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

Note: This Electronic Research Collection (ERC) is an archive site. For the most current information, please visit the US State Department homepage.
Wednesday, September 22, 1993

                                   BRIEFER:  Michael McCurry

Subject                                     Page

Secretary To Testify before Senate Judiciary 
  Committee's Subcommittee on Immigration and
  Refugee Affairs September 23 .................1
--  No Daily Press Briefing September 23 .......1

US To Host Donors Conference on October 1 ......1-9,16
--  Invitation List ............................1-3,6-9
--  Pledge by US/Others/Source of Funds ........3,5-8,16
Secretary's Meetings with Counterparts .........2,5

Secretary's Meetings at General Assembly .......2,5
US Review of Role in Int'l Peacekeeping ........15

Yeltsin Dissolves Parliament/Calls Elections ...9-13,16-17
--  Secretary's Activities/Contacts/Other
      Official Contacts ........................9-10,16-17
--  Support by US/Other Countries ..............9-10
US Aid .........................................11-13

Arrest of Aideed Aide/Disposition of Case ......14-15
Departure of UNOSOM/US Forces ..................15

Status of Sanctions ............................16


                           DEPARTMENT OF STATE
                           DAILY PRESS BRIEFING

                                                      DPC #132

                 WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 22, 1993, 1:08 P.M.

          MR. McCURRY:  Good afternoon everybody.  I have one very short 
announcement.  This is a reminder that Secretary Christopher will be 
testifying before the Subcommittee on Immigration and Refugee Affairs of 
the Senate Judiciary Committee tomorrow afternoon.  That will be at 2:30 
in Room 226 of the Dirksen Senate Office Building.  The subject will be 
the FY-1994 Refugee Assistance Programs and Admissions Programs.  
Because of that appearance, we will not be having a regular briefing 
here tomorrow.  With that announcement, I'll take any questions that you 
might have.

          Q    How is planning going for the Donor's Conference?

          MR. McCURRY:  There's a significant amount of planning 
underway.  Why don't I tell you a little bit about where we are?  Some 
of you may have heard Assistant Secretary Djerejian speaking at noon 
today; but I believe that he intended to announce that we have sent 
invitations from Secretary Christopher and from Secretary Bentsen to a 
variety of countries that we've asked to participate in the Conference 
to Support Middle East Peace.

          The conference will take place here at the Department on 
October 1, next Friday.  The conference will be held under the aegis of 
the Steering Group for the multilateral peace negotiations.  Members of 
the Steering Group for the multilaterals, I think as many of you know, 
are the United States and Russia, who will serve as co-sponsors; the 
European Community; Japan; Canada; Israel; the Palestinians; Jordan; 
Egypt; Saudi Arabia, which I believe represents the GCC states; and 
Tunisia, which represents the Maghreb states.

          The World Bank will also be participating in the conference.  
The United Nations and Norway have also been invited to send 
representatives.  Other countries have also been invited on the basis 
that they'll be willing and able to make a substantial material 
contribution beyond current programs that they now fund in the region.

          We are just in the process of delivering those invitations 
today, so I don't have any information yet on acceptances, but we will 
give that to you as we learn more. There will be a preparatory meeting 
of senior advisors from the principal contributing countries here on 
Monday.  I think a lot of the details of the conference itself will 
begin to come together next week while we're up in New York.

          It will obviously be the Secretary's intent to return from New 
York, where he'll be attending the U.N. General Assembly Meetings, 
probably Thursday evening so he can participate in the sessions here on 
Friday.  So I would describe the planning underway for this session as 
being quite extensive, involving clearly our partners over at the 
Treasury Department who are playing a very key role in fashioning the 
agenda and some of the various aspects of the discussions that will 
occur.  We look forward to what we hope will be a productive and 
successful meeting.

          Q    How many invitations have gone out?

          MR. McCURRY:  I don't have a total count.  As I say, we are 
being somewhat flexible.  Our desire here is to be inclusive and bring 
people together who have an interest in participating who can make a 
genuine contribution to the proceedings itself.  And, again, that will 
be evaluated as we continue to spread word of the conference itself to 
others in the world community.

          Q    Are you trying to get Syria and Lebanon to change their 
mind about participating to that group?

          MR. McCURRY:  The Secretary will be stressing the importance 
of this conference and the follow-up work that's being done on the 
Declaration of Principles when he meets with his counterpart Foreign 
Ministers next week and I believe early the following week.  I know he 
plans to have some contact with Foreign Minister Shara; I believe if not 
next week during the U.N. sessions perhaps early next week.  In working 
out the details of that meeting, there may be an opportunity to discuss 
the importance of the conference itself.

          Q    When you say early next week, does the Secretary now have 
plans to go back up to New York after this?

          MR. McCURRY:  No. I think Foreign Minister Shara -- my 
understanding is if we meet with him the following week, that would be 
here in Washington, probably early in the week.  I think the most likely 
date is Tuesday, I believe.

          Q    Will this meeting on the first be the actual pledging 
session, or will people just get a general idea of the dimension of the 

          MR. McCURRY:  I think it will be a combination of both.  
Obviously, there will be assessments of the overall need.  Many of the 
countries, who will be participating, we  hope, who will send 
representatives, have already indicated their willingness to render 
material assistance as has the United States.  So I suspect there will 
be a combination of both pledges from countries that are participating 
and then also a thorough assessment of what the likely needs are as you 
look ahead five and ten years.

          Q    Does the Secretary have any cumulative total in mind for 
what he would like to see?

          MR. McCURRY:  On Monday last, he referred, in his speech, to 
the World Bank's assessment that a $3 billion need over ten years has 
been assessed.  I think one thing that will be discussed during the 
course of this conference is other estimates that have been made.  I 
think that's the one that is the best estimate we have at this point and 
it's one that points to a need that needs to be addressed over a 10-year 


          Q    Mike, do you anticipate that there will be any 
discussions at this conference about oversight over all these funds that 
are suddenly going to go pouring into the territories?

          MR. McCURRY:  I think that will not only be a significant part 
of this discussion, but has been a very significant part of the 
discussions leading up to this conference because we are talking about a 
substantial sum of money one way or another; and making sure that the 
institutions and the structures are available to spend this money 
effectively so that the money is well invested is a keen concern of the 
United States and certainly of others in the world community who will 
likely participate in this conference.  That's something that we have, 
as you know, stressed to the parties themselves; that the importance of 
establishing those institutions, doing the work required in the 
Declaration, is fundamentally important to seeing that the resources 
available can be effective in delivering immediate changes on the ground 
in the region.

          Q    Will the U.S. be seeking a pledge from Israel?

          MR. McCURRY:  We have had discussions with them.  I don't know 
the answer to whether or not we will seek a pledge from them.  They 
certainly have made clear to us that they are more than interested in 
working in partnership, as required in the Declaration, to see to it 
that the transformation called for in the Declaration is a successful 


          Q    At what level will this conference be held?  And is it a 
one-day affair or a one-morning affair or an afternoon affair?  Do you 
expect it to go on over the weekend?

          MR. McCURRY:  I believe it will be a one-day affair.  I think 
it will probably conclude by mid-afternoon on that Friday.  We will hear 
more from the countries who have been invited on the level of their 
representation.  Certainly, Secretary Christopher will be participating 
in at least part of the sessions as they're held here.

          Q    Traditionally, there was never any meeting on a Friday 
either during the bilateral or multilateral conference in the peace 
process.  Are you sure that the Muslim countries can participate to such 
a conference on a Friday?

          MR. McCURRY:  I believe that there had been some discussions 
about that prior to the invitations being sent and October 1 being set 
as the date.  Part of the concern here is that everyone is under a very 
rigorous scheduling during that week because of the meetings that are 
being held in New York.  This did seem to be a date that would meet the 
need to move quickly to establish the importance of this work.

          Q    Mike, as a way to build on the momentum you expect to 
generate out of this conference, would you expect the Secretary to go to 
the region afterwards?

          MR. McCURRY:  I don't have anything new on any plans.  We 
don't have anything firm on any travel plans by the Secretary.  The 
importance of these meetings, the follow-up bilateral meetings with the 
Foreign Ministers, that's where we're concentrating our attention right 
now.  If we have any information on travel, we'll make that available at 
a later date.

          Q    Mike, at the conference -- the donor conference -- is it 
your anticipation that other issues will be discussed?  Is this going to 
be another multilateral session which includes a pledging conference, or 
is this essentially limited to this one issue?

          MR. McCURRY:  The agenda itself will very much concentrate on 
the issues related to providing the economic resources to empower this 
agreement to see that it goes forward successfully.

          Now, with that many people present, the likelihood that they 
will touch on other issues related to the peace process and, given that 
this is being held under the aegis of the multilateral Steering Group, 
the opportunity for some side discussions of other multilateral issues 
is something I would not rule out.  But the principal work of this 
conference is aimed very much at the issue of economic empowerment.

          Q    You said that the Secretary is planning to meet with 
Foreign Minister Shara of Syria.  Is there any plan to meet with Faris 
Buwayz from Lebanon?

          MR. McCURRY:  Yes.  He also has plans -- sometime within the 
context, either during or just after the U.N. session -- to meet with 
Foreign Minister Buwayz.  He will also obviously be meeting with Foreign 
Minister Peres and I expect with Foreign Minister Majali of Jordan, too.

          Q    On a somewhat slightly related logistical thing -- in 
light of the change in the Secretary's plans for dealing with the U.N., 
will he go any earlier on Sunday?  Will there be any substantive 
activities on Sunday?

          MR. McCURRY:  Ralph, I'm not aware of any other plans 
involving going up early.  There are some things under consideration for 
Sunday that might affect the time that the Secretary would go up to New 
York on Sunday.  We're obviously having to do some changing in the 
schedule and moving things around.  We're going to try to get some folks 
who will come down and give you a good briefing on where we are at the 
moment on our planning for the schedule next week so you can begin 
making your plans accordingly.  If we can get that done today, we will 
get it done today.  But, certainly, by tomorrow we'll at least give you 
a sketch of what we think is developing as the schedule for the week so 
you'll have a better opportunity to plan.

          Q    Just to follow that and perhaps shift the subject a 
little bit -- is the message that the President is going to deliver 
Monday at the U.N. being changed in any way as a result of what happened 
yesterday in Moscow?

          MR. McCURRY:  I don't know.  I haven't seen the latest or 
current draft.  I don't know what the thinking on the speech is.  I 
think there are certainly a number of events going on in the world that 
the President might likely account for in the speech, but I'd really 
leave it up to the White House to tell you more about how their planning 
is coming together for his speech Monday.

          Q    Mike, you mentioned the World Bank figure is $3 billion 
over ten years.  How much is the United States shooting for for the 
first year?

          MR. McCURRY:  What we have said already is the commitment the 
Secretary indicated the other day -- the $250 million two-year package 
that he announced on Monday.

          Q    That's the American contribution -- but the overall 
figure for the first year?

          MR. McCURRY:  Of how we assess the need?  I've seen it 
referred to in various ways.  One document has described it at  roughly 
$300 million a year, but I think that's just dividing the overall 

          There was an earlier World Bank assessment, or a World Bank 
paper that indicated, I believe, that the need over a 5-year period was 
somewhere in the neighborhood of $1.8 billion, which broke down, I 
believe,  to $300 million in operating costs -- which I would see as 
perhaps the start-up costs to put in some of the institutions and 
structures they're talking about -- and then an additional $1.3 billion 
in capitalization costs that would involve infrastructure improvements, 
facilities, and things that would presumably need to be constructed.  
But, I think, they're probably in the best position to give you a 
breakdown on their assessment.  That's the way I recall the figures.

          Q    Mike, the Administration has said that it would like to 
get the $250 million over two years by reprogramming money in the 
foreign aid budgets.  Have you decided where you're going to reprogram 
money from, or is that all under review right now?

          MR. McCURRY:  No.  They, clearly, did some very fast work to 
put together the package that the Secretary was in a position to 
announce on Monday.  They did have to think about that question, but I 
don't have a detail on how they put together all of the elements of the 
package itself.  It was done consistent with some of our conversations 
already with members of Congress about the FY-93 and FY-94 budget 

          Q    Mike, coming back to an earlier question, you were asked 
about meetings with Shara and with Lebanon.  Did the U.S. send 
invitations to Syria and Lebanon to attend the donor conference?

          MR. McCURRY:  Not that I'm aware of.**

** Note:  Later corrected to indicate Syria and Lebanon were invited to 
the conference.

          Q    Why not?  You don't want them to come?

          MR. McCURRY:  No.  As I say, we did it in the context of the 
multilateral groups working on the Palestinian issue directly.  Again, 
our desire is not to exclude anyone.  But I think our criteria is aimed 
at who is in the best position to provide significant financial 
resources that can help move the work of the conference forward.

          Q    But the U.S. has always -- or at least up until now 
anyway -- has consistently encouraged Syria and others who are not 
participating in those multilateral sessions to do so.  This, it seems 
to me, would have been a perfect opportunity to offer another 
opportunity for the Syrians to come in.  Even if they can't make a 
financial contribution, wouldn't you welcome their political support?

          MR. McCURRY:  I'm not aware of any impediment that we would 
place in the way of participation by those countries if they were 

          Q    Mike, going back to my colleague's question here about 
where the money is coming here, could you take it and find out so that 
we actually have a breakdown and we can look at the figures that were 
already presented to Congress and see where the money is coming from?

          MR. McCURRY:  I'll take it.  The likelihood that anyone wants 
to be real forthcoming in telling how they mash together budget figures 
is a fairly dubious proposition.

          Q    Sorry, it's a legit question.  If some country is not now 
going to get a certain amount of money that it was going to get because 
of this, it's up to us to find out and for them to know.

          Q    That's right.  It's a legitimate question, and we will 
legitimately pursue an answer.

          Q    Is it true to say that the decision is not to go for a 
supplemental come early next year, rather to reprogram?  They don't want 
to add to the budget, they just want to ...

          MR. McCURRY:  I think it's pretty clear that the desire is to 
do that within the existing constraints of the budget process.  This is 
not a time in which it's easy to ask Congress to consider additional 
budgetary appropriations, and it's something that we feel in this case 
we can get the money we need over this two-year period from the 
resources that we've got available.  That's something that we've been in 
close consultation with Congress on.

          Q    Michael, we have heard pledges from Japan, from the U.S., 
from the EC. We've not heard pledges from the Arab countries yet.  Are 
you trying to get some specific figures -- pledges -- from those 
countries before the donor conference?

          MR. McCURRY:  We've certainly been in contact with those 
governments about the importance of being supportive of this conference 
and of the effort to raise resources, yes.  I don't want to comment on 
any assistance that might be rendered by any state.  I think it's really 
up to them to make that type of announcement or to indicate at the time 
of the conference that they intend to participate.

          Q    Can you characterize their general response in doing 

          MR. McCURRY:  In general, there has been a great deal of 
enthusiasm in the region and amongst those that we've invited for the 
idea of the conference.  I think people recognize there's a great deal 
of work that needs to be done.

          Q    But aren't you kind of worried, or at least concerned, 
that the Saudis or the Kuwaitis are not willing to help their 
Palestinian brothers?

          MR. McCURRY:  That hasn't been ruled out.  Of course, they'll 
come to the conference.  We'll see.

          Q    Did you say whether Jordan was coming?

          MR. McCURRY:  No, I did not.  They were not in -- I'm sorry, 
they were because under the multilaterals, their participation with the 
Palestinians in that process.  They are on the Steering Group, so they 
are included under the auspices of the Steering Group that's putting 
together the conference.

          Q    Would you expect Chairman Arafat to come to this 

          MR. McCURRY:  I'm not expecting him.  I'm not aware of any 
plans for him to attend.

          Q    You said the Palestinians.  Has the nature of the 
Palestinian delegation to which the invitations were issued changed?  Or 
will the same rules apply as have been applied to the multilaterals 
until now?

          MR. McCURRY:  Again, it will be up to the parties to determine 
the composition of their delegations attending the conference itself.

          Q    What address did you send the invitation to?

          MR. McCURRY:  That's a good question.  I don't know how they 
extended the invitation or from whence it went and to whom it was 

          Q    Would you find out?

          MR. McCURRY:  I will find that out.

          Q    Would he be welcome if he chose to come?

          MR. McCURRY:  I think that anyone who wants to contribute to 
the success of the conference, subject to the work outlined by the 
multilateral Steering Group, would certainly be welcome.

          Q    I have two questions.  One, is Abdel Alla on the list of 
people to come since he was the key man on the Oslo negotiations and 
he's the observer to the multilaterals?

          MR. McCURRY:  As I say, we have not had responses to the 
invitations so I can't tell you anything about the composition of 
individual delegations.

          Q    A follow-up to that.  As to the observers that we've seen 
on all these delegations -- Palestinian observers like Nabil Shaath and 
Abu Allah and others -- is their status going to change now?

          MR. McCURRY:  That really will be something that the 
delegations themselves will have to address.  In a variety of ways, as 
the dialogue has continued between the United States and the PLO, you've 
seen some indications that there might be changes; but really, again, 
that's up to them to address because they have to tell you more about 
the composition of their delegations, the roles that individuals play.

          Q    New subject?

          MR. McCURRY:  New subject.

          Q    Can you give us sort of an update on what Christopher has 
done today with regard to the situation in Russia?  Has there been any 
contact with Minister Kozyrev today or others in Russia perhaps?

          MR. McCURRY:  He is, of course, as are many in the United 
States Government, following the developments there intensely.  He 
received his customary briefing on the situation this morning.  He held 
a meeting, a gathering, the weekly meeting of the Assistant Secretaries 
this morning and asked Ambassador Strobe Talbott to provide a fairly 
detailed and comprehensive situation report which provided our most up-
to-date information to the Assistant Secretary group.

          He has had a conversation about the events in Russia this 
morning with Foreign Minister Kinkel of Germany, and he may have by now 
been in contact with Foreign Minister Kozyrev.  His intent was to have a 
call at some point this afternoon, interrupting the proceedings going on 
at Dumbarton House where the Secretary is, of course, meeting with 
Foreign Minister Hurd, and there was a very obvious likelihood that they 
would be discussing the events in Russia at that session as well.

          Q    Is there an effort, either through the State Department 
or the White House, to bring some other allies on board with public 
support for what's happened?

          MR. McCURRY:  Yes.  I'm sorry, say the question again.

          Q    Is there an effort --

          MR. McCURRY:  I'll have to go back and eat my words in a 
minute here.

          Q    Is there an effort underway either through Secretary 
Christopher or through the White House to bring on board some of the 
other allies with public support for Yeltsin?

          MR. McCURRY:  I think there has been an effort to be in 
contact with other governments to assess how they're responding.  I'd 
say, as the Secretary said earlier this afternoon, that we have been 
gratified with the response that has come from our allies and friends in 
Europe and elsewhere.  Many of them are responding in a way very 
consistent with the United States response yesterday; and I feel that 
certainly, as the Secretary said, that's been one indication of the 
level of support for the process of reform in Russia:  the fact that 
within the world community there has been a largely positive response to 
these developments.

          I want to go back and correct...  I'm handed a note that the 
NEA bureau has provided that Syria and Lebanon have been invited to the 
conference.  They were not indicated on the list that I had, but they 
have been invited.  Someone listens.  It's very good.

          Q    That's right.  They're up there listening.

          MR. McCURRY:  Yes.

          Q    At the risk of asking you a question that somebody may 
have asked you yesterday, and forgive me if I am:  Does the Secretary 
have a sense that his senior aides are somehow letting him down -- that 
Dennis Ross let him get blindsided by the PLO-Israel secret dialogue, 
and that Strobe Talbott let him get blindsided by the constitutional 
coup in Russia?  And that somehow these people who are supposed to be 
such experts are not keeping him properly informed and are not giving 
him a heads-up on these rather earth-shaking events that change the 
entire political map seemingly every week?

          MR. McCURRY:  No.  (Laughter)  Next question.

          Q    Was that question asked yesterday?  Michael, do you want 
to elaborate?

          MR. McCURRY:  Do I want to elaborate that?  No.  That's just a 
wildly speculative theory.  I mean, I'm not aware of anyone who 
predicted either the events yesterday in Russia, except to say that it's 
obviously a situation that we have monitored carefully.  Strobe was in 
Moscow just a short while ago.  I think the urgency of the political 
situation there is something readily apparent to them, to our Embassy 
there which has been reporting regularly on it; and I think that we feel 
like we had a pretty good assessment and as it turned out a fairly 
accurate assessment of the political situation in Russia.

          As to the other issue and the detail on the conversations that 
have occurred, we've, as the Secretary has told you, had very good 
information and readouts on things going on in the Oslo track from the 
Israelis, from the Norwegians and others.  I think the premise and the 
overall direction of the question is just badly flawed.

          Q    Mike, just to follow.  There were news reports last week, 
though, that Russia -- that Yeltsin might dissolve the parliament.  Did 
Strobe Talbott have any information, any inkling that was going to 

          MR. McCURRY:  I think, as I say, we had a good, accurate 
assessment of what the political situation was.  I don't think we knew 
that Boris Yeltsin was going to go on television at a time certain 
yesterday and make the announcements that he made.

          Q    But did he raise the possibility?  Did he tell anybody 
that --

          MR. McCURRY:  I think the contest of political forces within 
Russia, the actions of the key players in that drama, is something that 
we have been assessing and monitoring for some time; and it was the 
basis upon which we had a fairly accurate read on the political 
situation in the country.

          Q    Is it clear that Yeltsin has the support of the military 
and the security forces?

          MR. McCURRY:  Their own statements on that issue have been 
fairly clear, and that's obviously a situation that we continue to watch 

          Q    Do you --

          MR. McCURRY:  We have no reason to dispute the public 
statements that have been made by Minister Grachev and other officials 
within the government, no.

          Q    Mike, is there anything that we can do in the interim 
period before elections?  I mean, what are the practical implications 
for American foreign policy?  Are we in a kind of a holding pattern now, 
and just waiting to see what happens?

          MR. McCURRY:  No, I don't think we're -- we're not at all in a 
holding pattern.  I think ironically in some sense the question of our 
own material support for the transformation of Russia's political 
economy was very much before the United States Congress as these events 
did unfold and as they continue to unfold; and, as the Secretary 
indicated yesterday, completing Congressional action on that package 
now, giving support to reform and democracy in Russia, can make a very 
powerful and important statement at exactly this moment.  That's 
something that we certainly hope the Congress will continue to consider 
and act accordingly on the request that has been submitted.

          Q    Mike, wouldn't the Administration be at all concerned 
about giving that much money to a government that might not be in power 
in a few months?

          MR. McCURRY:  I don't know whether Ambassador Talbott has 
addressed this publicly or whether any of the people doing the 
backgrounding for you have addressed this, but it's a very important 
point to make that we are in support of the process  of reform in 
Russia.  We are in support of the reformers; and you see across the 
country numerous places where reform is taking root, market economies 
are emerging, and efforts are being made to transform Russian society 

          Now, that's where we can be of assistance.  Much of the 
package of assistance that the United States is considering now and 
attempting to put forward is aimed at that process of reform at the 
grass roots.  The fact is you've heard us talk about that package often.  
One of its key features is that it does not necessarily have to go 
through Moscow to get to the places at the grass roots where it can make 
a difference.  I think that's one of the reasons, among many, why we 
continue to press the need to provide the type of aid that can make a 
difference in the lives of the Russian people.

          Q    So as far as the Administration is concerned, the Russian 
aid package is not married to the political future of Boris Yeltsin?

          MR. McCURRY:  No.  The package is married to the proposition 
of reform and the need to give it assistance urgently.  


          Q    In any of the conversations officials have had with 
Russian counterparts, has it been made clear that between now and the 
elections that President Yeltsin will implement monetary and fiscal 
reforms as called for by the IMF for the next round of aid that is due 

          MR. McCURRY:  The best information we have of that is from the 
President, who discussed these matters with President Yeltsin yesterday; 
but in addition to extending support to President Yeltsin, as you know, 
President Clinton also asked for certain assurances that certain things 
would happen, that reform would continue to be on track in Russia.

          I doubt very much they discussed things at the level of detail 
that your question implies, but I think the thrust of the assurances 
sought by the President were that the reform process itself and the move 
toward market economies and to economic liberalization would continue on 
course in Russia.

          Q    Strobe Talbott and Larry Summers have been in Moscow in 
recent weeks.  Is it their understanding that reforms are going to go 
underway now, or is the Administration willing to tolerate laxity until 
after the elections on the grounds that sharp, shock treatment-type 
reforms might undermine Yeltsin's support in the coming elections?

          MR. McCURRY:  I think that their assessment is the one that 
they provided:  that these events relate in part to the need that 
Yeltsin feels to gain a greater hold on the reform process itself so 
they can move forward.  Frankly, as you know, some of the reforms, some 
of the liberalization required in the  economic reforms advanced by the 
Yeltsin Government had been stymied in effect, and I think the 
assessment is that they were taking steps to try to move those reforms 

          As to how fast they can push for certain things, what they can 
ask of the Russian people as this transformation occurs, that's not 
something we can dictate at this point.  That's something that surely 
will enter into the picture as an election campaign unfolds in Russia, 
and I can't comment for you at this time on how that will be addressed.

          As far as the United States, given our concerns, we have 
placed a very high premium on their ability to make the kind of 
transformations necessary for both international lending through 
international financial institutions and then to demonstrate progress 
towards reform that would then warrant the types of assistance levels 
that we are currently pressing Congress to consider.

          Q    Mike, but we have influence in the IMF.  If Yeltsin does 
seize control of the central bank or make some adjustments to monetary 
policy, will we in the IMF take the position that the next $1.5 billion 
should go, even though for all intents and purposes there will be two 
people claiming to be the President of Russia until after the election 
or --

          MR. McCURRY:  That is a real speculative point.  I don't want 
to get into what position we're going to take at IMF lending conferences 
in advance of addressing those issues.

          Q    But, Mike, part of that question is not speculative, and 
that is regardless of what the U.S. public position is, the fact is that 
there are -- it is not clear who the President of Russia is right now.  
There certainly are at least two people who claim to be President, and 
is there anything in the aid package --

          MR. McCURRY:  I doubt that even an international financial 
institute would doubt which of the two make a stronger case.

          Q    But that's not the issue.  The issue is the American 
people are being asked and many other people around the world are being 
asked to give their stamp of approval to many billions of dollars of 
assistance to go to a country in whom right now there are at least two 
people claiming to be President.

          Is there any provision in the assistance package or in the 
Administration's view should there be some way of making sure that none 
of the money goes until it's clear who's running Russia?

          MR. McCURRY:  First, it's clear who's running Russia.  Boris 
Yeltsin is the democratically elected President, and he is clearly the 
President of Russia.  Second, in answer to the earlier question, I would 
restate, so much of this assistance  package is directed at the process 
of reform at the grass roots for exactly the reason that it then, you 
know, in a sense doesn't get tied up in Moscow politics as it gets to 
the countryside to make a difference.

          We are empowering the process of political and economic reform 
in Russia, not individual people who are members of a government.  We 
are assisting the Russian people make this transformation happen, and 
that's the important thing to remember, I think.

          Q    Michael, does the Embassy in Moscow have any contact with 
General Rutskoi?

          MR. McCURRY:  They have not had contact with him in the last 
24 hours I am told.

          Q    Mike, do you know when and how the text of Ambassador 
Albright's speech would be available tomorrow?

          MR. McCURRY:  I don't.  I will try to find out from Mr. Rubin 
up in New York how they make that available.  I know they were making 
changes in the draft, but it will be available in advance, I am told.

          Q    Can you give us some sort of guidance on what the U.S. 
feels in the Somalia case?  The U.N. has now arrested one of the aides 
to Aideed.  What is the U.S. recommendation for what ought to happen to 
that man?  Should he be on trial?  Should he be held indefinitely?  
Should he --

          MR. McCURRY:  I don't know whether we have made any 
recommendations to the United Nations authorities in Mogadishu about 
processing.  I have to step back from that question.  There's a larger 
question there about judicial and penal institutions within Somalia.  
That's something that I think is going to be addressed in short order by 
the U.N. Security Council, which is preparing a resolution on that 
subject that should be acted upon within the next several days; but the 
importance of establishing procedures to bring individuals to trial so 
they can be punished for crimes and held accountable for the misery that 
they've inflicted on the Somali people is something that is a very 
direct concern of the United Nations itself.

          Q    Is he still in the custody of the Rangers?  I mean, the 
U.S. Army?

          MR. McCURRY:  I am not aware of the current arrangements for 
his incarceration.

          Q    And under what law is he being held?  Whose law?

          MR. McCURRY:  I don't know the answer to that.  I can find 
out.  I'll try to find out.  He was being pursued -- the pursuit and 
apprehension of him was clearly at the direction of  the United Nations, 
as reflected in the relevant U.N. Security Council resolutions, so it's 
a matter of international law in one respect.  How he is currently being 
detained and incarcerated is something I'll try to find out more about.

          Q    Can you take the question of what the U.S. is likely to 
recommend in terms of this man's judicial future?  What venue he will be 
tossed into or what jail he is being held in and what is likely to 
happen to him?

          MR. McCURRY:  I'll find out what I can about how legal 
proceedings will proceed in his case.

          Q    Related to that, National Security Adviser Lake yesterday 
indicated or implied that U.S. troops might not be there that much 
longer.  What sort of time frame is he thinking about or the 
Administration thinking about?  There have been a lot of references to 
when U.S. troops might or might not be pulled out but never any sort of 
time frame.

          MR. McCURRY:  I direct you first to the resolution I just 
mentioned as being currently circulating at the United Nations and what 
it might say about the duration of the UNOSOM mission.  I think that 
they are pointing ahead towards a date, I believe, in the spring of 

          We have indicated that in the case of the Quick Reaction 
Forces, our desire is to return them to the United States as soon as 
possible; and then the remainder of the U.S. contingent still present, I 
think you've heard others in the Department talk about our drawdown 
timetable which would proceed over the course of the coming year.

          Q    Michael, do you have any remark on a report put together 
by a Professor at American University of the request of Admiral Howe on 
the way things were conducted in Somalia and being very critical of 
Glaspie -- Ambassador Glaspie.  Are you aware of that report?

          MR. McCURRY:  I'm not aware of that report, no.  I'll try to 
find out more about it.

          Q    Mike, on Somalia.  What's the current status of the 
discussion or the debate over PRD-13?

          MR. McCURRY:  I don't know that -- why is that related to 

          Q    If you don't want to relate it to Somalia, don't.  What 
is the current status of the debate over PRD-13?

          MR. McCURRY:  I think there's, in my understanding, a 
Presidential review on the subject generally of peacekeeping that is 
under consideration, as it has been for some time, and to my knowledge 
has not been forwarded to the President.

          Q    Mike, do you have anything today, any details on what's 
going to happen with Mandela?  If he on Tuesday gives the go-ahead to 
lift sanctions, then what will the U.S. do?

          MR. McCURRY:  There are certain things that are expected to 
happen and certain responses that may then occur.  I kind of prefer to 
leave it to see if things happen as they are scheduled to happen.  We 
have said in the past, of course, that should there be a call by Mr. 
Mandela for a lifting of sanctions, we then are in a position to proceed 
to do certain things; and we'll see if that occurs, but that certainly 
would be the expectation.

          Q    Now, doesn't he have an award here on Friday or a major 
speech -- the same time as the Middle East thing, on October 1?

          MR. McCURRY:  I'm sorry.

          Q    Isn't he due to have something here at the State 
Department October 1?

          MR. McCURRY:  I don't have firm information about his travel 

          Q    It's going to be a fun day.

          Q    I have two quick questions which you'd have to take on 
the donors conference.  The Palestinians are saying that the amount the 
United States has dedicated to this -- about $75 million a year in 
actual cash -- happens to match the exact amount the U.S. Government 
pays out to Israel for the deposit situation on Israeli aid.  Israeli 
aid is deposited at the beginning of the year, and she earns interest on 

          That is unique, and the Palestinians are saying maybe the 
United States is simply going to stop giving Israel her aid ahead of 
time.  Would you take the question on that, and is that where you're 
getting the money for the aid to Palestine?

          MR. McCURRY:  I don't think it would be profitable to take the 
question.  I don't think we would get much of an answer on that 
question.  That's not something that's under consideration, as far as I 

          Q    A follow-up on Rutskoi:  Is there any policy reason why 
the United States would not contact him directly, given the fact that he 
claims to be President?

          MR. McCURRY:  The reason is that we made clear yesterday that 
we recognize a single individual as President and a competing claim from 
someone else is not something that we would recognize.

          Q    So you're not going to deal with him.

          MR. McCURRY:  We could not deal with him in his capacity as a 
self-proclaimed President, because we acknowledge that someone else is 

           Q    Well, couldn't you be dealing with other people?  
There's a precedent, of course.  There's a large precedent for keeping 
your ears and eyes open to things going on in other countries; and in 
fact the Administration was criticized, the previous one, for not paying 
enough attention to Yeltsin and his people while they pinned their hopes 
to Gorbachev.  You may have the wrong horse here, no?

          MR. McCURRY:  I think through our Embassy in Moscow we have a 
variety of good and strong contacts with a range of people within 
Russian society, Russian political culture; but this is a specific 
question about diplomatic contact with an individual at this time who 
indicates that he is the President, and we say he is not and so that 
wouldn't be a profitable point of contact.

          Q    You do stay in contact with opposition leaders all around 
the world --

          MR. McCURRY:  Of course,

          Q    -- including people --

          MR. McCURRY:  Including in Russia.

          Q    -- including Russia and including people outside 
countries who claim various sorts of rights as -- leadership rights and 
things like that.  So you would continue to remain in contact with 
Rutskoi from the point of view of maintaining your contacts with 
Yeltsin's opposition, wouldn't you?

          MR. McCURRY:  That's a hypothetical question that doesn't make 
a lot of sense in the context that we're in right now.  Rutskoi has made 
-- there's been a dramatic change in the status he proclaims for 
himself, and so that would change the nature of the type of contact.

          Q    So you're -- I'm sorry to pursue this, but the answer to 
Mark's question is there's a U.S. policy at the moment that says no U.S. 
diplomats will be in touch with this man who claims to be the President 
of Russia, is that correct?

          MR. McCURRY:   I don't know if there is a policy written down 
somewhere that says we've decided we will not have contact with Rutskoi, 
but as a practical effect, we have not had contact with him, and we 
don't plan contact with him.

          Q    Thank you.

          MR. McCURRY:  You're welcome.

          (The briefing concluded at 1:50 p.m.)


To the top of this page