US Department of State Daily Briefing #117
Thursday, 8/20/92
Boucher
Source: State Department Deputy Spokesman Richard
Boucher
Description: Washington, DC
Date: Aug, 20 19928/20/92
Category: Briefings
Region: E/C Europe, MidEast/North Africa, Caribbean,
Southeast Asia
Country: Yugoslavia (former), Bosnia-Herzegovina,
Serbia-Montenegro, USSR (former), Iraq, Somalia, Lebanon,
Syria, Cambodia, Haiti
Subject: Regional/Civil Unrest, Military Affairs,
Development/Relief Aid, United Nations,
International Organizations, Human Rights, CSCE,
Mideast Peace Process, Democratization, Arms Control,
Trade/Economics, OAS
12:59 P. M.
(ON THE RECORD UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED)
MR. BOUCHER: Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen.
I'm sorry I'm late.
[Former Yugoslavia: Issues Update]
If I can, I'd like to start off with a brief update on
some of the items we've been tracking with regard to Yugoslavia
and tell you a few words about where we are in Somalia since
that's important as well, and then I'd be glad to take your
questions on other subjects.
In terms of the International Red Cross gaining access
to detention camps and detention centers, our understanding is
that as of today they have registered 11,522 prisoners in 16
places of detention. Of these, 921 of the prisoners are held by
the Croats, 955 are held by the Muslims, and 9,646 are held by
the Serbs. I don't have the entire list of detention centers
that they visited, but I suspect you can get that from the
International Red Cross.
On the U.N. Human Rights Commission Rapporteur Tadeusz
Mazowiecki, he's currently in Geneva. He's conferring with
officials of international humanitarian organizations. Tomorrow
he will fly to Zagreb, along with a support team from the Human
Rights Center, to begin his investigations. The U.S. Mission in
Geneva has met with Mazowiecki. He assured us that he intended
to meet the August 28 deadline for his initial report on his
investigations and findings.
The U.S. Mission offered to support his activities by
providing an officer to accompany the Special Rapporteur to
Zagreb, and this offer was accepted, and we have identified an
officer who has been assigned to go with him as part of his
support team.
Q A Foreign Service Officer?
MR. BOUCHER: Yes. Somebody from our Mission in
Geneva.
On the CSCE, there's a CSCE steering committee meeting
on the former Yugoslavia today in Vienna. They will consider
further steps. They will plan for the rapporteur mission to
detention camps, and they'll work on the placement of monitors
in Kosovo, Vojvodina, Sandjak, Macedonia and other neighboring
states.
We do not as yet have a readout of that meeting. In
going into the meeting, we're pressing to resolve these
questions at the meeting today. Expectation is that they can
name the rapporteur mission's chief, and that the rapporteur
mission from the CSCE could leave by August 25. That's the one
with the primary goal of gaining access to the detention camps.
As you know, there's already been a CSCE mission
visiting Vojvodina, Sandjak and Kosovo, but the placement of
regular monitors in flashpoints and neighboring countries, we
think might take a little longer to organize. A target date for
that to happen would be by September 1.
Another thing decided at the CSCE meeting last week was
that the Chairman in Office, who is Foreign Minister Moravic of
the Czech and Slovak Federal Republic, would go and travel to
the former Yugoslavia. In fact, he met with Serbian leaders
yesterday, August 19, in Belgrade. Today he plans to meet with
President Grigorov in Skopje. On August 21 he is scheduled to
meet with the Bosnian President Izetbegovich in Sarajevo, and
he'll meet Croatian President Tudjman on August 23, and then
return to Prague.
His goals for this mission were laid out by the CSCE
last week. First, to pass on the CSCE's strong political
message denouncing human rights violations -- pass that message
on to the Serbs -- and to call on all the parties to allow
access to detention centers, to secure access for the early
deployment of the various rapporteur and monitor missions that
were agreed at the meeting in Prague last week, and to stress to
all parties the need for full cooperation, and then finally to
review the situation on the ground and report back to the
CSCE.
The other meeting going on -- I guess it was yesterday,
actually -- was the meeting in Brussels on sanctions monitoring
in Romania. As you know, we've been working with the Government
of Romania, with our NATO and NACC partners to put international
teams of sanctions monitors in place in Romania as soon as
possible.
The meeting yesterday was attended by all the NATO
allies, by a number of the NACC partner states, and by Austria.
The proposed monitoring mission, which is based on the Romanian
initiative at the NACC, was discussed. For our part, the United
States offered to support the effort with a contribution of
personnel and logistical support. There's now a follow-up
meeting scheduled for next week in Brussels, and
we're continuing to work with the Romanians and other European
states to see these actions take place, since they can promote
full compliance with the United Nations resolutions and
sanctions.
And, finally, just one note on NATO. I think you
remember NATO last week decided that the Military Committee
should report back again to the Allies by August 24. In the
meantime, NATO has established liaison with the WEU through
Italy, which is now the Presidency country of WEU, in order to
facilitate the coordination of our efforts, and we're continuing
to review with NATO in other international fora and with other
interested governments possible next steps to implement the U.N.
Security Council's "all necessary measures" Resolution.
I'll stop there for Yugoslavia. If you want to, I'll
do Somalia briefly, and then we can go to whatever questions you
have.
On Somalia, I won't do the full rundown. I think over
the past few days you've gotten from the Pentagon or from the
briefers here a rather complete rundown. Just to update you on
a few of the elements, I understand there are three U.S. C-141
aircraft that have arrived already in Mombasa, Kenya; that the
C-141 flights are expected to begin as soon as possible from
Mombasa to a place called Wajir on the Kenya-Somali border.
About 18,000 tons of food has been identified in Mombasa for the
immediate airlift. That food was supplied by the United States
and other countries to the U.N. World Food Program.
I've seen some reports of problems with the runway at
Wajir, but I'm told that those have now been resolved.
Obviously, the latest information can be had from the Defense
Department.
I'll stop there with the update, and go onto --
Q You remember last week, we were talking about
Iraq? You were talking about how the U.S. was consulting with
coalition partners, which obviously means more than the
customary consultation with Britain and France.
Could you give us any notion of how popular the U.S.
approach to protect the Shi'ites is with the Arabs -- with the
Arab members of the coalition, specifically? Do you have their
support?
MR. BOUCHER: Barry, I don't want to speak for
other governments in specific terms. I would say that we have
been and we remain in close touch with U.N. partners, with
coalition partners, including Britain and France and countries
in the region on the appropriate steps to take in response to
violations of U.N. Security Council Resolution 688 and Iraq's
other violations of U.N. Security Council resolutions.
I think you've seen concern expressed at the United
Nations and elsewhere fairly consistently about Iraq's behavior
and Iraq's violation of U.N. Security Council resolutions. To
go beyond that, I would leave it to the countries themselves to
speak.
Q It's not like I'm being nosey, because normally
when you have support -- especially when you have united support
or near united support as you did, for instance -- near united
except for Jordan and some Palestinians -- in moving against
Iraq two years ago, the U.S. Government is very happy to tell
the world that its policy has total or near total support. Does
your policy not have that --
MR. BOUCHER: Barry, I absolutely disagree with your
characterization of what we've done. We have never tried to
speak for other governments here. When we have seen other
governments make statements, when other governments have voted
with us in the United Nations, we've certainly always welcomed
those statements. We've sometimes called your attention to
them, but I wouldn't say that we've stood up here and tried to
give you a rundown on who's in and who's out at any given point.
Q You don't speak for other governments but you
speak on how other governments respond to your entreaties, and
you've entreated them now to join in this campaign, and I'm
asking you -- and apparently I'm not going to get from you --
how your entreaty is falling on their ears.
MR. BOUCHER: I would say at this point, other
governments that we have talked to, including the list of people
that I said which includes allies, concerned countries, and
countries in the region, share our concerns about Iraq's
behavior and we'll see if there's anymore that could be said, if
we make an announcement at some point.
Q When do you expect this no-fly zone to be
implemented?
MR. BOUCHER: When it's time. I have no way of
predicting it at this point.
Q Before it's implemented, I understand that there's
no need in your view for a new U.N. resolution. But would there
be any form of U.N. action in the form of a statement or some
kind of declaration that would be handed to the Iraqis? How
would it take place?
MR. BOUCHER: At this point, Alan, I don't think I'm
able to go into that. I would characterize the position we're
in now as saying that we're still consulting and discussing many
of these details with other governments. We're in a period
where we're refining the details of timing and implementation.
When that is complete, obviously, we'll have more to say about
the implementation.
Q Are your discussions technical and concerning
operational details, or are they on the political principle of
the thing?
MR. BOUCHER: No. I think if you, for example, look at
what General Scowcroft said last night and what various other
governments have said, there's basic agreement on what needs to
be done. We're still discussing some of the details about how
to do it.
Q So would you say that it's a done deal, that there
will definitely be a no-fly zone erected, and it's just a matter
of time?
Q: (inaudible) Mr. Scowcroft?
Q: Or should we watch television?
MR. BOUCHER: You can watch all the television you
want, Barry. I would describe it -- the way Scowcroft described
it yesterday was accurate. There's agreement in principle.
We're still working on some of the details. That's what I said
again this morning.
Q Richard, can you tell us, do you think it's fair
to characterize this as a shift in U.S. policy, a major dramatic
change in U.S. policy that the U.S. did not at one point think
that it wanted to do this? And after the Gulf war, it had a lot
of reasons for not doing this -- reasons that actually were
articulated publicly by General Scowcroft at the time and now it
thinks that it's a good idea to do this? And if it is a change
in policy, why?
MR. BOUCHER: Mary, I think some of your questions,
since they're predicated on "do this," I think are better
answered once we can explain to you in more detail what "this"
is, and --
Q You already said that you've agreed to do in
principle.
MR. BOUCHER: -- we have to work out the details. So
at this point, we're dealing with the basic principle. And I
think the basic principle is that there is a United Nations
resolution, which we supported and which the United Nations
Security Council members voted for which deals with the
repressions of its civilian population by Iraq. That's
Resolution 688. It's the resolution that followed 687, which
was the ceasefire. So I don't remember the exact date, but it
was very early on.
The situation is such that we've seen the kind of
repression, the kind of attacks, the kind of bombing of civilian
populations; the declarations by Iraqi Ministers that they were
going to wipe out these people that would clearly, clearly --
that do and would continue to clearly violate that U.N.
resolution.
Our position has always been that these U.N.
resolutions need to be respected.
Q (Multiple questions)
MR. BOUCHER: I don't know. Does somebody want to let
me finish my answer, or we can go ahead?
Our position has always been that these resolutions
need to be respected, and that is the basis for action now.
Q But, Richard, isn't there also a resolution on the
books about war crimes against Iraq that has never been
addressed? Aren't there things in the resolutions that haven't
been enforced?
MR. BOUCHER: I'd have to go back and look at that
particular one. I think that our concerns, first and foremost,
have to be for actions such as these which cause misery and
hardship and loss of life.
Q Weren't they doing that to them last year as well?
Were the Shi'ites persecuted by Saddam Husayn last year --
MR. BOUCHER: Certainly. You're very aware of the
fighting.
Q -- where the U.S. Government took the position not
to do anything at this stage?
MR. BOUCHER: At this point, Barry, we'll answer --
perhaps we'll have more answers to some of these questions when
we can define in more detail exactly what we're doing at this
point. But the effort is one to effectively monitor that
Baghdad is respecting the U.N. resolution that requires it to
not repress its population.
There's a population in the south that's at risk, and
we think that steps need to be taken.
Q Can you just, off the cuff, if you're able to --
maybe not so off-the-cuff because we've been involved with this
for weeks now -- can compare the mistreatment this year to last
year? Is it worse this year? Is the degree of it worse?
MR. BOUCHER: I don't think I can make that kind of
comparison of misery, no.
Q That would be one rationale for doing something
that the U.S. Government chose not to do last year.
MR. BOUCHER: I think, clearly, if you look at the van
der Stoel report, the statement and information that Perkins and
others discussed in front the U.N. Security Council, that
you will see at least given the pattern of behavior in recent
months that there has been an increasing intensity of attacks.
There's been an increasing intensity of threats against this
population that do violate and indicate the prospect of further
violations of the U.N. resolution. That's what we think needs
to be monitored and kept track of.
Q Anything on fixed-wing aircraft recently? Have
they used it in any way?
MR. BOUCHER: The situation on the ground, I don't have
-- well, I'm told that there haven't been any flights of
fixed-wing aircraft south of the 32nd Parallel today. But, in
general, the Baghdad regime continues to repress its civilian
population in the marsh area in the south. There are continuing
Iraqi army ground operations against citizens in the south, and
they're continuing their efforts to divert water from the marsh
areas.
And, as I've said, these brutal actions are in direct
violation of U.N. Security Council Resolution 688.
Q Richard, just to go back, to follow up on my
original question, are you basically saying that there's been a
change in principle in the policy but that's because the Iraqis
have stepped up their acts of repression? The reason there's
been a principle change --
MR. BOUCHER: The policy has always been to see that
Iraq live up to the United Nations resolutions. We think that
steps -- as General Scowcroft described them yesterday and I
described them yesterday -- need to be taken -- as I've
described them today, that steps need to be taken to effectively
monitor that those resolutions are being respected. No-fly zone
is therefore one way of doing that. And if there is a no-fly
zone, then you don't want Iraqi aircraft in the area. That's
the principle that we're dealing with here.
So, I would describe it as a continuation of our policy
to see that Iraq respects the U.N. Security Council resolutions,
and it's necessary to consider these measures at this point
because of the stepped-up effort by Saddam Husayn and his
government to attack and kill and repress people in the south.
Q Can we move to Yugoslavia?
MR. BOUCHER: Sure.
Q Let me just -- I want to ask about a Reuters
story, actually.
MR. BOUCHER: I don't know what the protocol is on
that.
Q Do you have any information about a new kind of
Serbian offer to turn control of detention centers and prison
camps over to the United Nations or some other international
organization?
MR. BOUCHER: There was a report that I think we got
third hand that Serbian authorities were reportedly willing to
discuss turning detention centers over to the ICRC, or somehow
to the international community. The ICRC may have more
information on that. I'm not sure.
I think we stated before, our view is that the camps
should be closed and the detainees should be released. Some of
the reports indicate that there might be attempts to attach
conditions to that, that the releases might be conditioned upon
forced expulsions or relocation of non-Serb populations that
were released. And, of course, we think that violates a basic
principle here. We've condemned ethnic cleansing in all its
forms, and we don't think there should be conditions on the
release of people from camps when they don't belong there in the
first place.
Q Following you on Bosnian Foreign Minister
Silajdzic's visit here and what he said at the end of that
visit. Can I ask, what did the United States know about these
so-called detention centers, and when did it know it?
MR. BOUCHER: Alan, that's a question that maybe in
your absence was asked by your colleagues a half dozen times,
and I think we've answered it here many times as best we can, so
I'll refer you back to the record.
Q Richard, do you have any comment on the statement
made by the so-called frontline Arab states in Damascus with
regards to the peace process?
MR. BOUCHER: I have not seen that statement yet. I
just heard about it briefly this morning. So I don't have any
kind of analysis for you, and I'm sure we'll want to hear from
our embassies and our Ambassadors about it as well.
As far as the peace talks, I can tell you a little bit
about what we expect for that.
The sixth round of the Middle East peace talks is
scheduled to resume here on Monday, August 24 at about 10:00
a.m.
Arrangements for the press will be the same as in
previous rounds. You can expect stakeouts at three entrances.
There will be still the same arrangement on meeting rooms, and
we expect that they'll have their press conferences as usual,
perhaps -- well, it's up to them to decide, and it will be the
responsibility of them to name the places where to have that.
Obviously, we welcome this round. The United States
has worked hard to get all the parties to the negotiating table
and to focus seriously on the issues at hand, and we're strongly
committed to making the negotiations succeed and we will make
every effort to assist the parties towards this end.
Q There was a lot of talk by the Arab Ministers
about raising questions as to the role of the United States as
an honest broker. Do you have anything on that?
MR. BOUCHER: Well, I just, I think, told you that we
worked hard to get the parties to the table. We're strongly
committed to making the negotiations succeed. We'll make every
effort to assist the parties towards this end, so I would
describe our role in the same terms as we've always described it
-- honest broker, driving force, catalyst, making every effort
to see that they succeed, doing whatever we can to help them.
Q Do you plan to start out with any statements or
anything? Will there be a more activist role this time because
the omens are more positive than they were during the last
talks?
MR. BOUCHER: I don't necessarily anticipate any
statements. We've always sort of stated our view in general
terms and left it to the parties to negotiate and to state their
view on what was going on in the negotiations. So, for example,
I would not anticipate this time changing our practice of not
giving readouts from this podium of the progress in the talks or
commenting on every view that's stated by the parties in their
press conferences.
Q Do you know whether, because of all the personnel
shifts, James Baker and Dennis Ross will be playing any role?
How is it going to work this time? Who's involved?
MR. BOUCHER: I mean, first of all, if you look at the
way past rounds have operated, Ed Djerejian, for example, is the
one who has met, I think most often, with the delegations. And,
in fact, he expects to start meeting with the various heads of
delegations over the coming days as they arrive. I'm sure he'll
have meetings next week and throughout the talks.
The Acting Secretary -- Acting Secretary Eagleburger is
obviously available to be part of this and to help out as
necessary, as he feels appropriate. The other people who have
maintained such an interest in this process, like Secretary
Baker and Dennis Ross, I'm sure will maintain their interest in
the process. So we have the full team, I think, from top to
bottom that's prepared to continue the United States role on
this.
Q What's happened to the other co-sponsor -- Russia?
Have they bowed out?
MR. BOUCHER: No. They're still co-sponsors, and we
would expect to have them with us for the next round as they've
been here before.
Q Richard, there is a report in the Israeli press
about an American proposal to break the deadlock on the Golan
involving the U.S. military?
MR. BOUCHER: There was some kind of report a couple of
days days ago, and I'm just afraid I don't have anything for you
on that. I think as a matter of principle, we don't comment on
what may or may not have been part of our private discussions,
nor have we tried to comment on every single press item out of
the Middle East.
Q But are you denying the truth of that report, or
are you --
MR. BOUCHER: I'm just saying I'm just not going to
have anything to say at all.
Q Richard, can you go back to Yugoslavia for a
minute?
Q Can we stay in the vicinity?
MR. BOUCHER: In the vicinity. Okay.
Q Concerning the parliamentary elections in Lebanon,
Richard. They've been calling on the Lebanese Government to
conduct free and fair elections in Lebanon. Given the rising
opposition and the boycott to the elections, do you still
maintain the same position? Do you have a position on the
boycott? Are you in touch with the Lebanese Government?
MR. BOUCHER: I think I addressed that about a week
ago. And, certainly, we're watching the situation. We're aware
of the situation. We're concerned about the situation.
We've always called for free and fair elections in
Lebanon. We think that's very important, but some of the things
have to be decided by the Lebanese parties themselves like
timing and things like that.
Q Do you have the same position on Syrian presence,
whether the election should take place before or after?
MR. BOUCHER: I don't remember if we've ever quite
defined it that precisely. Let me see if there's something more
we have to say than what I've just said.
Q Richard, are all the parties coming here? Is that
a fact now? No problems?
MR. BOUCHER: I'm not sure I can guarantee it, Barry.
We are going to be open. We're going to be ready for business.
They've all accepted.
Q (Inaudible)
MR. BOUCHER: They've all accepted. We've told you
that before in the past.
Q You've just taken a bow for the hard work the U.S.
has done to get the parties to the table. I just wonder if
there's any doubt that they can all be here --
MR. BOUCHER: There's no doubt in my mind, Barry, but
there may be in yours. At this point, let me just say, we're
three days away. They've all accepted. We expect them to be
here.
Q (Inaudible) on the multilaterals, aren't they
coming up soon, too?
MR. BOUCHER: The multilaterals are coming up soon, and
I don't have all the dates in my head, but I think it's about
mid-September when they start again.
Q One more on the region. Given our haphazard
schedule, maybe you can address this: The reports that Syria
has been test-firing scud missiles, have you said anything or do
you have anything to say on them?
MR. BOUCHER: I haven't said anything. Let me see if I
can get you something.
Q Richard, should these Lebanese elections take
place, would the United States send monitors as it has to other
elections?
MR. BOUCHER: I don't know, Alan.
Q Could you take the question?
MR. BOUCHER: I'll see if there's anything I can say on
it.
Q Richard, can we go back to Yugoslavia for a minute
now?
MR. BOUCHER: Mary wants to go back to Yugoslavia.
Q You didn't mention the upcoming peace conference
in London. I wonder if you could tell us, is the United States
going to that conference with its own proposal for some kind of
solution to this conflict? And has the United States, or will
the United States take any position on this question of
cantonization of Bosnia-Hercegovina? Is it true that the EC's
position is that they support cantonization, which there are
stories today saying that the Bosnians are very concerned about
this, and that the U.S. is against it? Is it true? Has the
U.S. taken any position?
MR. BOUCHER: I think we've got four or five questions
in there. First, on the issue of cantonization: I think if you
saw the readout that we did yesterday on Acting Secretary
Eagleburger's meeting with Foreign Minister Silajdzic, you saw
in there a very clear statement by Acting Secretary Eagleburger
that the United States is opposed to the idea of cantonization.
I think it's basically for a couple of reasons.
First of all, that -- first of all, let me find my
piece of paper. Let me mention three reasons. We think that
cantonization would contradict CSCE principles and set a
dangerous precedent. Second of all, we think that cantonization
along ethnic lines in Bosnia would only reward Serbian
aggression and that we should in no way reward Serbian nor
Croation or anyone else's attempts to gain Bosnian territory
through aggression.
And, third, we've always said that we would support
whatever the parties could work out peacefully. It's very clear
that the Bosnian Government rejects cantonization so it's really
not a viable option at this point.
Second of all, Mary, you asked about the London
Conference. I think we'll leave some more to be said as we go
to the meeting itself. We have been in touch with the British
and with other governments about the upcoming conference.
Obviously, there'll be more to say there. I would characterize
the conference as part of an overall effort of the international
community to end the fighting, to end the killing, and to end
the bloodshed. It brings together the full weight of the United
States, the European Community, the CSCE, the United Nations,
and other governments.
The overall goals, I think, that we'd like to see come
out of the conference are to press the parties to reach a
political solution that's based on CSCE principles rather than
continuing the violence, to obtain rapid action on the delivery
of humanitarian assistance and immediate access to detention
camps.
And, third, to make efforts to prevent the spread of
the violence.
I think, in general, you can characterize many of our
actions to date as directed at those goals; and we see this
London Conference as a continuation of that in an effort, as I
said, to bring the full weight of the international community
together to try to achieve more movement towards those goals.
Q Richard, just to follow up on that, do you see the
international community -- the U.N., the U.S., the EC, the CSCE
-- going into this conference with some sort of unified stand
saying, "Here is what we think you ought to do"? Are they going
there to listen to what the parties have to say about their own
ideas? Do you have a blueprint? It sounds like there's some --
disagreement.
MR. BOUCHER: There's a lot of discussion on what the
conference is about and what the conference can achieve and,
obviously, the hosts -- the British, on behalf of the EC and the
U.N. -- are, you know, important for that discussion.
I don't think I can, at this point, characterize it
quite the way you did, Mary. I think we'll have to let those
preparations for the conference proceed a little more before we
start to characterize the kind of discussion there will be
there; but, certainly, everybody is going to have a role: both
the outside parties, and in particular the people from the
territories.
Q Richard, the Prime Minister of Thailand has said
that there are Hmong people, born in Laos and with U.S.
passports, who are entering Thailand to infiltrate into Laos,
and are creating problems with the government there; and he
specifically asked the United States to do something about these
people to stop them. He says, "Washington should do more to
oversee the activities of these people."
If Americans do that -- if they were to go into Laos --
would they be violating any U.S. laws, and has Thailand -- Mr.
Lambertson was to be called in by the Thai Foreign Ministry to
discuss this issue. Do you have anything on this?
MR. BOUCHER: I don't have anything on that. That's a
new one on me.
Q Could I ask you another question -- from the same
region? There have been a lot of reports about the Khmer Rouge
noncooperation in the peace pact in Cambodia --
MR. BOUCHER: Yes.
Q -- and there's a possibility that the whole -- the
largest U.N.-ever -- peacekeeping operation will fall apart. Is
the United States able to put any pressure on the Khmer Rouge or
on China, who does have some influence with the Khmer Rouge, or
on Thailand, which allows the Khmer Rouge access to its markets?
MR. BOUCHER: Well, I think the answer is basically
"Yes." And we are working on this; we have been working on this
problem.
We see the continued refusal of the Khmer Rouge to
disarm and accept cantonment as a serious obstacle to full
implementation of the military component to the settlement plan.
In this case, it's a term that's been used --
Q What's the difference between "cantonment" and
"cantonization"?
MR. BOUCHER: I don't know. We'll leave the scholars
to do that one, but the "cantonment" is the term that's being
used in these accords for the collection of military groups into
one place so that they can disarm and turn over their weapons.
And that's a good thing. (Laughter)
To date, the U.N. -- UNTAC -- has disarmed and
"cantoned" -- the verb -- over l5,000 non-Khmer Rouge forces.
We and the other core group countries submitted a proposal to
the Supreme National Council in June which sought to enhance the
role of the SNC and accelerate UNTAC's control over existing
administrative structures and which urged the full and immediate
compliance on the part of all Cambodian parties with the Paris
Accords.
We understand that the Khmer Rouge, as part of the SNC,
has not yet responded to that proposal.
The U.N. Security Council adopted unanimously a
resolution on July 2lst. That resolution improved efforts to
continue to implement the agreements despite the difficulties,
and it urged all states -- in particular, neighboring countries
-- to provide assistance to UNTAC to insure the effective
implementation of the Paris Agreements.
At the time of the resolution, in explaining our vote,
Ambassador Perkins stated that the international community
cannot wait for the Khmer Rouge indefinitely and should be
prepared to implement the Paris Accords with or without them.
Clearly, if the Khmer Rouge continue to obstruct the peace
process, we expect that the Security Council may have to
continue further measures against the Khmer Rouge and consider
those measures shortly.
We have been working on this problem extensively. Some
of the things I would mention is that we have been talking to
the non-Communist Cambodian parties. We've been in touch with
Security Council members; we've been in touch with other
interested governments.
I believe you'll find in the transcript of the
Secretary's readout at the ASEAN meetings, at the ASEAN post-
ministerial, that he discussed the problems in Cambodia rather
extensively with Foreign Ministers there.
Under Secretary Kanter met earlier this month with the
Chinese Vice Foreign Minister and he raised this problem with
the Chinese at that time, as we have in other fora; and Acting
Secretary Eagleburger, in fact, discussed this with the Japanese
Ambassador just the other day.
Q Can I follow up just a couple of things? When you
say that you urged the neighbors to cooperate, to assist UNTAC,
does this imply that you're not satisfied with Thailand's
continuing to allow the Khmer Rouge to operate a, you know, a
gem and timber exporting business across their border? And,
also, at the same time, when you say that the Security Council
may have to consider measures against the Khmer Rouge, what sort
of measures are these?
MR. BOUCHER: At this point, I'm not in a position to
specify in any more detail either one of those things.
Q Richard, there's a report in the L.A. Times that
the United States is considering relaxing its support for the
embargo against Haiti in exchange for promises that at some
point in the future Aristide may be permitted to retain his
title.
MR. BOUCHER: Is this a new report, or this was a
report last week like that?
Q Well, there's a wire story --
MR. BOUCHER: A wire story.
Q -- today.
MR. BOUCHER: O.K. Well, in Haiti our position on the
embargo remains the same. I think our position has been that
when there's a solution, a new government, then we would be in a
position to lift the embargo.
There have been, as you know, humanitarian exceptions
to the embargo; and there are licenses that come up from time to
time -- food, pesticides, things like that -- that get approved
for humanitarian purposes. So there is a certain amount of
exceptions to the embargo because of the humanitarian reasons
that we've explained before.
There is currently the mission down in Haiti. OAS
Secretary General Baena Soares and his delegation got to Haiti
on Tuesday. They're meeting, as we've said before, with all
sectors of Haitian society. And we've urged all Haitians to
work constructively with the mission and resume a dialogue that
can lead to the restoration of the democratic process.
Q Well, could you take the question as to whether
any further relaxations are contemplated?
MR. BOUCHER: At this point, I would just answer that
by saying our position on the embargo has not changed --
Q O.K.
MR. BOUCHER: -- and, certainly, there will be licenses
and exceptions from time to time, but the basic position on the
lifting of the embargo has not changed.
Q Do you have any reaction to the murder of the
three high-profile Aristide supporters last night?
MR. BOUCHER: Well, it's an act of violence that,
clearly, we condemn. It's the responsibility of the de facto
authorities, we believe, to condemn the killings, first of all,
and to investigate them. That investigation should be prompt;
it should be thorough. And they should prosecute those guilty
to the full extent of the law.
Q There's an Amnesty International report on Haiti
out today. Do you have any reaction to it?
MR. BOUCHER: I didn't know there was one, and I'm sure
we haven't analyzed it yet. So, no.
Q Can we do Somalia? The airlift, as I understand
it, was supposed to have started either yesterday or today; and
apparently it's not going to happen for a while. Could you
explain why?
MR. BOUCHER: Well, I'm not sure it's for a while,
George. My understanding was that it was slightly delayed, but
we're still hoping to see it start as soon as possible. Some
people have mentioned Friday as a possibility, but I think the
Defense Department will have to tell you that.
I think we better check with the Pentagon on exactly
what caused the delay. I think it was the type of aircraft they
had there. As I say, they've got the C-l4ls down there and the
eight C-l30s are still on their way. So it may have been the
place they wanted to go and the type of aircraft.
There was this question about the runway that they've,
apparently, now resolved.
Q So you, don't know -- you're --
MR. BOUCHER: In other words , I can't give you a full
detailed explanation, but I think it has something to do with
airplanes and runways and I want to let the Pentagon explain it.
Q But you can't rule out security concerns?
MR. BOUCHER: I asked about security and I was told we
have no information that would indicate the security situation
has changed markedly in recent days.
There's chronic instability and banditry that continues
throughout the central and southern areas of Somalia. Security,
obviously, is a major concern in planning these operations; but
the Defense Department has their planners out there already.
They've been working on these flights for several days. I'm
told there hasn't been much of a change in these last few days.
Q So it's still dangerous.
MR. BOUCHER: It's still dangerous; that's the answer.
But they still plan to go ahead.
Q Back on Yugoslavia one more time? You opened the
briefing by talking about -- I believe it was -- the Red Cross;
but, anyway, international observers --
MR. BOUCHER: Yes -- ICRC.
Q -- who have now had access --
MR. BOUCHER: Yes.
Q -- and the numbers of prisoners and so forth.
Has the United States reached any conclusion about
whether these are, in fact, concentration camps and whether
there is a systematic genocide going on behind those doors?
MR. BOUCHER: I don't think we have any conclusions at
this point, Johanna. I mean we've all seen the reports by news
people who have gone to these camps and seen what they've been
able to find. I don't think that I can remember they felt they
had substantiated evidence of systematic killings, although they
certainly had ample evidence of very difficult conditions.
I would have to leave it to the Red Cross to
characterize their information; but if I remember correctly, at
the U.N. Human Rights Commission meeting -- or around that time
-- the ICRC did put out a statement on their own of what they
had found at some of the most prominent of the camps where
things had been reported. And I think at that point they, too,
said that they had not found substantiated evidence of --
Q Well --
MR. BOUCHER: -- systematic killing. So I would say, at
this point, you know, the horrible conditions that are in many
of these places are amply demonstrated; but I'm not aware that
we've, at this point, been able to substantiate some of the
reports of systematic killing.
Q So the reporting was incorrect?
MR. BOUCHER: I would just have to say that, at this
point, we can't tell you for sure.
Q How about the -- do you agree with or do you have
an opinion on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee's Staff
Report?
MR. BOUCHER: I am told we don't have a copy of the
report. Yes. So I don't have a full opinion on it.
I've been told a few things about it. I think, in
general, I would just say that any efforts by anyone to collect
information -- whether it's the media, the ICRC, the Senate
Foreign Relations Committee Staff, or anyone else -- are
important to this.
I think there was a statement a day or two ago that the
ICRC said that they felt that the international spotlight that
had been focused on the detention centers had helped them in
gaining the access that they wanted and that they've needed. So
as far as research goes, I think I would welcome that.
Q But you're not --
MR. BOUCHER: I've been told there's also a certain
amount of criticism of U.S. policy, which obviously I don't
accept. I think the United States has taken the lead --
Q Richard --
MR. BOUCHER: -- for many months in denouncing ethnic
cleansing and in leading to the sanctions and leading to the
investigations that we're seeing now.
Q How come you don't have a copy of the report?
MR. BOUCHER: I don't know. I didn't have time to go
check.
Q It's kind of interesting.
MR. BOUCHER: Maybe they gave it to you before they
gave it to us.
Q Is that --
MR. BOUCHER: Well, I checked with the Bureaus that
would do the analysis and they didn't have one.
Q Uh-huh.
Q Would they like one?
MR. BOUCHER: I'd be happy to have one, Johanna. I'll
get it to the people who might want to look at it.
Q Can't you just call them up? (Laughter)
MR. BOUCHER: I'm sure we'll do that, John, but --
Q Just to go back, did you say how many camps the
Red Cross has been into? I know you mentioned how many --
MR. BOUCHER: The latest number we have was l6 places
of detention.
Q So they've been into l6 camps --
MR. BOUCHER: Yes.
Q -- and the United States, you're sure, is in
communication with them. And after going into l6 camps they're
saying that they can't substantiate the Nazi-like atrocities --
or the United States can't substantiate the Nazi-like atrocities
--
MR. BOUCHER: Sid, I think when the ICRC said it last
week, they also said how many camps they'd visited at that
point. And I'll leave it to the ICRC to describe what they've
concluded from their visits to l6 places. But I'm not aware, at
this point, that with the information that's come out from the
media and elsewhere -- I'm not aware, at this point, that there
are confirmed stories of systematic death camp kind of
situations, although, again, there are many stories of terrible
conditions. And we've seen, for months now, stories of death
and terror and abhorrent things happening throughout these areas
-- much of this associated with the practice of ethnic cleansing
that we've been denouncing for months.
Q Richard, Britain, two days ago, said that they're
willing to send up to -- I believe it's -- l800 ground troops to
ensure a convoy gets into Sarajevo. What is the United States
considering at this point? What kind of commitment -- given the
fact that the French have already committed 2800 ground troops?
MR. BOUCHER: Yes. I guess I would say that, for our
part, I believe the President has already stated that we're
willing to contribute naval and air assets to the effort to get
humanitarian assistance in.
But, overall, I'd also point out that the NATO, WEU,
and others are still working on this question of what are the
best means -- military or nonmilitary -- of getting these --
making sure humanitarian assistance gets to those who need it.
That's the mandate of the U.N. resolution, and that's what we're
trying to do with our friends, allies, and other interested
governments.
Q Thank you.
MR. BOUCHER: O.K.
(The briefing concluded at l:40 p.m.)