US Department of State Daily Briefing #75:
Thursday, 5/14/92
Tutwiler
Source: State Department Spokesman Margaret Tutwiler
Description: Washington, DC
Date: May, 14 19925/14/92
Category: Briefings
Region: MidEast/North Africa, Eurasia
Country: Israel, USSR (former), Libya, Iran, Argentina,
Bosnia-Herzegovina, Macedonia, Russia, India, Sudan, China,
Pakistan
Subject: Mideast Peace Process, Development/Relief Aid,
Terrorism, Security Assistance and Sales
Regional/Civil Unrest
12:28 P.M.
(ON THE RECORD UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED)
MS. TUTWILER: I don't have anything. I'll be happy to try
to answer your questions.
[Libya: Announcement Renouncing Terrorism/US Reaction]
Q Margaret, can you give us the State Department's view of the latest
Libyan statement about terrorism, whether you find it credible or different
from other pledges?
MS. TUTWILER: Not particularly. As you know, this is not
the first time that we have heard Qadhafi make these types of
statements.
We've seen the statement as carried by the Libyan News
Agency and reportedly contained in a letter from Libya's Foreign
Minister to the United Nations Secretary General.
The United Nations Security Council Resolutions 731 and 748
require Libya to demonstrate by concrete actions -- not mere
words -- its renunciation of terrorism. We have seen no such
demonstration. Indeed, we see evidence of Libya's continuing
support for terrorism.
Several terrorist groups train in Libya and receive
financial, logistical, and political support from Libya. Some
groups, such as the Abu Nidal organization, are headquartered in
Libya and have extensive training sites and support facilities
there. In February, a French judge issued arrest warrants for
four Palestinian members of the Abu Nidal terrorist
organization, believed now to be Libya, for the murder of
passengers on board the Greek ferry in July 1988.
I cite these as examples of actions that Libya has failed
to take, not as a complete list. The fact is, Libya has failed
to take the first step.
Libya has also failed to meet any of the broader demands of
United Nations Security Council Resolution 731 despite its
reported acceptance. Libya's continuing actions in support of
terrorists speak far louder than its empty assertions to the
contrary.
Q A couple of quickies. Has Libya, in any indirect
way -- because there's no direct way -- told the United States
this time anything along the lines that they've been saying
publicly through the U.N. envoy -- excuse me -- as they've been
saying through the U.N. envoy? Has there been any even indirect
pledges made to the U.S.?
MS. TUTWILER: About what?
Q Well, of the Pan Am suspects, mostly.
MS. TUTWILER: No.
Q And these examples you give of what you call
increased support for terrorism --
MS. TUTWILER: Not increased -- continuing.
Q --I thought you said "increased;" but anyhow --
alright--
MS. TUTWILER: I said "continuing."
Q --quite recent? You mention the February thing.
MS. TUTWILER: That was February 1988.*
Q Oh. Well, anything really lately that shows any
step-up, or is it just sort of --
MS. TUTWILER: I didn't say "increased." I said
"continuing support of," predominantly by -- as you know, this
organization lives there; financial support, continuing to let
them live in the country. Those were just examples. Not an
inclusive list.
The gist of what I -- the answer to your question, in
short form, is, these are words. We want to see actions.
Q One of the requirements in the sanctions is that
they renounce terrorism?
MS. TUTWILER: Correct.
Q Would that mean, to effectively renounce
terrorism, is it the United States view that they would have to
kick these people out of Libya?
MS. TUTWILER: It's not a United States mandate. As
you know, this is a United Nations Security Council resolution
that was passed. I don't know, for instance -- my instincts are
that it's not a specific laundry list of specific things that
you must do on terrorism. But as we've said before, we would
obviously know it when we see it, and mere words are not going
to cut it.
*Note: A French judge issued arrest warrants in February 1992.
Q Margaret, do you know if the Libyans gave any
other written matter to the U.N. envoy -- if there was any
attempt beyond the letter to show that they were complying with
the U.N. resolution?
MS. TUTWILER: We don't even know -- we only have
reports that they have tried to give a letter to the United
Nations Secretary General. We don't even know that that is,
indeed, true.
We've seen one report of what his statements says on
Libyan news. So we tried to get from the United Nations, if
indeed they even have a letter. As of this briefing, we can't
answer whether they do or do not. We only have a report of one.
Q Well, still, do you want to get into details, or
is that about it? In other words, the notion of people's
committees and all. Do you want to respond to any of the
specifics? I guess you haven't seen any specifics?
MS. TUTWILER: We haven't seen it.
Q Do you have any idea if the Abu Nidal group -- as
an example you've already made -- is active in Libya or if they
are just residents in Libya, not knowing where else to go?
MS. TUTWILER: I don't know specifically what their
activities are. I think you're well aware of our views, and
many others of that organization. I'll be happy to ask the
counter-terrorism experts here if they can give you an update on
their activities.
Q On this terrorism question, the other day there
was some comment about the reports regarding the bombing of the
Argentine Israeli Embassy in Buenos Aires some time ago. You
sort of updated on what the U.S. thinking was.
MS. TUTWILER: Right.
Q Subsequently -- and, in fact, I think it was the
same day -- there were reported arrests of a number of people in
South America. I think it was in Quito -- 5 Iranians and an
Iraqi. Does that seem to have any connection with this embassy
bombing or not?
MS. TUTWILER: I'm not in a position to tell you
whether it does or does not because I'm unaware of the five
arrests that you've mentioned. I'll be happy to see if we have
anything on that. I've never heard of it.
Q Margaret, do you have any assessment on the impact
of the embargo on Libya? Do you have any ideas of what's going
on there in terms of the impact of the embargo on Libya?
MS. TUTWILER: No. I'll be happy to see if I can get
something for you. No, I don't.
Q Margaret, anything on today's meeting between Mr.
Eagleburger and Mr. Gligorov of Skopje?
MS. TUTWILER: Excuse me?
Q Anything on today's meeting between Mr.
Eagleburger and Mr. Gligorov of Skopje -- the so-called republic
of Macedonia?
MS. TUTWILER: The Macedonian? That meeting, sir, was
still going on with the Deputy Secretary when I came downstairs
to begin the briefing. It is listed, as you saw, as the Deputy
Secretary of State is meeting with that gentleman. It's my
understanding that they know each other from Larry
[Eagleburger's] tenure when he was our former Ambassador to
Yugoslavia.
The Secretary of State attended the Deputy Secretary's
meeting and was there for -- it's my understanding -- a fair
amount of time during the Deputy's meeting, but I don't have a
readout from either gentleman. I'll see if we can get one from
Larry's office for you whenever the meeting concludes.
[Former Yugoslavia: Update]
Q Do you have an update on Yugoslavia?
MS. TUTWILER: Yes, I do. Yugoslavia and every other
place in the world. Believe me.
Yugoslavia: Last night, Sarajevo was relatively quiet.
Today, however, there is very heavy fighting, particularly near
the airport. We understand the United Nations Peacekeeping
Force is pinned down in its headquarters by shelling from
irregular forces.
We are concerned about reports that Serb forces there
have begun to remove non-Serbs in an ethnic "cleansing"
operation. Joint Serbian forces continue to widen their control
of the city in intensive street-to-street fighting.
We understand that in Sarajevo food supplies are
desperately short to non-existent. We are particularly
concerned that small children have no access to milk or baby
formula. The city has also run out of medical supplies.
Delivery of remaining supplies is impossible in certain
neighborhoods. Elsewhere, very heavy Serbian shelling and
fighting continues in Mostar.
Sometimes intense fighting and shelling continues in
several other towns in Bosnia, reportedly causing many thousands
of additional displaced persons. In recent days, fighting also
increased in Eastern Croatia, including Serbian and JNA attacks
on several towns.
This latest cease-fire, in our personal opinion, has
never taken hold.
Concerning the convoy that I mentioned yesterday: As I
mentioned, international humanitarian organizations are
arranging for the delivery of approximately 600 metric tons of
food to towns in Bosnia, including Sarajevo. The tentative
schedule is for a convoy of about 35 trucks to depart Zagreb on
Sunday. They will make a number of stops en route, making
deliveries along the way. Another dozen trucks will be leaving
Sunday for Belgrade on a similar schedule.
In addition to international organizations, countries
contributing to this effort include France, Germany, Italy,
Norway, and the United States. The United States contribution
is about 40 metric tons of food. This is DoD surplus that was
located in Europe.
The UNHCR is talking in Sarajevo with representatives
of the three ethnic groups to arrange, or try to arrange, safe
passage. In principle, they have reached agreement, but we
understand that talks were recently broken off due to the heavy
fighting.
The convoy is still in the planning stage. The
organizers intend for it to leave this weekend, but its
departure depends upon the security situation.
Ambassador Zimmermann is still in Belgrade. He is
working, as we said yesterday, on an urgent basis, to provide
the U.S. support to this relief operation which is being
organized by these international organizations.
Q You were asked yesterday whether we would consider
a pallet drop of humanitarian aid; do you have an answer to
that?
MS. TUTWILER: We do not think that is the most
effective way to get aid into Bosnia or into Sarajevo.
Q Well, it's not getting in. So, short of that --
if you can't arrange safe passage for the convoy, what else do
you have left?
MS. TUTWILER: We'll deal with that, I guess, after the
weekend. But right now, that is not the most effective way in
our opinion or others of how to get aid in there. And this, to
my knowledge, is the first major international convoy that has
been attempted, and it is well over 40 trucks that are going to
try. Hopefully, they will be able to reach the people. And, if
not, I'm sure that the international organizations and the
countries that are participating, and others that will be
participating, will take a look at it if it fails.
Q Margaret, you said the U.N. peacekeepers are
pinned down.
MS. TUTWILER: Right.
Q Are they particularly targeted, do you know, or is
it just the circumstances that are so chaotic they can't get out
from under? These are the people that are supposed to move out,
the bulk of them, anyhow.
MS. TUTWILER: The bulk of them. It's my
understanding, Barry --
Q (Inaudible) yesterday -- the bulk.
MS. TUTWILER: Right.
Q The bulk. He's going to leave some people.
MS. TUTWILER: It's about a hundred.
Q They're pinned down? Are they the target of
anybody, or the situation --
MS. TUTWILER: I haven't heard --
Q -- is just a mess?
MS. TUTWILER: This is purely speculation on my part.
I haven't heard anyone say that they are a target. I believe
they are just pinned down because of the deteriorating situation
there, the chaos, and the heavy fighting.
The bulk -- when you say "bulk," so that people know,
the U.N. headquarters, as you know, has been operating in
Sarajevo. They are planning, it's my understanding from the
U.N., to leave approximately a hundred of their staff and
observers there, and that means pulling out about 200.
Q Margaret, what did you mean by "ethnic cleansing"
operation? Do you have anymore details on that?
MS. TUTWILER: I'd ask the people who are putting out
that. That's their phrase.
Q Whose quotes?
MS. TUTWILER: That's why I used quotes.
Q So it's their quotes?
MS. TUTWILER: Correct.
Q You have no other details on what's going on in
that regard?
MS. TUTWILER: No, I don't have any details of it. It
is obviously -- well, I won't put an adjective on it. You do
that.
Q Margaret, did you say where these convoys are
leaving from?
Q Zagreb.
Q They leave from Zagreb?
MS. TUTWILER: Right. I think that's what I said.
Q Done with Yugoslavia?
MS. TUTWILER: Am I?
Q On the U.N., a quick question: The Secretary
General, at the Press Club yesterday, spoke of the U.N. being in
its worst financial state ever and mentioned that the U.S. owes
money.
MS. TUTWILER: We do.
Q And I wondered if you could bring us up to date as
to whether the U.S. intends to make good and, you know, is there
any particular problem? Are we holding -- is the U.S. holding
back funds, or is it just a mechanical problem or what?
MS. TUTWILER: I didn't bring it with me, Barry, and I
don't stay on top of the U.N. budget, but --
Q Well, it's off the wall, I know, so --
MS. TUTWILER: It's not off the wall, but I just don't
have the briefing at my fingertips.
Q Yes. No, I mean, I didn't mean to throw figures
at you.
MS. TUTWILER: No problem. But I do know that in
Secretary Baker's meeting with the Secretary General, the
Secretary acknowledged -- and I cannot remember the figure --
it's $100-something million that we are in arrears, it's my
understanding. He also pointed out that on peacekeeping the
Administration had requested a level that the Congress reduced
by -- I think it's over $100 million; that we would continue to
try to work to get our share of -- our percentage of the United
Nations budget that we are due for peacekeeping.
And as far as overall, I know that in the Bush
Administration one of the priorities of President Bush has
continuously been to get us out of our arrearage situation at
the United Nations. And I recall two payments that this
Administration has made that were quite large. I just don't
know on balance where we are right now, but I can get it for
you.
Q When Secretary Baker was before one of the
committees -- I think it was the House Committee on Foreign
Affairs, the question of the funds for U.N. peacekeeping was
raised by some of the members of Congress. And, as I recall, he
agreed to look into the question of whether or not the U.S.
share should be as large as it is of the total peacekeeping and
get into this whole issue of how these shares are allocated.
What has happened on that score?
MS. TUTWILER: I don't know. I recall the same
testimony that you do, and I believe his response was, "I'll
take a look at that." I don't know where we are on it, and I'll
check and see if the experts have come up with anything. I know
that I am -- I believe that I would be aware of a decision, if
one had been made, to change our percentages, and I have not
heard of any conversations along those lines.
Q Margaret, yesterday the Secretary had a phone
conversation with Senator Jesse Helms. Would you be able to
tell us who initiated that call, what was discussed, and why the
Secretary is opposed to the so-called "Israel Enterprise Fund"?
MS. TUTWILER: You know something that I don't know.
I'm not aware that the Secretary of State spoke with Senator
Helms yesterday, and I'll be happy to check with the Secretary's
office or with our Congressional office to inquire about the
phone call.
Q He said it publicly.
MS. TUTWILER: Who did?
Q Senator Helms.
MS. TUTWILER: I'm not doubting that a call took place,
but I can't comment on something I know nothing about.
Q Anything new on Cyprus with Boutros-Ghali and
Secretary Baker?
MS. TUTWILER: In the meeting that I attended
yesterday, Cyprus was not discussed. I can't speak for the
meeting over at the White House. I don't know.
Q Anything new today, first of all, on the flap over
law of return of the Palestinians, beyond what you said
yesterday?
MS. TUTWILER: No, Connie.
Q And any further readout on the talks going on, and
have you been able to convince them to give us some sort of
briefing? These are the Middle East talks.
MS. TUTWILER: I've worked on that. I know that
different groups have chosen to handle it differently, and my
understanding this morning is that the group here will not be
doing a press conference at the conclusion of their meeting.
And as far as any additional information that I have concerning
yesterday's meeting, I really don't have a lot to add to it.
I did check, since many of you asked me, "Are there
indeed discussions going on?" The answer is, as I guessed
yesterday, yes, indeed there are. And I have for you today's
schedule, which I believe has concluded. I believe they were
supposed to end at 12 noon today, and it was basically a wrap-up
session today.
Q And also there is another conference going on here
today. Do you have any readout on that?
MS. TUTWILER: There is?
Q I don't know. The paper said something about a
terrorism conference, but I think it might be these conferences.
Is there a separate --
MS. TUTWILER: You know as much about it then as I do.
Q Margaret, could I just follow up on Resolution
194? The United States in a sense has raised this issue to sort
of a new prominence because of the inclusion of Palestinian
exiles in a couple of the talks. And I just wonder, I'm looking
at resolution 194. There are a lot of sort of specific and very
nuanced positions that are included in that resolution. And in
having the U.S. reaffirm its support for the resolution, does
that include every aspect of the resolution, including the
suggestion that Jerusalem be put under United Nations
supervision, and that the -- sort of the area for inclusion of
Palestinian -- in which the Palestinians could return would
extend to quite a wide array of cities and towns?
MS. TUTWILER: With all due respect, the United States
did not raise this issue. The United States State Department
Spokesperson, after three days of being asked for an answer,
responded. And the United States is going to, today, in the
form of that same Spokesperson decline from any further
characterization, interpretation -- I have done none -- on terms
and elements. I have absolutely zero to add to what I have said
on Resolution 194, and what I have said on Resolution 237.
Q Thank you, I guess.
Q No, one more.
Q Oh, I'm sorry. You're pretty slow, Don.
Q Sorry. I didn't think it was that kind of pause.
Yesterday at the Foreign Relations Committee, the State
Department took the position that it did not object to an
amendment which basically would cut off any aid to Russia if the
deal between the Russian rocket organization -- whatever its
name is -- and the Indian space technology group goes forward.
This is quite a different position than the one
previously enunciated by the Department in announcing its
sanctions against these two organizations. Could you give us
any indication of why the Administration or the Department feels
that it's now appropriate to take a rather broad sanction --
that is to say, the cutoff of any aid to Russia -- because of
this sale?
MS. TUTWILER: If you're referring to Senator Biden's
amendment --
Q Yes.
MS. TUTWILER: -- I think that maybe you're aware,
maybe not, that it was agreed during yesterday's Senate Foreign
Relations Committee meeting that we will work with Senator
Biden's staff to clarify the intent of his amendment in a way
that is consistent with Administration objectives. And those
meetings and conversations are going on right now, it's my
understanding, at the staff level.
Q Mr. Armitage said that there was no objection to
the amendment in principle, but that there was some concern
about the way it was worded. I mean --
MS. TUTWILER: Correct. And staff are, it's my
understanding, as of this morning engaged in that exercise with
Senator Biden's staff that will be consistent with
Administration policy and will also satisfy Senator Biden.
Q Well, my point is simply that the principle of the
amendment -- what the amendment seeks to do is quite different
from what the Administration announced in the sanctions last
Monday. Your sanctions were targeted at a particular
organization -- Glavkosmos, or whatever its name is --
MS. TUTWILER: That's correct. That's the correct
name.
Q Whereas Biden's sanctions go against the
Government of Russia. Russia as a government would not be able
to receive any funds under this aid program if the Biden
Amendment is passed.
MS. TUTWILER: And I guess what I'm saying is you can
assume that we are aware of a difference in interpretation, and
that we are -- because we are aware of this, Senator Biden
agreed with us -- I don't know who -- I don't think it was Rich
Armitage, probably Janet Mullins -- to [say]: "Yes, I agree with
you, there is a difference, and we will work this out." And
that is what is going on right now today.
Q Margaret, can I follow up on that?
Q What is the view of the State Department on
Senator Helms' proposed or discussed amendment on the Israel
Enterprise Fund, which was discussed at the hearing yesterday?
MS. TUTWILER: I'm not aware of it. I haven't seen the
transcripts from the hearing.
Q Could I follow up on that, and then again --
Q (Inaudible) -- rephrase the question.
MS. TUTWILER: I can't comment on something that I'm
just simply literally not familiar with. I didn't go to the
hearing, I didn't see the hearing, and I haven't read a
transcript this morning. So I literally don't know about it.
Q Perhaps I'm a little thick --
MS. TUTWILER: That's O.K.
[Laughter]
Q But Armitage --
MS. TUTWILER: We all are.
Q We love you anyway, Carol. [Laughter]
MS. TUTWILER: This gets tricky.
Q Armitage on "Worldnet" the other day, when he was
asked the question about whether the U.S. would tie the rocket
deal to aid, said no. And now even in considering this
amendment, you seem to be changing that basic principle. I
mean, you're talking about wording and everything, but the fact
of the matter is if you're willing now to talk -- to work with
the Senate on an amendment that ties the rocket deal to overall
aid, then you're reversing what Armitage said the other day.
MS. TUTWILER: That is not my understanding, but I'll
be honest with you, I have not spent a great deal of time on
this this morning. I'll be happy to get Janet in touch with
both of you, if that would help. That's not my understanding.
I am aware of what all I've been able to describe to you is that
we are working at the staff level -- it is not at the Secretary
and the Senator at this time; it's at the staff level -- on this
language to make sure that it is in line with Administration
policy plus United States law.
The Glavkosmos case kicks in because of law. So I
believe that they're working with words to make all of this in
synch legally and, obviously, with Administration policy and
taking into concern Senator Biden's concerns. And I really
don't know any more in depth about it than that limited amount.
Q Has there been any other development on this
sanctions case? Have the Russians or the Indians or anybody
done anything further that would carry the story further from
the announcement that was made on Monday?
MS. TUTWILER: Not that I know of.
Q Thank you.
Q Excuse me. One final thing: Margaret, the leader
of the Islamic movement in the Sudan, Dr. Hassan Turabi, is in
Washington on a private visit. Sources close to him are saying
that he will be attempting to see some U.S. officials. Can you
confirm that? Could you look into it? Do you have anything on
it?
MS. TUTWILER: I don't know whether he will or will not
be attempting to see United States' officials. I just -- I
don't know how I could possibly answer that. What I can do is
see if he has indeed tried to see U.S. officials. I don't know.
Q Well, Margaret, a little broader: There's a whole
day's conference tomorrow on Islamic fundamentalism.
MS. TUTWILER: Where is that? Here?
Q It's here in Washington. I can't remember who
sponsored it. Probably one of the --
MS. TUTWILER: The State Department?
Q No, no, no. It's a "think tank" thing. Bob
Oakley is --
Q (Multiple comments)
MS. TUTWILER: I don't know everything that's going on
in Washington.
Q No, no. I know that. But I'm just saying if you
want to embellish -- if you want to pursue an answer, there are
a lot of folks in town. So the question --
MS. TUTWILER: There must be.
Q -- are they just here to go to a "think tank," or
will there be some interaction with the U.S. State Department.
Q O.K. I'll try to figure it out.
Q One quick question on rockets and missiles.
There's a report that China has not gone ahead with a missile
sale or missile technology transfer to Pakistan and Syria, in
accordance with the promise made to the Secretary last November.
Can you remark on that?
MS. TUTWILER: I saw that piece at about 12:18 before I
came down here, and I will be happy to take your question. I
did not have an opportunity to track down the experts to look
into it for myself.
Q Don't worry about it.
MS. TUTWILER: I know.
Q It's only Barry's story.
MS. TUTWILER: I know.
(The briefing concluded at 12:52 p.m.)