Note: This Electronic Research Collection is an archive site. For the most current information, please visit the
DEPARTMENT OF STATE
DAILY PRESS BRIEFING
DPC #74
MONDAY, MAY 24, 1993, 12:56 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 Do you have anything about Saddam Husayn perhaps planning
military action against the Kurds?
MR. BOUCHER: The Secretary of State talked about that a little
bit this morning. He made very clear our intention to enforce the
United Nations resolutions. He said we'll be watching very carefully
for any changes in the situation that might call for further action on
the part of the United States.
I'd point out that as recently as March 26, the U.N.
Ambassadors of the United States, the U.K., France and Russia warned
Iraq that any provocative actions would receive a firm and united
response, and that warning remains in effect.
Q Richard, I have two questions. First is a couple weeks
ago there was a report that the U.N. was pulling out some of its people,
and you put out a statement saying that the United States was going to
ask its allies for the necessary funds to keep that force in being at
full strength. Have you been successful in getting those funds?
MR. BOUCHER: The international community, I think, has been
working on this. Of course, the international community continues to
encourage Iraq to accept Resolution 706 and 712, which would allow it to
sell oil to buy food and medicine. And Baghdad's failure to take that
step really demonstrates a lack of concern on their part for the
suffering of the Iraqi people.
We have been making a concerted effort, especially over the
winter, to assist people that are suffering from Saddam Husayn's
embargo. At this point we've had some success in our work with other
donors. The United Nations has suspended any further rotation of the
guard force, so the guard contingent remains stable at 186. We're
continuing to work with other donors to secure the adequate long-term
financing for the U.N. guard force.
Q What can you tell us, though, about the Iraqi build-up?
MR. BOUCHER: At this point there's not much detail that I can
go into on that, except to say that they have had considerable troops in
the north for some time.
Q Richard, how long do the allies -- in your case the United
States -- intend to protect the safe havens and keep this opera-
tion -- this very expensive operation going?
MR. BOUCHER: Sid, we're there in furtherance of U.N.
resolutions, including Resolution 687 and Resolution 688, especially on
the repression of Iraqi people. I think we've expressed our firm
determination to continue these efforts as long as it takes to secure
full Iraqi compliance with U.N. resolutions.
Q Richard, to go back to George's question, are you saying
that the United States is unable to say whether there was increased
troop build-up by Iraq, or that you just don't want to say?
MR. BOUCHER: It's a situation that I think, as the Secretary
mentioned, we do follow very closely, but it's not a situation that I'm
able to discuss.
Q But in the past, people at this podium have discussed
whether or not there was change in deployments. What's the difference
now?
MR. BOUCHER: Other than to say that we know that they have had
significant numbers of troops in those areas for some time, I don't
think I can go into any further detail at this moment.
Q Richard, the Times indicates this morning, quoting Western
diplomats and intelligence sources, that Iraq is preparing to attack the
Kurds. Can you confirm that?
MR. BOUCHER: No, I can't, John.
Q Richard, the Kurds, part of them, live in this zone north
of the 36th parallel, which is protected by U.S. and allied air sorties,
but part of them live south of the 36th parallel. Do your words now
extend to protection of the Kurds south of the 36th parallel?
MR. BOUCHER: Alan, our "no-fly" zone north of the 36th is
exactly that -- it's a "no-fly" zone intended to help implement the
United Nations resolutions. Resolution 688 that forbids Iraq from
engaging in repression against the Iraqi people applies to all groups
and all areas of the country.
Q Richard, does that "no-fly" zone include helicopters?
MR. BOUCHER: I don't remember the precise rules, but I think
it does. I think that's on the record somewhere.
Q In other words --
MR. BOUCHER: I'd have to check that, Jim. I don't remember
exactly.
Q In other words, the protection of the U.N. extended to
Kurds would exist south of the 36th parallel as well?
MR. BOUCHER: I think you're sort of drawing into different
hypothetical scenarios, and I don't think I can really do that for you.
I think I can just tell you that Resolution 688 does apply to all the
country, and that as with other U.N. resolutions we have been determined
to ensure that Iraq complies fully with all those resolutions.
Q So what does that mean? I mean, does it -- it sounds like
that extends U.N. protection to the Kurds even if they live -- no matter
where they live in the country, is that correct?
MR. BOUCHER: The specific steps that we've taken, John, will
remain in place. The specific steps that we've taken include the "no-
fly" zones in the north and in the south.
Q Richard, again, the Secretary's statement and your
statement speak of U.N. resolutions. The "no-fly" zone, of course, was
tripartite action by three allies, and I think your position is it's
inferred by the U.N. resolutions.
When he speaks of warning Saddam Husayn, the U.S. intends to
resolutely enforce U.N. resolutions, he means the "no-fly" zone, or does
he mean something else, or everything, or what? Do you know?
MR. BOUCHER: Barry, there's a whole series of U.N. resolutions
that require his compliance.
Q I can't quote the --
MR. BOUCHER: The "no-fly" zone is a step that's taken in
furtherance of the resolution. The intention is, through the "no-fly"
zones and various other measures that are in place, to secure Iraqi
compliance with the resolutions.
Q Are there other things they are doing that seem to be
wavering where the U.S. wants to assert its, as you put it,
resoluteness?
MR. BOUCHER: Well, you've had the continuing difficulties with
Iraq in a whole number of areas, whether it's the situation in the
north, the refusal to accept resolution 706/712 on oil for food and
medicine. I don't believe they've accepted the border demarcation,
which has been completed.
The inspections have continued, but I don't think they've
accepted the long-term monitoring plan that's called for under 687. So
I think you still have the same pattern of mixed compliance, at best,
from the Iraqis with the U.N. resolutions.
Q If you don't mind, those questions refer to the Kurds and
your answer referred to Iraqis. Does the State Department have a
position on whether the Kurds are a recognizable people who are entitled
to some measure of independence on Iraqi territory?
MR. BOUCHER: We have continued to support the territorial
integrity of Iraq and have continued to feel that all the people in Iraq
deserve individual liberties, deserve their human rights, and the right
to choose their own government.
Q Can we move on to Yugoslavia? I imagine there are some
questions out there. What did the Secretary mean when he said that --
he stated in his first appearance this morning, there were three aims,
and he defined one of them as an aim of minimizing the killing insofar
as we can. How much killing do you think the United States would be
able to -- under this plan -- would be able to tolerate?
MR. BOUCHER: Alan, I think you're drawing a truly mistaken
inference from the Secretary's remarks. He said, once again, I think at
the event that we were just at, if our goal was to limit and to stop the
killing; and we'll be taking a number of steps that we have outlined
with our allies. These steps are designed to do what we can to stop the
killing, to do what we can to prevent the conflict from spreading, and
to do what we can to increase the pressure on the Serbs. And we will be
carrying out those steps as we promised to do.
Q Richard, how safe are these safe havens going to be?
Would you suggest -- are they going to be as safe as a school playground
in Maryland, or how safe are they going to be?
MR. BOUCHER: I don't have any analogies for you, Alan. They
will be safe as UNPROFOR and the rest of us can make them.
Q Richard, the Secretary also said that this plan, in the
earlier photo op, was in the interests of the American people. Could
you explain that?
MR. BOUCHER: Once again, the Secretary has discussed this
twice with you this morning. I don't see it deserves any or needs any
further explanation.
Q That was a tough one. "In the interests of the American
people" could either mean that the American people are interested in
doing just so much --
MR. BOUCHER: The Secretary, I think, meant --
Q -- or "in the interests of the American people" in the
sense that we're not going to do anything bold, because the American
people don't want anything done. I don't know what he means.
MR. BOUCHER: Once again, I think you'd be truly mistaken to
jump to conclusions like that. The Secretary has stated many times what
our interests and concerns are about the situation. He has expressed
our humanitarian interests and our strategic interests in this situation
in Bosnia.
He and the President have stated very clearly our interests in
seeing a stop to the killing, containment of the conflict, and the
increase of pressure on the Serbs to reach a negotiated solution.
The steps that we have outlined are steps that are designed to
move us further forward in all those directions, and they are steps that
we have announced that we are working on implementing.
Q Why are the Serbs happy with this, and the Bosnian Muslims
are despairing over it?
MR. BOUCHER: First of all, I don't think it's fair to judge
the steps by the initial reactions or by the reactions and statements
that you see. I think you have to judge it by what it does. And what
it effectively does is to take steps that will lessen or stop the
killing, to contain the conflict, and to increase the pressure on the
Serbs.
If the Serbs somehow are emboldened by this, I would say that
would be a mistake in judgment on their part. The sanctions are going
to be rigorously enforced. We've already seen some effect of that and
these steps do continue the pressure, and they'll continue to feel the
heat.
Q The Karadzic statement, in which he said he accepts the
joint statement, and he spoke of a Bosnian Serb republic. Does the U.S.
have an opinion on a Bosnian Serb republic?
MR. BOUCHER: Yes.
Q What is the position --
MR. BOUCHER: We have not supported the carving up of Bosnia.
We have supported the negotiations that were aimed at arriving at a
settlement that would maintain the unity of Bosnia and the ability of
these groups to live together.
Q Richard, can we talk a bit about the Security Council
resolutions which are envisaged for this week? The main one on the
question of safe havens: Do you expect that the resolution will broaden
the mandate of UNPROFOR so that they can actually, physically protect
the safe havens? Also, I'd just note that there's a report this morning
that the Security Council has no money for this operation and no further
volunteers for troops to make it work.
MR. BOUCHER: Barrie, we are working with other governments to
pass these resolutions and, of course, to make sure that they do work,
and that the necessary resources are there. The Security Council is
meeting today on the War Crimes Resolution. That is an informal
session, but of course sometimes informal sessions proceed immediately
to votes, so there's likely to be a vote this afternoon on the War
Crimes Tribunal.
We're working with others up in New York on the other
resolutions we would expect to see later this week, including the safe
areas resolution, which essentially is a resolution that would implement
the safe areas in Bosnia. The Secretary on Saturday expressed our
support for the early adoption of these measures. In addition to that,
we also expect in this time frame, near future, to get the resolution
that would prepare the way for placing international monitors on the
border. So all those three things are being worked on up in New York.
Q But is it the United States' determination to make sure
that there are adequate troops and adequate resources to adequately
protect the safe havens?
MR. BOUCHER: These things I think, first of all, are in the
hands of the U.N. and the UNPROFOR people, but we have been longtime
contributors, especially to the humanitarian aspects of this, and the
exact numbers and locations and things like that have to be worked out
with UNPROFOR.
Q But does the United States have a position on whether the
mandate of the UNPROFOR troops should be expanded, so that, as the task
force that went to Bosnia recommended, that there be an ability to make
a more robust response on humanitarian -- to get humanitarian aid and
also to protect the safe havens. Does the United States favor an
expanded rules of engagement -- more aggressive rules of engagement?
MR. BOUCHER: As I said, the Secretary stated on Saturday that
we favor the early adoption of these resolutions on safe areas. These
resolutions, without trying to describe them as more or less of
something, they do, indeed, implement the safe areas and provide for the
use of UNPROFOR forces to implement the safe areas.
Q Did they change the rules of engagement and, if they do
not, does the United States favor expanding or making more robust the
rules of engagement?
MR. BOUCHER: Again, we favor the implementation of the
decision. Exactly what the rules of engagement or the terms and
language that are to be in those resolutions is still under discussion
up in New York. We favor the adoption of these resolutions -- this
resolution that will implement the safe areas concept. And the exact
terms of that are under discussion in New York.
Q I don't understand the concept. Let me explain how.
You've got people living in Sarajevo, and the Serb artilleries are in
the hills around them, and they can fire at will, and they do, and
people get killed in the streets when they decide to fire shells into
the streets.
Now, how is your plan going to change that, and in what sense
can you describe that environment as safe?
MR. BOUCHER: Alan, again the U.N. has declared six safe areas
in Bosnia at this point: Sarajevo, Srebrenica, Tuzla, Bihac, Gorazde
and Zepa. The Security Council is considering a resolution that will
implement that concept, and it will flesh out that concept in the terms
that you're asking me now. That is still under discussion up in New
York. It's something that we and other members of the Council are
working on, but it will provide, as we've said in the statement, for the
use of UNPROFOR forces to ensure that those areas are safe.
Q Will it stop the Serbs -- I mean, just to declare
something as safe doesn't make it so. I mean, I could say --
MR. BOUCHER: That's why there's now a resolution to implement
it.
Q -- that you were a wombat, and it wouldn't make you a
wombat.
MR. BOUCHER: I know, but you could pass a resolution that
would make me a wombat. That's exactly the process that we're doing
through. The U.N. has declared these as safe areas, and there is now a
safe areas resolution that's under discussion, the exact terms of which
I can't lay out for you because it's still under discussion, but which
will implement the safe areas.
Q Well, what's going to happen if one of these naughty Serbs
decides not to go along with your resolution and fires his artillery?
What are you going to do then?
MR. BOUCHER: Well, again that sort of detail is to be defined
in the process of defining the exact implementation of the safe areas
resolution. But the intention of the new resolution is to provide that
sort of mandate and wherewithal to the people who will implement it.
Q Will there be any new resolutions regarding the first
point of the 13 points of Saturday and Saturday's agreement -- that is,
that the nations will insist on getting the humanitarian aid through?
Do you contemplate any further action to insist?
MR. BOUCHER: Well, there's no new resolution, nor is there a
new resolution required. It's a reaffirmation of the determination
which UNPROFOR has used and which has resulted in them being successful
in many cases and getting into places that were very difficult.
Q And unsuccessful in many cases. But let me ask you again,
more -- as the State Department team that went out to investigate
suggested, that the United Nations forces be given more robust rules of
engagement in order to break through, to get the humanitarian aid
through. Are there any plans for the United States to support a
resolution in the Security Council to enable them to get this aid
through?
MR. BOUCHER: Saul, you know that there's already a resolution
which authorizes them to use all necessary measures, whatever they
consider the best way to get through. So I'm not sure that there's any
new requirement for a new resolution on that score.
Q UNPROFOR forces on the ground, as you're well aware, have
complained that they do not have enough leeway to break through
roadblocks or to dislodge roadblocks or to defend themselves -- to
defend convoys that may be stopped in order to get aid through. They
have said this. People on the ground who have watched it have said
this. I'm asking whether there are going to be any more rules of
engagement so as to implement that resolution that says "all means
necessary," better than it's been implemented in the past?
MR. BOUCHER: I'm not aware of any new resolutions under
consideration at this point, Saul.
Q There are indications from Belgrade that Mr. Milosevic may
be having second thoughts about allowing monitors on his border. Are
you getting -- I suppose one way to ask this is, what will the U.S.
recommend if the government in Belgrade says, well, no, I guess we won't
allow the monitors? The U.N. can pass resolutions until it's blue in the
face. If they don't want them there, they're not going to be there.
MR. BOUCHER: Well, I think there are a couple of things to say
about that. First of all, we do have ways of monitoring, of
surveilling, of watching what's going on out there with regard to the
borders. One of the purposes of this resolution is to test Mr.
Milosevic on his word, as to whether he's willing to make good on this
promise.
We have ways of watching that, but it would seem to us that the
deployment of border monitors would be one way of him showing that he is
clearly willing to make good on his word. And the rejection of that, I
think, would be met with an equal judgment that he was not willing to do
that.
Finally, I think the information that we have is that he has
not yet taken a clear position on the issue of border monitors; that
there are other Serbian officials and so-called FRY officials who have
rejected the idea. Vitaly Churkin is expected to be in Belgrade today.
We would expect him to raise the issue out there, and that, of course,
may clarify their views somewhat.
Q Since you have those other means of monitoring the border,
perhaps you can give us something that is more descriptive than mixed
results, which is -- what? -- for the last three weeks the State
Department has been able to say about the border. Is anything being
stopped? Are you seeing a continual flow of some percentage of trucks
and convoys across the border? What's the status?
MR. BOUCHER: I'm not able to break it down into percentages
for you. There is a flow in some areas and sometimes. There are things
that are being stopped in other areas at other times.
I think you've seen the press reporting on this, you get
similar reports to what we've seen. There are reports of border posts
that are idle at points, at times, and other reports that indicate
border posts where there's continuing traffic.
Q We had a senior official come by Saturday late in the day
-- for those who were still in the news room -- and he said their
performance is unsatisfactory so far.
You have these other means, and these other means have lead to
the conclusion that Milosevic is not fulfilling his promise. I can't
quite understand where all this is going. It seems to me in a circle.
Now you're going to place monitors if he says they're okay and, egad,
they may find out that he doesn't intend to live up to his pledge. What
is that -- and you will judge him to be untrustworthy. I don't
understand what this all is producing except delay.
MR. BOUCHER: Barry, it's producing, first of all, I think more
pressure on the Serbs to make good on their promise. Second of all, it's
producing the possibility of monitoring this traffic and ascertaining in
more detail the level to which it is being respected. And third of all,
the presence of monitors should have some deterrent effect over crossing
the border, and we think that deployment would be useful and ensuring
that the Bosnian Serbs are cut off from supplies.
Q Will they get to look into the trucks, as the U.S.
envisages it?
MR. BOUCHER: We envisage that the force should be able to be
effective. These details will be planned out. We're discussing things
like that with other governments at the U.N. I guess it envisaged that
the resolution would authorize them. The Secretary General will quickly
prepare a plan for the implementation of that that would be approved by
the Council. So many of those details are under discussion and it will
be set as we move forward.
Q (Inaudible)
MR. BOUCHER: In terms of what?
Q Making the monitoring effective and working out the
"modalities?"
MR. BOUCHER: Well, the first thing -- those discussions have
been underway. We've had some discussions with other governments in the
U.N. As I said, we're working on the resolution to do the resolution on
border monitors and then probably a more complete plan prepared by the
Secretary General that would be approved by the Council. So we'll be
working together with the U.N. The discussions are underway.
Q Does the United States think that Russians should be able
to operate as peacekeepers in the safe havens? Apparently, the Muslims
are concerned that the Russians should not do that unless other Islamic
countries are able to also act as peacekeepers?
MR. BOUCHER: I think if you look back at the joint statement
as regards to safe areas, the joint statement which we supported said
that the --
Q Encourage other countries to --
MR. BOUCHER: -- Russian Federation is considering making
forces available in Bosnia in addition to its forces presently in
Croatia, and that's a statement that we support.
Q What about the participation of Islamic countries, though?
Do you think that there should be equal time there?
MR. BOUCHER: I don't think that's the way that UNPROFOR has
planned the participation of the troops that are involved. But in the
end, it's a U.N. and UNPROFOR decision on the composition of that force.
Q You don't think they'll let the Bosnian Muslims have an
issue or a point?
MR. BOUCHER: I'm not familiar with that issue.
Q Richard, can I try just one more time -- and cut it off if
there's nothing here -- but in Saturday's statements, particularly by
the President, there was an inference that the safe havens that have
been agreed to here, or safe areas, are somewhat distinctively different
from the safe haven idea of just a few weeks ago. Now, if that's a
misinterpretation, I'll drop the question.
You say the U.N. will work on implementing. "Implementing," to
me, means enforcing. But is the idea of what a safe haven is, has that
changed since Christopher criticized it before Congress as promoting
"ghettoization?" Is there a different kind of a haven that you have
mind?
MR. BOUCHER: I don't know what you had in mind, to begin with,
I guess is my problem.
The Secretary has frequently discussed this, and, as he said to
you again on Saturday, he's discussed the pros and cons, the pluses and
minuses.
Q But he left out that he found more minuses than pluses,
though, a few weeks ago. When he reviewed his remarks Saturday, he
happened to leave out that he had come down on the negative side. But
be that as it may, there's an inference that the concept has changed.
Has it changed in any way that we don't perceive yet to make it
palatable?
MR. BOUCHER: Again, I think I'm not quite sure what you're
referring to as an original concept that might have changed. The U.N.
declared safe areas in U.N. resolutions, I think, about the beginning of
May. So those declarations are clear. What the present resolution
would do is to provide the implementing authority, to provide the rules
for the implementation of those safe areas and to define them perhaps
further in the direction of what you're discussing.
As far as the concept of safe areas, we've seen the pluses and
minuses of this. This is something that the other governments are
prepared to do, that does have the immediate value of helping stop some
of the killing. We're pledged to support, to protect, and, if
necessary, rescue their forces that might be involved in that.
Q Let's bring it down to an individual level. Let's take
the example of a family, let's say, who have been driven out of their
homes. Maybe the father has been killed or locked up in one of these
dreadful camps and tortured; they've lost their house, they've lost all
their positions, and now they find themselves in a place like Gorazde,
or one of the others, as refugees with no possessions, no home. What
does this plan do for them?
MR. BOUCHER: It provides them with an area where they can be
safe from further attack and from further deprivations.
Q If it happens that the Serbs decide to disagree with your
definition of "safe," and loose another salvo of artilleries and mortars
at them, what does it do for them then?
MR. BOUCHER: The presence, as defined by an upcoming
resolution -- and therefore I can't tell you exactly its parameters or
its capabilities -- of the UNPROFOR forces in the area, is designed to
ensure that that doesn't happen and that the areas maintain safety.
Q To ensure that it doesn't happen. But let's be straight
here, that the United States and its allies have decided not to take out
that artillery and not to lift the embargo against the Muslims so that
they can better defend themselves.
MR. BOUCHER: Exactly how it would be implemented, as I think I
told you, is the subject of a discussion that's ongoing right now and
you will see in a resolution to come. But I can't define for you its
precise parameters today, but in a resolution to come you will see the
Security Council defining how it should implement the declarations to
make these areas safe.
Q So if that family was sitting before you right now in my
place, your message to them would be, "Have faith, you will be safe. Go
back to your safe haven and relax because it's going to be all right."
MR. BOUCHER: My message would be, Alan, that the United
Nations Security Council -- we and the other governments there -- first
of all, several of us, on Saturday declared our intention in different
ways to support this conference of safe areas and to make it real; that
we are working right now for the U.N. resolution that will implement
that concept of safe areas; that this work is actively underway in New
York; that we expect to see this resolution passed very shortly; that,
then, we expect to see it implemented; and, that we are going to do the
things that we declared we would do on Saturday.
Q When you say protect and rescue the U.N. peacekeepers, is
it still like Saturday, on their request?
MR. BOUCHER: Yes, it's still as it was on Saturday.
Q And would an air strike -- would you go to the source to
protect them, or would you protect them where they're attacked, or do
you know yet?
MR. BOUCHER: Once again, I can't go through all the
hypothetical scenarios and military options.
Q Well, that was the original notion of -- the President,
who was running for office, spoke of using military strikes against the
artillery.
I'm wondering if the concept of protecting them is broad enough
to encompass the military measures that the allies didn't go for?
MR. BOUCHER: Barry, I think the statement that we've issued is
quite clear, but it's as clear as we can be for the moment in terms of
planning for different military scenarios that might arise.
Q Richard, I was going to ask, can you tell us anything
about what the United States would like to see in this resolution of
implementation so as to make it clearer to the Muslims -- who right now
think that this is a sell-out -- to make it clearer to the Muslims that
the United States really has their best interest at heart, as the
Secretary -- what is the United States for? And what would the United
States like to see in this implementation resolution?
MR. BOUCHER: We would like to see, as we stated on Saturday,
along with the other governments involved -- who were the ones who,
indeed, pledged troops on the ground and who were involved in the
UNPROFOR forces that will be implementing this -- we would like to see a
resolution along the lines of what has been proposed by the French and
others to implement the safe areas concept and to make these areas safe
and free from further attack.
Q I've asked you what you want to see in order to implement
it, and you replied that you want to see a resolution to implement it.
What does that mean, that "implementation?" What are the elements of
this implementation?
MR. BOUCHER: Those specific discussions are still underway,
Saul, and I can't give you a list of elements at this point.
Q You can't tell us what the United States favors in such a
resolution?
MR. BOUCHER: Once again, those discussions are still underway.
Q Richard, you've got the Foreign Ministers of a third of
the Security Council agreeing on something. Presumably, those
discussions are not going very deeply into changes in their agreement,
are they?
MR. BOUCHER: No, and I said I believe that the statement that
we issued on Saturday is, indeed, quite clear. But as far as going
further into different scenarios, it's not something I can do for you at
this moment.
Q Richard, can I ask -- back on the borders -- these other
ways that the world community has of monitoring the borders, are you
saying that those are as good or better than putting monitors on the
border crossings?
MR. BOUCHER: No, I'm not. I think the preferred course is the
one that we've supported, and that's to put monitors on the border with
the ability to be effective in monitoring what is crossing and,
hopefully, what is not crossing the border.
Q Can we ask about something else?
Q On an issue that hasn't been visited in some time, can you
tell us the latest on whether concentration camps still exist in Bosnia
-- Serbian concentration camps still exist? How many people are in
them, and whether they've opened them up as they were directed to by
U.N. resolutions?
MR. BOUCHER: I don't have new numbers. There was a release
about two weeks ago, I think, after some people were detained in the
fighting around Mostar. There was a release of some thousand people
that had been detained in that fighting.
The International Red Cross, I think, has continued to try to
visit various camps around Bosnia. I'm not aware that they've succeeded
in any wholesale releases, but they've continued to do that work. I
just don't have an update for you.
I'll see if we have anything new, Carol.
Q Over the weekend, the Russia and the Cuban governments
signed a new trade agreement in Havana, and even some of the Russian
officers hinted to the possibility of making special help plan for Cuba.
Have you anything on this?
MR. BOUCHER: I wasn't aware of that. I'll have to check for
you.
Q What do you know about the protest in Lhasa and the
crackdown by Chinese authorities in Tibet?
MR. BOUCHER: I hadn't seen anything new on that, Carol. I'm
afraid that's something I'll have to check on as well.
Q What about an announcement -- are you going to announce
two Middle East types going to the Middle East to work on that
Palestinian-Israeli statement?
MR. BOUCHER: I don't have anything at this point on travel.
Q Mr. Kurtzer and Mr. Miller are not being detailed there?
MR. BOUCHER: I'll have to check on that.
Q Please? Thanks.
Q Richard, what is the reading that you get from the
Cambodian voting? Anything?
MR. BOUCHER: Yes. Over 40 percent of the eligible voters in
Cambodia cast their votes on May 23, the first day of the election. The
turnout on the second day, May 24, was also reported to be heavy. The
voting continues through May 28.
According to our reports from Cambodia, the mood of the people
was enthusiastic and purposeful. Many had walked for miles and lined up
for hours to cast their ballots in Cambodia's first democratic election
in decades. In Phnom Pehn and other populous areas, the turnout was
around 50 percent or greater.
The only major security incident was the detention of two U.N.
Transitional Authority in Cambodia military personnel by the Khmer Rouge
in one district in Kampot Province. The staffers were then later
released unharmed.
The U.N. Transition Authority reports that there are between
1,400 and 1,500 polling stations. We applaud the hard work of the U.N.
personnel in making this election possible despite great difficulties,
and we also want to express our admiration for the courage and
determination of the Cambodian people to decide their own political
future.
Q Besides the detention of the two U.N. people, there have
been no concerted attempts by the Khmer Rouge or anybody to disrupt the
process?
MR. BOUCHER: That's the only significant security incident
that we've heard of.
Q It may be too early to tell, Richard, but so far are we
satisfied with the conduct of this election?
MR. BOUCHER: I would stick with the readout that I gave you.
Certainly, any incidents involving the U.N. personnel are of concern to
us, but I think we're very encouraged by the turnout, by the enthusiasm
with which the voting is being conducted, and we're very appreciative of
the U.N. for having made it possible under very difficult circumstances.
Q Are you considering any foreign aid program to Cambodia in
the process to democratization after the vote, after the general vote?
MR. BOUCHER: After the vote?
Q Or do you have any foreign aid program --
MR. BOUCHER: We've had humanitarian assistance programs there
already. I'm not sure -- there must be more in the Paris Accords, etc.,
about further assistance. I'm not sure of any specific plans. I don't
know about any further details at this point.
Q And one more, please, on North Korea. You had a second
preparatory talk with North Korea last Friday. What are you going to
solve in the preparatory talk? In the past, you said that the working-
level talk in Peking was enough to communicate between the United States
and North Korea with general matters?
MR. BOUCHER: I don't think I have indeed said that much about
our discussions in Beijing because we've not said very much at all about
them.
We had a second working-level preparatory meeting that took
place in New York on May 21, on Friday. Like the first meeting, it was
at the Office Director level. Preparations for a higher-level meeting
in New York are now underway but nothing has been scheduled yet.
The goal of such a meeting would be to seek the resolution of
the nuclear issue as part of the international community's efforts. I'd
point out to you that in the last higher-level meeting that we had in
January 1992, when Under Secretary Kantor met with the Secretary for
International Affairs of the Korea Worker's Party, that there were
several preparatory working-level meetings also held for that.
Q So how soon do you expect to have the high level talks?
MR. BOUCHER: At this point, I don't have anything for you on
arrangements.
Q Richard, some time ago an American citizen, who is, I
gather, a retired military officer, stated his intention to go to
Estonia and take up head of the Estonian armed forces. The State
Department at that point said, if you do that, we will revoke your
citizenship. His name is Colonel Einseln. He has gone ahead and taken
up the head of the Estonian armed forces despite the best efforts of the
State Department, and I'm curious of what is your intention with regard
to his citizenship to the United States?
MR. BOUCHER: Everything you say is true except for the quote
of what you say we said at the time. I think you'd have to look back at
the record. It was while we were in Europe, and Mr. Snyder ably
discussed the issue back here. So I'd invite you to look at that
record.
Q So there is no action intended against this American
citizen because he is --
MR. BOUCHER: I'll check and see if there has been any further
determinations on that score, but not that I'm aware of.
Q Thank you.
(Press briefing concluded at 1:35 p.m.)
(###)