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.)