930520 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.
                                  US DEPARTMENT OF STATE
                                      DAILY PRESS BRIEFING

DPC #72

                             THURSDAY, MAY 20, 1993, 12:57 P. M.
                         (ON THE RECORD UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED)

          MR. BOUCHER:  Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen.  If I can 
start off with two announcements of public speaking engagements by the 
Secretary, and then we can go on to your questions, if you have any 

          Secretary of State Warren Christopher will give an address on 
Africa policy at the closing plenary of the 23rd African-American 
Institute Conference on May 21 -- that's tomorrow -- at the Sheraton 
Reston Hotel in Reston, Virginia.  The Secretary's address is scheduled 
for 10:40 a.m. in the main ballroom.

          The African-American Institute is one of the most prominent 
and respected institutions in the United States devoted exclusively to 
fostering cooperation between Africans and Americans.  The conference 
marks the 40th Anniversary of the AAI.

          Members of the press who wish to cover the event, please call 
Margaret Novicki -- N-o-v-i-c-k-i -- at 703-620-9000.

          Q    Advance text?

          MR. BOUCHER:  We would --

          Q    Will there be a text at all?

          MR. BOUCHER:  There will be a text, and we would expect to 
have it to you -- we will try -- we will do our usual best to have it to 
you under embargo before the event.

          Q    How about Q&A?

          MR. BOUCHER:  There's no Q&A there.

          Q    Will it be piped in?

          MR. BOUCHER:  (To staff) Do we know for sure?

          Yes.  We'll have it piped in for you as well.  O.K. Text and 

          Number two:  Secretary of State Christopher will visit 
Minneapolis on Thursday, May 27, to address the Hubert H. Humphrey 
Institute of Public Affairs at the University of Minnesota.  The event 
will be held in the atrium of the Humphrey Institute.

          The Secretary's speech is scheduled to begin at 12:00 noon, 
Minneapolis time.  Q&A session will follow.  Members of the press who 
wish to cover or have questions about this event, please telephone Pat 
Kaszuba -- K-a-s-z-u-b-a -- at 612-624-8520, or Gwen Ruff -- R-u-f-f -- 
at 612-625-1326.

          Q    What is the subject?

          MR. BOUCHER:  The speech is part of a -- it's part of a series 
of speeches, part of a series of events, part of the commitment to go 
out and speak to the American people, to listen to the American people 
on foreign policy.  This one will be in the university section, so he'll 
be talking, I think, about the importance to Americans, especially 
younger Americans, of being engaged in foreign policy, engaged in 
foreign affairs, and our interests in the world, particularly in Russia.

          Q    Will it be piped in here?

          MR. BOUCHER:  I don't know that yet.

          Q    Q&A?

          MR. BOUCHER:  Q&A.  There is a Q&A.

          Q    Is there an age limit for asking questions? (Laughter)

          Q    Will Clinton be in the audience?

          Q    Will he take questions from children, or is he going to 
take questions from reporters or --

          MR. BOUCHER:  It's university people.

          Q    Oh, university.

          MR. BOUCHER:  It's the University Institute -- the Hubert H. 
Humphrey Institute of Public Affairs.

          Q    Will there be an advance text?

          MR. BOUCHER:  Smart people.  We'll do our usual best to get 
you an advance text.

          Q    Well, having gone to the Chicago speech where reporters 
were not among those asking questions --

          MR. BOUCHER:  I don't think we ever promised that reporters 
would ask questions.

          Q    You never did.  You never did.  But, I don't know ---

          MR. BOUCHER:  If he wants to do a press conference, he can do 
a press conference.  If he wants to talk to an audience and listen to 
others around the country, he doesn't need to answer questions from a 
group that he brings with him from Washington.

          Q    Richard, when will you know whether it will be piped in 

          MR. BOUCHER:  I may know by early next week.

          Q    Well, is he doing anything else in Minneapolis?

          MR. BOUCHER:  We would expect other events, meetings, possibly 
business, civic leaders, other events, in Minneapolis.

          Q    Baseball game?

          MR. BOUCHER:  No plans for a baseball game.

          Q    Too bad.

          MR. BOUCHER:  I'm not sure what he'll do in terms of local 
press events.

          Q    So what can you tell us about his meeting with Mr. 
Kozyrev, assuming that's it for announcements.  Why is Kozyrev so 
bubbly?  (Laughter)

          MR. BOUCHER:  Barry, the Secretary --

          Q    No.  Let me ask what's gone on at the meeting, because 
God knows why he's so bubbly.

          MR. BOUCHER:  Secretary Christopher and Foreign Minister 
Kozyrev met this morning privately for just over an hour.  Both the 
Secretary and the Foreign Minister exchanged their current thoughts on 
the situation in Bosnia.  At the conclusion of their discussion, the 
Secretary and the Foreign Minister asked their staffs to explore some of 
the details of their respective approaches.

          Assistant Secretary Oxman and Ambassador Bartholomew and 
others from the United States side are now meeting with their Russian 
counterparts.  Minister Kozyrev will return here to the Department late 
this afternoon, and he and the Secretary will then review the work of 
the two delegations.

          Q    Richard, when you say they exchanged their current 
thoughts, does that exclude or do you mean to rule out the Russians 
coming here with some new proposal?  "Thoughts" sort of sounds like 
things on people's minds.  Did they come with anything representing a 
course of action comparable to the American course of action that was 
rejected by the Russians?

          MR. BOUCHER:  Barry, I'm not going to go into the details of 

          Q    I didn't ask for details.  I just want to know if they 
have a proposal.

          MR. BOUCHER:  Barry, I'm not going to go into the details of 
this.  The discussions were private between the two ministers.  I said 
they discussed the -- the staffs are exploring the details of their 
respective approaches to the problem.

          We don't expect to give you a blow-by-blow account or make any 
major pronouncements, even later this afternoon.  But the Secretary and 
the Minister will be available to you at the end of the meeting.  And at 
that point they will tell you as much or as little as they feel they can 
at this point about their conversations.

          As you know, the Secretary expects to meet with Foreign 
Secretary Hurd tomorrow; expects to meet with French Foreign Minister 
Juppe also in the next few days; and in these consultations generally we 
are trying to forge a common approach with our allies that will bring 
the international community together on next steps for action.

          But as that process goes on, I really don't anticipate that 
we'll be going into the conversations in any extent.

          Q    Can I ask a question on tone rather than substance.  Mr. 
Kozyrev seems very optimistic about developing a joint plan of action.  
If he didn't come with any new proposal, what's changed --

          MR. BOUCHER:  Whoa]  Stop]  Right there.  Who said he didn't 
come with any new proposals?

          Q    Well, did he come with any proposals?

          MR. BOUCHER:  I'm not answering that question.


          Q    Then why can't she make an assumption?  It's a --

          MR. BOUCHER:  O.K.  In that case, it's a hypothetical 

          Q    O.K.  Then is the United States as optimistic as he was 
when he appeared a couple of hours ago and said he's absolutely positive 
there are going to be good results?

          MR. BOUCHER:  Once again, we're in the middle of this process.  
The Secretary and the Minister will be available to you at the end of 
the day, after they --

          Q    Richard, do you know what time that's going to be?

          MR. BOUCHER:  Late this afternoon.

          Q    What time?

          Q    Can you put a little more number on it than that?

          MR. BOUCHER:  I can't put a number at this point, Norm.

          Q    Even when it starts?

          Q    Are we talking about -- for those who have deadlines late 
this afternoon, are we talking in the range of 4 or 5 o'clock, or are we 
talking in the range of 6 or 7 or 8 o'clock?

          MR. BOUCHER:  Elaine, I can't put a number on it at this 
point.  I'm sorry.

          Q    Would you give us a sense of when you might know?

          MR. BOUCHER:  I'll give you a sense of when I might know, yes.  
As soon as I can.

          Q    Mr. Kozyrev said this morning that they were trying to 
forge a common policy.  Is that your understanding of the process that's 
going on right now?  Do we -- some time early next week, are we going to 
see an announcement that the Russians, the British, the French and the 
United States have all agreed or failed to agree on a common policy?

          MR. BOUCHER:  I think I just said that in these meetings that 
we're having, the series of meetings that we're having with our friends 
and allies -- with the Russians, the British and the French -- we are 
attempting to forge a common approach that can bring the international 
community together on the next steps to take in regard to this crisis.

          Q    Is it safe to assume that the next steps would be 
somewhat less than what the Draconian and what the United States 
originally anticipated, since nobody wants to buy that?

          MR. BOUCHER:  I don't think it's safe to assume anything in 
particular at this point, John.  We have indeed put some ideas on the 
table.  Everything is still on the table.  As you know, they haven't 
excluded the ideas and options that we've proposed, and we haven't 
excluded theirs.  So we'll be working together to try to find a common 

          Q    Well, now, you said we have put some ideas on the table.  
So back to the original question.  Have the Russians put ideas on the 

          MR. BOUCHER:  Barry, I'm --

          Q    "We."  I thought you meant the Americans.  I'm sorry.  He 
said you just said it.

          MR. BOUCHER:  I'm giving you history and not something up to 

          Q    Oh, I meant today.

          MR. BOUCHER:  No.  I'm not getting into the meetings today.

          Q    You just said, though, Richard, they haven't excluded the 
ideas we proposed and we haven't excluded the ideas they proposed.

          MR. BOUCHER:  Yes.

          Q    As of today.

          MR. BOUCHER:  That's the overall situation as we face it in 
general.  I'm not trying to report on this morning's meeting.

          Q    Richard, on Tuesday, it sounded very much like the 
Secretary was opposing and perhaps even rejecting Kozyrev's plan for 
sequential -- or whatever that word is -- implementation of Vance-Owen.  
That seems to be still what he's talking about. Can we now say that 
that's no longer rejected?

          MR. BOUCHER:  Norm, all these things are ongoing.  They have 
discussed their respective approaches this morning.  There are indeed 
common elements in our thinking.  There needs to be further 
consultations with our friends and allies.  The goal of these 
consultations -- as I said, in these consultations we're trying to forge 
a common approach on the next steps that we can all take together.  But 
I'll leave it to the ministers at the end of the day to see if they do 
or do not wish to comment on any specific ideas.

          Q    Richard, could I --

          MR. BOUCHER:  Let's go back to Johanna.

          Q    I just wondered if the -- if they do reach this common, 
you know, agreement on next steps, whether you would anticipate a 
foreign ministers-level meeting at the U.N. to give it the, you know, 
proper imprimatur.

          MR. BOUCHER:  At this point I really don't think I can predict 
that.  The purpose -- one of the purposes of the consultations is to 
determine what options can gain support from the different allies and 
the different parties, and we'll try to forge a common approach.

          How that approach needs to be decided and finally implemented, 
I think I'd leave to a later stage in the process.

          Q    Richard, generally when --

          MR. BOUCHER:  I think John had one, too.

          Q    When the Secretary goes to Moscow, he and the Foreign 
Minister there spend many hours together in the course of a day's visit, 
and the Secretary would normally also go to meet the Russian President, 
I think, just about -- probably in every case.

          Why is it that they -- the Secretary apparently can't clear 
his schedule for more than an hour in the morning and some time at the 
very end of the day?  My first question.  And, secondly, will the 
Secretary be going with Kozyrev to the White House to see the President 

          MR. BOUCHER:  I don't know of any plans to go to the White 
House at this point.  And the question of the meetings, I think, is 
basically, you know, what -- it's not so much a question of the 
Secretary not being able to clear his schedule, it's the way they decide 
to work most efficiently.

          I think you could as easily have said generally in Moscow they 
have an initial meeting.  Then they assign some working groups to work 
on the problem, and then they get back together to hear from the working 
groups.  So I just think that we've used both modes of working, and in 
this case we're doing it in one way.

          Q    Why is there a problem about whether or not he'll be 
going to the White House?  I mean, it would be unprecedented in a large 
number of years for a Russian -- visiting Russian Foreign Minister not 
to have at least a courtesy call on the President.  Everybody over 
here's acting like -- and at the White House, too -- like this is some 
very strange question to be asking, and you can't seem to say whether it 
is tentatively planned, whether you intend to do it, whether you desire 
to do it, or you choose not to do it.

          MR. BOUCHER:  Well, first of all, Terry, I'm not the White 
House, and all I can tell you at this point is I don't know of any such 
plans on the schedule.

          Q    Richard, there have been occasions during the last four 
or five years that I've been here when we have been misled from this 
podium, usually by inadvertence.

          Could you explain to me in the interest of veracity why the 
State Department continues to hold to the fiction that the idea of the 
use of force in air strikes and the lifting of the arms embargo has not 
been rejected by the Europeans, when the entire world except perhaps 
some people in the State Department understands that it has been.

          MR. BOUCHER:  John, I've been here for the last four years, 
and in the interests of veracity I will tell you that the reason that we 
say that is because that is what they, themselves, have said to you.  If 
you choose to believe otherwise, that's your problem.  In the interests 
of veracity, they, themselves, have said repeatedly -- whether it's the 
statement in Moscow, the EC Foreign Ministers' statement, I believe some 
of the statements they made yesterday, they don't exclude any options.  
That's all I'm saying again today.

          Q    And the State Department believes this and is acting in 
this -- and is acting on that, on that assumption.  Is that correct?

          MR. BOUCHER:  We are acting -- we are talking to our allies.  
We are trying to forge a consensus.  We're trying to forge a common 

          Q    That wasn't the question.  The question was, does the 
State Department believe --

          MR. BOUCHER:  And everything's part of the mix.

          Q    Do you know where Kozyrev was yesterday when he talked to 
the Secretary on the phone?  Apparently they did speak yesterday.

          MR. BOUCHER:  No.  They did talk on the phone yesterday, but 
no, I don't know where Kozyrev was.

          Q    I'm just wondering if he was --

          MR. BOUCHER:  On the other end of the phone line.

          Q    Yes.  Were they in touch while Kozyrev was in Yugoslavia?

          MR. BOUCHER:  I don't know.

          Q    Because I'm trying to see if Kozyrev in some way was a 
middle man between the U.S. and Serbia.

          MR. BOUCHER:  I think various people have had consultations 
with the Serbs, you know, including our envoys and people at various 
times.  Obviously, the Secretary and the Foreign Minister discussed U.S. 
and Russian ideas.


          Q    Richard, during his confirmation hearings, Secretary 
Christopher called for a much stronger role for U.N. peacekeepers, and 
he talked about the need to explore whether peacekeepers should indeed 
be peacemakers.  He also called human rights one of the linchpins of 
American foreign policy.

          Why is it when there are Canadian, French, British 
peacekeepers on the ground, some of them volunteers, under the U.N. 
flag, that the United States has not sent Americans under the U.N. flag, 
even as volunteers, to help, indeed, deliver humanitarian aid and assist 
UNPROFOR in various ways.

          MR. BOUCHER:  Elaine, I think the United States has sent 
people -- U.S. troops in some cases -- to assist UNPROFOR. We have 
people who have worked on aid.  We have airplanes that have flown in day 
after day after day, sometimes with fire against them, who have flown in 
to deliver humanitarian supplies.

          We have had airdrops which have gone day after day to deliver 
humanitarian supplies.  So we are involved militarily.

          Q    But you didn't answer the question.  Why aren't there 
American peacekeepers side by side with Canadians, British and French?  
What's the thinking behind that?

          MR. BOUCHER:  The United States has been involved in 
humanitarian aid deliveries, which is one thing you asked about.  The 
President at the same time has made clear that he only expects that we 
would put -- you know, he intends to put troops or U.S. forces into the 
situation, into a hostile situation -- go back.

          The phrasing is that he only intends to deploy U.S. forces to 
implement an agreement that is arrived at consensually and in good faith 
by the parties.

          Q    And why?  What's the reason behind that?

          MR. BOUCHER:  I think we've made very clear the reasons behind 
that.  The Secretary has testified on it a number of times.  It has to 
do both with the practical aspects of dealing with the problems, with 
the responsibility of dealing with the problems and with the ability of 
the United States to solve the problem in those ways.

          Q    Richard, let me follow up, please, on Elaine's question 
because over the past day you have, yourself, from the podium said that 
you support the idea of an international peacekeeping monitoring force 
on the Bosnia-Serbia border to monitor the traffic.  And yet you, 
yourself, have said that the United States will not participate in this.

          Now, if you are going to be part of an international force, if 
you're going to push for an international force, if, indeed, as you seem 
to want to do, to lead an international force, why aren't you prepared 
to be there on the ground?

          MR. BOUCHER:  Jan, first of all, I think there's an assumption 
in your question that everything that gets done the United States has to 
do.  Clearly we understand, and I think our allies and friends 
understand, that this is a problem at the heart of Europe; and at the 
heart of this problem, it's a European problem.  The Secretary has made 
that clear.

          We need a common approach.  We need an approach where we're 
all able to do what we can to help the problem, to help resolve it, and 
we're in the process now of trying to forge such a common approach.  
That's what's underway right now.

          Q    Richard, the time before last, when the Secretary was on 
the Hill, he found more minuses, as he put it, than pluses in the idea 
of safe havens as a vehicle for maybe ending or decreasing the fighting 
and the pain of what's going on in Bosnia.  Does he still feel that it 
is largely a negative option?

          MR. BOUCHER:  Once again, Barry, as far as commenting on 
specifics that may or may not be under discussion right now, it's really 
not something I want to do at this point.  They'll be available to you 
afterwards and at that point, they'll say as much or as little as they 
wish to about specific options.

          Q    Well, of course, I wasn't asking whether they're talking 
about safe havens.

          MR. BOUCHER:  No, I know.  What you're asking me is to sort of 
prejudice the outcome of their decisions.

          Q    Oh, no.  No, no.  We're trying to see if there's a shift 
in the policy that never shifts.

          MR. BOUCHER:  I'm sure you'd write a story about it that 
wouldn't even mention Kozyrev and Christopher.

          A    No.  I'm telling you that I'm not trying to connect it to 
the meeting going on today.  We're trying to see if the Administration's 
policy is undergoing some change, because even yesterday you said the 
military option is still the preferred option.  And as you can tell, 
there's a lot of skepticism that this will go down with the Europeans.  
They've come up with things -- the French, particularly -- with safe 
havens, and Christopher thought little of the idea.  But having run out 
of maybe of military options, I wonder what he thought now of safe 
havens?  If he's changed his mind?

          MR. BOUCHER:  Barry, at this point, I really can't get into 
specifics of what we may be discussing today or we may discuss in the 
next few days and start commenting and giving pros and cons on things.

          The Secretary has outlined his thinking in public.  In their 
discussions this morning, he and Minister Kozyrev outlined their 
thinking on different approaches.  They outlined, each of them, their 
respective approaches to these issues there and now we're trying to work 
and forge a common approach, not only with the Russians, but with the 
other allies over the course of the coming days.

          Q    Is the French still scheduled for Monday, or is it 
something like the next few days?  It's still Monday, isn't it?

          MR. BOUCHER:  It's still scheduled for Monday.


          Q    Can you restate what the Secretary said only two days 
ago, which is that we do not want to be in the business of enforcing an 
agreement which all sides have not signed on to?

          MR. BOUCHER:  I think I said once more that the only 
circumstances we can conceive of putting U.S. forces into Bosnia is in 
order to implement an agreement that is arrived at consensually and in 
good faith by the parties.

          Q    Richard, does that phrase of U.S. forces include things 
that we would not normally consider to be military forces, such as 
perhaps customs officials or police units or something of that sort?  
Are you referring to U.S. personnel?

          MR. BOUCHER:  We're doing a variety of things in this conflict 
with a variety of ways.  We have civilian monitors.  We have military 
personnel helping on the ground with UNPROFOR.  We have hospitals out 
there.  We have airlift.  We have logisticians.  We have customs 
officers and neighboring states helping with sanctions enforcement and 
things like that.  But I think the particular question and circumstances 
we've addressing is the issue of introducing troops into hostilities in 

          Q    Would customs personnel, such as the ones you had in use 
in neighboring states, be eligible for use in Bosnia?

          MR. BOUCHER:  I can't imagine what a customs person would do 
in the middle of Bosnia.

          Q    Richard, on something else.  I guess it involves Russia 

          Q    Can I call for a filing break, please?

          Q    Oh, filing break.

          MR. BOUCHER:  Okay.

          Q    A couple of weeks ago Pravda ran an article, or articles, 
reviving the notion that Jews are engaged in ritual murder.  This is the 
sort of the allegation that historically has touched off bloody progroms 
in Russia, in the Ukraine, and Eastern Europe, generally.

          Has State talked to the Russians about this?  What is --

          MR. BOUCHER:  We have indeed talked to the Russians about 
this, both in Washington and in Moscow.  We talked to them on the 6th 
and 7th of May.

          For background, for the rest of you, the journal newspaper, 
Pravda, on May 5 printed an article that was virulently anti-Semitic.  
It gave currency to the so-called "blood libel" claim that Jews 
committed ritual murders, a charge that was used in the Czarist past to 
generate anti-Jewish progroms.

          In an apparent attempt to embarrass the Russian Government, 
the Pravda story also linked the murders of three Russian Orthodox 
priests to ongoing efforts by the American Lubavitch Jewish community 
and the U.S. Government to gain the release of the Schneerson Library, a 
collection of 12,000 religious texts seized by the Bolsheviks in 1917.  
We have firmly supported the efforts of the Lubavitch community to 
regain custody of these books.

          Now, Pravda is no longer the official press organ of the 
Russian Government, but it is a widely-circulated newspaper, and we're 
therefore concerned that articles such as this threaten the spirit of 
religious tolerance in Russia.

          But we're also encouraged by the Russian Foreign Ministry's 
statement on May 14 that denounced the article.  In that statement, the 
Russian Ministry noted that the article is "destructive in its manner 
and facilitates the inflammation of nationalist and religious 

          The statement further said that the Russian Government "takes 
all the necessary measures for the effective guarantee of the rights of 
Russia's citizens, regardless of their nationality or religion."

          That's the rundown on that.

          Q    Do you -- returning to Bosnia just for a moment. Do you 
expect that the U.N. Security Council is going to deal with today the 
Bosnian monitoring resolution -- the monitors between Bosnia Serb-held 
territory and Serbia?

          MR. BOUCHER:  They're meeting informally on it today, but I 
don't think I could lead you to expect a vote today.  It's still under 
discussion by the members of the Council.

          Q    So you expect it will be another day or two, perhaps, 
until we get that together?

          MR. BOUCHER:  Yes.

          Q    What about the vote on the war crimes tribunal?

          MR. BOUCHER:  Consultations continue.  The draft was discussed 
at an informal session of the Council yesterday with a possible vote as 
early as tomorrow.

          Q    Richard, how much is this tribunal going to cost? And how 
many people is it going to employ?

          MR. BOUCHER:  I think there was some just wire reporting on 
it.  I assume all that information is in the Secretary General's report.  
I don't have it with me.

          Q    The wire said that it was going to employ 400 people and 
it was going to cost $30 million a year?

          MR. BOUCHER:  I don't know if that's right or not.

          Q    Could you please check on how much it's going to cost, 
and try and reconcile that number with the United States' well-known 
view on the way the United Nations and its finances is organized?

          MR. BOUCHER:  Alan, I will check on it.  I would suggest you 
also check with the United Nations.

          Q    Sure, but you haven't voted for the resolution yet.

          MR. BOUCHER:  That's true.

          Q    Once they set up the thing, it will be there.  The 
salaries will flow, and the travel department will start organizing 
trips and all this.

          MR. BOUCHER:  Once again, Alan, I assume all that information 
is in the Secretary General's report on the establishment.

          Q    Would it be possible to get some information from our 
State Department on what the war crimes tribunal resolution is all 
about?  They don't seem to want to answer phone calls in Legal.

          MR. BOUCHER:  Well, I think we've talked to you.  I talked 
about it here yesterday, didn't I?

          Q    You said they were going to vote on it.  You didn't say 
what was in it, what the words are all about.

          MR. BOUCHER:  I said the draft resolution requires all states 
to cooperate fully with the war crimes tribunal.  It requires them to 
take any measures necessary under the domestic law to implement the 
resolution, including an obligation of states to comply with requests 
for assistance or orders issued by the trial chamber of the tribunal.  
Those are the things it does.  It requires states to cooperate.  It 
establishes the tribunal and requires states to cooperate with it.

          Q    I wouldn't mind a little more detail than that.

          MR. BOUCHER:  Well, some of that will be in the resolution, 
John, and I'm sure we'd be glad to provide it to you when we can.

          Q    What if states don't cooperate?  Is there a penalty 
clause in that resolution?

          MR. BOUCHER:  Once again, we'll have to see the final 

          Q    Richard, is it the U.S. view that these resolutions -- 
both of them, the Security Council resolution on the war crimes tribunal 
and the one on the border monitoring -- can and should proceed at the 
U.N. regardless of the state of the discussions going on here in 
Washington between the U.S., France, Russia, and Britain?

          MR. BOUCHER:  Yes.

          Q    So the U.S. favors a vote before next Tuesday?

          MR. BOUCHER:  We've supported both of these resolutions.  We 
think they're important.  We think they are things that the 
international community can agree on and can do.  I think they're both 
useful and important in this situation, and we'd like to see them happen 
as soon as possible.

          Q    Is it the position of the U.S. Government that a partial 
implementation of Vance-Owen is unwise?

          MR. BOUCHER:  Once again, I think I've been asked that 
question before.  I know the Secretary discussed this in testimony the 
other day.  But in the interest of keeping out of any specific options 
and discussions that they might be having now, I just really don't want 
to go into specifics.

          Q    Does that mean that there might be change in thinking 
from two days ago?

          MR. BOUCHER:  I'm not trying to imply that, Elaine.

          Q    Richard, can I come back, just to clarify your answer to 
Barry on this anti-Semitic article in Pravda?  You say you talked on May 
6 and 7.  Could you say who spoke and where?

          MR. BOUCHER:  I think I said also we did it both in D.C. and 
in Moscow.  In D.C., on May 5 -- is it 6 and 7, or 5 and 6?

          Q    Five is the article, and 6-7 was the speech.

          MR. BOUCHER:  Okay.  Five was the article.  We talked to them 
in Washington on the 6th and in Moscow on the 7th, with embassies.

          Q    (Inaudible) normal diplomatic --

          MR. BOUCHER:  It was with embassies, yes.

          Q    Richard, the Slovak Prime Minister was here in 
Washington.  Do you have anything on that visit?

          MR. BOUCHER:  He's meeting with the Deputy Secretary this 
afternoon at 5:45, I think the time is.

          Q    Is this regarded as a courtesy call, or is it expected to 
be a meeting of some substance?

          MR. BOUCHER:  I would expect it would be a useful and 
substantive meeting, yes.

          Q    There's nothing more on the Slovak visit -- on his visit?

          MR. BOUCHER:  He's on a private visit to the United States.  
Dr. Wharton is seeing him this afternoon at 5:45.

          Q    And whether he met with Clinton or not, you're not aware 
of that?

          MR. BOUCHER:  It's a question you'd have to ask the White 

          Q    Can I ask you another question while I have you -- about 
Angola policy?

          MR. BOUCHER:  You've got me as long as you want.

          Q    Secretary Christopher is going to talk about a Africa 
policy tomorrow.  But do you have anything on the recognition of Angola?

          MR. BOUCHER:  The President made the announcement yesterday.  
I don't know what more you want to know.

          Q    Whether this is a sea change in U.S. policy towards 
Africa and whether we're going to see more of these sort of abandonment 
of old Reagan-Bush allies?

          MR. BOUCHER:  In terms of U.S. policy towards Africa, as a 
whole, the Secretary will try to talk about that and characterize that 
tomorrow.  Clearly this will be, I think, probably the first speech on 
Africa by a Secretary of State since the end of the Cold War, and 
therefore a chance to establish a basis for our relationships out there.

          As far as the recognition of Angola goes, obviously that fits 
into the overall picture.  But I think the President also, yesterday, 
gave some pretty specific reasons why in this circumstance we felt it 
was the best thing to do and the right thing to do.

          Q    Richard, the Cubans that were seized at sea, has the U.S. 
had any access to them?  Where does that stand?

          MR. BOUCHER:  We have not had access yet.  They're still 
declining to grant us consular access based on the claim that they're 
not U.S. citizens.  Nonetheless, we're continuing to seek contact with 
them.  We'll keep this effort going, and we'll continue to follow the 
situation closely.

          Q    Have you determined whether they're American citizens or 

          MR. BOUCHER:  I understand INS is still checking their 


          Q    Richard, would you be willing to take Terry's question 
about what else is on the Secretary's schedule that precludes a meeting 
with Kozyrev before 5:45?  The only thing on the public --

          MR. BOUCHER:  I don't think that was Terry's question. Second 
of all, I think I already said, I don't think it's much of a matter of 
scheduling as it is a matter of how they determine they can best do 
their work in this circumstance.

          I pointed out that in the past sometimes the Ministers have 
met at great length.  Sometimes the Ministers have met briefly at the 
beginning of their contacts and then sent other people off to do some 
working group work and then gotten back together at the end once the 
working groups had finished their work, and that is the pattern that's 
being followed today.  It's not unusual.

          Q    The reason that they're looking at 5:45 or late 
afternoon, I guess is what you said --

          MR. BOUCHER:  Who said 5:45?

          Q    You didn't.

          MR. BOUCHER:  I said late afternoon.

          Q    You said late afternoon.  The reason they're looking for 
late afternoon is to give the working level time enough to do their work 
and not because Christopher's schedule is --

          MR. BOUCHER:  To get back together -- he does have other 
things on his schedule.  But I know that he's cleared some things that I 
was involved in.  He's cleared off his schedule later this afternoon so 
that he could meet with Kozyrev.  So they decided to get back at a 
convenient time.

          Ralph and Warren.

          Q    One more on Kozyrev's scheduling?  I'm sorry. It's just a 
briefing -- maybe you've already answered this. Kozyrev apparently has 
met with Senate Foreign Relations Committee people on the Hill.  Will he 
be meeting with other Executive Branch officials that you can tell us 

          MR. BOUCHER:  Not that I know of.


          Q    Two quick items:  Do you have anything on either North 
Korea or the investigation of Iraqi possible involvement into the 
assassination plot?

          MR. BOUCHER:  North Korea, I don't have anything new for you 
today.  And the Iraqi -- the investigation:  U.S. law enforcement 
officials are continuing their investigation with the cooperation of the 
Kuwaiti Government.

          Q    That's it?

          Q    They don't have the confession?

          MR. BOUCHER:  I highlighted it.

          Q    Richard, on Cambodia, anything on Cambodia?

          MR. BOUCHER:  I guess one could say quite a bit about 
Cambodia.  Let me try to say -- during the past week, there's been some 
decrease in the level of violence but the security situation out there 
still represents a serious concern.

          While acknowledging the difficulties of conducting an election 
in this environment, the U.N. Transitional Authority in Cambodia has 
announced that the elections will proceed on schedule.  All 20 Cambodian 
parties have participated in the campaign, have reaffirmed their 
commitment to participate, and there's been a lot of interest on the 
part of potential voters.

          During the voter registration process, almost 95 percent of 
those eligible registered to vote.  We think that's a clear 
demonstration of the desire of the Cambodian people to determine their 
own future.

          We and other countries have assisted the U.N. Transitional 
Authority by providing additional equipment and material requested by 
them.  In the past two weeks Australia, Indonesia, Japan, Malaysia, 
Singapore, and Thailand, as well as the United States, have all made 
important material contributions to enhancing UNTAC's capability.

          The secret balloting will be supervised by UNTAC and conducted 
in as many parts of Cambodia as possible, depending on the security 
situation.  There are nearly 900 international polling officers who have 
arrived in Cambodia this week.  Most have arrived at their polling 
sites, and the rest will arrive shortly.  Fifteen hundred polling sites 
are scheduled to be open.

          We're also encouraged by reports that Prince Sihanouk will 
return to Cambodia before the elections.

          While we can't discount the possibility of Khmer Rouge attacks 
or of other political intimidation, nonetheless we believe that the 
elections can and should proceed.

          Q    Could you be any more specific about the nature of U.S. 
assistance that's been shipped in the last couple of weeks?

          MR. BOUCHER:  I don't have that information with me, but I can 
get it for you.

          Q    I understand that among the things provided was the U.S. 
provided airlift for some Australian helicopters?

          MR. BOUCHER:  Yes.  We provided an initial set of supplies 
ourselves, and we have offered to airlift anything else that other 
people could provide, and I think helicopters was one of the things.

          Q    Has the U.S. actually provided any choppers itself, or --

          MR. BOUCHER:  I'd have to look back at the list of what we 

          Q    Thank you.

          (Press briefing concluded at 1:33 p.m.)

To the top of this page