doc>


US Department of State Daily Briefing #67: Monday, 5/4/92

Tutwiler Source: State Department Spokesman Margaret Tutwiler Description: Washington, DC Date: May, 4 19925/4/92 Category: Briefings Region: MidEast/North Africa, Eurasia, E/C Europe, East Asia, Subsaharan Africa, South America Country: Israel, USSR (former), Bosnia-Herzegovina, Russia, India, Kazakhstan, Iran, Libya, South Korea, China, North Korea, Tajikistan, Sierra Leone, Kenya, Peru Subject: Mideast Peace Process, Development/Relief Aid, CSCE, EC, Nuclear Nonproliferation, Security Assistance and Sales, United Nations, Trade/Economics, Regional/Civil Unrest l2:l8 P.M. (ON THE RECORD UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED)

[Former Soviet Union: Update on Aid to Newly Independent States]

MS. TUTWILER I have two things I'd like to do. It's Monday and, as you know, I do highlights of what all we have done concerning the republics in the former Soviet Union. I have, as I did last Monday, a brief statement and then we will post for you all of the details in the longer statement. And then I have statement concerning the situation in Yugoslavia. Over the past week, we made our first humanitarian deliveries into the Georgian capital of Tbilisi, with two medical flights and three food flights. As we mentioned earlier, Georgian President Shevardnadze was on hand to greet one of these flights. Two C-l4l aircraft delivered 80,000 pounds of USDA infant formula to Khabarovsk, which is in the far eastern part of Russia; and this was for distribution by the Catholic Relief Services. The Overseas Private Investment Corporation, OPIC, has received over $l2 billion worth in registrations for insurance from private U.S. companies for investments in the former Soviet Union. AID has signed a one-year $l million grant with the American Bar Association for a rule-of-law program with the new independent states. The program provides U.S. legal experts who will assist the new states in the judicial reforms. And, as I said, I have a much longer statement, as we have every Monday, that has more specifics on all of this.

[Bosnia: US Calls for Restraint/Cooperation with EC/UN]

Can we go to Yugoslavia? Q Yes, please. MS. TUTWILER: The United States is deeply concerned about the continued fighting in Bosnia, including in Sarajevo. Destruction to the city is enormous, both in human and material terms. The United States condemns perpetrators of violence in Bosnia on all sides, including the Serbian side and the "Yugoslav" army, which clearly bear the heaviest blame for continued fighting in Bosnia and have the greatest responsibility for working to obtain a cease-fire. We call on the JNA and the Governments of Serbia-Montenegro to fully respect the territorial integrity of Bosnia-Hercegovina. The United States condemns the JNA seizure of Bosnian President Izetbegovic against his will on Saturday. We note that active efforts by the U.N. and the EC, as well as by our Ambassador in Belgrade, played a significant role in arranging his release. The United States is also dismayed that Bosnian armed forces engaged in actions in Sarajevo over the weekend which are not conducive to dialogue or negotiation. We especially condemn the attack on a JNA column departing Sarajevo on a Sunday under a safe-conduct agreement negotiated by the U.N. Peacekeeping Forces. We strongly urge the Government of Bosnia- Hercegovina to exercise restraint and to abide by its agreements with the U.N. peacekeeping force. We also strongly urge the Yugoslav military command to exercise restraint and avoid actions contributing to a spiral of violence. We will continue to work closely with the European Community in support of its efforts to negotiate a peaceful settlement in Bosnia-Hercegovina. Q Margaret -- MS. TUTWILER: Yes. Q -- what confidence do you have that these calls for restraint have any chance whatsoever of being heard by the actors on the scene, given the history of the last few weeks? MS. TUTWILER: I don't know, Alan, that you have any kind of scale I could put confidence on; but the alternative, I guess, would be to say nothing and to pretend it wasn't going on. Q I'm just a bit confused about your policy in the last few weeks, and maybe you can help me -- MS. TUTWILER: I'll try. Q When the Bosnian Foreign Minister came here in the middle of last month, he saw Mr. Baker; and Mr. Baker and others that heard him were extremely moved by what he said. And there followed a series of very tough statements from Washington, including one which said that if Serbia carried on the actions that it was taking it would become an international pariah. MS. TUTWILER: Yes. Q And you yourself drew our attention to an upcoming meeting of the CSCE on the 29th of April. That meeting came and went, basically -- MS. TUTWILER: Yes. Q -- nothing was decided on Serbia's membership. And, as far as I can see, it's no further towards becoming an international pariah than it was then; and yet the violence, if anything, has intensified. So could you please explain to me what the thrust of your strategy, your policy, is to actually try and stop this fighting other than urging people to show restraint, which they plainly are not showing? MS. TUTWILER: Our policy throughout, as you know, has been to work very closely with our allies, and specifically the EC. We have been consistent in that. And, as you so rightly point out, yes, the fighting over the weekend was intensified. But on Friday the fighting was not, and so I can't freeze-frame for you and stop time. And things have been in a state of flux. And, as you know, I even said last week -- I believe on Wednesday or Thursday -- that we had seen some hopeful signs. They went up in smoke. I do not know if we will see other hopeful signs. But our effort, as you point out, when the Bosnian Foreign Minister was here, we made quite clear was an emergency humanitarian effort. I believe within 48 hours or a little longer we had sent -- I believe it ended up being six U.S. planes with food and medicine, et cetera. We stated why we believed that we were doing what was right on a humanitarian level for Bosnia. We have consistently -- I know I have, every day that I have been here -- called on all parties, all groups, to stop the violence, to stop the fighting. Now, I don't know, Alan, what will ever eventually cause them to do that. But in the meantime, there are innocent people who are having their homes destroyed, who are being killed. We don't even have a number today for you of the casualties over this weekend. Q Margaret, given the fact that our policy of working with our allies in the EC doesn't seem to be working very well -- MS. TUTWILER: That's your judgment. I mean -- Q If the object was to stop the fighting and bring about peace there, I think your statement would indicate that it's not working very well. Is there any move in the State Department to rethink this policy -- perhaps change it, perhaps -- MS. TUTWILER: No. Q -- do something unilaterally? MS. TUTWILER: No. I know of no suggestions that have been made in the State Department to do something unilaterally. I know of no suggestions that our overall approach, which is, one, to work very closely with our allies in the EC -- as you know, and Alan points out, they did have a meeting of the senior officials at CSCE on April 29th. I believe they have another such meeting scheduled for May 6th. I believe that the EC has a meeting scheduled for May 6th in Brussels on this subject. The meetings over the weekend in Lisbon were suspended because of the violence that was going on in Bosnia. So I believe, John, that not only our country but other countries are coping with the situation and trying to do whatever they can. But, overall, is there a major United States rethink of our policy? I wouldn't say so, because our overall policy has been to do whatever we can to encourage those who either are encouraging or have taken the law into their own hands to please stop. Yes, I grant you, they have not. This has been going on for months. And in Sarajevo over the weekend it was extremely intense. Q Margaret, can you tell us any more about what role the U.S. Embassy played in getting the release of the President of Bosnia? MS. TUTWILER: I can't get too specific, but my understanding is that Ambassador Zimmerman spoke -- I believe this was on Saturday -- with the generals who were, indeed, holding the president; with the president himself, and with other individuals who he thought could use their influence. And I think with, obviously, his help and as I said, with the EC's help and with others, they were able to secure his release. But he had quite, it's my understanding, extensive phone conversations throughout the day with various people who could have an influence on the matter. Q And did he use any inducements available -- threats, whatever? MS. TUTWILER: Threats? To be honest with you, I don't have that level of detail of what he said. I would be surprised if he used threats. I don't know. I mean I'd be just totally free-lancing if I put words in his mouth. All I know is that when I got to work this morning I was told that he played a significant role, and that's the level of his significant role that I personally got into. Q Is it your judgment now, then, that there is nothing else that outsiders can do to stop the violence? MS. TUTWILER: I'm not going to say that all creative thinking -- I don't know that the European Community, the United States, that others, have exhausted every single, solitary possibility. But in response to John Dancy's question, I'm not aware of a major or even, to be honest with you, minor overall policy review of United States overall policy. Obviously, do you, reevaluate the situation every day? Of course, the experts here do -- and I'm sure that, of course, in close consultation with Ambassador Zimmerman and our Embassy in Belgrade. So I can't say that there's nothing else that anyone can do. Everyone will continue to try. Q Margaret, is it United States policy to make Serbia an international pariah if it should continue with this aggression? MS. TUTWILER: Sure. Q Then how would you actually go about doing that? MS. TUTWILER: The ways that we mentioned before, Alan, that have not been closed. And, as we said, the meeting we called for April 29th -- if you check the transcript -- we said was to discuss the possibility. We did not say that was a decision-making meeting. Prior to that meeting we said, and I can give you the specifics -- I don't have them with me -- that there were, indeed, encouraging -- possibly encouraging signs. As I just stated a moment ago, that turned out not to be true. It went up in smoke. I've just said that the senior officials are going to meet yet again. So the question of legitimacy, of isolation, et cetera, in my opinion, is still on the table. But I've also pointed out today, as we have in previous statements, that there are others who also have been involved in contributing to the violence -- specifically, in this case, there in Bosnia -- Q Margaret -- MS. TUTWILER: -- and, in fact, some of them -- excuse me -- were Bosnian-armed individuals. Q Margaret, is any thought being given -- perhaps this doesn't fall under the rubric of an overall rethink of policy -- but is any thought being given to calling a session of the Security Council, to sanctions, perhaps to some sort of a blockade of the ports of Serbia? MS. TUTWILER: Well, the first two have been addressed. I'm aware of one meeting at the Ministerial level that the Secretary of State went to -- the French called -- addressing the situation in Yugoslavia. That was several months ago, if you'll recall. I don't know right now if there's another such Ministerial meeting that someone has suggested. The United States at this time has not. As far as sanctions, as you recall, as long ago as the President's trip to The Netherlands, he said that he would join with the EC in sanctions. And when he returned to the United States, shortly thereafter we did, acknowledging that our economic leverage was miniscule -- I believe it's about $5 million, or was about $5 million total. And your third thing was -- I can't remember -- what? Q Meeting of the Security Council. Q Blockade -- MS. TUTWILER: Security Council was first, then sanctions. Q -- or a blockade of the ports there. MS. TUTWILER: Or blockade. I haven't heard anybody talk about a blockade. I'm not sure that that has, to be honest with you, ever been raised. Q Do you know when and if there is going to be a decision-making meeting when that would be? MS. TUTWILER: Decision-making by who? The EC or the United States or the U.N. or -- Q Anybody. MS. TUTWILER: No. I don't know of one that's scheduled, and I'm not sure, to be honest with you, that the United States Government can have a decision-making meeting -- back to Alan's question, that, you know, are we going to decide in Yugoslavia. What we are most concerned about -- have been and have been very consistent -- is that somehow these groups find a way to somehow have a peaceful dialogue and some type of negotiation to work this all out, and to stop -- whoever's doing it. And we have at times said -- in fact, the Deputy Secretary of State recently did -- there are no angels here; that anyone who is participating in this should stop it. Q Margaret, the Bosnian President has just called for a -- MS. TUTWILER: Who? Q Bosnian President -- just called for a foreign military intervention. Does the global overall American policy over Yugoslavia rule out any kind of military intervention by the U.N. or by the EC or by anyone? MS. TUTWILER: That's something that I have never heard discussed here in our government, and it would be totally irresponsible for me to just venture a guess. Those types of decisions, whether in Yugoslavia or other areas, are made at a different location than this building, at a much higher pay grade than my own. Q What is the major difference in your May 2 statement on the assessment of the Bosnian war, as opposed to the previous ones, saying that there are now conflicting reports on who started the war, and the other one that Serbia is not mentioned in the May 2 statement at all, as in the previous ones it was a constant thing? MS. TUTWILER: You're reading from a statement that we put out on May 2? Q Right. MS. TUTWILER: I'll be honest with you, it would probably be more fruitful for me to analyze those two after this. I don't have that statement in front of me, and so I'm not aware of the questions that you're asking me. I'm not aware that we've intentionally -- as I think your question to me is -- Why did you leave out Serbia? I'd just be happy to look at those two statements for you after the briefing. Q Margaret, to what extent are the options limited by funding for possible future U.N. peacekeeping? Could something be done if there were sufficient funds to accomplish it? MS. TUTWILER: Well, as you know, there's been a question concerning peacekeeping versus peacemakers, and it's my understanding that I believe -- correct me, if I'm wrong, Richard -- over the weekend is that they -- the EC decided to take out EC observers, to suspend them. So I think one of the questions, Barrie -- whether it's EC or U.N. -- has been under the overall policies that have been here decades, putting people into -- for lack of a better phrase -- a type of civil war or certainly in harm's way. And so I don't know that this, particularly, is a money issue. I'm well aware of the enormous cost of peacekeeping to our government this year, and you've heard the Secretary testify on a number of times. I'm not sure, to be honest with you, that that is what's driving this. I know that the Secretary General has allocated the number of peacekeepers, etc. I think it's -- this is my observation -- that it's the violence that is prohibiting -- every time, if you look at it, that the United Nations says another group is going or another tranche, then they have to stop because of the violence in the area they were going. And so I think that, more than anything, at this moment in time that is dictating their decisions. Q Margaret, on Libya. MS. TUTWILER: Libya. Q A couple of American lawyers have been involved in the latest -- one being Plato Cacheris -- have been involved in assuring the two Libyan Flight 103 suspects that they would get a fair trial in the United States. Do you know if the State Department or the United States Government has had any role in these efforts by private American lawyers, either in getting to Libya or in conversing with the two suspects? MS. TUTWILER: I have no knowledge of this whatsoever, so I'll just have to ask the experts. I've never heard of it. Q Could you take that question? MS. TUTWILER: Sure. Be happy to. Q Margaret, there are reports that a South Korean Government delegation is coming to Los Angeles to survey the damage done to Korean-American businesses and what not, perhaps seeking some kind of assistance. Are they in touch with you? Do you have any plans to meet with them? MS. TUTWILER: No. We checked with every bureau this morning, and we don't have the information that you've just given us. In fact, every bureau except for the EAP Bureau registered that no one has contacted them. I do have for you -- since you had asked Richard on Friday -- there are 49 Consulate Generals in Los Angeles. There are 26 honorary Consulate Generals. So there's a large universe. We have not heard from any other than the North Koreans who are apparently sending two different delegations here, which has all -- Q South Koreans. MS. TUTWILER: South Koreans -- sorry -- which has been made public, and I haven't heard a thing about the South Africans. Q (Inaudible) MS. TUTWILER: In fact, to be honest with you, they're not on the list that I have of Consulate Generals in Los Angeles. So somewhere there's a busted signal. Q The South Africans are not on the list. Q The South Africans or the South Koreans? MS. TUTWILER: The South Africans are not on the list of Consulate Generals in Los Angeles, that we have from Diplomatic Security this morning, either honorary or a full Con Gen. So somewhere there's a busted signal. Q Do you mean you did not get any -- weren't asked from South Korean Government -- MS. TUTWILER: Yes. I misspoke and said North Korea. I obviously meant South Korea. We're well aware they're sending two delegations. I don't have when they will be arriving, and I will give you later, if we get it, who all is leading those two delegations. My understanding is that they are Foreign Ministry personnel. Q What are they coming here to do? MS. TUTWILER: We don't have any details. Q Are they looking at their Consulate General, or are they looking at Korean-Americans and their businesses and their interests, in which case it would seem to be some -- MS. TUTWILER: I would imagine they are, probably, Alan. I don't know. You'd have to ask them. They do have an Embassy here, and since one of the delegations is representatives of their Foreign Ministry -- it's governmental -- I'm sure they could answer your questions. I don't know -- I don't have any information that their actual building was hurt, but I'm sure they are probably coming to speak to those members of the community who have suffered damage. But that's my guess. Ask them. Q But you have no plans for meeting with them at this point? MS. TUTWILER: They're going to Los Angeles -- none that I know of. I don't know if Diplomatic Security or if personnel are flying to Los Angeles to meet with them, or even if they've requested to meet here in Washington. If they have, the Bureau this morning was unaware of it. Q On the subject of North Korea, have you seen a list of nuclear facilities offered by the North Koreans, and do you find it sufficient? MS. TUTWILER: Not yet. It's my understanding that they are presenting their initial inventory list earlier today in Vienna. We expect the IAEA to announce the list of facilities and types of material on the North Korean inventory list, and until we've been able to examine this information, we would prefer not to comment. Q Margaret, on a new topic, on India: Has the United States issued warnings of sanctions to Russia and India if they go through with this deal for a cryogenic rocket? MS. TUTWILER: We have been involved in detailed discussions at various levels with Russia and with India regarding the sale of rocket engines to India. Both the United States and its partners in the Missile Technology Control Regime have expressed the view that the transaction is inconsistent with the guidelines of the regime. The National Defense Authorization Act for FY-91 provides for penalties for such transfers based on a determination of the nature of the transaction. We are completing our discussions with Russia and India and our review of this matter and expect decisions soon. Q Margaret, on a related subject, have you seen reports that some tactical nuclear weapons from Kazakhstan have shown up in Iran? MS. TUTWILER: The Secretary was asked about this in testimony and said he believed that was an old story that we had seen before. I haven't gotten back into it, but it sounded to me exactly like the same story we had seen, which, as I recall it, months ago was that two either nuclear weapons or tactical nuclear weapons had -- were missing and had shown up in Iran. And, as the Secretary said, we had nothing that we have to substantiate that report. I'll check for you again today to see if there's anything new on it, but that -- our analysis of that has been consistent since the report first surfaced months ago. Q In that same report, it was mentioned that Kazakhstan had not been cleared for receiving part of the monies that had been set aside for, I guess, for the dismantling of the former Soviet nuclear deterrent and the $25 million, or whatever it was -- no, sorry -- the $400 million. Is that so? According to this report, three republics have been authorized to receive part of that money, those being Russia, Ukraine and Byelarus; and Kazakhstan had not been authorized because the United States was not satisfied with the strength of its commitment to dismantle its nuclear weapons. Can you take the question if you don't know? MS. TUTWILER: I'll take it, but I do know something about it. I do not believe that we are to the point yet where you have even given Byelarus money yet, which is part of your question. That's not how Mr. Gallucci and the group are working. I will be happy to take your question, having stated that other than the Science Center in Russia that you're aware of and the Ukrainian Science Center that we're setting up, no money yet out of the $400 million has gone. I'm not aware that it is being, as your question suggests, divided among those four republics, or three republics or two republics. I don't think they're to that point yet. Q Just one more. Is the United States satisfied with the commitment from Kazakhstan to get rid of its nuclear weapons, or are there still lingering doubts about that commitment? MS. TUTWILER: The United States, in the form of the Secretary of State, even just this weekend, is continuing to discuss this subject with Kazakhstan and with Russia, Byelarus, and the Ukraine. He spoke on Saturday, again, with the Russian Foreign Minister. He will be speaking -- he probably already has, as I'm briefing -- to the Ukrainian Foreign Minister. He has sent messages this weekend to all four of those capitals. It's a situation and a problem that he continues to work on and to address. Q Back to missile control? MS. TUTWILER: Excuse me? Q Back to the missile control technology. You mentioned the penalties. Can you elaborate on that? Are the penalities on Russia, or India, or both? And, secondly, although the word "missile" is used, this really, according to the Government of India, is for space research. Does your statement mean that the Government of India should not be in the space business? MS. TUTWILER: No. What it means is that the United States, under law, has to ensure that MTCR guidelines are adhered to. Reggie Bartholomew has had in-depth discussions concerning this subject. I'm well aware of your statement of what the Indian Government says, and it is something that we are going to, as I said, continue to review this matter, but you should expect decisions soon. It's my understanding concerning penalties that the penalities, basically, involve suspension of access to U.S. technology which would require export licensing and suspension of access to U.S. Government contracts. These sanctions are imposed for a specific period of time but can be waived if the offending export is cancelled. Q To follow on one of your previous responses -- MS. TUTWILER: Okay. Q One of the news agencies reported that Baker and Kozyrev discussed all four nuclear Soviet -- former Soviet republics becoming signatories to START. Do you have any guidance on that? MS. TUTWILER: No. I'd love to be helpful to you, but this is something that he has personally been dealing with and personally working. It's just not appropriate to get into any level of detail other than, suffice it to say, which I know is not very helpful to you, that he's really working on this problem, and trying to find a way. Q Do you have anything on the situation in Tajikistan where the President was given the right to rule by decree over the weekend, where there are demonstrations going on against the regime. Does the State Department still believe that President Nabiyev is abiding by the five principles that he pledged to abide by? MS. TUTWILER: It's a very good question. And to be honest with you, I overlooked this morning getting you an update on the situation there. It's my fault. I'll be happy to, after the briefing, get you something. It just slipped by me. Sorry. Q Back to Libya? MS. TUTWILER: Libya? Q Yes, please. Questions have been raised in many parts of the Arab world -- even in countries which are friendly with the United States -- that in view of what has happened in Los Angeles, would the United States accept now to have the two Libyans being tried in neutral countries, especially whatever jury you would be having here has already been exposed to -- has been preconditioned by media for a long time? MS. TUTWILER: I'm not aware of any change in our government or any other government's view concerning the Pan Am 103 and French aircraft. I don't know of any change whatsoever. Q On the same subject. The Libyans and the Chinese, and perhaps others, have had a field day in the wake of the King verdict and the riots. Is the State Department feeling any discomfort over that? MS. TUTWILER: None. I haven't seen anything from the Libyans. It's my understanding, concerning China, that the criticism was contained in a Foreign Ministry statement and in People's Daily, which is the Communist Party newspaper. The United States is quite prepared to have its overall human rights record judged against the Chinese record of recent years. Q Margaret, back to arm shipments. Do you have any reaction to reports that Russian ships are continuing to deliver weapons to Cuba despite the fact that they had said they were going to curtail such shipments? MS. TUTWILER: I haven't seen those reports. I'll be happy to look into it.

[Sierra leone: Evacuation of Americans/Update]

Q Do you have an update on Sierra Leone? MS. TUTWILER: What do you want? Q Airlift? How many people were -- whether the airlift of people out of there is complete? MS. TUTWILER: Basically. The city of Freetown is calm. Embassy officials can move about the city. Almost no gunfire was heard in the city last night. As you know, the 23-member National Provisional Ruling Council has announced its membership and appointed a 19-member cabinet. Two members of the previous cabinet -- the Finance Minister and Foreign Minister -- have been named to the new cabinet. Concerning the evacuation, I think you might be familiar with the evacuation which began Sunday, May 3. The National Provisional Ruling Council granted formal permission for military flights to arrive at the airport to conduct evacuation operations. Approximately 359 persons have been evacuated so far. This total includes 232 private American citizens, 7 Embassy employees, 16 Embassy dependents, 80 Peace Corps volunteers, and 30 third-country nationals, including 8 Canadians, 5 Danes, 4 Swedes, 7 Liberians, 1 Japanese, 1 British subject, 1 Lebanese and 3 persons of unknown nationality. The first flight left for Sierra Leone Sunday, May 3. All were flown to Senegal or to Frankfurt, Germany. Four evacuation flights have been scheduled for today. Three flights have already departed for Senegal. A fourth flight will depart later today. In Senegal and Germany, we are assisting the evacuees to make onward travel plans to their final destinations. There are no plans at this time for additional evacuation flights. We have urged all Americans who wish to depart to make arrangements with the Embassy or leave the country independently on regularly scheduled commercial flights if they can do so. Commercial flights to Sierra Leone are resuming and regional air service is operating. That's about everything I know. I'm sorry -- the American Embassy in Freetown will remain open with 18 United States Government employees. We estimate -- you asked -- that 300 to 400 private American citizens remain. Q Is it only people we're bringing out? MS. TUTWILER: People? Q We're not bringing out equipment of any kind? MS. TUTWILER: I didn't even ask. Q Because they sent in -- the press office said this morning they sent in two C-141s and four C-130s, and those are capable of carrying far more than the numbers of people that you just mentioned. MS. TUTWILER: Normally -- and I don't mean this in any disrespect -- what people are most concerned with are people. So those are our large carriers and transports; 359 people -- that's a lot of people. I didn't ask. I'll be happy to see if they're, in addition, bringing out -- Q Embassy equipment or some -- MS. TUTWILER: But the Embassy is open, so I can't imagine bringing out too much, but I'll be happy to ask. Q Margaret, on Kenya: There was a report over the weekend that the U.S. Government believes there's strong evidence to suggest that the Kenyan Government is deliberately stirring up ethnic conflict to thwart the move toward multi-party democracy. I'm wondering if you have protested to the Kenyan Government, and if you -- MS. TUTWILER: I don't know. I'll have to ask. Q Would you check? MS. TUTWILER: Yes. Q What has Assistant Secretary Aronson reported by the success or lack of it in his trip in Peru? MS. TUTWILER: I don't know because I haven't seen Bernie this morning. He wasn't in early this morning when I was. He did a press conference that I'll be happy to give you the transcript of -- I believe it was either Saturday night or Sunday -- that is available in the Press Office. I just haven't seen him. I think that he characterized his own trip and answered questions in that press conference. I didn't really have -- even if I had seen him -- a whole lot to add other than to steer you towards what he said there in Lima. Q (Inaudible) the settlement activity in Jerusalem? Do you have any comment on that? MS. TUTWILER: I don't even know what your specific question is? Q The settlers are planning a new neighborhood in the (inaudible) side in East Jerusalem. MS. TUTWILER: No. Q No comment on that? MS. TUTWILER: No. Q Back to the North Korean nuclear matter, please. Are you going to keep full support for the IAEA decision which might be made in the course of the investigation process, regardless of the result? I mean, whether IAEA declared their satisfaction or dissatisfaction? MS. TUTWILER: That's too hypothetical for me. I can't prejudge for you when you say, "Will we give our full support, depending on what the decision is of the IAEA or their recommendations." I just can't do that for you in a vacuum. Q Until now, you have said that the United States fully supports the IAEA. MS. TUTWILER: We do. Q So, in the future, also, in the process of the investigation, you are prepared to give full support for the -- MS. TUTWILER: Do we continue, generically speaking, our full support of the IAEA? Yes, we do -- concerning the North Korean situation -- absolutely. Q Regardless of the result? MS. TUTWILER: I'm not going to do the "regardless of the result." That's the part of your question that's just totally speculative for me. Q Margaret, if we could just go back to India for one second. Did the United States talk to the Russian Government and the Indian Government about this? MS. TUTWILER: Yes. Q They did. And what did they say? They just discussed it and said, "Listen, if you guys do this, we're going to -- this is what you're facing." MS. TUTWILER: These are diplomatic discussions that have been held. Concerning the Russian Government, the Secretary of State has raised this issue with the Foreign Minister previously. The Under Secretary for the Department has, it's my understanding, been -- or has raised this with the Indian Government. I'm sure he's also raised it with the Russian Government. But, no, I don't have a specific for you. They're very well aware of our concerns in this matter. And, as I just said, you should look for or expect a decision soon. Q Have we included Pakistan in those discussions? MS. TUTWILER: In this particular case? Q On this matter, yes? MS. TUTWILER: Not on this particular case. This particular case concerns Russia and India. Q Thank you. (Press briefing concluded at 12:51 p.m.)