Note: This Electronic Research Collection is an archive site. For the most current information, please visit the
US DEPARTMENT OF STATE
DAILY PRESS BRIEFING #11:
State Department Spokesman Richard Boucher
DEPARTMENT OF STATE
DAILY PRESS BRIEFING
DPC #11
FRIDAY, JANUARY 22, 1993, 12:51 P. M.
(ON THE RECORD UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED)
MR. BOUCHER: Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen. Good
afternoon, John. I have off the top for you one more personnel
announcement.
Marc Grossman has been named to be Special Assistant to the
Secretary and Executive Secretary of the Department. He takes up his
duties as of close of business today. Marc has been with the Department
since 1976. Most recently he's been the Principal Deputy Assistant
Secretary in the Bureau of Politico-Military Affairs.
Q Where does that leave Bob Pearson? Is he -- that was Bob
Pearson's job, right?
MR. BOUCHER: Yes. That was Bob Pearson's job.
Q Does he have another assignment?
MR. BOUCHER: I'm not sure what Bob's going to do.
Q Is that it?
MR. BOUCHER: That's it. Be glad to take your questions.
Q Could you talk about Haiti? There's been a lot of talk
about sending human rights observers there.
MR. BOUCHER: Be glad to talk about Haiti. We've, as you know,
been long in support and strong support of the idea of sending human
rights observers, a civilian democracy mission, to Haiti. Minister
Caputo at the U.N. and the Organization of American States' envoy has
been working on the details of a civilian observer mission. You'd have
to get details from them. It is being worked on, and we hope the
negotiations on the mission would proceed rapidly, and that the mission
could go to Haiti as soon as possible so as to sustain the momentum of
Mr. Caputo's efforts.
We have, as I said, strongly supported this initiative to
monitor human rights, support democratic institutions and advance the
cause of a negotiated political settlement in Haiti. The United States
has provided $1 million to the OAS team that's already in Haiti. I
think they have 16 people already down there. We're working with the
Congress to re-allocate funds to provide an additional $1 million to
support this effort, and I'd add to that that we and I'm sure other U.N.
and OAS member nations are prepared to provide additional support that
will be necessary.
Q Do you have any idea how large the mission will be?
MR. BOUCHER: At this point I don't. The U.N. and OAS are
working on the details. We certainly hope everybody will join in to
support it.
Q So the flood that --
MR. BOUCHER: At this point we don't have the details.
Q How soon is it supposed to --
MR. BOUCHER: We hope as soon as possible, but the arrangements
are still being worked out.
Q The flood of refugees that had been anticipated does not
appear to be materializing.
MR. BOUCHER: For the moment, John, I didn't check on new
numbers today -- I think the numbers I had yesterday showed that there
hadn't been much for the past few days. Hadn't been many people leaving
Haiti for the past few days.
Q Have you set up the new application system inside Haiti
itself?
MR. BOUCHER: You're quite right that the Secretary and others
have talked about that. We are sending a technical team to Haiti
shortly that will look at improving the in-country refugee processing
program. To cite what the Secretary and the President have said, and
that's we want to give Haitians every opportunity to establish their
eligibility for refugee status without needing to risk their lives in
unsafe vessels. And we're moving a survey team down there. We're also
trying to identify personnel and resources to expand in-country
processing.
Q How large is the group?
MR. BOUCHER: It was going back and forth. I don't know. I
think in the range of ten or so, give or take five.
(Laughter)
Q And their primary mission is to look specifically at areas
where they can set up additional processing centers?
MR. BOUCHER: I'm not sure how much out of -- how much travel
they'll be doing. They'll be going down to set up a system for an
expanded in-country processing program.
Q Richard, do you know if the --
Q Richard, when do they leave?
MR. BOUCHER: Again, I don't know. I don't think I have an
exact date on that at this point.
Q Richard, do you know if the terms of reference for the
observers has been transmitted to the Haitian Government, the de facto
government?
MR. BOUCHER: I don't know quite specifically on that. Caputo
has had some discussions with all the parties about it. I think he's
got basic agreement in principle on expanding the mission -- this is the
OAS mission down there -- but I don't know how he's -- where various
details stand.
Q When did you say the technical team was going?
MR. BOUCHER: Shortly.
Q Shortly?
MR. BOUCHER: Yes.
Q The other one was "as soon as possible." This one is
going "shortly."
Q Could we go to the area of -- as soon as possible -- are
we through with Haiti?
MR. BOUCHER: It's up to your colleagues.
Q The Bosnian Vice President doubts that the plan that Mr.
Vance and David Owen are putting forward will succeed, objecting mostly
to the drawing of lines. Does the Secretary share those doubts? Does
he think they should keep at it; that it's worth it trying to pursue
these negotiations on the basis of this plan or sort of a mixed feeling
type of attitude?
MR. BOUCHER: I'm getting deja vu all over again. Yesterday we
went through this, I think, in quite some detail, and we explained the
difficulty of the process. Several times I spoke of United States
support for the efforts that the U.N. and the EC are making under the
terms of the London Agreements and the CSCE resolutions and the U.N.
resolutions to try to achieve a peaceful settlement.
We support their efforts. We're aware of the difficulty of the
task, but we do -- we support their efforts as we support U.N. processes
in many places around the world to try to bring the parties together.
Q Richard, you also talked about --
Q Can you be more specific, though, about the drawing of
lines? Does the U.S. have -- I don't expect you to, you know, stick to
the plan piece by piece, but the central area of controversy is the
drawing of lines. I needn't embellish that. You know what the problem
is.
Is there any objection here to that facet of the plan?
MR. BOUCHER: Barry, as we said yesterday, again, we are not
going to try to second-judge the negotiations. The negotiators are
involved with the parties. Talks, I think, start again tomorrow with
all the parties in Geneva, I understand.
They have been working on three parts of it. One is the
constitutional principles, one is a map, and one is military
arrangements. That's what they're doing out there, and I haven't tried
to comment on specific aspects from here.
Q Richard, you also talked yesterday about the
Administration realizing the need to make decisions on an urgent basis.
Where does that stand? Are decisions being made now? Is there a sort
of a schedule for when decisions might be made?
MR. BOUCHER: No. I don't have a schedule for you. I would
say what we said yesterday. The President, the Secretary and their
advisers are giving their urgent attention to this. They're looking at
the options on Bosnia and the former Yugoslavia as they are on other
issues, and they recognize the difficulties of the issue and have
expressed, I think, their deep concern about the fighting there and the
possibility of a spillover.
Q What options are they looking at?
MR. BOUCHER: That's not something I would go into.
Q Just another follow-up on this: Yesterday in testimony
Madeleine Albright said that this question was the highest priority
among the issues on the national security agenda.
Could you elaborate on that? I mean, is that -- shall we take
it at face value that it's a higher priority than what happens in Russia
for instance?
MR. BOUCHER: I wouldn't elaborate on that, Carol, no.
Q A follow-up on that: Ms. Albright also in her testimony
said that there would be a high-level meeting to talk about this option.
Do you know when that --
MR. BOUCHER: Basically, we're coming down to the same
question. I think she talked about the possibility of an NSC meeting,
and that obviously is not something I'd address here. That's something
you'd have to address at the White House.
Q Is this not the highest priority, foreign policy priority?
MR. BOUCHER: I haven't really asked for a list of priorities
myself, Carol, but I would expect that she knows what she's talking
about.
Q Richard, speaking of the testimony, though, it was, I
think, just a week ago that then soon-to-be Secretary of State Warren
Christopher testified that he had some "personal concerns." I think he
discussed this to some extent yesterday.
MR. BOUCHER: Yes. And it was just yesterday that we talked
about that.
Q Right. My question is, do those -- does the Secretary
still have those personal concerns, or are they now the U.S. Government
concerns about the negotiations?
MR. BOUCHER: Ralph, both yesterday and today, I've said that
we recognized the difficulty of the process that Vance and Owen are
engaged in, but we support U.N. processes to bring peace to regions, to
bring parties together. That's what they're engaged in, and yesterday
and today I've said that we support their efforts. So, yes, it's a
difficult task, and those are the kinds of doubts that we talked about
yesterday.
Q Were those the kinds of --
MR. BOUCHER: But we certainly support their serious efforts.
Q Was the difficulty of the task, what it was that soon-to-
be Secretary Christopher was referring to when he talked about "personal
concerns"? I thought it was --
MR. BOUCHER: That's exactly the question that I was asked
yesterday and it's the response I gave yesterday.
Q Richard, does the United States still support the arms
embargo on Bosnia?
MR. BOUCHER: Again, in his confirmation hearings, Secretary
Christopher said that it's an idea -- lifting the arms embargo -- is an
idea that we're considering. But, clearly, since it's based on U.N.
Security Council resolutions, there would have to be consultations and
agreement with other countries.
Q Have you started consultations on that subject?
MR. BOUCHER: At this point it's an idea that we're
considering.
Q Can you tell us where the "no-fly" resolution stands?
MR. BOUCHER: The "no-fly." The discussions continue in New
York with the Permanent Four plus Spain on the text of a resolution.
There is a draft resolution which is the basis for these discussions.
However, several important details remain to be decided.
Q What are the -- can you tell us either about the draft or
the
details that are not in it or not decided --
MR. BOUCHER: No, I can't at this point.
Q Do you have anything on Croatia? I mean, the Croatians
attacking the Serbs, there is --
MR. BOUCHER: The fighting -- I got an update on fighting sort
of
overnight, but I think there's some press reports of more fighting this
morning. So I'm not sure what I have is current, but I'll be glad to
share it with you.
What we knew about today was that there has been some sporadic
shelling and small arms fire in Sarajevo. There was a heavy fog
blanketing the city, and the temperature was near minus five Celsius.
Elsewhere in northern Bosnia-Herzegovina, Bosnian Serb forces
have shelled Maglaj and Gradacac. Fighting between Bosnian Croats and
Bosnia government forces at Gorni Vakuf apparently has subsided. That
was reported over the last few days. And today we have reports of a new
Bosnian Serb attack on the city of Mostar, south of Sarajevo.
Q Can I go back to the series of questions Ralph was asking?
You referred to difficulties. You keep saying that you see the
difficulty in the plan. Could you possibly elaborate a little more?
Is the difference -- does -- I mean, there are all sorts of
possibilities -- what's difficult about it? That it's a complex plan;
that the parties --
MR. BOUCHER: Barry --
Q No, wait a minute. One newspaper drew, you know,
startling and front-page conclusions from what you were saying
yesterday. What I thought you were saying yesterday is that it's a
difficult plan and you wished they'd keep at it, and I didn't think you
were saying more than that.
But since we're all into it now because of front page
treatment, is the difficulty attached to the credibility of the parties
-- the fact that some of them are war criminals in the State
Department's judgment, or is the difficulty the complexity? What is
difficult about it? Can you elaborate a little?
MR. BOUCHER: Barry, what I've said today is a very shorthand
version for a ten-minute discussion on this subject that we had
yesterday.
Q Exactly.
MR. BOUCHER: I'm not desiring, really, to repeat that
discussion. I thought it was fairly clear yesterday that we weren't
indeed commenting on the specifics of the plan or the plan that they
were working on. We are firmly in support of their efforts. We support
the process of trying to reach a political solution. We're aware of the
difficulties of the problems of getting the parties to accept a plan in
terms of what we talked about yesterday -- the history is there, the
fighting, the different views of the different parties. They have a
difficult task to get something agreed to --
Q Does Mr. Christopher --
MR. BOUCHER: -- the negotiators do, but we support their
efforts to seek a political solution to this conflict, as we do support
other efforts to get political solutions to conflicts where you have the
United Nations, and in this case the EC, with appointed representatives
who are working on this, and we support their efforts.
Q Now, Mr. Christopher -- is he torn in some way between his
old attachments to Mr. Vance and the problems that he sees in this plan,
and is he somehow trying to find a middle ground to separate himself
from an old loyalty to a current skepticism about a plan's feasibility?
MR. BOUCHER: I wouldn't describe anything in that way, Barry.
I would describe this as the policy of the U.S. Government. Obviously,
this is policy of the Secretary of State. Frankly, it's very similar to
what we were saying a week ago on the subject.
Q Could the Administration give its blessing to a solution
which, in effect, codifies the results of ethnic cleansing?
MR. BOUCHER: George, again we've gone through this three
times. Again, they are working out there under a set of principles --
the London Agreements, the CSCE principles, the U.N. resolutions. The
views of ourselves and the international community are well expressed
there. That is the framework that they are working under, and we
support their efforts to try to reach a political solution to the
conflict, and that's where we really have to stay. That realistically
is where we have to be for the moment.
Q Richard, that leaves the impression that the U.S. -- that
whatever the outcome of those negotiations, because it took part --
because it came about as a result of the process you just discussed,
that the U.S. will support it -- is committing itself now to support it,
because --
MR. BOUCHER: No, I didn't say that, Ralph. I said that we're
very familiar -- we're all familiar with the framework that they're
working under. They're working on it. I'm trying not to second-guess
the negotiators at this point or try to characterize or comment in any
detail on their plan. But we know what they've been working on, and
we're supporting their efforts.
Q Richard, if I could just go back to the lifting of the
arms embargo. It's fair to say then that this Administration is
reviewing the former Administration's policy on the arms embargo and may
consider changing its position on it?
MR. BOUCHER: It's fair to say what Secretary Christopher said
in his confirmation hearing -- that lifting the arms embargo is an idea
that we are considering.
Q (Multiple questions)
Q I mean, he was not Secretary of State then. He's
Secretary of State now.
MR. BOUCHER: And it's still true today that we are considering
the idea.
Q But so did the previous Administration.
MR. BOUCHER: Well, you know that this was raised by Secretary
Eagleburger during his trip to Europe.
Q Exactly.
MR. BOUCHER: He discussed it with others.
Q In what way is this being considered? Has it been tasked
out to a group or does Christopher sort of mull it over in the shower in
the morning? (Laughter)
MR. BOUCHER: John, I think, we've said that the Secretary, the
President and others have said that they will give their urgent
attention to these issues -- these issues involving Yugoslavia. We just
talked about the hearing yesterday. Madeleine Albright described it as
the highest priority, a high-priority issue for the Administration.
Certainly, as they look at all the various options, what there
is to do in Bosnia to advance the goals that we have set out, this is
one of the ideas that they're looking at.
Q Is there an interagency group looking at this?
MR. BOUCHER: I don't know the specific structure of the
discussion at this point.
Q Can you offer us any evidence that we could see or observe
of the urgent attention which you say is being given to this issue?
MR. BOUCHER: I can offer you the fact that I'm coming down
here and telling you about it.
Q But you're not telling us about it. You're simply saying
that it's being given urgent attention. In what way? How is that being
given urgent attention?
MR. BOUCHER: It's being discussed, will be discussed among the
President and his advisers, including the Secretary.
Q Has the Secretary met with, for example, EUR officials to
discuss this issue since he took office? I don't want to limit it to
that particular group, but --
MR. BOUCHER: The Secretary has been meeting with various
officials in the Department on different issues. I'm sure that he has
met with EUR and others to talk about this situation in Yugoslavia. It
is something that he's giving his attention to.
Q Richard, does this Administration feel that unless it does
something on Bosnia, like lifting the arms embargo, that the damage done
to the United States reputation in the Moslem world will be beyond
repair? We won't be able to accomplish anything with Moslem allies or
Arab allies, such as the peace talks or -- I mean, for instance, Turkey.
The Prime Minister of Turkey today was censured by the Parliament for
allegedly allowing U.S. offensive air strikes out of Incirlik. Are you
starting to see some sort of pattern, and are you trying to rehabilitate
the United States in the Moslem world?
MR. BOUCHER: I understand the question, Sid. I'm not quite
sure that I can address the answer in exactly the same terms. But
certainly the perceptions, the concerns of people in the Moslem world
have been something that have been very apparent to all of us; and that
we've had, as you know, in the past Administration a number of
discussions with Arab governments, Moslem governments, about their
concerns.
We're trying to do certain things in Yugoslavia. We're trying
to make sure that people who need humanitarian relief get it. We're
trying to make sure that the sanctions are enforced tightly. We're
trying to make sure that we support -- there is support for a peaceful
settlement and a few other things which I probably don't remember. I
mean, I guess the basic one is trying to bring pressure on the Serbs and
in any other way we can to see an end to the aggression being carried
out and the deprivations.
What this Administration is looking at are options on how to
advance this agenda, and how to move forward in terms of these and
perhaps other goals that I have forgotten about in order to try to bring
us closer to a solution of the conflict and an end to the horrible
fighting there.
Q But, Richard, on --
Q Have any Moslem countries offered their participation or
suggested options or contributed to this difficult decision-making
process?
MR. BOUCHER: I don't know what you're asking, Howard. Are
they going to attend --
Q In other words, the U.S. and other allies are involved in,
(a), the effort to achieve a political solution in Bosnia that involved
wrangling over the "no-fly" enforcement situation. I'm curious what
Moslem countries may have offered in terms of thoughts contributing to a
solution.
MR. BOUCHER: I guess, again, Howard, in terms of thoughts -- I
mean you've seen a lot of statements out of the Moslem world. There
have been OIC meetings that have suggested various things, including
lifting the arms embargo. Certainly we've had contact with a lot of
other governments, both in Europe and the Arab world and elsewhere
around the world, to discuss the situation there and to exchange
views on what can be done about it.
Q But Richard, that's a change, because when the last
Secretary was in Europe it was made quite clear that following
negotiations and discussions that he'd had with your European allies
that the Europeans had seriously considered that the idea of lifting
the arms embargo was an idea whose time was not to come, it was a
lousy idea, and they didn't want to see it happen.
The French still believe that, the Brits still believe that.
What's changed that you and the new Administration are now going
around on this thing again when you haven't got support from the
Western allies?
MR. BOUCHER: Well, "going around" -- I didn't say that we'd
gone around to other countries at this point on this. As I said, the
Administration -- the President and his advisers understand that this is
a serious problem that deserves their urgent attention, and they are
giving it their urgent attention. And in that context they're looking
at the various options and ways we have of advancing this.
And this is certainly an idea, as you said, that's come up
before -- and I'm sure we'll take the views of all the various countries
into account as they discuss this -- but it's an idea that the Secretary
said is worth considering, so they're considering it.
Q Richard, if I can go to another subject -- on Angola. Is
there any kind of review, overall review, of U.S. policy towards Angola,
given this current situation there?
MR. BOUCHER: Well, the current situation -- let me run through
and tell you where we stand on that. I wouldn't characterize anything
in particular as a review at this point, but certainly it's a
situation that's of concern to us. I'm not sure exactly if there have
been any meetings on the subject, but it's something we follow closely
in this building.
There has been heavy fighting continuing in many parts of the
country. There appears to be an ebb and flow, and depending on the
location, with either the government or UNITA has the advantage.
We believe that UNITA has taken control of the northwestern
town of Soyo. In addition to an already considerable loss of life,
we're deeply concerned about the welfare of oil company employees and
others in the city held by UNITA. There are apparently no Americans
involved, however.
We think the holding of innocent civilians and foreign workers
is unacceptable and we would call on Dr. Savimbi to order their release
immediately.
Now, we know there are press reports that peace talks under
U.N. sponsorship have been agreed to by both parties and that they
could occur within the next few days in Addis Ababa. At this point,
we can't independently confirm those reports; but we have strongly
supported the earliest possible return to face-to-face talks and, for
our part, as an official observer in the peace accords, we're prepared
to participate if the U.N. and the parties would find it useful.
Q A follow-up. Is the U.S. prepared to increase pressure on
Mr. Savimbi to have him abide by the election results or at least
participate in the run-off, which he's so far --
MR. BOUCHER: Well, I don't know exactly what you have in mind,
Steve. I think we've made clear over the last several months, and again
today, that we have strongly supported the idea of face-to-face talks.
We've made clear to all the parties in our contacts with them that we
think that fighting is not an option, that there's not a military
solution, and that they should, in fact, get back to the process of
the elections and the peaceful implementation of the agreements that
have been reached.
Q Is the U.S. not putting any more pressure on Mr. Savimbi?
Does this not send a signal to --
MR. BOUCHER: I didn't say we were not putting any more
pressure on Mr. Savimbi. We've made our views very clear repeatedly
to both the parties about the situation there, and about the need to
get back to the peaceful process that was under way and about our
rejection of any sort of fighting and military solutions.
Q Is there concern about the signal that might be sent, in
that if you don't have Savimbi abiding by the results of the election or
participating in the run-off, what that might bode for other areas --
other places in the world where you're pushing for elections? Are you
concerned about kind of signals we send here?
MR. BOUCHER: I think, first of all, we're concerned about the
situation in Angola and that this continued fighting doesn't bring
anything to the people of Angola and it results in a lot of death and a
lot of trouble for the people of the country. So we've been urging the
parties to get back to the peaceful implementation of the accords.
And, yes, that is, basically when people agree to something
with the U.N., when they agree to a process, we, everywhere in the
world think they should adhere to that process.
Q Richard, you keep talking about the peace accords or the
peace process, but people on both sides -- UNITA and the MPLA -- are
saying that the peace process per se is dead, the war has resumed.
Do you still believe that there's a chance of reconstructing or
reviving the peace process that existed before December?
MR. BOUCHER: Jim, that's the framework that's in place. And I
think the first step -- and the one that we've pointed to most
directly here -- is the need for some kind of face-to-face talks to
try to resolve the issues that are involved there.
Q But, in other words, can you pick it up at the run-off
elections or do you have to go back to square one?
MR. BOUCHER: I don't know. I don't think I have a judgment on
that today.
Q Richard, you said the Administration is going to
participate in these talks?
MR. BOUCHER: Yes.
Q What sort of role do you -- what level of participation
and what sort of role do you see?
MR. BOUCHER: At this point, I don't know, Sid.
Q Honest broker or observer?
MR. BOUCHER: Well, we've been an official observer to the
peace accords and to this whole process. We and other governments
that have been deeply interested in this have participated in many of
the meetings and discussions that they've had along the way. And if
the U.N. and the parties find it useful, I'm sure that we and others
would be prepared to participate in helping them get back to the
process.
Q Can you comment on the second incident in two days in the
northern "no-fly" zone in Iraq? What does this bode in terms of, sort
of a pause, in terms of the U.S. Government? Or maybe there isn't a
pause.
MR. BOUCHER: For the details of the incident, I think we'll
ask you to check with the Pentagon. But, basically, early this morning,
U.S. aircraft fired two missiles at an Iraqi surface-to-surface missile
site about l5 nautical miles east of the city of Mosul, 20 nautical
miles north of the 36th parallel. The action was taken after onboard
indicators confirmed that the aircraft were being tracked by Iraqi SAM
tracking radar.
As far as what it means more generally, John, I think you have
to ask the Iraqis what it means in terms of these kinds of incidents,
this kind of tracking going on.
We have made clear, as the Secretary said yesterday, to the
Iraqis what is required for them to avoid this kind of incident. And as
this President and the Secretary made clear yesterday, we are determined
to enforce our current policy and to allow our pilots to defend
themselves as necessary.
Q Does the fact that these incidents keep happening and then
Iraq immediately says, "Well, despite this terrible aggressive behavior
on the part of the United States, we, the Iraqis, are going to continue
to observe the cease-fire and U.N. inspectors keep coming in"? Does
that signal something to the U.S. Government?
MR. BOUCHER: I don't think I could draw any conclusions at
this point, John. We've made clear our determination to continue with
this policy. We've made quite clear to the Iraqis over the course of
time, very directly, what it takes for them to avoid this kind of
military confrontation and what form of cooperation it takes for them to
avoid this kind of incident.
Q What about the "heat" that the U.S. is feeling,
increasingly, from some of its friends on this issue? Sid mentioned
earlier the Turkish delegation. First of all, the Prime Minister has
been censured in their parliament --
MR. BOUCHER: I don't think -- I'm not aware of exactly what it
was that passed the current -- the Turkish parliament, but I'm not aware
of anyone that has said that our pilots shouldn't be able to defend
themselves when they're threatened.
Q Well, there is increasingly some questions about whether
or not the entire enforcement of the U.N. "no-fly" zone and the
declaration of the "no-fly" zones themselves are adequately covered by
current U.N. resolutions. Is there any plan by this Administration to
go back to the U.N. and seek additional authorization to be doing the
kind of military operations that have been undertaken in the last two
weeks?
MR. BOUCHER: Not that I have heard of, John. I think if you
look at the comments of the President and the Secretary, they have
stated firmly their intention to continue to enforce the "no-fly" zone
to ensure Iraqi compliance with all the U.N. resolutions.
Q So you feel that the United States is well within its
right to be exercising this level of military force, even though some of
our allies are beginning to question that?
MR. BOUCHER: John, again, I think you have to look at the
various statements that have been made. I have not seen any one
question the right of our pilots to defend themselves. The need for
Iraqi compliance with the United Nations resolution is also something
that many, many countries, including our allies, have repeatedly
expressed their support for. The terms of the "no-fly" zone and the
justification for the "no-fly" zone is something that is widely
accepted and has been discussed many times, both when it was
established in the north to protect the population there from Iraqi
aerial attacks and when it was established in the south to help protect
the population there from Iraqi aerial attacks -- understand the basic
humanitarian purposes of this.
Q But you weren't being asked about whether anyone
questioned whether U.S. pilots have the right to defend themselves.
You were being asked whether the U.S. -- there was a question --
MR. BOUCHER: I was asked if I was concerned about criticism of
this level of military action.
Q That's right.
MR. BOUCHER: I'm not quite sure what that means.
Q O.K. Well, we can be more specific, has anyone questioned
the U.S. insistence on the type of enforcement the U.S. is engaging in?
MR. BOUCHER: You mean the fact that when we're -- that we
shoot back?
Q No. Flying missions which, for one reason or another,
appear to provoke Iraqis to light up their radars, for example. Just as
one example --
MR. BOUCHER: Ralph, I just -- I just --
Q -- you didn't mention in your list a minute ago of things
that endorsed --
MR. BOUCHER: I did deal, in my list of things that had been
endorsed, that have been explained, with the "no-fly" zone there.
Q Right.
MR. BOUCHER: Now, if you're going to say that our flights --
Q Enforcement of them.
MR. BOUCHER: -- over the north and the south, which are there
to protect population from aerial attack by the Iraqis, are somehow
provoking them into targeting our airplanes and shooting at them, I
think I'd have to differ on that.
Q Have you seen any of the -- my question was about whether
anyone else has questioned that. You didn't address --
MR. BOUCHER: I personally haven't. I'm not sure I'm done a
scrub with everything that's been said on every single detail of this,
but the "no-fly" zones have been explained many times and I think the
justification is ample.
Q The justifications for the "no-fly" zones have been
explained, the "no-fly" zones have been explained. The enforcement of
them, the specific ways in which the allies enforce them, have not, to
my knowledge, been either endorsed by the U.N., specified by the U.N. or
explained by the U.N. or the coalition. It's sort of done --
MR. BOUCHER: I certainly think that we have.
Q That's right.
MR. BOUCHER: That we have explained it.
Q Right. So the question is: Have any of these critics
questioned the U.S. explanation of how that's to be enforced?
MR. BOUCHER: Ralph, if you get to that sort of level of
detail, I'm afraid that -- I can't say that I've done a look at every
single criticism or statement that's been made about us.
Q (Inaudible) on the ground of late?
MR. BOUCHER: Somewhere I have some information on that.
Despite Iraqi obstacles to humanitarian relief supplies, some
supplies are getting through at this time. Convoys are now moving at
the rate of 40 to 50 trucks a day.
The situation in northern Iraq, however, remains fragile. We
remain concerned about the plight of the 3.l million Iraqi citizens in
northern Iraq as the winter months are upon them.
The U.S., Turkey, and the other coalition partners remain
dedicated to ensuring the welfare of the people in northern Iraq.
Q What are the obstacles? Are they still putting bombs on
trucks?
MR. BOUCHER: I haven't checked recently on bombs on trucks,
but I guess I'd have to get you more detail on that.
Q On a related topic, has this Administration at a high
level been in touch with Kurdish leaders, with the Iraqi National
Congress, about the
situation in Iraq?
MR. BOUCHER: I don't know, Sid, what recent contacts we've had
with them. We've had ongoing contacts, I know, with the Iraqi National
Conference.
Q This Administration.
MR. BOUCHER: I don't know at what level or with who exactly
those contacts have been and how recent they've been. I'd have to check
on that.
Q Since a request by Skopje is pending at the United Nations
to get recognition under the so-called "Republic of Macedonia," what
position will you take? Will the Clinton Administration veto the
application so that a creation of a non-existent Macedonian (inaudible)
at least will be prevented, which has been already opposed by the
majority of its multinational residents?
MR. BOUCHER: The application is currently pending before the
Security Council. We're looking at it. We're consulting with other
members of the Security Council about it. And we haven't taken a final
position.
Q Not yet?
MR. BOUCHER: Not yet.
Q To another contentious issue: It's long been the policy
of the United States that the status of Jerusalem will be determined at
the end of the peace process. However, the Clinton Administration was
elected on a ticket which included the promise that Jerusalem would be
regarded as the capital of Israel and the Embassy would be moved there.
This has been creating some concern in the Arab world, and I was
wondering what the policy of the current Administration is towards the
American Embassy in Israel. Does it stay in Tel Aviv? Does it move to
Jerusalem?
MR. BOUCHER: It's not an area that I've had a chance to look
into, Jan. I believe that the Secretary was asked and had some comments
at his confirmation hearings about that.
Q Could you take the question?
MR. BOUCHER: I'll check on that and see if I can get you
something, yes.
Q On an unrelated matter, can you tell us what contacts, if
any, Secretary Christopher has had with Andrei Kosyrev, or aides to
Andrei Kosyrev, to set up any kind of meeting that he's promised to
have?
MR. BOUCHER: At this point, Ralph, I don't know of any
specific contacts. I know that he has had some contacts with foreign
officials, as well as --
Q With who?
MR. BOUCHER: -- with foreign officials -- with other
government officials. I don't have a list at this point.
Q Could you take the question of with whom he's been in
contact?
MR. BOUCHER: I'll see. I'm not sure we're going to want to
start off with a list of everybody he talks to, but I'll see.
Q Well, I'd like to know whether, for example, he's made
"get-acquainted" phone calls to -- for example -- the NATO allies. Has
he been in touch with the participants in the Middle East peace
process, for example?
MR. BOUCHER: There have been various messages coming in.
There have been congratulatory messages. I think he's probably had
conversations with at least one or two -- maybe more people -- so
there have been various exchanges of messages, or messages that have
come in to him.
Again, I don't know specifically which countries at this point.
Q Can you give us a sense of what he's doing? One thing on
his public schedule -- does that mean he's napping the rest of the day,
or what? What is he doing?
MR. BOUCHER: John, he was over at the White House, as you
know, for the formal swearing-in. I think there was a meeting over
there -- a Cabinet meeting afterwards. He's been meeting with various
officials in the Department on different policy issues.
As I said, he's had some contact and some messages with foreign
governments.
Q Richard, what's the reason for the meeting between
Assistant Secretary Djerejian and a number of Mideast Ambassadors today?
MR. BOUCHER: They've asked for -- and I think all I know at
this point is that they've asked to come in and talk to us about a
number of issues.
Arab Ambassadors requested the meeting with Assistant Secretary
Djerejian to discuss a range of issues.
Q Can you give us a readout on that?
MR. BOUCHER: I'll see if we can get anything. We can, at
least, get you --
Q That's a little broader.
MR. BOUCHER: -- that they came to see him and discussed a
range of
issues. I'm not sure. We'll see what we can get beyond that.
Q O.K., thank you.
Q Well, thank you.
MR. BOUCHER: Thank you.
(The briefing concluded at l:29 p.m.) (###)