Note: This Electronic Research Collection is an archive site. For the most current information, please visit the
U.S DEPARTMENT OF STATE
DAILY PRESS BRIEFING #3:
Source: State Department Spokesman Richard Boucher
DEPARTMENT OF STATE
DAILY PRESS BRIEFING
DPC #3
WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 6, 1993, 12:44 P. M.
(ON THE RECORD UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED)
MR. BOUCHER: Ladies and gentlemen, why don't we begin. If I
can, off the top, I'd like to talk to you a little bit about Haiti,
and then we can go on to any questions you might have.
In their initial meeting this morning, Secretary Eagleburger
and Secretary-designate Christopher discussed the new diplomatic
initiative being undertaken by the U.N. and the OAS to find a
solution to the Haiti crisis.
The Department and the Clinton transition have been
coordinating closely in a joint effort to support this initiative. U.N.
and OAS representatives have been in close touch with the
Department and with senior members of the Clinton transition team
in recent days.
The incoming Administration and this Administration share the
goal of restoring democracy to Haiti, safeguarding the human rights
of all Haitians on the island, and helping the parties find a lasting
solution that will end Haiti's suffering and attain new support for
Haiti's economy and people.
We urge all sides to be flexible in their positions and to be
responsive to the entreaties of the U.N. and the OAS.
And with that, I'd like to take your questions.
Q Just a
technical one on that, when you say "we" in the last sentence of that, I
take it from the first sentence that you are speaking in that for both
Mr. Clinton and for Mr. Bush. Is that correct?
MR. BOUCHER: For Secretary Eagleburger and Secretary-
designate Christopher, yes -- for their designated Secretaries of
State.
Q So this is sort of your first pronunciation on behalf of
the new Administration. Is that correct? (Laughter) Congratulations.
(Laughter)
MR. BOUCHER: I appreciate it, Ralph. This was something that
they wanted to do after their breakfast this morning.
Q When you say that they are working closely in a
joint effort, is that to indicate that we may get some flavor or
feeling for what the new Administration would like to do about
this can of worms prior to them coming into office? There has
been repeated speculation that they're going to try to put out
some word through the U.S. Government about what their policy is
going to be. Do you anticipate that?
MR. BOUCHER: John, that would be something that they
would address, for what more they want to say. The Clinton
people would have to address that.
Q In their conversation today, was there a
difference of opinion on how to deal with Haiti?
MR. BOUCHER: Well, there was an agreement on what I
just read you, between Secretary-designate Christopher and
Secretary Eagleburger, that these elements -- this common
support for the U.N. and the OAS initiatives -- were something
that they shared, and that they wanted to express publicly. As
for other aspects --
Q What about the 10,000 people who may climb on the
boats?
MR. BOUCHER: -- as far as refugee policy and things
like that, I think you're aware of our refugee policy. I can
tell you about it, and I'm not going to be able to speak on
behalf of the incoming Administration on that.
Q Just practically speaking, Richard, what does this
mean to the people who are preparing boats for a trip to the
States in a couple of weeks?
MR. BOUCHER: Saul, I'm not sure this says something
specifically to the people that are preparing boats or who may
be planning on trips or who may be planning, as we would hope,
on applying to the U.S. Embassy if they think they have a
credible claim to asylum.
What it speaks to is to the people of Haiti who are
suffering. We recognize that this situation has brought a lot
of suffering to the people in Haiti. We think there's a moment
of opportunity here. We're trying to speak to all responsible
Haitians to recognize that they do have this opportunity, and
the only way to create a lasting solution is to establish a
democratic government, to work with the U.N. and the OAS to
establish democracy, human rights, and things like that.
Q What I want to know is, is Christopher agreeing
with Eagleburger that they should stay home?
MR. BOUCHER: You'll have to ask Christopher for his
views of refugees and refugee policy. We're addressing here a
political solution -- the efforts that the U.N. and the OAS have
underway to bring a real lasting solution to the problems down
there and to restore democracy and human rights.
Q Did Christopher ask Eagleburger to either take any
action or withhold from taking any specific action until the new
Administration comes in?
MR. BOUCHER: Again, for specifically what Christopher
may have said, you'd have to ask him. Clearly they -- this is
something that the new Secretary -- Secretary-designate -- has
been concerned about, and they were interested in getting this
much out. We share their views, and we wanted to make these
views clear.
Q How long was their meeting? Hours, days?
MR. BOUCHER: I'll have to check exactly on that, John.
I think it was an hour or hour and a half, something like that.
But I'll double-check.
Q All the words you used like "democracy" and "human
rights" and "suffering," they seem to be political expressions,
not economic expressions. Has this Administration in its final
days come to the conclusion that the Haitians are victims -- are
political refugees and not economic refugees?
MR. BOUCHER: Barry, our position on --
Q Like the Cubans, for instance.
MR. BOUCHER: -- the so-called "boat people" has not
changed. Our position on the political problems in Haiti -- I
mean, after all, let's not forget where this all started. This
all started with the coup, and if a coup's not a political act,
I don't know what is.
We have had efforts underway for a long time with the
OAS, in support of the OAS, to try to resolve the political
problems which underlie many of the other problems that the
people in Haiti face -- the economic and others.
And so this addresses the way of trying to address
those political problems. We now have not only the OAS efforts,
but we have the U.N. now that's part of this -- the U.N. willing
to play a constructive role. The Secretary General has named a
Special Envoy, the former Argentine Foreign Minister, Dante
Caputo. He has been active. We have been in touch with him.
He's been talking with Governor Clinton and Brian Atwood, the
Director of the transition team here at State. He's been in
touch with senior members of the State Department as well.
Q Of course, all this begs the question, and that
is, again, the people who are sitting there, building their
boats, putting the final touches on them, waiting for Bill
Clinton to arrive, and they're going to shove off. This doesn't
speak to those people at all?
MR. BOUCHER: It speaks to them in the same terms it
speaks to all Haitians, in that there is an opportunity now to
solve the political crisis which underlies the problems -- to
resolve these political issues that started with the coup, and
that we are supporting those efforts, and the new Administration
is as well.
In terms of the policy on boat people, it's pretty much
what it was. We've given the Haitians with valid claims to
asylum or refugee status a chance to be heard. We have admitted
over 11,000 Haitians to the United States to pursue their
claims, and we have established a facility in the U.S. Embassy
in Port-au-Prince where Haitians can apply directly for refugee
status.
Q Richard, the OAS has been trying to restore
democracy in Haiti for 18 months. What makes now an opportune
time? Why are their chances better now than they were a year
ago?
MR. BOUCHER: As I think I've mentioned a couple of
times, we have the United Nations involved. We have the
Secretary General's Special Envoy, Dante Caputo, who has been
active. He has made trips to Haiti. We understand his first
trip was very positive and was well-received. We are supporting
a new diplomatic effort through the U.N. and the OAS,
particularly through the U.N. Secretary General's envoy, to try
to resolve these questions, and we understand the U.N. is
coordinating very closely with others on this.
Q Richard, is the Administration considering a
similar type of intervention in Haiti that it had in Somalia --
that it is now doing in Somalia?
MR. BOUCHER: Sid, I think I've addressed our policy
towards Haiti and what we're supporting and what we're doing,
and I'm, for the usual reasons, not going to get into
comparisons.
Q Would you clarify something for me? Your
statement said that you urge all sides to be flexible in their
positions. I could understand why Cedras -- you would urge
Cedras to be flexible. I mean, after all, he came to power in a
coup. What kind of flexibility are you asking from Aristide --
the duly elected leader of that country?
MR. BOUCHER: The issue is restoring democracy to
Haiti, and we've addressed that issue many times before. The
efforts are underway by the Secretary General's envoy. He is
trying to make the arrangements, put together the kind of
solution. We think that all the parties indeed do need to be
flexible and to work with him to support his efforts. But the
issue remains, as it always has been, the restoration of
democracy to Haiti.
Q Well, what kind of flexibility could a person who
has already been elected and then ousted -- what kind of
flexibility could you ask from him?
MR. BOUCHER: I think that's something I'd have to
leave for those who are more directly negotiating this.
Q But are you suggesting a power-sharing
arrangement?
MR. BOUCHER: I'm not suggesting any specific solution
right now. I'm suggesting that the parties should cooperate
with the U.N. envoy and the others who are directly involved in
trying to make arrangements to restore democracy in Haiti and
restore human rights there.
Q Richard, this joint statement that you read
earlier doesn't -- as you've pointed out, doesn't deal with the
boat people at all. Governor Clinton has made clear, crystal
clear, what his view is on the boat people. One might read the
joint statement as some indication that Christopher and
Eagleburger agreed to give this U.N.-OAS initiative some kind of
a political boost in hopes that Clinton will not have to
exercise the change in policy which he has publicly said he
would exercise.
Is that part of the agreement that they reached this
morning?
MR. BOUCHER: If you want to ask for what is the
thinking on behalf of the Clinton people or the
Secretary-designate, I'm afraid you're going to have to ask
them. Except to the extent that I'm reading something on views
that we share, that's about as much as I have to say for them.
I think that you might also just conclude that this was
something that we agreed on; that we agree on the importance of
a political solution in Haiti, and we agree on the fact that
these efforts are the best way to get there, and we want to
express our support for those efforts.
Q Is it fair to conclude then that on all the other
issues related to Haiti, some of which have been discussed here,
Eagleburger and Christopher failed to reach agreement, assuming
that they discussed all those things?
MR. BOUCHER: I don't -- no, I don't think that's fair
to conclude. I'm not sure they discussed all the other issues
related to Haiti.
Q What else did they discuss, Richard, besides
Haiti?
MR. BOUCHER: I don't know.
Q They did discuss other issues?
MR. BOUCHER: I assume they did, yes.
Q Could we ask for a further readout on that
meeting, or are you basically telling us that you've asked, and
they don't want to do any further readout?
MR. BOUCHER: I haven't really asked, Ralph. I was
sort of given to indicate in advance that there probably
wouldn't be a readout, but I'll be glad to see if there's
anything more that either one -- well, that Secretary
Eagleburger wants to say about the meeting.
Q Could you check on the Shoval meeting while you're
at it -- the luncheon, please, would you have anything
afterwards yet?
MR. BOUCHER: I'll see if we have anything to say on
that. They meet fairly regularly.
Q I would assume at the breakfast meeting one of the
things they did discuss was Iraq and what's being done. Can you
tell us anything about that?
MR. BOUCHER: About their discussion, no.
Q Well, can you tell us anything about Iraq?
MR. BOUCHER: Oh, O.K. Well, I can tell you, first of
all, that I'm not going to get into specifics. O.K. I do want
to mention, however, that when the "no-fly" zone was declared in
August, we and our coalition partners made clear to Iraq that we
would not tolerate actions which put our aircrews at risk.
We made clear that we meant this on December 27 when
coalition aircraft destroyed an Iraqi MiG below the 32nd
Parallel after it showed hostile intent. At that time we
reminded Iraq that it should scrupulously respect the "no-fly"
zone and avoid actions which could put our personnel at risk.
Iraq should take these warnings very seriously.
Q What is Iraq doing -- that is, is Iraq doing
anything, and what specifically, if it is, that is putting those
forces at risk?
MR. BOUCHER: You've heard from us and the Pentagon and
the White House in recent days, not only our concern about the
flights, but our concern about some of the movement of missiles
that we've observed.
Q What about radar? Is that a --
MR. BOUCHER: That sort of detail on radar and lock-ons
and painting and all those other terms that I don't understand,
I'm afraid you have to get from the Pentagon.
Q Does the U.N. resolution specifically talk about
the missiles themselves, or is that just understood?
MR. BOUCHER: The U.N. resolutions, John, address Iraqi
repression. There are a number of U.N. resolutions that deal
with this, but principally Resolution 688. And the "no-fly"
zones are established -- both in the north and the south -- to
prevent the Iraqis from using airplanes or aircraft of any kind
to repress its own people, which is something that's prohibited
by the U.N. resolutions.
In announcing the "no-fly" zones, we made very clear,
first of all, what the rules were and, for example, at the
Defense Department briefing on August 26, they said that, "We
will respond appropriately and decisively to any Iraqi failure
to comply with this requirement or any other interference with
our air operations."
Q But the "no-fly" zone was never explicitly
authorized by the U.N. Four nations or three in that case, now
with Russian alongside, have inferred from that the authority to
establish a "no-fly" zone. Is that correct?
MR. BOUCHER: The U.N. resolutions address a number of
things. They address U.N. operations -- humanitarian operations
that we're engaged in, and they address Iraq's repression of its
people, and they authorize necessary measures for a number of
things. And the coalition "no-fly" zone operations have been
undertaken under their authority.
Q Well, can I just ask you what Iraq -- whatever
Iraq is doing, is that inhibiting the enforcement of the
"no-fly" zone? Are you intimidated by what they're doing?
MR. BOUCHER: Well, sending airplanes into the "no-fly"
zone is violating the "no-fly" zone.
Q No, no.
MR. BOUCHER: Demonstrating hostile intent with their
airplanes is violating the "no-fly" zone and is trying to
inhibit the actions of the U.S.-- of the coalition.
Q (Inaudible) this warning that you have put
forward?
MR. BOUCHER: That's the kind of detail I'm not in a
position to get into.
Q Richard, you said the United States made clear
what the rules are, but isn't the United States making up the
rules as they go along?
MR. BOUCHER: You know, I'll go back to August and, you
know, tell you exactly what we've said when we imposed the zone
in the south. The President made that very clear.
Q Did you tell them specifically they could not move
missiles?
MR. BOUCHER: They were told in very specific terms
that we would respond appropriately and decisively to any Iraqi
failure to comply with this requirement -- that's the "no-fly"
requirement -- or any other interference with our air
operations.
Q Well, Richard, do we plan to approach -- do we and
friends plan to approach the Iraqis in New York or elsewhere to
reinforce this warning?
MR. BOUCHER: We are ensuring that the Iraqis are left
in no doubt about the importance of strict adherence to the
terms of the "no-fly" zone.
Q How are we doing that?
MR. BOUCHER: That's the kind of detail I can't get
into at this point.
Q But we haven't done that yet, have we? We're in
the process of trying to walk up to the line to provide them
with that demarche or that -- whatever.
MR. BOUCHER: John, I'm not going to get into details
on where we stand on various steps. But, first of all, I'd like
-- I mean, I think we need to make clear that right from the
start of these zones, the terms and conditions were made clear.
And, second of all, that we are ensuring that Iraq is left in no
doubt about the importance of strict adherence.
Q Well, Richard, you've clearly got an idea what
they have to do to comply. Why won't you state what that is?
MR. BOUCHER: At this point I'm not going get into
specifics. I would say what they have to do to comply is to
strictly adhere to the terms of the zones.
Q Will you get into specifics with the Iraqis, or do
they have to guess?
MR. BOUCHER: At this point, John, I'm not in a
position to go into any more detail.
Q I really don't -- I don't understand, because if
what they're doing -- I mean, I don't know that this is a
question that if what they're doing conflicts with the "no-fly"
zone, is it a big leap to conclude that "stop doing what you're
doing" would remove their intimidation of American warplanes --
American inspection planes?
What do you mean, what do they have to do? You said
the missiles are in conflict with the "no-fly" zone. Isn't it a
given that they have to remove the missiles? What's all the
ducking and weaving about?
MR. BOUCHER: Barry, you can write your own terms and
conditions if you want to. At this point I'm not going into any
more detail.
Q But we're telling -- "we" are telling. Who's "we"?
MR. BOUCHER: We, the United States, is in close touch
with our coalition partners and with others on these matters.
Without trying to speak for anybody else, I would say that there
is agreement on the need for Iraq to comply fully with the U.N.
resolutions and with the "no-fly" zones.
Q Is there agreement that the compliance by Iraq
must be done within a certain number of hours or days? In other
words, is there a deadline?
MR. BOUCHER: I am not at this point going to get into
any specifics.
Q Is the U.S. discussing with Britain, France, Saudi
Arabia and Russia an ultimatum, including an hour deadline with
specific instructions to Iraq as to what it must do with its
missiles?
MR. BOUCHER: I'm afraid at this point, Ralph, I'm not
in a position to get into any specifics.
Q So you're not denying that or confirming it.
You're just refusing to discuss it. Is that correct?
MR. BOUCHER: I'm not getting into any specifics.
Q (Inaudible) need for Iraq to comply. Is there
agreement on the need for Iraq to comply? Is there agreement on
the need to make Iraq comply?
MR. BOUCHER: I wouldn't draw any distinction there.
Q Wait until you hear this hair split. Is there an
agreement on what Iraq must do but not an agreement on how to
word it?
MR. BOUCHER: I'm not going to split any hairs with
you, Barry. I think you've seen the resolve of the coalition
demonstrated many times. You've seen the resolve of the
coalition demonstrated in the patrols and the air operations
that they have engaged in, and Iraq has seen the resolve of the
coalition demonstrated many times. I wouldn't split hairs.
Q Is Russia now a full-fledged member of this coalition?
MR. BOUCHER: You can ask Russia what it considers --
Q Uh, uh. No. It's your coalition. You put the
coalition together that went to war, and I wondered if there's
room for new memberships.
MR. BOUCHER: You can join too, Barry, if you want to.
(Laughter) I'm not going to try to address any specific countries.
Q I'm trying to stay neutral.
Q Is there an intelligence assessment and would you
be willing to share it with us about what Saddam is up to; what
the U.S. thinks is behind -- the motive for this?
MR. BOUCHER: If there were an intelligence assessment,
I probably wouldn't want to share it with you, but I think we
and others in the Administration have talked in recent days and
weeks about the pattern of challenges and violations that has
been established by Iraq, particularly in its flights south of
the 32nd Parallel.
We've also noted the pattern of harassment of relief
trucks in the north and the continuing pressure that its had on
the Kurds and on the northern areas.
Q If we were to speculate that this might have --
might be one last attempt by Saddam to twit George Bush, would
we be far off?
MR. BOUCHER: I don't know. I don't speak for Saddam.
Q (Inaudible) -- if you would lay out conditions too
precisely about what Iraq might do, that they will meet those
but find some other way to either violate the "no-fly" zone or
drag this out as they have in the past. Is that why you're
ducking and weaving?
MR. BOUCHER: No.
(Laughter)
MR. BOUCHER: Connie.
Q What are -- can you refresh us on the rules about
violations on the ground? Are there any U.N. resolutions about
that?
MR. BOUCHER: There are -- clearly, there's -- I mean,
the most pertinent one is Resolution 688 which deals with
repression of Iraqi civilians, and the "no-fly" zones were
established to prevent them from engaging in that kind of
repression that they had been through the use of aircraft.
Q You use the phrase "pattern of harassment," you
referred to. I'm trying to see how wide a net you're laying
here. Is Iraq in violation of the "no-fly" zone in the north as
well by this pattern of harassment?
MR. BOUCHER: You could check with the Pentagon on
specific flights and aircraft activity in the north. I'm not
aware of any specific pattern of violations up there. But there
has clearly been a pattern established of harassment of relief
operations, harassment of relief trucks, of military pressure,
of economic embargo on the north. So this -- it's fitting to
the pattern.
Q Richard, is there a violation on the ground as
there is in the air? Is there a specific violation that will
trigger action on the ground?
MR. BOUCHER: The "no-fly" zones are just that --
they're "no-fly" zones. Don't fly in this area and don't
threaten our aircraft that are in this area.
Q I'm asking about repression not conducted by
airplanes.
MR. BOUCHER: Well, the U.N. resolutions have made very
clear that Iraq should not engage in any such repression,
whether it's by airplane or any other means.
Q But it has. It has engaged clearly in the north
and in the south too, so what happens now?
MR. BOUCHER: And we have established things like
"no-fly" zones in order to prevent that repression from being
carried out from the air.
Q Richard, concerning the enthusiasm that the allies
are showing for enforcing the "no-fly" zone in Iraq, I'm
wondering if they have demonstrated any greater enthusiasm for
enforcing the "no-fly" zone over Bosnia?
MR. BOUCHER: Excuse me? You're asking about the
status of the "no-fly" resolution on Bosnia?
Q You could put it that way, if you like.
Q I liked his way better.
MR. BOUCHER: Well, his way was a little more
complicated.
We're continuing consultations in New York with our
allies. We're seeking a resolution that would authorize
enforcement of the "no-fly" zone and would authorize
commencement of enforcement actions with a minimum of delay.
Q Now it becomes our turn to ask how many flights?
Do you have an update?
MR. BOUCHER: Oh, no, I don't. I should have gotten
one.
Q Can we go to 400 or now or stick with 300?
MR. BOUCHER: I'll have to check and see if my people
have an update, or if there's been any more recent update this
week from the U.N. The totals that have been done in the past
have been on the basis of the Secretary General's report.
Q If "all necessary means" means a "no-fly" zone in
Iraq, why doesn't "all necessary means" mean a "no-fly" zone in
Bosnia?
MR. BOUCHER: There are a whole series of different
resolutions, Saul. You can't just take one situation and throw
it on top of the other. The resolutions, you know, apply in
different ways.
Q The coalition in order to get aid to the Kurds and
to keep the Iraqis from being repressed took the resolution 688
which said "all necessary means to prevent this" and turned it
into a "no-fly" zone without a specific enforcement resolution
as far as I know. Why can't the same thing -- since the
resolution concerning Bosnia and humanitarian aid says "all
necessary means," why can you not turn that into a "no-fly" zone
without further action by the Security Council?
MR. BOUCHER: Saul, I guess that's an interesting
question, and I could have the lawyers study it for a few weeks,
but I think basically the situations are different. You have --
in the Iraq situation you have a series of U.N. resolutions that
established that Iraq's activities, including its repression of
its own population, constituted a threat to international peace
and security. And there are a variety of interlocks between the
different resolutions which we've explained many times.
Q Is there not a violation of international peace
and security in the former Yugoslavia?
MR. BOUCHER: I'd have to go back and look through the
way the resolutions were done, but it's clear that we and others
believe that a Security Council resolution is required to
enforce the "no-fly" zone. The last resolution that imposed the
ban on the "no-fly" zone said specifically that the Council
should consider further measures.
Q You remember yesterday --
Q Why doesn't the -- if the resolution that
explicitly in the case of the Bosnia creates a "no-fly" zone, if
that resolution requires another resolution for enforcement, why
doesn't the non-existent U.N. resolution for a "no-fly" zone in
Iraq require some kind of U.N. Security Council action for
enforcement?
MR. BOUCHER: Ralph, these things -- you know, we've
got two "no-fly" zones in Iraq. We've got one in the north,
we've got one in the south.
Q One was created -- in the case of Bosnia, it was
created by a U.N. resolution. The ones in Iraq were created, as
you stated earlier, in pursuit of the U.N. resolution.
MR. BOUCHER: Ralph, one of the reasons why we don't do
comparisons is because situations are, indeed, different. We've
got two "no-fly" resolutions in the case of Iraq. We've gone --
Q (Inaudible).
MR. BOUCHER: Excuse me.
Q You said you've got two "no-fly" resolutions in the case
of
Iraq.
MR. BOUCHER: Let me reword my sentence, if I can.
Q Can I ask you --
MR. BOUCHER: Well, one of these days I'll finish a
sentence that I'll try to get out in a full fashion without
being interrupted, and I'll try not to interrupt you all, too.
We have two "no-fly" zones in the case of Iraq. They
were imposed at different times. This whole issue of the
authorization of the U.N. Security Council resolutions for those
zones were discussed in very great detail, and I remember it at
the time. We're really just going over old ground here.
The resolutions dealing with Iraq made very clear that
Iraq's actions had been a major threat to the international
community and Iraq needed to comply in a whole variety of ways
with the requirements of the U.N. Security Council. And
pursuant to those resolutions, including the resolutions on
repression of its own civilians, the "no-fly" zones were
established in order to prevent Iraq from carrying out the kind
of depredations against its own population which it had been
carrying out.
Situations elsewhere in the world are different. The
U.N. Security Council resolutions on those other places are
different; and the U.N. Security Council, in the case of Bosnia
and the "no-fly" zone, has decided how it wishes to approach the
issue.
We have approached that issue. You will remember when
we first went for a "no-fly" zone -- for a "no-fly" resolution
for Bosnia -- we sought to have an enforcement provision in
there. We didn't get that at the time. It was agreed at the
time that if there were significant violations -- if there were
violations -- that there would be further action by the Security
Council, and that's the kind of further action that we've been
seeking.
Q Do you have any reaction to the deaths in
Sarajevo? We don't even know what's been happening in other
places in Bosnia where there are no reporters. But certainly in
Sarajevo, there are reports of old people dying in the cold, of
lack of fuel, with no heating; people chopping down the remnants
of trees.
Basically, it adds up to a humanitarian nightmare. Do
you have any words, if not action, to offer?
MR. BOUCHER: I have quite a bit of information on
what's going in, Alan. I think, first of all, on the whole
question of winterization, it's important to note that we have
focused efforts for many months in this direction.
Obviously, deliveries have been hampered both by
cancellation of flights and difficulties with convoys, but there
has been a focus on this. I've seen recent statements by the
U.N. High Commissioner for Refugees people about how they would
orient their work even more towards providing the kind of
materials that are needed for the winter.
Now, I have some numbers, which I can give you, on what
we've been sending in there. Basically, we've got $20 million
specifically appropriated by Congress in a Development
Assistance Fund for fuel, construction materials, portable
heating units, dairy products, wheat, and other urgently needed
food for people in Bosnia-Herzegovina, Croatia, and Kosovo.
The Office of Foreign Disaster Assistance has shipped a
thousand rolls of heavy-duty plastic sheeting for repairs,
10,000 multi-fuel space heaters. The UNHCR has delivered
approximately 15,000 metric -- 1,500, excuse me -- metric tons
of plastic sheeting, nails, and tape for winterization to
various locations around Bosnia-Herzegovina. They've also
delivered 206,000 pieces of bedding like sleeping bags and
blankets, 124 transport pallets -- whatever that is -- of winter
clothing, and 2,680 heaters that have also been delivered.
We have been working with the High Commissioner very
closely on these projects. We've offered the services of
shelter construction and other kinds of specialists. The
Defense Department has provided already more than five million
meals to the U.N. High Commissioner for Refugees for use in the
former Yugoslavia, and we're continuing to identify additional
food supplies.
We're helping out with the logistics of transporting
humanitarian assistance. We have a U.S. presence on the land
convoy and airlift planning units that work out of Geneva,
Zagreb, Belgrade, and Split. We've got contracts with U.S. Data
Management specialists to work with the UNHCR. We've got U.S.
military personnel who are working at Zagreb Airport to organize
and load humanitarian supplies for air transport.
We've provided vehicles requested by the U.N. High
Commissioner for Refugees, and we're prepared to provide
additional military trucks, including dump trucks for the
delivery of fuel.
We have provided, or are providing, bailey bridges --
the military's way of getting across a river -- to repair
existing damaged bridges on the Ploce/Mostar/Sarajevo route.
Those are some of the things we're doing.
We understand that according to the U.N. High
Commissioner as of January 4 -- that's Monday -- that natural
gas was available in Sarajevo. That's been an
on-again/off-again thing.
Q But, Richard, people are freezing to death. We
all saw it on the nightly news last night.
MR. BOUCHER: They certainly are, yes.
Q Would you say this is because these things aren't
getting to them, aren't getting distributed, or just aren't
enough? Is a lot more needed and it's just not coming in or
it's not available, or what's the problem?
MR. BOUCHER: The problems, as we have explained and as
the UNHCR has explained, have been with getting the stuff
through, getting it through to places where people need it --
Q So is there any new efforts to do that?
MR. BOUCHER: -- getting it through because of weather,
getting it through because of security.
Q Is there any new ideas on anything that you can do
to get it through?
MR. BOUCHER: They've been working on new routes
consistently and, indeed, over the past several months, we have
expanded the routes, and we've been getting more through, I
think, in the last several months than we had in the past.
The UNHCR and we have people that are planning and
looking for other ways of getting things through. I'd just say
they continue to work on it.
Q Do you know what kind of space heaters, the 10,000
space heaters are? Are they electric or gasoline, or how are
they powered? Because if they're electric, it wouldn't do much
good --
MR. BOUCHER: I don't think they're electric. I'm not
sure exactly whether it's kerosene or wood or some combination,
or some alternate thing. I'm pretty sure they're not electric.
Q So we deliver fuel with the space heaters?
MR. BOUCHER: One of the things we're trying to do is
get fuel through, yes.
Q Do you have any further information, Richard, on
the number of prisoners being held by the Serbs in Bosnia or
elsewhere?
MR. BOUCHER: I think I went through yesterday with you
the numbers that the ICRC has been able to register. Those are
people, of course, that they have been able to have access to,
and we have talked about and they have talked about, in addition
to problems that they've had in getting access to additional
places. So the problem is really that they haven't been able to
get access to all the possible places of detention. They
continue to try. So until they get that kind of access, it's
very difficult to get firm numbers.
We do have estimates. There are U.S. Government
estimates that there could be as many as 70,000 people who are
held in camps in the former Yugoslavia. These estimates have
been shared with the International Committee of the Red Cross.
We continue to cooperate in all efforts to locate and bring
under Red Cross protection any prisoners in this conflict.
There are other estimates that are lower. The point
is, I think, that we continue to support the Red Cross, to urge
the Red Cross, and to urge the parties to allow the Red Cross to
get access to all possible places of detention and, indeed, to
support their efforts to get these places closed.
Q How many detention sites do we estimate there are?
MR. BOUCHER: I don't have a number of detention sites.
I'm sorry.
Q Are all of them in Bosnia or are some of them in Serbia?
MR. BOUCHER: That, again, is the kind of detail I'm
not in a position to provide.
Q What's the estimate for the fairly dramatic
difference in the order of magnitude between the estimate you
just talked about and the one you spoke about yesterday by the
official body that's keeping count?
MR. BOUCHER: Well -- that I just talked about --
again, the registrations are the places where the ICRC has been
able to get access, has gone in and seen the prisoners. They've
gotten thousands of people released, and that's something that
we heartily welcome and it's very important.
But the problem -- the difference is essentially, have
they been given access to all possible places. Now, the numbers
of actual prisoners may not turn out to be as large as these
estimates or even some of the other estimates that are lower.
But they need to get access to all the possible places of
detention for them to be able to register and care for the
prisoners.
Q But what I'm trying to get at, though, is that
you're saying that the difference -- the order of magnitude is
the difference between roughly 10,000 and roughly 70,000,
something like that.
MR. BOUCHER: Possibly as many as.
Q And then you're talking about access to every
single place. It would suggest that there are a few places they
haven't gotten. What you're really saying is, you think that
the Red Cross has really had access to a small fraction -- about
one-seventh, if you wanted to be mathematical about it?
MR. BOUCHER: No, you can't do that because the
estimates are different. Somewhere -- yes, has not had access
to all; has access to only a portion of; has had access to what
may turn out to be a small portion of -- yes, those are all
accurate. But I can't give you an actual fraction because it's
compared to actual people that they've been able to talk to and
see or get released, versus estimates.
Q The ICRC has seen only about 2,500, 2,600 people.
MR. BOUCHER: They have seen -- Ralph said 10,000. I'm
not sure what the actual thing is. If you take the numbers that
they had seen and who are now released, they now have registered
2,577 prisoners that are being held at present.
Q Have we confronted the Serbs about this?
MR. BOUCHER: Oh, we've talked to them repeatedly about this.
Q And what do they say?
MR. BOUCHER: We've talked to them repeatedly about the
need for ICRC access, and you've seen the various statements
that they have made.
Q Are they denying that there are 70,000, or up to
70,000?
MR. BOUCHER: I don't know if they themselves have
provided any estimates of the numbers. At various times various
of the parties in the area have claimed that they have given the
ICRC full access. We don't think that's the case.
Q New topic?
Q No. For how long have you been -- have you had
that information, reliable information on this huge difference
between the number of prisoners registered with the ICRC and the
number you're just mentioning?
MR. BOUCHER: I don't know when that particular
estimate was prepared. We've always known, we've always talked
about the problems that the ICRC has had in gaining access to
all the facilities. We've always shared information with the
ICRC whenever we had information that might point out where
people might be held and places they could go check out.
They have checked out some of those places in the past
and found they were transit centers or refugee camps. But they,
indeed, in many of those places, found prisoners and been able
to register them. So this discrepancy between the numbers that
they've been able to locate and register versus some of the
difficulties that they face in getting to other places, that's
something that's always existed.
Q Do we have any idea of their condition, of these
prisoners? Do we have estimates?
MR. BOUCHER: I guess we do from the ones that the ICRC
has visited.
Q I mean the condition of the people that they're
not showing to the ICRC, do we have any -- you have
approximately up to 70,000 people that the ICRC has not seen.
MR. BOUCHER: I don't really know, Saul. Not that I
have for you at this point.
Q Considering the plight of people who are in their
homes or old folks homes in Sarajevo, I was wondering if you had
any suggestion as to what the possible conditions there are for
these 70,000 people who nobody has access to?
MR. BOUCHER: No, I don't. I don't have any
information on their condition for you.
Q Do you have any information --
Q (Inaudible) prisoners held by the other side, by
the other factions -- the Croats and the Muslims? Is it a big
problem?
MR. BOUCHER: First of all, these are -- this is a
composite estimate. First of all, make sure there is a range of
estimates. I was asked specifically about this 70,000 number
yesterday because it appeared in a magazine and, indeed, there
is a U.S. estimate that number could be as many as that. But it
would be a composite of those being held in various camps by all
the groups.
I went through yesterday the ICRC's numbers on the
number of people that they've actually been able to get access
to and the number that they believe to be still held by various
groups in the area.
Q Do you have any other information or estimates that you
have not shared with the Red Cross or with any other international
organization on the number of camps, number of refugees?
MR. BOUCHER: These estimates have been fully shared.
We share regularly and fully the information that we get on
possible places of detention and people.
Q But we were left with the impression that the
issue of the prisoners were fairly under control and that the
only problem at one point was the resettlement of those
prisoners. But that basically we knew how many were there, we
knew how many had to get out of those camps. And, suddenly, we
are confronted with this new huge figure and this new huge
problem of prisoners.
MR. BOUCHER: I'd say a couple of things, Jacques.
First of all, I don't think we left that impression. We did,
indeed, talk about the people who had been released. And for
every single one of those people, that was a wonderful thing.
But we've also talked consistently about the problems that the
Red Cross has faced in gaining access. We've consistently urged
the parties to allow the Red Cross to have access.
I can't tell you that there are 70,000 people still in
detention. I can tell you that there is a range of estimates
and that some of these estimates go as high as 70,000 of the
numbers of people who could be still in detention.
Q Whose estimate is that?
MR. BOUCHER: This was a U.S. Government estimate.
Q It is the U.S. Government?
MR. BOUCHER: That it could be as high as that.
Q Can I ask for a final clarification on Iraq? Does
the United States believe it is empowered to act militarily
against Iraq without specifying in public and in advance what it
is Iraq has to do to avoid that military action?
MR. BOUCHER: That, I would have to say, is a
hypothetical situation at this point.
Q Any update on Kenya, on the elections?
MR. BOUCHER: No, I don't.
Q Do you have a readout on the meetings with the
Ukrainians -- on START?
MR. BOUCHER: The meetings just started this morning,
so I don't really have any sort of readout for you. They met
today with Under Secretary Wisner at 10:00. They'll meet
tomorrow with the Secretary. They'll have lunch in the
Department, and other meetings hosted by Policy Planning
Director Ross.
To follow up on the previous meetings in Kiev -- the
same group that went to April -- will be meeting with them
tomorrow. I'm sorry. The same group that went to Kiev in
April, or almost the same group that went to Kiev in April, I
have to say, will meet with them tomorrow. That will be Policy
Planning Director Ross, Under Secretary for Defense Wolfowitz;
and in this case, Nicholas Burns of the NSC. The April group
was Ed Hewett of the NSC.
We understand that Mr. Tarasyuk has also got meetings
scheduled at the Pentagon and the NSC, and that he'll have
meetings with members of Congress as well.
Q The President?
MR. BOUCHER: It's something you'd have to ask about at
the White House.
Q Richard, just a last one on Bosnia: On two
different occasions French officials talked about using force to
go to the camps and try to open it up and release the prisoners.
Are you in favor of such -- of the use of force in
that respect, with respect to the camps? Is the U.S. Government
in favor of, for example, pushing through the U.N. a new
resolution for the use of force on that issue?
MR. BOUCHER: I don't know that that's something that
we addressed nor do I think there's any resolution in front of
the U.N. at this point. So, no, I don't have anything on that.
Q Richard, if we have maybe the possibility of
70,000 people in prisons that we didn't know that were there,
what are we doing to find out from the Bosnians -- from the
Serbs if, indeed, there are 70,000 people? Aside from sharing
the information with ICRC who has no real authority except moral
authority to ask, what are we doing to find out whether these
people are, indeed, there and what their condition is and
whether some of those camps are not really camps but just sites
and whether some of them may not even be in Bosnia? What are we
doing to find out? Seventy thousand people are a lot of people.
MR. BOUCHER: I would say, first of all, that we're
collecting all the information we can get on this subject, and
we have been for some time and we've been sharing -- we are
sharing that information with the Red Cross and we have been
doing that for some time.
The Red Cross is, indeed, the most qualified
organization to investigate these, to find the prisoners, to see
them, to look to their welfare and to see to their situations
and to press the parties to get the kind of information that
they need to do that job thoroughly and effectively.
We, and various other governments, have been
consistently supporting those efforts. We have consistently
been urging the various parties to allow that kind of ICRC
access, and we'll continue to do that.
Q May I change the subject to the START treaty
that's just been signed. In the period of the Cold War, the
mission or purpose of the American nuclear arsenals was to deter
the threat posed by Soviet nuclear arsenals and now 75 percent
of those will be cut back, but 25 percent will remain when it's
all completed.
My question is whether this Administration has
addressed the question of what the mission and purpose of that
25 percent -- about 3,000, 3,500 weapons -- will be now that the
Cold War is over?
MR. BOUCHER: If I can get away with saying "I'm sure
we have," that would be my answer. I'm afraid --
Q I'd like to hear an elaboration of it if there is one.
MR. BOUCHER: -- I don't have any specific references
in my head. I'm not sure -- I have to admit to not having
listened carefully to the President's speech yesterday, but he
addressed the whole issue of national security and military
policy. He may have addressed it there.
But in any case, I think we have addressed that in the
past, and I'll see if I can get you anything on that that we
might have.
Q I'd appreciate it, if there is.
Q On the question of Soviet nuclear weapons, more
than a year ago President Yeltsin promised that the strategic
weapons would be retargeted. Do you know if that has, in fact,
been accomplished?
MR. BOUCHER: That's really a question you have to ask
the Russians. I'm not sure we have any -- there's no
verification procedure for that that I'm aware of.
Q But these were assurances given to the United
States. Don't you suppose they would tell the United States if,
in fact, they had carried it out?
MR. BOUCHER: They might. I seem to remember he said
something subsequently in public but I'd have to double-check on
that, but it's really a question for them, not us.
Q The question is, are the assurances still, as they
say, operative?
MR. BOUCHER: Again, that's a question for them, not us.
Q But as far as you know they haven't withdrawn them?
MR. BOUCHER: I haven't really looked at this subject for
months.
Q One more on the Ukraine meetings. Presumably, the
U.S. -- has the U.S. changed its position at all on insisting
that Ukraine and the other nuclear former Soviet republics
comply with the START I treaty and ratify it and so on? There
hasn't been any change in that, has there?
MR. BOUCHER: No, there's been no change in that.
There's been agreement by the parties to the START treaty.
There's been agreement to seek its ratification, and we have the
assurances of those who haven't ratified the START treaty and
the NPT that they will proceed to do so.
Q You've had those assurances from Ukraine for quite
a long time. I don't remember exactly how --
MR. BOUCHER: We've expressed our concern about the
delays.
Q And the U.S. has expressed its concern. My
question is, what is there to talk about with this delegation?
Is the U.S., in effect, telling this delegation that relations
between the U.S. and Ukraine will be hurt, damaged, or will only
proceed so far as long as Ukraine hasn't ratified and fails to
ratify?
MR. BOUCHER: Well, I think, first of all, I should say
that the Secretary made clear just a few weeks ago that failure
to ratify START and the NPT would, indeed, have an effect on our
relationship with Ukraine.
But these talks that we're having are not just about
START, although, obviously, it's an excellent opportunity to
discuss that, to discuss those kinds of security issues.
These talks are, first of all, a follow-on to the
bilateral policy discussions that were conducted by the Policy
Planning Staff Director Dennis Ross, Under Secretary of Defense
Wolfowitz, and NSC Senior Director Hewett in Kiev in April of
'92. Second of all, they will address a full range of bilateral
policy issues. Third, I'd put them in context in terms of their
part of developing a bilateral relationship with a free and an
independent Ukraine.
We'll be addressing common security, foreign policy,
and economic concerns.
One issue, obviously, that is of great importance is
the question of Ukraine's ratification of the START treaty and
accession to the non-proliferation treaty, and these meetings
provide an excellent opportunity to discuss those as well as
other security issues.
Q I guess my question really is, from the appearance
of these two days of discussions, it would look as though the
U.S. is proceeding with that bilateral agenda -- the economic,
security, and foreign policy agenda -- independent of Ukraine's
failure, to date, to fulfill its own promises to the U.S. on
ratification issues. Is that correct?
MR. BOUCHER: I don't think it's fair to put it that
way, frankly. I think that's not fair to put it that way. I
would say that the U.S. is proceeding with the bilateral agenda
with the Ukraine, one very important part of which remains the
adherence of the Ukraine to both START and the NPT.
Q So the failure to ratify does not stand in the way
of going ahead with these other issues; is that correct?
MR. BOUCHER: Again, Secretary Eagleburger expressed
our views on that several weeks ago and they remain the way they
were.
Q Thank you.
Q Kuwait-Iraq border: Do you have anything further
on Iraq's behavior along that disputed border zone?
MR. BOUCHER: It's something I'd have to get you
something on.
Q Thank you.
(Press briefing concluded at 1:37 p.m.)