930407 Daily Press Briefing  Return to: Index of 1993 Daily Briefings || Electronic Research Collections Index || ERC Homepage

Note: This Electronic Research Collection is an archive site. For the most current information, please visit the US State Department Homepage.

                         DEPARTMENT OF STATE
                         DAILY PRESS BRIEFING

                                                      DPC #49

                 WEDNESDAY, APRIL 7, 1993, 12:55 P.M.
                (ON THE RECORD UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED)


         MR. BOUCHER:  Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen.  I don't 
have any statements or announcements, so I'd be glad to take your 
questions.

          Q  The Secretary is meeting with the top aide to the Pakistani 
Prime Minister this afternoon.  Do you have anything on the state of 
U.S.-Pakistani relations in advance of that meeting?

          MR. BOUCHER:  No, not in advance of that meeting.  I think the 
other day we put up a little taken question, or something, to confirm 
that he was having a meeting.  They'll discuss a variety of issues -- 
their relationship, terrorism, and other issues.  That's pretty much the 
preview.  That's all I have for the moment.

          Q   Could you get a readout of that, maybe?

          MR. BOUCHER:  I'll get you some kind of readout.

          Q  Richard, does the Administration feel that Pakistan is 
arming and training the Freedom Fighters in Kashmir?

          MR. BOUCHER:  Sid, that's an interesting question that I'm not 
about to answer now.  We'll obviously want to discuss the issues with 
the Pakistanis, and I'll try to get you a readout after the meeting.

          Q  Could you try to address that specifically?

          MR. BOUCHER:  I'll see if we can address that question.

          Q  Richard, does the United States Government have any 
independent reporting on the nuclear explosion, or incident, in Russia 
today?

          MR. BOUCHER:  I've got a lot of information.  But if you ask 
your question that way, I think the answer has to be "no."  I think what 
we have comes from the Russian notification to the IAEA, and I can tell 
you what we know about it, but that's where it comes from.

          The Russian Ministry for Atomic Energy has said that the 
accident took place at the Sibir Chemical Combinat -- Tomsk-7 -- at 9:00 
a.m. local time on April 6.

          The Ministry also stated that a short circuit in some 
equipment at the industrial uranium extraction plant of the Tomsk-7 
chemical facility caused a fire and explosion of a vat of low to medium 
radioactive uranium solution.  That explosion ignited the roof of the 
plant and contaminated "several hundreds of square meters."

          According to the Ministry, there were no casualties from the 
incident, and the level of radioactive contamination is "several 
roentgen per hour in the epicenter."

          The Ministry of Atomic Energy has stated that the "living area 
in the vicinity is out of danger," and we have no information at the 
present time on the exposure of plant personnel.  Their first assessment 
of the accident places it at a Level 3 on the 7-level international 
nuclear event scale. Level 3 is defined as a "serious incident."

          In comparison, the Chernobyl accident in 1986 was a Level 7 
and Three Mile Island was a Level 5.  The Russian Government states that 
the contamination from the accident is localized; and so far as we know 
at this time, the problem is a local one.  According to an IAEA 
notification to governments received this morning, the Russians have not 
asked for assistance.

          That's the rundown.

          Q    Considering the Chernobyl history, are you satisfied with 
this information?

          MR. BOUCHER:  I don't have a complete analysis of it, 
obviously.  I think the fact that the Russians notified the IAEA 
promptly and gave this kind of complete information is noteworthy.  But 
this notification, I guess, is preliminary. Obviously, they themselves 
have more to do to confirm all the facts.

          Q    Richard, on another subject.  Have you seen the report 
out of Libya where the Libyan Government calls President Clinton's call 
for the handing-over of the two suspects to be logical and in keeping 
with what the Libyan Government wants?

          MR. BOUCHER:  I saw the report.  I've also seen -- we've all 
seen -- that Libya is not in compliance with the U.N. resolutions and 
that they haven't turned over the suspects for trial.  So I can't 
explain it.

          Q    Does this sound to you as if they might be moving in that 
direction?

          MR. BOUCHER:  Jim, the fact is they "ain't" done it, and we'll 
just have to see when they do it.

          Q    Richard, does the United States believe that the 
international community -- the U.N. -- should be looking now for a way 
to get out, to disengage from Cambodia quickly after the elections are 
held?

          MR. BOUCHER:  Carol, I wouldn't say that.  Our goal is to 
pursue the process in Cambodia, to pursue the elections. There have been 
-- I think some 95 percent of the electorate is already registered to 
vote.  We intend to pursue the process to bring the peace and stability 
that Cambodia needs, and there is a U.N. plan for doing that.  
Obviously, the U.N. will have to carry it out and decide when it's been 
completed.

          Q    Well, is there a difference of opinion between the United 
States and Australia on this?  The Foreign Minister?

          MR. BOUCHER:  I don't know the issue in that degree of detail, 
but I'll check on the specifics on that and see if there is any--

          Q    The Foreign Minister made some comments this morning 
which suggested that this is something that the U.N. should be looking 
at.  He calls Cambodia a test case for the way in which the U.N. would 
disengage.  Could you also get a readout of that meeting?

          MR. BOUCHER:  Yes, I'll get a readout.  But I didn't read his 
comments as implying some difference.  He was, I thought, implying the 
completion of the process and bringing to fruition of what we're trying 
to do there.  We'll see.

          Q    Richard, what is the U.S. feeling about the no-sail or 
no-float zone off the coast of Yugoslavia and other forms of 
sanctionings, navigationally?

          MR. BOUCHER:  As you know, they are already ships in the 
Adriatic that are checking for cargo that might violate the resolution.  
I think that was something that was raised in an article about possible 
further sanctions that would be in this, what we call the "omnibus 
resolution."

          At this point, I'm afraid I can't go into the specifics of 
what's in the resolution, but we continue to discuss these issues in the 
Security Council.  We believe there's been sufficient time for the 
Bosnian Government -- since the Bosnian Government has signed the peace 
plan for Bosnia -- and for the Bosnian Serbs to reach an agreement with 
the other two parties. We're therefore seeking rapid adoption of a 
resolution strengthening the sanctions against Serbia and Montenegro, 
the Bosnian Serbs main source of support.  The Secretary had some 
comments along these lines this morning as well.

          Q    Richard, when is the "no-fly" enforcement scheduled to 
begin?

          MR. BOUCHER:  It was scheduled to begin within seven or 14 
days after -- between seven and 14 days after passage of the resolution.  
If I remember correctly, that's between the 8th and the 15th of this 
month, but don't hold me to that.  So that's what it says in the 
resolution -- not less than seven but not more than 15.

          Q    Do you know if there is a specific starting date 
scheduled yet?

          MR. BOUCHER:  That is the -- the authorities that will -- 
there was not a specific date in the resolution.  The resolution had --

          Q    I know.  I'm asking you --

          MR. BOUCHER:  -- between seven and 15 --

          Q    I'm asking you if you're aware of the schedule.

          MR. BOUCHER:  I'm not aware of the specific starting date.  At 
this point I think that's a question for the military authorities to (a) 
decide and (b) answer, if they want to.

          Q    What about sightings in the "no-fly" zone?  Have there 
been any recent reports of --

          MR. BOUCHER:  There have been recent reports.  I don't have a 
full rundown for you, but there have been continued flights observed.

          Q    Helicopters?

          MR. BOUCHER:  Yes.  Helicopters.

          Q    Richard, the Secretary and others have made it clear that 
there's not a lot of support for lifting the arms embargo.  What about 
the stepped-up sanctions?  Do you expect that to breeze through?

          MR. BOUCHER:  It's something that we continue to discuss.  I 
can't give you a precise prediction on how much we'll get and when we'll 
get it, but it's something we keep pushing.  You know from the 
President's comments yesterday and from the Secretary's comments this 
morning that we are trying to do whatever we can to push forward with 
additional sanctions, to tighten and to toughen the sanctions.  
Obviously, this has to be done multilaterally, and we'll continue to 
work it.

          Q    Richard, on a related matter, does the United States have 
a view on the current issue in Germany over whether or not German crews 
should be participating on AWACS planes in the enforcement of a "no-fly" 
zone?

          MR. BOUCHER:  I don't remember that we've taken a view on 
that, Barrie.  I'll have to check and see if we have anything to say.

          Q    Richard, a number of European countries have already 
announced the level of their participation in the enforcement of the 
"no-fly" zone.  Is there anything that the U.S. Government has to say 
about its participation?

          MR. BOUCHER:  We have said before that we intend to 
participate through NATO in the enforcement of the "no-fly" zone.  
Exactly what form our participation will take, in terms of how many 
aircraft or other assets, I think you'll have to ask the Pentagon on 
that.

          Q    But we will be using our aircraft to enforce the "no-fly" 
zone?

          MR. BOUCHER:  On specifically which assets are being 
committed, you'll have to ask the Pentagon.  We will participate in the 
enforcement of the zone through NATO.

          Howard?

          Q    I wonder if you have any kind of update on the situation 
in northern Iraq, as far as Iraqi troop movements, buildups, threatening 
postures?

          MR. BOUCHER:  That's something I'll have to get you something 
on.

          Q    Richard, Haiti:  Where does the U.S. policy stand on 
granting amnesty to the military coup leaders?

          MR. BOUCHER:  It stands exactly where the Secretary put it 
this morning.  I think I'd leave it to him.  He answered that specific 
question this morning.

          Q    Which was?

          MR. BOUCHER:  The question?

          Q    Yes.  Well, yes, and his answer.

           MR. BOUCHER:  The question was what do we think about amnesty 
in Haiti, and the answer was the one he gave.  I can't quote it for you, 
but we're doing the transcript and should have it available shortly.

          Q    Richard, can you tell us what you know about the 
situation in Nagorno-Karabakh and especially after the very strong 
statement made by the Turkish Government?

          MR. BOUCHER:  Yes.  I think you all saw our statement 
yesterday on the recent fighting.  I'll give you a rundown of where we 
are now.  There's what they call "positional" fighting that continues in 
various places, particularly around the Azerbaijani town of Fizuli.  
However, there have been no major developments since the ethnic Armenian 
forces occupied the Kelbajar region of Azerbaijan last weekend.

          The Security Council issued a Presidential statement yesterday 
calling for the cessation of hostilities and the withdrawal of local 
Armenian forces from the Kelbajar district.

           As for the Turks, I'd note today's statement, which we 
welcome, by Turkish Prime Minister Demirel that "nothing would be solved 
by giving military aid to Azerbaijan."  Turkish officials in Ankara have 
ruled out the use of Turkish air force in Azerbaijan, noting that Turkey 
would be unable to respond positively to Azerbaijan's request for 
helicopters to evacuate civilians from Kelbajar.

          The U.S. Government remains convinced that the CSCE-sponsored 
Minsk Group negotiations remain the best hope for a peaceful resolution 
of the conflict, and we've called on all the parties to the conflict to 
refrain from seeking a military solution and to return in good faith to 
the negotiating table.

          We continue to consult closely with all governments in the 
region, including Turkey, and to monitor closely the events in Kelbajar.

          I would also note that there are quite a number of refugees in 
very, very inhospitable circumstances; tens of thousands of Azeri 
refugees fleeing the fighting in the Kelbajar district.  For many, their 
only escape route is on foot over perilous mountain passes covered with 
snow and ice. And both the International Committee of the Red Cross and 
the U.N. High Commissioner for Refugees have sent emergency teams to the 
area.  The teams are delivering blankets.  They've worked around the 
clock to deliver blankets -- over 4,000 blankets to civilians that are 
crossing the snowbound passes.  They've used all-terrain vehicles to 
transport to safety hundreds of women and children that are weakened by 
the journey and trapped by the snowstorm.  So that work is going on, 
too.

          Q    Do you have any confirmation of Turkish military -- 
Turkish troop movements on the border with Armenia?

          MR. BOUCHER:  I don't have anything on that.  And, as I've 
said, we have the Turkish Prime Minister stating today that nothing 
would be solved by giving military aid to Azerbaijan, and that's a 
statement that we welcome.

          Q    What's the definition of that phrase you used, 
"positional fighting"?

          MR. BOUCHER:  I guess it's something that experts use, because 
my experts use it.  I take it to mean that -- just fighting in a very 
small localized area, not a strategic thrust of any kind.

          Q    What, trying to straighten out truce lines or --

          MR. BOUCHER:  Something like that, yes.

          Q    -- political lines before there is a settlement?

          MR. BOUCHER:  Not necessarily.  Just trying to reinforce their 
positions or get slightly better positions but not a major thrust of the 
kind that would change the overall situation.

          Q    Richard, the President yesterday said that he was 
ordering a review of the information the United States received from 
Egypt on whatever it was -- on terrorism in the United States.  Can you 
tell us what -- how that -- what building is doing that review, how it's 
going to be undertaken, what -- how it's going to work?

          MR. BOUCHER:  I can't tell you all that at this point, Sid.  I 
think that's probably a question better asked over at the White House 
since it is the President that asked for the review.  But obviously 
we'll have a -- we'll participate in that and try to help out in any way 
we can.

          Q    Thank you.

          (The briefing concluded at 1:10 p.m.) (###)

To the top of this page