US Department of State Daily Briefing #63:
Monday, 4/27/92
Tutwiler
Source: State Department Spokesman Margaret Tutwiler
Description: Washington, DC
Date: Apr, 27 19924/27/92
Category: Briefings
Region: MidEast/North Africa, Eurasia
Country: Israel, USSR (former), Syria, China, Germany, Peru,
Afghanistan, Serbia-Montenegro, Iraq
Subject: Mideast Peace Process, Development/Relief Aid,
Trade/Economics, Travel, Human Rights,
Security Assistance and Sales, Terrorism, Refugees,
State Department
l2:l8 P.M.
(ON THE RECORD UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED)
MS. TUTWILER: I have, and I ask your patience, a
number of things I'd like to do. Some are housekeeping matters;
some are updates; some are announcements. So I guess, as we've
done in the past, if it suits you all, after each subject we can
stop and I'll try to answer your questions and then go on to the
next, knowing that I have statements in almost every area today.
Housekeeping: This Thursday, April 30, Secretary Baker
will testify before the House Foreign Affairs Committee. The
testimony will be at l0:OO a.m. I do not yet have the room
number for you. We'll post it as soon as we get it. The
subject of his testimony will be the Freedom Support Act; and,
as you know, we will not have a briefing here at the State
Department.
[Former Soviet Union: Update on Assistance]
Okay. My next update, which I'll be brief -- we have a
very long statement for you, two, as a matter of fact -- is my
weekly update on assistance to the former Soviet Union. I have
a six-page update statement. It has a great deal of detail
covering a lot of the different baskets that we're involved in.
I also have available for you this weekend's Group of
Seven statement that was issued yesterday. As you know, that
concerns the former Soviet Union also.
In the economic area, briefly, Assistant Secretary
McAllister is leading a delegation to discuss bilateral
investment treaties with Russia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan and
Armenia. Treasury is also leading a separate team to discuss
tax treaties with Ukraine, Kazakhstan and Russia. As you know,
many of these treaties the Secretary of State has personally
discussed. Alan, I think you were on the trip when he went
through the former Central Asian Republics. You weren't there;
it was Carol? These are the follow-ups to those things that the
Secretary personally did when he was there.
We also have a quite lengthy statement for you that
Ambassador Armitage's office has prepared for us concerning
where we are with various donor groups. It identifies what is
needed and the areas where it is needed.
Ambassador Armitage is testifying this afternoon before
the House Select Committee on Hunger. I do not have the room
number or the specific time, but his office will have that for
you.
And we have other areas that were covered in our
six-page statement.
[Middle East Peace Process: Opening of Bilateral Talks] ]
On the bilateral talks that began here today, this
morning, as you know -- and I don't have the literal, specific
times -- the Syrians and the Israelis began, the Palestinians
and the Israelis, and the Lebanese and the Israelis. The
Jordanians and the Israelis are beginning this afternoon.
It is my understanding that the following groups are
having press conferences: The Palestinians at l:30 p.m., the
Syrians at 2:00, the Jordanians at 2:30. Those, it's my
understanding, are all at the Grand Hotel. And the Israelis' is
at 3:00 p.m. at the Mayflower.
Each time that these groups meet you all ask me who all
Ed Djerejian is meeting with or met with. Ambassador Djerejian
met last night with Eli Rubinstein. He spoke by phone with
Ambassador Shoval. He met with the Palestinians this morning.
He does not, as of this briefing, have any other meetings
scheduled today, but that does not mean that they won't occur.
And throughout the time that the groups are in town, he will
continue, as he has in the past, to meet with them.
On the beginning of this fifth round, I'd like to make
three points:
First, it's important to take a step back and keep
what's occurring in perspective. With the opening of the fifth
round of bilaterals, direct Arab-Israeli negotiations are
becoming a normal part of the landscape. That's a remarkable
development, and it's the first condition for substantive
progress.
Secondly, as we've said all along, this is going to be
a hard step-by-step process. No one should expect immediate
breakthroughs.
And, thirdly, what's important to keep in mind is that
all of the parties are showing seriousness and a willingness to
begin to engage in substance. We'll be encouraging them to
continue to do so during the current round and to begin to
narrow their differences on substantive issues.
Many of you had asked me about the [invitations to]
multilaterals, and I had said that I believed they were going
out over the weekend to be delivered early this week. That's,
indeed, what has happened. All invitations are out, and they
will be delivered verbally today in the various capitals.
Q Could we have a copy of the invitations and see if
you've changed the terms of reference for Palestinian
participation?
MS. TUTWILER: We have not changed the terms of
reference for participation. As you know, the terms of
reference laid out in the negotiated document for Madrid --
which all parties went to -- dealt with Madrid, bilaterals and
the organizational meeting of the multilaterals.
One of the issues to be discussed at that
organizational meeting in Moscow was to determine what the
participation would be in any follow-on meetings that happened.
And, no, we're not going to make public our invitations. This
is not something that was negotiated as the other was. It is
being handled the same way that our proposals for the bilaterals
have been, and that's being handled by our Ambassadors in
capitals verbally.
Q So can you, at least, make public how you are
phrasing the issue of Palestinian representation -- which is
different, by all predictions, from what approach you used in
Madrid?
MS. TUTWILER: It's being phrased exactly as the
Secretary of State phrased it to you in Moscow any number of
times.
Q Can you give us a list of who's been invited, or
provide one for us after the briefing?
MS. TUTWILER: I'll see. Sure.
Q For the arms control meeting, specifically, here
in Washington --
MS. TUTWILER: Yes.
Q -- am I right in assuming that, at least, all the
parties who were in Moscow have been invited to that?
MS. TUTWILER: I don't know. I am not in that level of
detail to tell you which list for every single different one
that's going out. I don't know.
Q Are they different? Are the invitations to
different groups being addressed to different parties, or is
that kind of an inclusive thing -- you're invited to all five?
MS. TUTWILER: I don't know. I'll be happy to check
for you.
Q Margaret, on the --
Q Is this (inaudible) to ask you about the talks?
Go ahead.
Q Yes. Back on the bilaterals, are you disappointed
that all the parties have scheduled press conferences, given
that --
MS. TUTWILER: No. They have one every day when
they're here -- in the past.
Q Well, I know that, but Mr. Djerejian last night
made a sort of public appeal to hold down the rhetoric; and here
they are, Day l, having as many press conferences as ever.
MS. TUTWILER: Well, rhetoric is -- we have a daily
briefing here and sometimes I can come out and use rhetoric, or
we can come out and just do a normal briefing. So I don't think
the two are exclusive of the other. And so --
Q Tell us which one you're doing. (Laughter)
MS. TUTWILER: What am I doing today? Today I'm just
--
Q Just give us a signal. (Laughter)
MS. TUTWILER: I'm just informational today.
Q Things are just normal.
MS. TUTWILER: So I mean this is what they've all
along. I'm not aware that Ed or anybody else has ever suggested
--
Q Or expressions --
MS. TUTWILER: -- don't have your daily or weekly, or
every morning or afternoon -- or whatever you want -- press
conferences. But that's quite different than using rhetoric at
those opportunities versus, you know, just a different approach.
Q Well, here's a rhetorical opportunity --
MS. TUTWILER: I have another statement. Remember.
Q -- The Israelis are saying, in Finland and other
places, that they're ready to put on the table an election plan
-- a plan for municipal elections to further autonomy. Is that
something the United States welcomes?
MS. TUTWILER: I don't have anything new for you today
on the various plans that may or may not be put on the table. I
addressed it, I think, almost every day last week; and the
statements are the same. We're just not going to enjoin in that
right now.
Q Well, Mr. Djerejian says that it's time to get on
with it and to narrow differences --
MS. TUTWILER: That's what I just said.
Q -- autonomy is the issue on that front, and the
Israelis are proposing elections. Isn't that the sort of thing
Baker and Djerejian and everybody else has in mind?
MS. TUTWILER: I'll say what I said to you on Friday,
and I said generically speaking -- I believe it was you who was
asking me --
Q Yes.
MS. TUTWILER: -- I will say the same thing again on
Monday that I told you on Friday: Generically speaking,
generally speaking, does the United States support elections?
Of course. But I also said, as I recall, that we were not going
to get involved in the specific proposals that may or may not be
being proposed. That was for the parties themselves to
determine and to discuss, and the appropriate avenue or venue
for that was at the negotiating table.
Q Margaret, is it your understanding that these
talks will only go four days, this round?
MS. TUTWILER: I don't have any understanding like
that. I've seen various rumors, as we have, at each one of the
beginnings of these meetings; and so far the actual length of
time, to my knowledge -- quickly running through it in my mind
-- has never come out to be what the rumors are.
So I don't know. There's no agreement that I know of.
Q Margaret, since this is the last session in
Washington before going to Rome, Italy, can we ask that maybe
after the conclusion that the Secretary of State will have a
news conference to address these main issues and give an
assessment of the achievements so far in the peace process or
the peace talks?
MS. TUTWILER: I'll ask him.
Q Thank you.
MS. TUTWILER: May I do a statement I have on Syria?
We are very pleased to have obtained official
confirmation from the Syrian Government of the lifting of
discriminatory restrictions on travel and disposition of
property for the Syrian Jewish community.
As you may know, the status of Syria's Jewish community
has been a part of our dialogue with the Syrian leadership.
President Bush discussed Syrian Jewry with President Assad in
their meeting in Geneva in November l990, and Secretary Baker
has raised this issue on several occasions with President Assad
in Damascus. Indeed, during the course of one of Secretary
Baker's eight visits to Damascus to discuss the peace process
and other issues, he discussed the status of Syrian Jewry for
over one hour with President Assad. These discussions have
focused on the release of the Soued brothers, granting exit
visas for unmarried Jewish women, and reuniting divided
families. Further, Ambassador Ed Djerejian and his successor,
Chris Ross, have continued this dialogue.
Following President Assad's recent meeting with the
leaders of the Syrian Jewish community, including Rabbi Hamra
and Dr. Hasbani, the Soued brothers were released from prison;
and in the case of travel, all members of the Syrian Jewish
community will now be accorded the same rights as those afforded
to all other Syrian citizens. This means that Syrian Jews will
now be allowed to travel abroad as a family, on business and for
vacations. Further, the Syrian Government has removed
difficulties encountered by its Jewish citizens with regard to
the sale and purchase of property in Syria.
We have been told by the Syrian Government that these
measures have already been put into effect.
We welcome this policy decision by President Assad and
his government. Further, we are pleased that our high-level
dialogue with Syria has contributed, not only to the Syrian
decision to join the peace negotiations, but also to this
decision on the rights of Syrian Jews, and we look forward to
its full implementation.
I forgot to point out at the beginning: Marlin will be
making a very similar statement on Air Force One. They are en
route to Florida -- Florida, I think Marlin said -- and so
there's a White House statement that's going out simultaneously
-- as I was here.
Q Margaret, beyond this, would we like to see free
emigration rights for Syrian Jews?
MS. TUTWILER: We would like to see free emigration for
everyone. We are, today, welcoming and acknowledging what we
were told -- finally confirmed this morning and told over the
weekend was a new policy by President Assad.
We recognize that it does not cover what you have just
asked me about. As we understand it, Syria's Jewish community
will now be accorded the same rights as those enjoyed by other
Syrian citizens, i.e., as I said, they're free to travel and
return to Syria. Syrian Jews will be treated no differently
than all other Syrian citizens. This means the total freedom of
travel. However, Syrian law continues to prohibit travel to
Israel.
Q Is there a quid pro quo on this? Did the United
States give Syria anything in return?
MS. TUTWILER: No.
Q Did Israel, as far as you know?
MS. TUTWILER: Not that I know of.
Q Do you know, generally speaking --
MS. TUTWILER: I'm not aware, John, that this has been
public until Marlin's (Fitzwater) release on Air Force I and my
own.
Q Do you know if Syrians, generally, have a right to
travel freely? You're saying the community is going to get the
same rights as most Syrians --
MS. TUTWILER: Let me put it to you this way: It's my
understanding that the last time President Assad met with the
Rabbi and the heads of the Syrian Jewish community was in 1976.
I believe -- and maybe I'm incorrect -- but the experts here in
this building see this as a substantial step that we are pleased
with, we have welcomed. We want to, obviously, see its full
implementation, and that this is something that the President of
the United States and the Secretary of State have spent quite a
bit of time on in their meetings with President Assad.
Q I get the drift. I'm just trying to see if the
State Department has any appraisal of the rights of Syrians --
all Syrians to travel? Do they have an unfettered right to
travel -- Syrians?
MS. TUTWILER: Maybe that's in our human rights report
that I don't have at my fingertips.
Q We'll look it up.
MS. TUTWILER: I'm sure that if that is the case,
Barry, that that is addressed there. But I do believe you'll
acknowledge that this was a situation that did exist concerning
Syrian Jews.
Q We're taking a filing break. We'll make it easier
for Marlin.
Q One question: You said Syrian Jews are free to
travel but not to Israel?
MS. TUTWILER: Correct.
Q Margaret, does this fulfill the requests made by
the President and the Secretary in their meetings with Assad?
MS. TUTWILER: On this specific matter, concerning the
Soued brothers, on unmarried Jewish women, and on the rights --
for the lifting of Syrian Jews to be able to travel,
yes.
Q And there's nothing outstanding as far as the
issues taken up on this matter between the United States and
President Assad; is that right?
MS. TUTWILER: Not that I am aware of, or that has been
pointed out to me, Mark. On these specific issues that were
raised in our meetings, this is what has been decided by
President Assad and the Syrian Government.
Q Margaret, in your formulation, you said that they
would be free to travel for business and for vacation.
MS. TUTWILER: As a family.
Q As a family -- right -- which was not the case
before.
MS. TUTWILER: Correct.
Q Should they not return, would this prejudice that
right or the current situation for other Syrian Jews who may
want to leave afterwards? What about --
MS. TUTWILER: That's a speculative question for me. I
don't have an answer for you. Maybe you're answer could be
addressed to the Syrian Government. That's purely speculative
for me. I'm merely stating what we have officially been told,
what we understand it to mean, and that is a total hypothetical
for me: Should someone leave and they not return, does it then
harm others who may wish to leave? I can't deal with that.
Q As a matter of policy, does the U.S. Government
support the right of Syrian Jews to decide whether they want to
stay or go after they travel abroad?
MS. TUTWILER: What I'm really going to do today is not
hypothesize with you. I'm going to stick --
Q No. I'm asking about U.S. policy.
MS. TUTWILER: I understand that, but that's
hypothetical for me. I don't know that a Syrian Jew would make
such a decision. So when you have a specific case, I'll give
you a specific policy. I don't have a case this morning.
Q What about freedom to emigrate?
Q (Inaudible)
MS. TUTWILER: I understand that. I have been
forward-leaning on this and said, honestly, that Syrian law has
not changed concerning -- they are still, under Syrian law,
prohibited to travel to Israel.
Q Margaret, as you acknowledge, the Secretary and
the President have worked with Syria for some time on this.
What's your assessment as to why they're making this move now?
MS. TUTWILER: I'm not sure, Carol, that we are the
best people to do this assessment. We took a look at that this
morning. It's our view that the Syrian decision came in the
aftermath of President Assad's meeting with the leaders of the
Syrian Jewish community, the first, as I said, since 1976.
We think that it would be irresponsible to speculate on
motivation, except to say that it should improve the general
atmosphere and build confidence in the Middle East.
As I've said here today, the President, Secretary
Baker, and other members of the Administration have long
encouraged the Syrian Government to take such steps. We believe
our ongoing dialogue with the Syrian Government was helpful, and
we also see the ongoing peace process as creating a climate
which encourages such gestures.
Q Margaret, let me ask you, do you know if the
invitation was the initiative of President Assad or did the
Jewish community leaders request a meeting with President Assad?
MS. TUTWILER: I don't know. You'd have to ask the
Syrians.
Q Can I get a copy of that statement, please?
MS. TUTWILER: Sure.
Q Is this the kind of confidence -- would you go so
far as to say that this is the kind of confidence-building
measure that the United States has been looking for from both
sides?
MS. TUTWILER: I don't know whether you would call it a
confidence-building measure or not. I'll leave that to you.
But this is specifically -- in our U.S.-Syrian dialogue --
specifics that we have been asking for quite a while; on
something for the Syrian Government to re-evaluate, review, and,
hopefully, make a different decision. They indeed have.
Q But this is the kind of thing you have been urging
both sides to show flexibility on some of the issues --
MS. TUTWILER: Well, sure.
Q So this is a confidence-building step?
MS. TUTWILER: I'm going to leave the adjectives --
whether it's confidence-building or not -- up to you all.
That's not my job. You all can decide that, if you think it is
or is not. What I'm dealing with is something that we have been
in discussions about, had a long dialogue about.
We were informed officially -- Saturday, I believe it
was; late Saturday -- that this, indeed, is an official decision
by the Syrian Government.
Q If I can just clarify Mark's question. The issue
of emigration was not then on the agenda?
MS. TUTWILER: I didn't say these are the only things
that Secretary Baker and President Bush have ever discussed.
I'm sure, as you know, in any of our bilateral relations, there
are a whole host of issues.
On these specific ones, we are pleased about how the
Syrian Government has resolved these. That does not mean -- I
don't think I said out here -- there are not other issues in our
dialogue with the Syrian Government that we still continue to
press on.
Q Then is it fair to say that emigration is one of
those that you still continue to press on?
MS. TUTWILER: It is fair to say that, today, we are
very pleased with the results that have -- that we were informed
of by the Syrian Government concerning specifics that we have
discussed.
I have said that this does not change the Syrian law
concerning travel to Israel. That is obviously something that
we would like for them to address.
Q Margaret, what issues of concern to Syria has the
U.S. discussed with the Government of Israel in the same way
that freedom of travel for Syrian Jews was an issue of concern
to Israel that the U.S. discussed with Syria?
MS. TUTWILER: I don't know. I'll have to check.
Q I believe I know your answer to this, Margaret,
but is there any connection between this move by Syria and the
lifting of the travel --
MS. TUTWILER: Travel advisory. Zero. Since we were
officially informed this weekend, we did not know this was
coming.
As you know, the specific travel advisory you're
speaking to, that review has been in the process for weeks. So
there's no way the two are connected at all.
John.
Q Margaret, Syria does remain on the terrorism list;
is that correct?
MS. TUTWILER: Yes.
Q Is that under review at all?
MS. TUTWILER: No.
Q Their membership on that is not under review?
MS. TUTWILER: No.
Q Would it be fair to call this a modest thaw?
Would it be fair to --
MS. TUTWILER: I've got to leave the adjectives up to
you.
Q Margaret, under the Taif agreements, Syria is due
to withdraw its troops to the Bekaa Valley in Lebanon in
September. Do you think Syria should stick to that schedule, or
is there some leeway?
MS. TUTWILER: I don't remember, Patrick, to be honest
with you. The schedule, I remember -- the substance of the Taif
Agreement. We have called for all of those -- and I believe
that Syria was a party to Taif -- to implement what they agreed
to. But I just don't remember the specific schedule.
Q So there's no give there? That could be one
concession you could make to Syria in order to obtain this --
MS. TUTWILER: It's something I have not asked this
morning. I'm not aware of any change in our policy concerning
Taif.
Ralph, on your question, I'll be happy to ask. I just
don't have it in front of me. I don't know.
Q I'm sure there are some issues that -- I mean,
Baker himself has spoken many times, for example, of discussing
a cessation of settlements; he's talked about something to do
with the Arab boycott, and he has spoken many times about who
has accepted what. But I wondered whether there were any issues
with regard to Syria, specifically, that he discussed with the
Israelis?
MS. TUTWILER: I'm sure there are. I just don't have
them at my fingertips, and my memory is failing me.
Q New subject?
MS. TUTWILER: Suits me.
Q Was the United States aware that, in the months
immediately preceding the war, Iraq may have been diverting
money for food into arms?
MS. TUTWILER: This is the bank question?
Q Well, it gets to that.
MS. TUTWILER: This is something that I don't have
anything for you on. It's something that we have just referred
you to the record on.
The only part of the story that I'm personally aware
of, the Secretary has addressed many times. This one this
morning is the agricultural part of it, as I recall -- the
Secretary calling --
Q Yes. The question is whether he called Secretary
Yeutter?
MS. TUTWILER: And he himself has said many times that
he has. So there's nothing new I have to add to this. This is
-- if you're speaking about -- I believe it's the Los Angeles
Times is doing a really long -- it has been doing a long series
on this.
Q There are several pieces out there; yeah.
MS. TUTWILER: I have nothing on it, really.
Q Well, the question, of course, is that after he
meet with Tariq Aziz -- the Secretary -- in May '89, and Aziz
complained, then the Secretary is supposed to have gone to see
Secretary Yeutter and ask him --
MS. TUTWILER: Called him.
Q Called him and asked him to --
MS. TUTWILER: It's all out there.
Q -- and asked him to continue aid -- the
agricultural credits -- to Iraq.
MS. TUTWILER: To be honest with you, I did not refresh
my memory this morning with the Secretary's own statements on
this subject. They're all out there. If you don't have them,
I'll try to get the Press Office to be helpful and get them for
you.
Q It would helpful. Thanks.
MS. TUTWILER: They're out there.
Q Maybe I don't remember all of his statements
either --
MS. TUTWILER: It's hard.
Q -- but I think the nub issue on Baker at this
point is whether, having been fully informed at an interagency
meeting of the diversion of U.S. food aid for purchase -- in
exchange for arms purchased by Iraq, having been informed of
that, did the Secretary turn around almost immediately and urge
additional food assistance to Iraq?
MS. TUTWILER: Without agreeing to your question --
which I don't -- all I'm going to do is continue, honestly, to
refer you to his own statements concerning his involvement. I
believe it was a CCC credit. I believe that he has said in
public testimony -- it's all part of the record, etc., -- that,
yes, he called Clayton Yeutter, but does not describe it exactly
as your question comes.
So it's just something that I don't have anything to
add to. He has answered this question himself, and so I really
don't have anything on it today.
Q But the revelation of facts in terms of the time
line is what makes that question more interesting. He confirmed
that he asked for more food aid. Did he do so in the immediate
aftermath of having been informed of this diversion?
MS. TUTWILER: I have no idea. Honestly, I didn't ask
this morning.
Q Would you restate for the record his reason for
going back to Secretary Yeutter?
MS. TUTWILER: No, because I did not even bring it with
me. I would rather -- since you have so much interest in it --
refer you literally to his exact words. Since this was -- what?
-- 1989 -- and today is April 1992, I do not have that memorized
myself. So I'll produce it.
Q New subject?
MS. TUTWILER: Yes.
Q Do you have anything on the Chinese deliveries of
arms to Libya?
MS. TUTWILER: Not a lot. We are aware of these
reports, and we have raised them directly with the Chinese. The
Chinese Government has assured us that they will comply with
sanctions imposed under U.N. Security Council Resolution 748.
Q Why did you raise it with the Chinese?
MS. TUTWILER: Why? Why wouldn't you?
Q What was the occasion upon which you took up the
subject with them? Did you have information to that effect?
MS. TUTWILER: Well, if we didn't have our own
information, we'd certainly have it through news reports. When
we see things all the time, we raise them with various
governments. Why wouldn't you?
Q Well, since these are U.N. sanctions, in what
capacity is the United States raising this issue with them?
MS. TUTWILER: I didn't ask. I don't know. We raised
it. What prohibits us from doing so?
Q Could you take the question: For what reason did
the United States consider itself, in effect, the policeman on
this issue?
MS. TUTWILER: I didn't say that we were acting as a
policeman.
Q I know you didn't, but you raised it. So the
question is, why would the U.S. raise this issue? It's a U.N.
sanction.
Q Does the Administration accept the explanation
that the ship was within Libyan territorial waters --
MS. TUTWILER: What I'm not going to do is be able to
get into any types of specifics concerning our conversations
with the Chinese about this situation.
Q To your knowledge, are there other ships en route
that might present a violation?
MS. TUTWILER: Not to my knowledge. But I can assure
you if I did have any knowledge of it, I'm sure it would be a
classified matter that I couldn't comment on.
Q Can I just follow? Is there any need, do you see,
for a multinational naval force in the Med to monitor this sort
of thing?
MS. TUTWILER: That would be something that would be a
decision for the Security Council and for the United States'
vote. That would be a decision for President Bush, not for me
to freelance on.
Q Do you have -- on Genscher's announcement today
that he would be resigning, did the Secretary call him and do
you have any --
MS. TUTWILER: Foreign Minister Genscher called
Secretary Baker yesterday morning at Secretary Baker's
residence. The Secretary basically expressed his sorrow that
his friend would be no longer the Dean of the Foreign Ministers'
corps, that he would miss him, how much he respected his
decision, and that he looked forward to seeing him on Wednesday.
As you know, Foreign Minister Genscher will be here.
Q Margaret, has the Administration certified Russia,
Ukraine and Byelarus for aid?
MS. TUTWILER: Yes.
Q And what's happened with Kazakhstan?
MS. TUTWILER: Well, we have about a five- or six-page,
single-spaced statement that we put in. It was an old story, so
I don't understand why it was there, to be honest with you. We
put out this statement on April 10 and, remember, the Secretary
had said in his testimony before the Senate that he thought they
were signed and going up that day.
So I was a little confused this morning, because it's
all out there. Nothing has changed since we issued this lengthy
statement concerning the situation.
Q The story suggested this certification had gone up
to the Hill on Friday night.
MS. TUTWILER: When I checked with the Secretary and
the Deputy Secretary this morning -- because I asked the very
question, "Why is this here?" -- I was told that it had gone.
So maybe there was a busted signal at a lower staff level. If
there is, they didn't know about it, because I asked.
Q Has there been any movement on the START --
MS. TUTWILER: Over the weekend?
Q Yes.
MS. TUTWILER: No.
Q Margaret, do you have any comment on an appeal
presented over the weekend by Palestinian women in East
Jerusalem to the U.S. Consulate and European Consulates about
the activities of so-called "hit squads," "Jewish hit squads,"
which eliminated, according to the reports, over 30 Palestinians
in the last two months?
MS. TUTWILER: I haven't seen that report.
Q Can you look into this, please?
MS. TUTWILER: Yes.
Q Margaret, back on Genscher for a moment --
MS. TUTWILER: Genscher. Yes.
Q Did he explain to Baker why he was announcing his
resignation?
MS. TUTWILER: Yes. It's no different than his public
statements, which his Foreign Ministry has made and he himself
has made.
Q Margaret, do you have anything new on the Air
Force plane gunned down in Peru? Anything new on it?
MS. TUTWILER: Anything new? No.
Q What's the status of U.S. and Peruvian diplomatic
exchanges on that subject?
MS. TUTWILER: I don't really have anything new to add
to it. As I believe you all know, our Ambassador spoke
immediately after this with President Fujimori. The Pentagon is
doing, it's my understanding, a briefing on this today. We --
the United States -- are conducting our own investigation of
this. This is something that, obviously, we're very concerned
about, but we do not have any definitive statements to make
until our own investigation is concluded.
[Afghanistan: Situation Update]
Q How about the situation in Afghanistan? Is the
United States satisfied with the level of calm in Kabul right
now?
MS. TUTWILER: May I do one thing? I have a statement
on Afghanistan, and I believe this is something, John, you asked
me about previously. It concerns the United States'
contribution to repatriation of Afghan refugees.
The United States will make an initial contribution of
$2 million to the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees
in support of the repatriation program for Afghan refugees in
Pakistan in 1992.
Through this contribution, the United States will
assist in the voluntary repatriation of those Afghan refugees in
Pakistan who wish to return home.
Approximately 300,000 refugees have participated in
this program since its inception in 1990. It's my understanding
that in 1991, the United States contributed
$3.6 million to that program.
One of our principal goals for Afghanistan continues to
be the return of the refugees in safety and dignity.
Concerning the overall situation -- for John McWethy --
our reporting out of Afghanistan is incomplete and sometimes
contradictory. Our assessment is that the former regime has
completely collapsed with Mujahidin forces having infiltrated
Kabul.
It appears that a coalition of resistance and militia
groups headed by Mr. Masood now controls most installations and
has the dominant position in Kabul.
There was fighting around government installations in
Kabul over the weekend between Masood's coalition and forces
associated with Hekmatyar. At this point, Hekmatyar seems
outclassed militarily and isolated politically. Major
commanders belonging to his own Pushtoon ethnic group are now
part of the coalition against him.
Resistance party leaders in Peshawar, in consultation
with Masood and other commanders around Kabul, have chosen a
council, headed by Professor Mojaddedi to temporarily take power
in Kabul. The professor and a group of Afghans are en route by
road to Kabul. Our understanding is that they expect to take
over the administration of Kabul once they arrive.
We have seen announcements of a cease-fire. We hope
that they are true, that fighting stops immediately, and that
the Afghans proceed with a political resolution based on a
broad-based transition mechanism in which the major Afghan
groups are represented.
Q At what level, or if at all, is the United States
represented to any of these groups at this time?
MS. TUTWILER: I'm not sure I know what you mean.
Q Either on the Pakistani border prior to them
leaving to go back to Kabul, or what sort of U.S. representation
is there in Kabul?
MS. TUTWILER: In Kabul, to my knowledge, zero.
Q And on the border --
MS. TUTWILER: Since we pulled them down.
Q -- has the U.S. Ambassador to Afghanistan been
operating with these potential leaders --
MS. TUTWILER: At the border? I haven't read that or
been told. I don't know. I don't think that he is at the
border. And let me ask --
Q Is he out of the United States?
MS. TUTWILER: Our Ambassador to Pakistan?
Q To Afghanistan.
MS. TUTWILER: Last week, Peter Thompson was here. (TO
STAFF) Richard [Boucher], do you know if he has gone again? I
don't know.
MR. BOUCHER: I don't think so.
MS. TUTWILER: He was in this building in Washington,
D.C., last week. He obviously last week was talking with
various people by phone. I don't know. I'll check if he's
planning on going back over there this week.
[Former Yugoslavia: Federation of Serbia-Montenegro Announced]
Q Margaret, how about Yugoslavia? Serbia and
Montenegro apparently have formed their own republic.
MS. TUTWILER: That's correct. It's our understanding
that on April 24, the Serbian and Montenegrin Assemblies
approved a constitution of a "Federal Republic of Yugoslavia,"
consisting of both those republics. Later this afternoon, local
time, Serbia and Montenegro will issue a political statement on
their new constitution. We understand this statement will
address issues relating to the territorial integrity of
Bosnia-Hercegovina.
We have previously stated our readiness to discuss with
Serbia and Montenegro their plans to have a common state. The
question of our relationship with them remains under review and
will be fully coordinated with our EC partners.
As we have explained to the Serbian leadership, the
U.S. attitude about future relations with Serbia and Montenegro
will be framed by their demonstrative respect for the
territorial integrity of the other former Yugoslav republics and
for the rights of minorities on their territory.
We look for their willingness to negotiate all related
issues at the EC Conference, led by Lord Carrington, on the
basis of mutual agreement with the other four republics. The
role of Serbia in the current violence in Bosnia-Hercegovina
will be a major consideration as we review this question.
So there's no answer today.
Q So the United States is withholding recognition?
MS. TUTWILER: Well, number one, it's my understanding
that the parliaments have voted on this, but they, themselves,
say they're supposed to issue some statement concerning some new
constitution. Yes, we're aware that they have a new name, that
they are going to call themselves the Federal Republic of
Yugoslavia. And, yes, today, the United States, concerning
recognition has no "yes" or "no" answer for you.
Q Where does this leave Macdeonia -- out of any
state?
MS. TUTWILER: No. As you know, Macedonia is something
that on April 6, when the EC met and the United States agreed,
we said this was something that we would continue to work on,
and we would be looking towards a definitive decision on that
shortly.
Q Will this new development fasten this up?
MS. TUTWILER: Fasten it up?
Q Yes.
MS. TUTWILER: Not that I've heard.
Q Margaret, can I come back to Peru for just one
second?
MS. TUTWILER: Peru?
Q Yes. I guess I don't really understand what's
going on here with these various investigations, but there are a
lot of other countries in the world which, if they shot down a
U.S. plane and killed a U.S. uniformed officer, I think the
United States would be pretty upset about it. I detect that the
United States is not upset in this case.
MS. TUTWILER: That's an incorrect detection. What I'm
not going to do is go into these literal specifics that our
investigation -- our own -- is finding out for us about the
events that took place. I said that we are very concerned. Our
officials all weekend, Ralph -- this happened on Friday -- our
officials all weekend have expressed our sympathy, obviously,
for the United States serviceman's family. We have had any
number of officials speaking out all weekend. So I didn't think
it was necessary to repeat that.
But until we -- the United States Government -- have
all these facts and details that are in, we are not going to
have a definitive statement for you on the circumstances
concerning this. But that is not a lack of sympathy or
compassion, obviously, for United States servicemen.
Q No one's suggested there would be any lack of
sympathy or compassion for any U.S. servicemen.
MS. TUTWILER: You said I didn't say anything.
Q I said it didn't seem as though the U.S. was very
upset at the Peruvian Government, and that still seems to be the
case. The question is, has the U.S. grounded all further drug
-- narcotics control program operations pending the outcome of
this investigation?
MS. TUTWILER: It's not my understanding. As you know,
throughout this we have done a number of things, one of which
was suspend all aid that was in the pipeline basically, as you
know, which included -- I believe you kept asking me -- future
aid.
Q Yes.
MS. TUTWILER: We said at the time that our
counter-narcotics programs were under review. The Pentagon has
since announced the Green Berets that were there as trainers are
out. I cannot give you any numbers of DEA officials that are
still there, for obvious security reasons. There are some DEA
programs that are continuing. Those that are even continuing
are under review. The reason they're continuing is obviously
because of our strong concern for drug traffic, and I don't know
what eventually will happen to all those programs. But DEA
personnel are still there on the ground and, yes, some of their
programs are continuing.
Q What about flights of the sort that got shot down?
MS. TUTWILER: I don't know. I didn't ask.
Q Forced down. I'm sorry.
Q Can I follow up on this? It appears then -- you
may correct me on this -- that the level of protest against this
incident has not been as forceful as in other instances. Is
there a reason for that?
MS. TUTWILER: Our Ambassador, who is there on the
ground, immediately called the President of the country. The
President of the country, it's my understanding, issued
immediately an expression of regret and promised a prompt
investigation. That is a Peruvian investigation.
I have tried to explain as well as I can that we, the
United States Government, are conducting our own investigation
concerning specifically, literally the events and details
surrounding this tragedy -- this incident -- where a U.S.
serviceman lost his life. Until that is concluded and in, I
cannot speculate with you, comment on, what may or may not have
happened that specifically triggered this event. That's where I
am.
Q I did not necessarily ask about the occurrences.
I'm only saying about the reaction of the U.S. Would you
characterize the reaction of your government as being similar or
equal to any of these kinds in the past in other circumstances?
MS. TUTWILER: No two incidents are the same. I don't
do comparisons. We have expressed our obvious sympathy about an
incident that cost the life of an American serviceman. We have
expressed to the highest level of the Peruvian Government --
immediately -- in the form of our Ambassador, our concern. And
I've told you what the President of Peru has done and why we
right now, or I, am prohibited from going into details that,
it's my understanding, they have not concluded gathering -- our
government -- on exactly what happened. That's all I'm saying
here.
Q Could you take the question of whether operations
such as the one that involved that flight have been halted?
MS. TUTWILER: Sure. And I doubt they'll tell you, if
they're intelligence operations.
Q Margaret --
MS. TUTWILER: I'll take the question.
Q You don't need to tell me what they are. All they
need to do is say whether they are continuing or not -- whether
they've been stopped as a result of that.
MS. TUTWILER: I understand. But breaking down what
I've said, which is some DEA programs are continuing, and
getting more specific -- whether they include airplanes or
helicopters or cars -- is a specific in an intelligence matter
that I'm not positive that they'll break down for you.
Q Margaret, back to Iraq for a moment.
MS. TUTWILER: Iraq?
Q Yes. Do you have any reports that there's been
fighting in the south of Iraq down by the Basra area?
Apparently there are press reports that there's been
considerable shelling of Shi'ite towns and villages.
MS. TUTWILER: I don't have considerable shelling, but
I have there are some indications of increased fighting in
southern Iraq. We are concerned by these reports, and we
obviously think that Iraq should abide by the United Nations
resolution which takes this type of thing into account.
Q Margaret, back on Syrian Jews for just a second,
could you get for us a statement or an affirmation of whether
the United States indeed seeks the right of emigration for all
Syrian Jews as opposed to the specific issue of family
unification or unmarried women being able to travel abroad?
MS. TUTWILER: Yes.
Q Margaret, on Peru for just a second. Without
pre-empting the results of the investigation, can you say that
the American plane was marked and flying in international
airspace in broad daylight with clear visibility?
Q Thank you.
MS. TUTWILER: I haven't answered him. [Laughter]
Q We're all restless.
MS. TUTWILER: No problem. To be honest with you, my
understanding is the Pentagon is doing this briefing this
afternoon, so they can probably -- I don't have whether it was
marked or not. It's my understanding that a C-130 was fired
upon by one of two Peruvian air force aircraft using machine
guns. At the time the C-130 was fired upon, it was 60 miles off
the coast of Peru. So ask the Pentagon about it, Mark. I don't
know.
Now, Carol.
Q Thank you.
(The briefing concluded at 1:02 p.m.)