Note: This Electronic Research Collection is an archive site. For the most current information, please visit the
DEPARTMENT OF STATE
DAILY PRESS BRIEFING
DPC #47
MONDAY, APRIL 5, 1993, 12:35 P.M.
(ON THE RECORD UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED)
MR. BOUCHER: Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen. I'd like
to start off by announcing the Secretary's trip to Japan, which you may
have heard about.
As you know, the Japanese have agreed to host a G-7 Foreign
and Finance Ministers meeting in Tokyo on April 14-15 to discuss support
for reform and democratization in Russia and the other New Independent
States.
Secretary Christopher and Treasury Secretary Bentsen will
attend this meeting. They plan to depart Washington on Monday, April
12, and return on Thursday, April 15.
A sign-up sheet has been posted in the main Press Office for
those of you wishing to apply for a seat on the Secretary's plane. The
sheet will be taken down and applications closed at 5:00 p.m. Tuesday,
April 6.
And with that announcement, I'd be glad to take your
questions.
Q A procedural question: Is the Secretary coming down with
President Mubarak later on, and will we get a readout of some kind if he
doesn't?
MR. BOUCHER: I did not check on whether he'll be coming down
with President Mubarak. I don't think he is, but we'll see if we can
get you some kind of readout on the meeting.
Q What about Mubarak himself? Will he say anything? Do you
know that?
MR. BOUCHER: I don't know. That's something you have to ask
Mubarak when you see him, if you see him.
Q Has the Secretary of State contacted the Japanese about
notes allegedly found after the dinner? And can you tell us what
exactly -- who he did contact and what he said?
MR. BOUCHER: The Secretary called Japanese Vice Foreign
Minister Owada when he heard about these stories that were starting to
appear, just to make sure that the Japanese understood the context of
the discussion on Japan at the summit.
George Stephanopoulos, I think, has already talked a little
bit about the context of the specific remark. But I think it's
important to note that at the summit the Presidents -- President Yeltsin
and President Clinton -- reviewed the questions of Japan and Russia
relations. The President, in that context, expressed our support for
the Japanese position on the Northern Territories.
The President also relayed his conversations with Japanese
Prime Minister Miyazawa to President Yeltsin, including passing on to
President Yeltsin Japan's strong support and intent to play a
constructive role in the G-7 process of providing assistance to Russia.
We certainly welcome that role. We look forward to further
discussions of that role in Japan when we go to Tokyo on April 14-15.
And the Secretary was basically -- having heard that these
stories were appearing, wanted to call the Japanese and make sure they
knew the context and make sure that they knew that the context of the
discussion on Japan between the two Presidents was in the context of our
appreciation and our gratification with the role that Japan was playing
in terms of the G-7 support for Russia.
Q But what about the specific question of the notes
apparently saying that the President said the Japanese sometimes say
"yes" and mean "no?" Is that what he tried to clear up? And, if so, did
he deny that the President said it or not?
MR. BOUCHER: Again, George Stephanopoulos talked about those
remarks this morning, and I think I'll leave it to him to explain
particular remarks by the President. But, yes, basically it was in the
context of those reports, to explain what the real discussion was on
Japan and how it went and what the context of any reported remarks would
be.
Q Is there a feeling in the Administration that sometimes,
for diplomatic reasons, the Japanese say "yes" and mean "no?"
MR. BOUCHER: I don't want to try to characterize the Japanese
attitude on things. We've seen strong support, good support by the
Japanese in the G-7 process for looking at what the G-7 can do in terms
of Russia.
As you know, we're engaged very, very deeply with the G-7; and
the Japanese have already played an important role in that process and
have expressed their intent to continue to play that role. That is what
President Clinton was able to convey to President Yeltsin at the summit,
based on President Clinton's conversations with the Japanese Prime
Minister.
So it's a role that we've seen the Japanese play, and that
they have their intent to continue to play, and we certainly appreciate
that.
Q Richard, what is the role, if any, that the Secretary
would like Egyptian President Mubarak to play vis-a-vis the coming, or
hoped-for again, peace talks on the 20th?
MR. BOUCHER: Well, as you know, we and the Egyptians have
both been supporting the idea of -- supporting the peace talks, the
process, as a whole. We certainly continue to be confident that the
parties will return on April 20; and obviously we will be discussing the
peace process with the Egyptians, with President Mubarak while he's
here.
We continue to have discussions with the various parties about
the deportees issue and the other questions. We have continued to
stress the return to the negotiating table on April 20. We are looking
forward to discussing the peace process with President Mubarak. The
Secretary, or the President, would bring him up to date on our
discussions with the Palestinians, since the Palestinians were just here
a week or ten days ago. So we'll continue to discuss those issues with
him.
Q A follow-up on that, if I may. Do we have any intention
-- "we" being the United States -- to ask Mubarak to use his good
offices to try and make sure the Palestinians attend?
MR. BOUCHER: We certainly believe that everyone should
encourage the parties to attend. I think we believe that that's
important. I think the Egyptian Government has made clear that it
believes it's important for the parties to attend the peace talks on
April 20.
But as I said, in the context of these discussions, I would
characterize it more as we'll be bringing the Egyptians up to date on
where we stand in our discussions with the Palestinians and other
parties on some of the more specific issues that are being discussed.
Q Richard, if I heard you right a minute ago, you said we'd
be discussing with the parties about the deportees issue and other
matters.
I thought the deportees issue was settled. What is there left
to discuss?
MR. BOUCHER: Our position is unchanged. We want to -- we
have been discussing with the parties, as we approach April 20,
discussing a number of things with the parties, especially the need for
meaningful and substantive progress in the talks. And so we've had a
continuing exchange with the parties about that.
We've also been discussing the process of getting back to the
table. As you know, the deportee issue has been something that they've
been concerned about, that's been raised in that context by the
Palestinians.
Q Mubarak is quoted as saying that he thinks the United
States should ask the Israelis to get those deportees back by August or
September, and unnamed officials are quoted as saying that we're not
going to do that. Could you give us some --
MR. BOUCHER: Our position on the deportation issue really
remains unchanged. First of all, the United States is opposed to the
deportations, but we believe that an effective process is in place to
implement U.N. Security Council Resolution 799.
As I said, we've been discussing the deportee issue with the
Palestinians and with other parties. We've stressed the importance of
returning to the table on April 20.
Q Richard, I just heard that there was a meeting for the
PLO Executive Committee and they announced that another Palestinian team
will be visiting Washington soon. Are you aware of that? Do you know
anything about it?
MR. BOUCHER: No, I wasn't aware of that. I'll try to check
that for you. We have been in touch with various parties to the peace
process, and we do expect some of the other parties to come for talks in
advance of April 20. But I don't have anything on the Palestinians at
this point.
Q Can I please ask you something else? On the closure of
the Territories, did you make any comments that you could refer me to?
And if not, can you make a comment now -- that is, the closure by Israel
of the Territories?
MR. BOUCHER: I believe we made some comments last week on
that. I'll check for you and get you something.
Q Just one other point, please. Was there a comment -- I
mean, did anybody ask you about the closure of Jerusalem, East Jerusalem
-- being part of Israel, as Israel considers it?
MR. BOUCHER: I don't think I was asked anything that
specific, so I'll have to -- I'll get you something on the general issue
later.
Q Would you please look at Jerusalem, in particular?
Because the U.S. does not recognize Israel as part of -- does not
recognize Jerusalem as part of Israel. Israel had closed it because it
considers it part of Israel.
MR. BOUCHER: We'll look at something on the overall security
situation and see.
Q Richard, last week -- can you just repeat that there is a
processing place for the solution of the deportees problem? You say
it's along with 799 -- the Security Council resolution.
You are alluding to the February 1 agreement between Mr.
Christopher and Rabin -- and Mr. Rabin -- about solving the issue of the
deportees? Or is there some other means of solving the issue which
could possibly bring it closer to the six points that the PLO or the
Palestinians agreed with Mr. Christopher in Jerusalem?
MR. BOUCHER: We're referring to the process that the Israelis
established after discussions with us. We have said that we believe
that that framework is consistent with Resolution 799. And, indeed, the
U.N. has taken note of that -- the U.N. Security Council has taken note
of that.
But as I said, we've continued to discuss this issue with the
parties, and we continue to look forward to having them back at the
talks on April 20.
Q Richard --
Q But this February 1 agreement that you allude to is a "no
go;" it stands still there. They didn't move. They did everything 101,
and there was no actual movement, and it was rejected by everybody,
including the Palestinians and the peace negotiators and everybody.
MR. BOUCHER: The understandings that we reached with Israel
established a process. We believe that that process is consistent with
Resolution 799 and that it's an effective process.
We will continue our discussions with the parties in that
context on the deportee issue. As I said, we've been talking to the
Palestinians about this issue. They were in town just a week or so ago.
We'll bring the Egyptians up to date on where we stand in
that, but we do continue to look forward to having the parties here on
April 20. We think it's important to them. It's certainly important to
us.
Q Richard, what is the U.S. reaction to Mubarak's statement
that the World Trade Center explosion could have been prevented if the
United States had followed up on information it had been given by Egypt?
MR. BOUCHER: As you know, there are restrictions on how much
we could say in particular about the World Trade Center. I think it is
important to note that President Mubarak himself said that Egypt did not
pass specific information regarding any planned acts of terrorism to the
United States.
We do have continuing cooperation with the Egyptians on
counter-terrorism issues. We look forward to continuing that
cooperation. We did have a group of U.S. Embassy and FBI personnel from
the U.S. that met with the Egyptian officials in Egypt at various times
over the last several months, including a visit between February 6 and
11.
Without trying to go into the details of that, I would just
note that, as President Mubarak himself has said, Egypt did not pass any
specific information on planned acts of terrorism in the United States
in the context of those discussions.
Q But, Richard, did they alert the United States that
Middle Eastern terrorists were setting up networks in the United States
and may be planning something this spring?
MR. BOUCHER: Sid, I hadn't offered to go into any details of
that discussion. Obviously we have continuing discussions and
cooperation with the Egyptians on counter-terrorism issues, but I'm not
in a position to go into the details of those discussions. And I think,
again, I would leave the issue of domestic terrorism to the FBI.
Q O.K. And just to follow up, does the Administration now
feel that with this new focus on domestic terrorism, the threat from
that has been substantially reduced, or is it still something we
consider to be --
MR. BOUCHER: Once again, Sid, I think I have to leave
questions involving domestic terrorism to the FBI, to domestic law
enforcement authorities.
Q Richard, did you hear from the Israelis? Did you hear
anything from any of the other parties to the peace process, and
actually did you hear from the Israelis?
MR. BOUCHER: Excuse me? I mean, we talk to all the parties
in the peace process all the time about issues in the peace process.
Q I wondered if they are coming on April 20?
MR. BOUCHER: On specifically whether people are coming on
April 20, I believe at this point the only acceptance that we've gotten
is the Israelis. I would say, however, that we've been in continuing
contact with the parties. We're still looking forward to seeing them on
April 20. And, as I said, we do expect some of the parties, based on
our discussions with them, to come for earlier discussions the way the
Israelis and the Palestinians have. Several of the parties have
expressed their intent to do that.
Q Any specific dates for any of them?
MR. BOUCHER: No, not at this point.
Q Doesn't this tell you something about the process that
you established about solving the detainee problem or the deportees'
problem, that even Egypt and the rest of the countries who are
participating in the peace process are not coming forward and saying
that is acceptable, and you are waiting and we are in the 5th, and they
are meeting in Jordan the 16th?
So why are you adamant on that arrangement that you made with
Mr. Rabin of February 1 and see no other way out of the issue that is
holding the peace process?
MR. BOUCHER: Well, I don't think -- I don't accept the
premise of your question. As I said, we have had continuing discussions
with the parties. We have continued to discuss not only the return to
the table, if you will, but we've discussed the prospects and the issues
and the need for meaningful progress in those discussions.
We remain confident and look forward to seeing the parties at
the talks on April 20. In addition to that, we've heard from several of
the parties that they do intend to come for earlier discussions, as we
have invited them to do. While I don't have specific people and
specific days for you yet, we expect that to happen as well. So this is
a continuing process of discussion that we've had. We've discussed the
peace talks with all the parties, and we continue to discuss the
deportee issue with the Palestinians.
Q Richard, another post-summit question. I assume -- well,
you've announced the Secretary's trip to Tokyo for the G-7. Can you
tell us what plans are being made to make similar requests for aid to
the Russians from Saudi Arabia and Kuwait, Korea and other countries
that are not members of the G-7?
MR. BOUCHER: I'll see if I can get you anything on that at
this point.
Q Richard, also on Japan, at the White House briefing this
morning there was a cryptic reference to some telephone call or some
message that Christopher had sent to Tokyo.
MR. BOUCHER: We've done that already.
Q Oh, you have? O.K.
MR. BOUCHER: Yes.
Alan?
Q Excuse me if I was late and if this has been mentioned
before: In what way has the Bosnian Serb so-called parliament decision
affected your thinking about future steps on Yugoslavia?
MR. BOUCHER: That hasn't been covered yet, Alan, but I'll be
glad to cover it for you.
As you've seen over the weekend, this so-called, self-styled
Bosnian Serb parliament twice rejected the revised Vance-Owen package
for a negotiated settlement in Bosnia-Herzegovina. That package, as you
know, has been accepted by the Bosnian Government and the Bosnian
Croats.
The Bosnian Serbs reportedly objected to the map of provincial
boundaries. They also rejected a plan that was presented by Radovan
Karadzic which would have accepted much, but not all, of the Vance-Owen
map.
As the Secretary said on Saturday, we think the Bosnian Serb
decision is regrettable. The international community is making every
effort to persuade the Bosnian Serbs to reach a negotiated settlement to
this tragic conflict. We'll continue to work with the Vance-Owen
process which offers the best hope for reaching a comprehensive
settlement.
We continue to discuss with other members of the Security
Council what more we can do to encourage the Serbs, to provide them an
incentive, and indeed pressure the Serbs to reach a negotiated
settlement so that they can stop the killing and reach a solution.
Q What about the omnibus? Has the omnibus reached the
station?
MR. BOUCHER: The motor's been turned on, and it's warming up.
Let me try to go beyond metaphor and tell you where it stands.
The Security Council will discuss the resolution this
afternoon at 3:00 p.m. during an informal session. As you know, we
support a resolution that would call on the Bosnian Serbs to reach a
peace agreement and that toughens the economic sanctions against Serbia
and Montenegro -- that's the Bosnian Serbs' primary source of support --
if the Serbs fail to participate and reach a peace agreement shortly or
within a specified time frame.
We think it's essential that the Council demonstrate its
resolve to move the peace process forward and to maintain pressure on
the Bosnian Serbs to reach an agreement.
Q Lastly, Christopher's been talking for some time -- at
least a week -- about soon opening discussions with allies about lifting
the arms embargo with respect to the Muslims. Have you started doing
that?
MR. BOUCHER: I don't think the Secretary has given, nor could
I give you, a specific deadline for that or a specific timetable on
that. We are moving, as you know, in the United Nations on this
resolution that I described that would bring more pressure on the Serbs.
We and other countries have tried to bring that diplomatic
pressure to bear on the Serbs to get them to stop the killing and
participate in the negotiations. As the Secretary has said, we would
intend to consult on the arms embargo if the Serbs continue to hold out.
As you know, we've raised the issue in the past and have
discussed it, but I wouldn't be able to say that a certain -- that that
sort of more formal consultation has begun at this point.
Q Can you just say whether that was discussed either
between Mr. Clinton and Mr. Yeltsin or between Mr. Christopher and Mr.
Kozyrev, and whether there's any reason to believe, either on the part
of the Russians or our European allies, that there's more hope that this
issue could be resolved?
MR. BOUCHER: The arms embargo specifically?
Q Yes, the arms embargo.
MR. BOUCHER: I just don't know.
Q Richard, just for the record or whatever, is there any
way around the arms embargo without a specific and veto-able action by
the Security Council?
MR. BOUCHER: Any way around?
Q Well, is there any way to --
MR. BOUCHER: The arms embargo is a U.N. resolution, and the
U.N. Security Council would have to change the Resolution if they were
going to change the embargo.
Q Then technically, would it just be negated, or would you
have to pass a new resolution which, as Norm points out, could be --
MR. BOUCHER: I assume they'd have to pass a new resolution.
Q In discussing this, Richard, the Secretary has noted that
it might result in presumably the French and the British withdrawing
their forces and their humanitarian work.
Is there a point and are we approaching a point in which that
would be an acceptable trade-off?
MR. BOUCHER: It's very hard to predict, Barrie. I mean, the
Secretary has said it's a difficult equation, it's a delicate balance,
it's an important factor that gets raised whenever we talk about the
arms embargo -- what would be the effect on the humanitarian operations
and would in fact the humanitarian operations have to cease if the arms
embargo were lifted. So that will obviously be the main source of
discussion if we decide that we want to consult more formally on this.
But at this point we're moving forward on the diplomatic
pressure on the Serbs. We're moving forward in the U.N. Security
Council. We're moving forward, as the Secretary has said, to tighten
and to toughen the sanctions. We're continuing the pressure to get
humanitarian deliveries in there. We've continued the airdrops into the
areas of eastern Bosnia where the people are suffering the most. So
we've been moving forward, as the Secretary has promised, in all those
fronts.
But we have also made clear that if the Serbs fail to
participate in a negotiation, to reach an acceptable solution, that we
will begin to raise other issues as well. We will begin to consult and
raise this issue of the arms embargo in particular.
Q There has also been reports that the Administration would
be willing to consider air strikes if the peace process fell apart. I'm
just wondering whether you'd care to comment, whether that's something
that could be under consideration or not? I mean, it seems slightly out
of tenor with the approach that's been taken so far. I just was
curious.
MR. BOUCHER: I don't want to speculate on that -- on, you
know, all the various possibilities that one could dream up this
morning. The policy of what we're doing has been stated clearly. Our
policy on military action has been stated clearly, and I've told you the
direction where we're heading. So I don't think I want to speculate on
other things.
Q Well, Richard, just in terms of dreaming up, the
candidate Clinton actually did mention the possibility of air strikes,
so it's not some wild, crazy idea that we thought of today.
MR. BOUCHER: No, I didn't say it was wild, crazy. Reputable
people have discussed this issue, including our fellow journalists over
here -- your fellow journalists.
Q Richard, another procedural question: The Secretary is
going to be on MacNeil-Lehrer tonight at 6:00?
MR. BOUCHER: That's right.
Q Is that going to be taped live?
MR. BOUCHER: Taped live?
Q All right. Is it going to be --
MR. BOUCHER: That's when the show broadcasts, yes.
Q So he's going over there at 6:00?
MR. BOUCHER: Yes.
Q O.K.
Q Richard, on a different topic, is a delegation from
Pakistan here today to discuss their alleged role in supporting
terrorism in Kashmir?
MR. BOUCHER: An interesting question, Sid. I'll have to
check.
Q Richard, on North Korea. Maybe you addressed this on
Friday, but I'm wondering if we have any other further meetings with the
North Koreans planned in light of the fact that the IAEA has now
referred this issue to the Security Council?
MR. BOUCHER: It's something I'd have to check on, too, if
there are any further meetings with the North Koreans -- set or having
occurred.
Q Thank you.
MR. BOUCHER: Thank you.
(The briefing concluded at 12:59 p.m.) (###)