US Department of State Daily Briefing #57: Wednesday, 4/15/92

Tutwiler Source: State Department Spokesman Margaret Tutwiler Description: Washington, DC Date: Apr, 15 19924/15/92 Category: Briefings Region: MidEast/North Africa, Eurasia, E/C Europe, East Asia, South America Country: Israel, USSR (former), Libya, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Serbia-Montenegro, Afghanistan, Ukraine, Peru, Mexico, North Korea, Iraq Subject: Mideast Peace Process, Development/Relief Aid, Military Affairs, Trade/Economics, Immigration, Regional/Civil Unrest, Nuclear Nonproliferation, State Department 12:22 P. M. (ON THE RECORD UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED)

[Libya: Overview/Update on Effect of Sanctions]

MS TUTWILER: What I would like to do -- I've tried to pull together as much asI could this morning concerning the Libyan sanctions. Let me go through that which I think touches on a number of questions you may have; then I will try to answer any additional questions. If not, then, as you know, there will be a senior expert who will be giving you a briefing this afternoon at 3:30. It is our understanding from both press reports and diplomatic reporting that there are significant numbers of foreigners leaving Libya. We've heard that some Americans have departed, but at this point I don't have the numbers involved. We have been in contact with our protecting power, the Belgians, regarding the status of Americans who still may be in Libya. Bear in mind, as we have said many times, that some of the American citizens believed to be in Libya may be spouses of Libyan citizens or dual nationals who have not intended to leave. Our most recent information has not changed. It is still the 131 Americans that we've spoken of previously that are the only ones that are currently registered at the Belgian Embassy in Tripoli. While air service to and from Libya is being cut off under the U.N. sanctions regime, it is still possible -- we have to assume, if you wanted to -- to leave overland or by sea routes. United Nations Security Council Resolution 748 has no affect on the land borders of Libya. The borders were closed by Libya yesterday, and as far as we know they're open today. There is full agreement that by 11:59 p.m. Eastern Standard Time tonight all international air flights to and from Libya must cease. Any violations would be referred to the United Nations Sanctions Committee for possible action. I should also, or would like to point out that the Libyan Arab Airlines continues -- if it continues to fly, in our opinion it will have a great deal of difficulty finding places to land. The United Nations has formed just this morning a committee to monitor compliance with mandatory sanctions against Libya. As you know, these sanctions are in effect today, April 15. We would estimate that Libyan Airlines has offices in about three dozen countries worldwide. There are about 50 scheduled international flights a week by Libyan Arab Airlines. Other foreign carriers have in our estimation about 55 scheduled flights a week. We expect all flights to be cancelled. I do not have precise numbers of Libyan diplomats. As you know, the resolution addresses itself to that also. The resolution calls on all member states to significantly reduce the number of Libyan diplomats at their missions, and we also expect all states to comply with this requirement. In accordance with the provisions of the Resolution, paragraph 6a, the United States is consulting with the United Nations today regarding the reduction of the size and level of the Libyan diplomatic presence at the United Nations. Currently, there are 12 Libyan diplomats at the United Nations mission, and we expect that that reduction will be carried out promptly. The sanctions, with the weight of the international community behind them, are designed to secure Libyan compliance, as you know, with Resolution 731, and we certainly hope that Libya will do so. The sanctions are narrowly focused and are appropriate to Libya's responsibilities for the barbaric bombing of Pan Am 103 and the French UTA flight. They are not designed to cause hardship to the Libyan people. The United Nations Resolution 748 is mandatory and binding on all U.N. member states. All states are required to report to the U.N. Secretary General by May 15 on the measures they have taken to implement the resolution. The U.N. Security Council Libyan Sanctions Committee will review those reports, monitor implementation and recommend appropriate measures in response to violations. It is my understanding that Marlin -- whom I believe is going to be briefing, if he has not already started -- has told a number of your colleagues at the White House and will be restating it in his briefing, that the President will be signing an Executive Order later today that will go into effect at 11:59 p.m. Eastern Daylight Time concerning the sanctions against Libya. The White House will be issuing a written statement providing details on the Executive Order. Q Margaret, on a technical point, you say there's full agreement that the sanctions will begin at 11:59 tonight. Some people in Europe and the Middle East think it began at 11:59 last night. MS. TUTWILER: That's right. And in our opinion, the point is that this is effective today. We've said that the United States -- it begins for us at 11:59 p.m. tonight. The actual time when other countries have decided -- it's obviously up to those countries to decide. And we really think that the exact precise time, to be honest with you, is irrelevant. We've said when our portion or our membership -- as we view it, it kicks in for us at 11:59 tonight. Also, I must remind you there are different time zones around the world, so people are, you know, doing what they're doing. But it's not a problem for us. Q But it's 11:59 New York time. MS. TUTWILER: Correct. Eastern Standard Time for the United States. I'm well aware that others who are in different time zones -- and I've read wire copy, but they will speak for themselves -- have already put these into effect. I can't speak to what time it is, for instance, right now in Egypt or in other parts of the world. You're reading the same copy that I'm reading about what they right now are doing. Q Standard or Daylight? Q Is that 11:59 Eastern Standard or -- MS. TUTWILER: What? Q Standard or Daylight? MS. TUTWILER: When -- Q Eastern Standard or Eastern Daylight? We're in daylight time now. MS. TUTWILER: When it's 11:59 p.m. tonight in New York. It's 11:59 p.m. Q That would be Eastern Daylight Time. MS. TUTWILER: Thank you. Eastern Daylight Time is the United States' view, in New York -- New York time. Q Margaret, some of the Americans in Libya are not in the category you described. They're workers. They're people who have good jobs. MS. TUTWILER: Who are there illegally. Q Yes. Well, that's the point of my question. They're there, and they're there for their own economic interests, and they don't care to take your advice and leave. MS. TUTWILER: It's their business. Q Is that the end of it? It's their business? There's no -- you're not going to try in some way to prosecute these people or do something about them? MS. TUTWILER: I don't know, Barry, what the rules are, to be honest with you, for -- this isn't the only country where we don't give visas or recommend strongly -- validate their passports for Americans to go to. I'll be honest with you, I don't know. I can certainly ask the Consular Affairs Officers when an American comes out and says, "Hey, I was just in a place I wasn't supposed to be," I don't know what our country does about that. But you're absolutely right that we believe there are -- we're guessing, and we've said this for weeks, anywhere from 500 to 1,000. From the first time I came out and talked publicly about the United States supporting and trying to get an air embargo, 131 Americans have registered at the Belgian Embassy. But that's all, so, I mean, our numbers could be wrong that there are a thousand there. We don't know. Q To get really technical, people at the Belgian Embassy are looking after American interests. If Belgium draws down its diplomatic staff there, doesn't -- don't you lose something by that? MS. TUTWILER: It's my understanding, I believe, in the 1970s our buildings were basically burned to the ground, so we haven't had any buildings, it's my understanding, since I believe, it was either '73 or '77. I can't remember the exact date. Q '79. MS. TUTWILER: '79. Thanks. Sid says '79. It's the 70s, as I remember. Q But so far as looking after American interests, there won't be anybody there to do it, right? MS. TUTWILER: Well, number one, it's a hypothetical. I don't know that the Belgians are drawing down. Number two, if our estimates are right that there are 500 to 1,000 Americans there, I think it's close to four weeks ago when we publicly said that 131 have let the Belgians know they are there in that country. Q Margaret, are there any meetings of the U.N. Security Council scheduled on this matter before the May 15 re-evaluation deadline? MS. TUTWILER: Not that I know of, but that might better be asked at the U.N. I haven't heard of such a thing. I don't know. I mean, the Sanctions Committee, which I believe I was told right before I briefed, they have formed this morning -- I believe, Joe, who did you tell me is in charge of it? MR. SNYDER: The Hungarian. MS. TUTWILER: The Hungarian has been appointed and is in charge of that. I don't know how often they meet. I just don't know. Q Do you anticipate, though, that there would be no further U.N. formal action toward Libya until the May 15 deadline for everyone to comply fully? MS. TUTWILER: That would be my guess, but it's only a guess on my part. Q Margaret, I know this is probably going to be classified as a hypothetical, but it's not without being in the realm of possibility that Qadhafi would send one of his aircraft to try and break the embargo. Are there contingency plans for that eventuality? I mean, say, or example, he sent a Libyan Arab Airliner packed with Libyans to Rome, and he's not allowed to land. MS. TUTWILER: My understanding from wire copy this morning is that that very situation has existed in some countries, and it's my understanding that those countries' towers have turned the planes back. Q And the planes have gone back voluntarily. MS. TUTWILER: I don't know where they are. I've only just read this this morning, and I'm prefacing it by saying I have had no independent confirmation here in the building. This I've only seen in the last 90 minutes, and it's all been wire copy. I'm not doubting the wire copy, but I'm not confirming it. Q Margaret, are U.S. actions regarding Libya limited to enforcing the sanctions -- the U.N. sanctions, or are there other actions the U.S. is taking with regard to Libya that go beyond or outside the U.N. sanctions? MS. TUTWILER: Not that I have any knowledge of. Q And do you have any comment on Libya's announcement that it would ask other -- ask the nations who have required a drawdown of Libyan diplomats in their capitals to withdraw diplomats from Tripoli? MS. TUTWILER: It's their business. Q And also, you said earlier that these sanctions are not designed to cause hardship on the Libyan people. It sounds a little almost like you're making a virtue out of a necessity. The sanctions don't seem as though they would have very much effect on most Libyan people. Most Libyan people don't travel anywhere. They still will be able to get food shipments, they'll still be able to trade their oil, their valuable oil? MS. TUTWILER: That's right. And we think that it is important that we point that out: That this is not, as you know, many times -- we can take Haiti as an example. Many of the questions that we received is that, "You were hurting innocent people across the board in Haiti." This is very narrowly focused. After all, this is about a barbaric terrorist act: 441 people -- men, women and children -- are dead from blowing up two airplanes, and this is very narrowly focused. There are -- I just pointed out -- whether it's 50 or it's one, the international community is making a statement -- has made a second resolution that is tougher than the first resolution of what it expects Libya to do. And, you know, I have just told you our estimates of -- counting both Libyan flights and international flights, there's 105 right there. I don't know what kind of economic impact that has to the Libyans. I don't know if all those flights are full. I don't know if there are more flights. Q Would you expect -- do you think the United States could expect to receive support even from some of its closest allies for imposing stiffer sanctions against Libya, such as a reduction or cutoff in its oil exports? MS. TUTWILER: Secretary Baker answered that question yesterday when it was asked, I believe, by Barry, about if the United States was going to go further and have an oil embargo. I have nothing really to add to his response of yesterday. Q Margaret, Qadhafi is putting his defiance of the order that he surrender the -- the demand that he surrender the suspects in Arab terms. Do you have -- does the State Department have any accounting of how loyal the Arabs will be to this embargo? Is there any waffling in the Arab world? Do you expect them to be as -- MS. TUTWILER: We expect all U.N. members to abide by this, and I can only -- I am not going to go down a list of all the countries, whether Arab or European or Asian, etc. Obviously, we are getting lots of information of what people are doing, and various countries today have spoken out. One Arab country that I'm aware has spoken out is -- President Mubarak this morning has spoken of what Egypt will be doing. I don't have a complete rundown of every country. But, yes, we expect them to. Q Have any of them said to the State Department, "We wish you wouldn't do this. You're being too tough." Is there any buckling reported back to you? MS. TUTWILER: Not that I know of. It's my understanding that Egypt has halted all air traffic to Libya as of the end of the day, April 14. There's one. Q Yes. I know Egypt has. Q Can we -- just to follow on that, give us a sense of the Secretary's phone work on this, if any? MS. TUTWILER: There hasn't been any that I'm aware of. Q But there has been at a lower level, just sort of routine consultations on it, or is it all going on in New York? MS. TUTWILER: Well, this passed, as you know, two weeks ago, and at that time said it would go into effect April 15. The Secretary weeks ago, I'm sure, did have involvement, if nothing more than sending instructions to our representatives at the Security Council on language, etc. Over those two weeks, these two weeks, to be honest with you, there hasn't been a whole lot for anybody to do other than those who have relations with Libya to try to convince them the U.N. is deadly serious. This is going to happen. You have a two-week lead here. They, as you know, have floated a number of unacceptable proposals, and here's where we are. Q But there was no sort of attempt at a coherent strategy -- let's pull all our diplomats at a certain time or -- MS. TUTWILER: Well, we don't have any. Q Well, I know you don't, but usually you do spearhead coalition efforts. MS. TUTWILER: We were very involved, which is no secret, in the garnering of support for this second resolution, in the crafting of this second resolution. The resolution, we were very pleased, passed. And since that point, Johanna, I just can't say once everybody signed on to it -- and this morning there seems to be quite a bit of evidence people are indeed going to abide by this resolution. And it's what, speaking for the United States, we expect all United Nations members to do. Q Margaret, could you say whether Libya's friends in the Arab world -- countries like Sudan, Iran -- while not technically in the Arab world -- are complying with this U.N. resolution? MS. TUTWILER: As of this briefing, I cannot. I just don't have that information. Probably by tomorrow, but again I want to preface, we're not going to every day come out and do a country list. I mean, we'd spend 30 minutes going through that. This is the United Nations -- a hundred and -- it used to be 157. Now there are what -- 19 new countries? I mean, it's a large number we'd be dealing with. I would guess that there is going to be -- hopefully not -- but an instance where I will probably be answering questions. But right now, this morning, this is just now going into effect, I don't know of anyone who has notified the United Nations or notified the United States, "Under any and all circumstances, we will not abide by this resolution." I'm unaware of any situation like that. Q Margaret, what steps does the United States have to take to comply -- does the United States as a member of the U.N. have to take to comply with this resolution? The U.S. has no flights to Libya -- MS. TUTWILER: Right. And the President's Executive Order that is being issued at the White House will address what the United States will be doing. He has not, as I came to the podium, yet signed that, and there's a White House, it's my understanding, paper that will be sent out with it. So can I leave that to the White House? Q Well, but I guess I don't understand -- MS. TUTWILER: We don't have a lot. You're absolutely correct. But the President -- Q He's going to issue an Executive Order that -- MS. TUTWILER: Right. Q -- maybe doesn't do anything. I mean -- MS. TUTWILER: Well, let's judge it by when we see it, when they release it. And I grant you, you know, we do not have by any stretch of the imagination normal relations with Libya. The United States has recognized that from the beginning. We have no personnel. Barry spoke to our assets. They basically burned to the ground in the 70s. So I acknowledge to you that's correct. But the United States also feels very, very strongly about Pan Am 103 and did an extensive investigation to ferret this out. Q I guess I was trying to get at the fact that for the United States anyway, complying with this resolution is a relatively cost-free situation. It doesn't really cost the U.S. anything to comply with this resolution. Some other countries, it costs them business, it costs them income, it costs them perhaps some tourism, and so on. Isn't the U.S. sort of asking other people to take on the burden here that the U.S. doesn't have to bear simply because there isn't anything to bear? MS. TUTWILER: With all due respect, I would argue that it was not cost-free to the people who were flying on Pan Am 103, and I am aware that there are other countries that, yes, there is probably more of a direct economic hit to their people. But let's not forget what this is about, and that was a very incredible, barbaric, terrorist activity, and many Americans have suffered a great deal because of it. Q Could we move on to something else? MS. TUTWILER: It's fine with me.

[Former Yugoslavia: Update on Fighting in Bosnia/Related Subjects]

Q Yugoslavia, or what used to be Yugoslavia. Can you give us a rundown on U.S. diplomatic activities over the last few days in Bosnia? MS. TUTWILER: Yes. And in fact I can do as recently as this morning in a meeting in Helsinki of the CSCE. As you all know, Secretary Baker yesterday characterized the situation in Bosnia as extraordinarily tragic and outrageous. It remains so today. In Sarajevo, intensive gun battles and sporadic shelling by Serbian forces have continued overnight and into today. Militant Bosnian Serbs say their aim is to take control of Sarajevo. Serb forces have encircled it for a week, cutting off all outside commerce. Sarajevo, a city of over half a million people, is beginning to run short of food. The Yugoslav military is now overtly siding with Serbian paramilitary forces. Fighting continues throughout Bosnia. Much of it appears concentrated in towns along the Drina River in eastern Bosnia. International relief agencies report that tens of thousands of refugees, mainly Bosnian Moslems, are fleeing from areas affected by the fighting. This morning the Deputy Secretary of State underscored our grave concern and our condemnation of Serbian aggression against Bosnia to the Yugoslav Ambassador. The Deputy Secretary made the following points to the Ambassador: (1) The conduct of the Serbian leadership in Belgrade and of Serbian armed forces is completely outside the bounds of civilized behavior. (2) We need to see immediate and concrete steps to reverse this behavior and not lip service to peaceful principles while Serbian aggression continues. (3) The United States is consulting closely with the EC and other friends and allies on further steps to bring the international community's strong concerns to bear on Belgrade. Our message to Serbian civilian and military authorities is that if they continue their aggression against Bosnia and to deny human rights to Serbia's own citizens, Serbia will very quickly become an international pariah. The United States delegation to the CSCE Helsinki follow-on meeting, which is meeting right now in Helsinki, is working with EC and other delegations to put Belgrade on notice as to the consequences of its behavior in the CSCE context. Today the United States representative to the conference, Mr. Kornblum, made the following comments during a session on Yugoslavia: "The United States joins with the EC and other nations in calling on the Serbian leadership to take clear and concrete steps to correct flagrant violations of CSCE principles in its dealings with Bosnia. "If the Serbian authorities, Serbian military and Serbian paramilitary, have not taken such steps by April 29, CSCE senior officials will meet, and they will consider stronger action such as full membership for Bosnia in the CSCE on an emergency basis. "Continued refusal of Serbian authorities to live up to its CSCE commitments would raise serious questions about their presence in CSCE. We will consult with our EC and NATO partners about the continued legitimacy of the Serbian delegation at CSCE. If the situation has not improved by April 29, careful consideration should be given to the possibility of a decision to suspend their participation at that time." Q Can you give us a little bit about Secretary Baker's direct activities? MS. TUTWILER: Secretary Baker had a number of phone calls late yesterday afternoon after his meeting with the Foreign Minister, and again early this morning. He asked me to refrain from saying with whom. They are with our strong European allies, and he just didn't want me to get into the specific names. But he, himself, yes, is personally involved in this. Q Basically, the anonymous official who is quoted in the Washington Post with all the material, could we assume all that material is correct? Can you substantiate -- MS. TUTWILER: To be honest with you, I read that this morning before 7:00. I can't tell you everything that's in any article because I read them so fast. Q Just the front page of it. MS. TUTWILER: I read it -- Q They managed to get some -- MS. TUTWILER: I read seven newspapers this morning. I cannot remember. Q It's a very informed piece, as if they had access to a very senior official. I wonder if -- MS. TUTWILER: They may have. Q I wonder if we could have equal information here a day later? MS. TUTWILER: I've just given you information that the Washington Post did not have this morning on what our official was instructed, this morning, to say and has said at a CSCE meeting that is going on right now. I just gave you -- Q Well, maybe someone in Helsinki (inaudible) -- MS. TUTWILER: Well I think that what we just did -- Q This building is what I'm interested in. MS. TUTWILER: -- had some very fresh and new information that I have just given you. Q Margaret, in the past, the United States has seemed content to sit back and let this be an EC show. You're joining in with the EC in these calls for actions by Serbia -- does that indicate that the United States is now willing to take a more involved role than it has in the past? MS. TUTWILER: Let me tidy up one thing. The statement I just read to you -- parts of -- is what the United States representative, this morning, said at the Helsinki meeting. I cannot speak for the EC or other member countries, but this was what we said that we felt we should all do in the CSCE context. Q Could you clarify -- MS. TUTWILER: I'm going to answer the rest of -- Q I wanted to clarify the position of this official. Who exactly is it? Q She's answering my question. Q When we were on the question of who said it -- sorry to interrupt. Could you just say who the official is? MS. TUTWILER: No. I will never do that. Q No, the official that spoke at CSCE? MS. TUTWILER: Oh, Mr. Kornblum. I said that. Q She did. John Kornblum. MS. TUTWILER: I said that. I believe John Dancy's -- the first part of his question was that the United States previously had not been as basically involved and the EC was taking the lead, I believe was along the lines you were asking me. That is correct, and I'm not saying that the United States today is in the lead. Obviously, the EC is. As you know, we strongly support the EC Ambassador, who has just been in the region. We also strongly support Secretary Vance's mission. But we've also pointed out -- and we issued a very strong statement yesterday. We have sent over the last two weeks two very strong demarches, that I am aware of, to President Milosevic, and we have now done this at the CSCE. We have pointed out each time that Bosnia did exactly what CSCE principles call for in their seeking their independence, if you recall. That was done peacefully. There was no unilateral decisions or unilateral -- for instance, remember, the incidents with border posts being seized, etc., etc. So we have pointed out, in all of our statements, that here is a country, a new country, that followed to the letter every single thing that the international community and the principles subscribed to. And yet what is going on there today -- and I can't recall if you were there or not -- but if you listened yesterday to the Foreign Minister of Bosnia, that was a very powerful statement of what is going on in this small area on this planet Earth. It's something the United States, yes, cares very much about. If nothing more, on a humanitarian level. This is just wrong. Q In your statement, the last sentence says, in effect, that if the Serbians don't shape up by April 29, their participation should be suspended. You're saying participation in CSCE? MS. TUTWILER: Correct. Q Well, so what? Since they're acting as outlaws already, what do they lose? MS. TUTWILER: Some countries, Jim, care about legitimacy. I'm not here to judge whether Yugoslavia is one of those or not. Maybe you could call their Ambassador and ask him if he would care or not. But we know that many countries do care, and this is why we said that consideration should be given to suspending their participation. Q And "their," in this case, refers to Yugoslavia if there, in fact, still is such thing? MS. TUTWILER: Correct. Q Not Serbia? MS. TUTWILER: Basically, we have three new countries, as you know: Croatia, Slovenia, Bosnia. Yugoslavia -- because that's what we all continue to call it -- basically, as you know, is that portion of former Yugoslavia which is Serbia. Yes, I'm well aware there are others in there; but, basically, that's what it is today. Q Margaret, do you know what the Ambassador's response was to these requests by the Deputy Secretary of State? MS. TUTWILER: No, I really don't. It's a good question. I forgot to ask Larry (Eagleburger). I'm sorry. Q Was that a meeting at the U.S. request, or at the Yugoslav -- MS. TUTWILER: Yes. Q At the U.S. request. Q Margaret, does the U.S. view that what the army and the Serbian nationalists are trying to do is to partition the country? MS. TUTWILER: That is what many of them claim. I can't stand here and speak for them either because, as you know, you get contrary statements from government officials there. But what is quite clear, not only from our meeting with the Foreign Minister -- and I believe he did a press conference with many of your colleagues yesterday afternoon -- but from many of your colleagues on reporting in this morning's newspaper, including the article in the Washington Post, where someone is there on the ground and is reporting what is going on. It is really something that is very difficult to comprehend how you could do this to fellow former citizens, or just human beings. It is awful. Q The U.S. does not have information independently to confirm that this is the aim of the Serbian nationalists -- that is, to partition the country? MS. TUTWILER: We have various Serbian officials who have made comments to that effect. I can't tell you at any given moment -- as you know, things are not exactly routine and normal there -- who is speaking for whom. But it is not something that we are not aware of. I can't tell you that there are not some people, especially people who are out there on the ground, that that's not in their minds. The way -- it's my understanding -- and, again, some of your own reporting is educating people about this -- what is going on, as the Foreign Minister described it, is fairly barbaric. Q Margaret, the Foreign Minister mentioned the possibility of an aid flight going in. Do you know anything about that? MS. TUTWILER: A United States aid flight? Or just a humanitarian aid flight? Q Just a humanitarian aid flight. He didn't specify where it was going to come from. MS. TUTWILER: He mentioned to the Secretary of State that a general humanitarian aid flight would, in his opinion, be helpful. He did not have any more specifics for us, or asked the United States to do such a thing. The Secretary said that he would be more than glad to look into that, and there's nothing on that today. Q Sarajevo is running short of food, as you say -- MS. TUTWILER: They've cut it off. Q -- you're going to have to address it at some point, presumably? MS. TUTWILER: Correct. The Secretary said to the Foreign Minister, "Do you specifically mean the United States sending in a humanitarian aircraft?" He said, "I am not. But the situation is such that we are surrounded, our airport is surrounded." Yesterday, I believe, the airport was closed, and food is becoming a problem. That's why I wanted to point out how many people live there. I don't know what the international community will do if this situation continues. But we are aware of the situation; and, yes, he did raise it with the Secretary. Q Margaret, another one: Now that you've recognized Bosnia, this is an international conflict. You have one country -- Serbia -- sending its army into another. Why not take that up at the U.N.? MS. TUTWILER: That may be something that we look at. Q Peacekeeping forces: Did they discuss that? MS. TUTWILER: They did discuss that. And the Secretary pointed out that the United Nations peacekeeping forces and peacekeeping observers are just that. They are not peace-makers, which they are not in any country where they are sent. You have -- for lack of a better word -- certainly a large conflict going on there. The United Nations peacekeepers do not have a history of and are not in this case -- the Foreign Minister was very well aware of that policy. He had just spoken the day before with former Secretary of State Vance, and I believe he told us he had just met at the United Nations with the Secretary General. So he knew that. Q So what is the U.S. position? MS. TUTWILER: The U.S. position is, we agree. Peacekeepers are peacekeepers, not peace-makers. Q I mean there are options. So let's see what the U.S. -- does the U.S. think that peace -- limited as their powers are -- does the United States support, as a matter of policy, having the peacekeepers in Bosnia, too? Does the United States -- MS. TUTWILER: At this particular time when there's no cease-fire? No. They are not peace-makers. Q Do you support the idea of a European force going in? MS. TUTWILER: That would be something that, to be honest with you, I have not heard us give an opinion on, and something that I believe the Europeans have all expressed themselves on. Q The U.S. seems -- MS. TUTWILER: I don't have an opinion for you on that. Q The U.S. is taking a lead on this. When there was trouble in Serbia and Croatia and Slovenia, the United States was off on the side there and the Europeans were in the lead. MS. TUTWILER: I answered that question. That was John Dancy's question. Q Well, your answer was that it's more horrible than the situation. MS. TUTWILER: That was not my answer. Q There's another reason. MS. TUTWILER: That was not my answer. Q The reason is that it's cross-border, and that's probably what's gotten you into -- MS. TUTWILER: That was not my answer. My answer was, Barry -- and if you'll go back and look at the record -- Q That they followed the letter of the law. MS. TUTWILER: Correct. Q Then the question I was going to ask you, then, is, did Slovenia and Croatia follow the letter of -- whatever -- principles? MS. TUTWILER: No. Q They didn't? MS. TUTWILER: As you know, they took unilateral actions. And if you will recall, they seized their border posts. It was exactly what the Secretary of State had stood there and said would happen and, indeed, happened. He has spoken to this many, many times when asked the very question you're asking me. Q Does the United States think that this is something that the North Atlantic Cooperation Council should take up? Does it put it in a category, as the Secretary did in Brussels last month with Nagorno-Karabakh, for example, that it's something the NAC-C might consider involving NAC-C/NATO forces in? MS. TUTWILER: I'm not aware, Ralph, that -- I've heard various officials here discuss such things, but it's just totally hypothesizing. I'm not aware of, point blank, what our position would be should we be asked. I'll be happy to take your question. Q Do you have an update on what Cyrus Vance is doing? MS. TUTWILER: My understanding -- and this is information as of late yesterday afternoon -- is that he would be in Yugoslavia today. For security reasons, they had requested that we not give his schedule. Q Another area? Q Without giving us his schedule, can you tell us what he's going to do? MS. TUTWILER: Well, that would pretty much -- Q We don't want a minute-by-minute blow. Just what type of people he's going to meet with and -- MS. TUTWILER: As you know, the Secretary General announced last week that he had asked the former Secretary to go back on a fact-finding mission concerning the situation in Bosnia. I'm not aware that there's been any change in his mission. Q Can you discuss the warning that was delivered to Iraq? MS. TUTWILER: The warning that was issued to Iraq? The demarche, you're talking about yesterday? I can't discuss, to be honest with you, a lot of it -- the contents of it. Yesterday, as I remember, I recall that it happened. I believe that the United States consulted with our coalition partners -- Turkey, Britain, and France -- on our ongoing concerns about Iraqi behavior in northern Iraq. They made a demarche -- those three countries -- to the Iraqi representative. I believe it was at the United Nations. I believe the United States, as I recall, was represented by Ambassador Watson. The demarche covers, generally speaking, the Iraqi deployment of surface-to-air missiles north of the 36th parallel, the continuing prohibition on Iraqi flights north of the 36th parallel, and the use of military forces to repress civilians in all parts of the country in contravention of United Nations Security Council Resolution 688. I do not have for you a specific readout of the Iraqi response. All I can say is that we, and the people, obviously, who made the demarche, look for and believe that what counts is Iraqi actions and not words.

[Afghanistan: Reports of Resistance Advancing on Kabul]

Q Margaret, do you have an update on the situation in Afghanistan where the government of Najibullah seems to be crumbling? MS. TUTWILER: Yes. There are reports over the past few days of rapid advances by Afghan Resistance forces toward Kabul. The situation remains very unclear, but it appears that some regime strongpoints have fallen. These developments do not alter our conviction that only a political solution to the Afghan conflict will be an effective one. There is a danger that current military operations will only lead to more fighting and bloodshed. The Afghan Resistance has fought a long and bitter struggle for self-determination which won admiration and support from around the world. They are now on the verge of achieving their goal of self-determination for the Afghan people, but would risk a prolonged and pointless conflict if they pursue a military option which will not bring resolution and reconciliation. We urge all parties involved, and particularly the forces of the Afghan Resistance, to use this opportunity to pursue a final settlement through political means with the assistance of the U.N. Secretary General and his special representative for Afghanistan. The United States strongly supports fully the U.N.'s key role in bringing the Afghan people together. My understanding, on a literal update on the ground, is that the situation is fluid. We don't have a lot of details at this time. We're aware of what I just said is going on. It is my understanding that the U.N. Secretary General's special representative is working very hard in putting together the Council of Notables, and he's working on that right now. Q Are you saying -- Q Are you calling on the rebels to stop their advance on Kabul? MS. TUTWILER: We're calling on people to work through a political mechanism and not use one of the military and violence, to be honest with you. That's our statement. Q Isn't that the same thing? Are you calling on them to stop their military actions? MS. TUTWILER: I think our statement is fairly clear in what we have just stated is the United States' view. Q It would be clearer if you said, "Stop your military advance on Kabul." But you're choosing not to say that. Is there some difference? MS. TUTWILER: I'm choosing to stand by our statement which addresses ourselves to the current situation on the ground and says what the United States Government view is. Q Have you relayed that view to the Resistance leaders -- the Resistance groups? MS. TUTWILER: I didn't ask Ed Djerejian this morning. I'll be happy to ask him. I didn't ask the question. Q So the Administration still considers them freedom fighters, which is what the Reagan Administration called them all the time? MS. TUTWILER: Yes. Q New subject? MS. TUTWILER: It's fine with me.

[Former Soviet Union: Ukraine]

Q Do you have any comment on the reported remarks -- the reported announcement by the Ukraine Foreign Minister that shipments of nuclear warheads will resume soon to Russia? MS. TUTWILER: Yes. What we have, to be honest with you, are press reports that the Ukrainian Foreign Minister said yesterday that Ukraine will resume the movement of tactical nuclear weapons to Russia for elimination. As you know, the Defense Minister was here yesterday and had a very lengthy meeting with the Secretary of State where they discussed, in quite some detail, this subject, START and other subjects. We were very pleased yesterday to see this report of what the Foreign Minister of Ukraine said. And, as you know, we encourage the Ukrainians and Russians to continue with this process. We understand that an agreement on this has been reached between Ukraine and Russia, but that it has not yet been signed. It would be inappropriate for us, in our opinion, since this has not been signed, to have any other comments. As you know, I've told you the Secretary of State has personally been working on this. Our view -- and it's been consistent -- is that we hope that this agreement will be signed and implemented promptly. One of you -- and I can't remember who -- asked me yesterday, since there's been basically a 6-week delay, if we thought if they started today, could they, indeed, move all these weapons by July. In the same statement yesterday, where the Foreign Minister said they reached agreement, the Foreign Minister said, yes, they believe that they can. Russia has said they believe that they can. Our opinion right now is that we hope that they will reach that goal. Q Does that mean that the Defense Minister made no mention of this announcement? Or does it mean that he discussed it in terms of an agreement that hadn't been signed? MS. TUTWILER: Not only has the Secretary of State met personally with the Defense Minister, he had quite a lengthy conversation on Saturday with the Foreign Minister of Russia. So what I'm trying to steer you toward is that we are well aware that the Ukrainians and the Russians say that they have an agreement. But there is not yet -- there is a document, and that document has not been signed. Q How will that agreement, if it comes about, how does that schedule and so on work with regard to helping the U.S. get the START treaty ratified, or does it impinge upon it at all in your view? MS. TUTWILER: I'm not sure that the two are entwined.

[Peru: US Suspension of Aid during Review/OAS Mission]

MS. TUTWILER: Peru? Q What's the situation of the anti-narcotics program in Peru now? Is the United States pulling some people out? MS. TUTWILER: I am in the position today of continuing to tell you that that is an extremely sensitive security matter with us, and I have no details for you nor will you find that the Defense Department does. I think it's understandable that we do not. There was one report -- and I can't remember where it was -- this morning that we have stopped delivery of all military assistance to Peru. That's not true. There was one order of urgently needed aircraft safety equipment for the Peruvian air force. As far as our State Department and DEA counter-narcotics programs in Peru, those are still under review. Q Another subject -- on the Middle East? Q Can I follow up? The Secretary of State spoke with the Mexican Foreign Minister this morning. Did they discuss the situation in Peru, and can you tell us something about it? MS. TUTWILER: I don't know. I was unable to attend that bilateral. I was preparing for the briefing. I'll be happy to ask someone who was in the meeting to give you a readout. Q I know that someone asked the same question yesterday, but could you tell us something about what you expect of the OAS mission traveling to Lima probably next week? Do you expect them to get any positive results there due to the soft approach that many people say that the OAS has taken? MS. TUTWILER: I don't have a time yet for the OAS mission, when they're departing and when they will be there. Obviously, we are very supportive of the mission. It was a unanimous vote, as I recall -- 32 to zero. They have with them their marching orders from the OAS, and they are obviously going to try to resolve this situation according to what was decided in the document -- the resolution -- of the OAS. We certainly fully support them and hope that they will be able to. Q Margaret, on the Middle East, this morning in Cairo, Yasser Arafat was visited by Faisal Husseini and Hanan Ashrawi along with about a dozen or so other Palestinians. Arafat is there recuperating, as you know. Does the U.S. have any view as to whether the United States will continue to meet with those officials with whom it has met before, now that they have openly met with Arafat? MS. TUTWILER: I'm not aware of a meeting in Cairo this morning. And to be honest with you, I wasn't aware that Arafat was in Cairo. I haven't seen anything about this, and I'm not going to speculate on something I don't know about and whether it does or doesn't affect the Secretary or other U.S. officials meeting with individuals. I really have heard nothing about it. Q But the status of the U.S. policy, as of today, still is the U.S. does not have a dialogue with the PLO; is that correct? MS. TUTWILER: We do not. Q But could you check the facts? Because -- MS. TUTWILER: Yes. I just heard of this. I don't know anything about it. Q I understand. Could we hear later in the day whether -- MS. TUTWILER: Yes, I said I would. Q -- the United States will still consider these two folks to be legitimate advisors to peace talks if they're having meetings with Arafat? MS. TUTWILER: Yes. Q Margaret, do you have any reaction to the interview in the Washington Times today by Kim Il Sung in which he calls for better relations with the United States? MS. TUTWILER: Not particularly. I can restate for you what it takes to have better relations with the United States. Our policy hasn't changed. We can't judge this morning if this is, indeed, a shift in North Korea's attitude towards the United States. Q Thank you. (Press briefing concluded at 1:07 p.m.)