraint, the
words you used yesterday?
MS. TUTWILER: You can go check the record. I don't
believe those are the words that I have used. I'll be happy to
--
Q Whatever words you used yesterday are still
operative today; is that correct?
MS. TUTWILER: Correct.
Q About Turkey?
MS. TUTWILER: The policy has not changed overnight.
Q Margaret, the PKK is headquartered in the Bekaa
Valley, which is under Syrian control. Have you raised their
headquartering and the patronage that they receive --
MS. TUTWILER: I assume that we have.
Q -- there with your friends in Damascus?
MS. TUTWILER: I didn't ask this morning.
Q In the same topic. Germany has suspended military
aid to Turkey on the grounds that it's equipment was used in
these operations, as fellow NATO member. Do you have any
reaction to that?
MS. TUTWILER: Do I have a reaction to it? No.
Q Can I go back to Ambassador Harrop's statement? I
was a little bit concerned or puzzled over the statement that
the figure gave of U.S. aid to Israel -- I think he said -- at
one time he said $4 billion and then he said $4.3 billion. How
did he come out with this figure? I understand it's $3 billion
a year.
MS. TUTWILER: I don't know.
Q And last but not least, the Israelis, according to
reports today, said that they would like to ask the United
States to give them a copy of the report of the investigative
team?
MS. TUTWILER: I haven't seen that. I do not know, as
I've told you, how this will be concluded at the end. I don't
know.
Q Could you possibly look into that statement of
Ambassador Harrop -- how did he come up with this figure?
MS. TUTWILER: We'll take a look at it.
Q A couple of other topics. Have you resolved the
question of the timing and location of the next session of the
Middle East peace talks yet?
MS. TUTWILER: No.
Q And have you -- does the Administration think that
it should go forward with a separate bill requesting aid to the
former Soviet Union -- of Congress -- at this time?
MS. TUTWILER: I can't answer that for you at this
time.
Q How soon will that question be answerable?
MS. TUTWILER: When the Secretary of State concludes
his deliberations that he is working on, he's been working on
all week, and when we have something to announce, we'll announce
it.
Q And what about the same sort of question regarding
peacekeeping funding to the U.N.?
MS. TUTWILER: The peacekeeping is tied up all in the
same package.
Q On Haiti, do you -- can you confirm that the --
Washington Post report this morning -- that the United States is
against the use of any kind of military force, blockade or
otherwise, in the current situation?
MS. TUTWILER: I haven't seen that report this morning,
but the President has addressed himself to that in the past. I
would just -- I'm not aware of a change since the last time he
enunicated our views on that.
Q It's a State Department source.
MS. TUTWILER: There are 8,000 people who work in this
building.
Q Has any U.S. diplomats discussed with their Syrian
counterparts this apparent deal they're getting ready to strike
with Iraq to transport oil out of that country?
MS. TUTWILER: We have no information to substantiate
the media reports that we saw this morning. We are looking into
it.
Part of that report, I believe, if you read the same
one I did, said that they were considering opening two border
posts with Iraq. We understand from Syrian officials that
they're border with Iraq remains closed as it has been for many
years.
Q Have we discussed the situation now or in the
past?
MS. TUTWILER: Borders or oil?
Q In the past, either borders or oil, with Syrian
diplomats?
MS. TUTWILER: My understanding is this border
situation must somehow be garbled, because they've had closed
for years.
On the report of this oil, I don't know if it's been
discussed in the past. Obviously, it was probably discussed
when we were putting together the United Nations resolutions.
Since then, I haven't had a reason to ask, so I don't know. But
we saw this report this morning, and we're looking into it.
Q Can we go back to Libya?
MS. TUTWILER: I'm sorry, I didn't -- this gentleman
has been trying--
Q Back to the Ukraine --
MS. TUTWILER: Ukraine?
Q -- nuclear weapons. (Inaudible) also reported
today that the U.S. is starting to establish an international
group -- a monitoring group -- to monitor the dismantling of the
nuclear weapons on Russian soil. Is that idea floating here?
MS. TUTWILER: There are a number of ideas that are
being explored. I would refer you to public testimony this
afternoon by Retired Major General William Burns who has just
come back and concluded our delegation of experts that I believe
numbered at one time 67 experts in eight different sub-groups.
They were over there, I believe, two or three weeks. He has
testimony this afternoon.
Obviously, in any of the various areas and sub-groups
that he is discussing various proposals, many things get raised.
But I'm not aware of any decision along those lines.
Q Go back to Libya, please?
MS. TUTWILER: Libya?
Q Yes. Regarding the sanctions which might be
imposed tomorrow in Libya, has there been any thinking how to
spare neighboring countries from the adverse effects of these
sanctions -- countries like Egypt, like Tunisia, which are very
friendly with the United States, which has also been trying to
help the United States in this crisis?
MS. TUTWILER: We are very sensitive to, should this
resolution pass, not only neighbors but other countries where
this will have a definite economic impact.
I would say that in our conversations that the other
countries, without naming them, are aware of our sensitivities
and yet they are still telling us that they are supporting this
resolution.
Q Thank you.
MS. TUTWILER: Thank you all.
(Press briefing concluded at 12:58 p.m.)