Note: This Electronic Research Collection (ERC) is an archive site. For the most current information, please visit the
US DEPARTMENT OF STATE
DAILY PRESS BRIEFING
Friday, October 29, 1993
Subject Page
ANNOUNCEMENT
Secretary's 11/2 Address to Los Angeles World
Affairs Council and the Town Hall of California .....1
HAITI
Update on Situation in Haiti ..........................1-2
--UN Special Envoy Caputo's Assessment ................1,2
--Expected "Friends Group" Statement ..................1-2
--Governor's Island Process ...........................2-4
--Sanctions/Ship Boardings/Diversions/Cargo ...........4-5
--Dominican Republic/Sanctions Obligations ............5-6
--Effects of Sanctions ................................6
--U.S. View re: Stricter Sanctions ....................6-7,8
--Assets "Frozen" Under Sanctions .....................7-8
RUSSIA
Opposition to Stricter Sanctions Against Libya ........9
INDIA/PAKISTAN
US policy toward Kashmir ..............................9
Reported Request for Meeting by US Embassy with
Kashmiri Leader Abdul Ghani Lone ....................9-10,11
EGYPT
Attack in Hotel in Cairo/Amcits Involved ..............10
FORMER YUGOSLAVIA
Status of Diplomatic Efforts/Prospects For a
Political Settlement ................................11-12
Status of Sarajevo/Assessment of Situation ............12-13
--Flow of Humanitarian Relief to Sarajevo .............13
Travel of Counselor Wirth in the Region ...............13-14
SOMALIA
Travel by Ambassador Oakley to the Region .............14-16
NORTH KOREA
Blix Report to IAEA re: Safeguards ....................17
--UN Meetings/Representatives North Korea & US.........17-18
CHINA
DOD Assistant Secretary Freeman Travel to China ......18
MIDDLE EAST PEACE PROCESS
Prospects for Resumption of Washington Talks ..........19
Ambassador Ross Comments re Peace Process/Help
to Israel to Defray Costs ...........................19-21
EL SALVADOR
Release of Vest-Murphy Commission Report ..............21
(###)
DEPARTMENT OF STATE
DAILY PRESS BRIEFING
DPC #143
FRIDAY, OCTOBER 29, 1993, 12:51 P. M.
(ON THE RECORD UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED)
MR. McCURRY: Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen. Just one
housekeeping matter at the beginning: I'd like to let you know Secretary
of State Christopher is going to deliver a foreign policy address at the
Biltmore Hotel in Los Angeles on Tuesday, November 2. It will be at
noon Pacific Standard Time.
The event is jointly sponsored by the Los Angeles World
Affairs Council and Town Hall of California, working very closely with
the Bureau of Public Affairs Public Liaison Office. The subject of the
Secretary's remarks will be the foreign policy implications and the
importance of NAFTA, and the ratification of NAFTA.
We are going to attempt to receive the audio transmission of
that speech here at 3:00 p.m. Eastern Standard Time. And we do have
some information in the Press Office on who you can contact if you want
to direct some of your correspondents out on the West Coast to that
event.
Q Will there be a Q&A?
MR. McCURRY: I think there will be Q&A, yes, following his
remarks.
Q Could you tell us what additional measures you are
considering to pressure the Haitian leaders?
MR. McCURRY: I'll give you a little update on where we are on
Haiti, and I'll be somewhat circumspect in what I say here because of
the following: Very shortly we expect that the United Nations Special
Envoy to Haiti, Dante Caputo, will have some things to say in Port-au-
Prince. He will be providing his assessment of the situation as we look
to the timetable in the original Governors Island Accord.
Following his statement, during the day, there will be in
succession a series of supportive statements from the United States as
well as some of the other of the so-called "friends group," including
France, Canada, Venezuela and others. I do believe that later on in the
afternoon the White House will be issuing a statement, perhaps from the
President himself.
I'll just describe this to, in a sense, get you going. These
statements and the process that I think the Special Envoy will outline
will reflect the importance that the world community attaches to the
restoration of democracy in Haiti and the importance of the process that
was established by the Governors Island Accords themselves -- the steps
that would be necessary, both for the return of the duly elected
President and the steps necessary to ensure that the restoration of
democracy would be successful.
Meanwhile, as you know, the sanctions that were enacted as a
result of U.N. Security Council Resolution 873 remain in effect. They
do need some time to work; but at the same time we don't rule out the
possibility of stricter sanctions in the future. As the President said
yesterday, we're looking at what other options are, and we will be
assessing the situation as we look at the days ahead.
I do believe that one thing that the Special Envoy will say is
that it might be very important for the parties originally participating
in the Governors Island Accord to reaffirm their commitment to that
process. Obviously, that's a meeting that we would expect to be very
important to the assessment of what the current conditions in Haiti are
and what the prospects for the return of President Aristide would be.
Q You would expect some sort of follow-on meeting, now, to
Governors Island? Is that what you're --
MR. McCURRY: I think that it's our understanding that's very
likely the kind of thing that the Special Envoy would suggest, and of
course we would welcome that.
Q Outside of the country? Is that what you're saying?
MR. McCURRY: I'll leave it to him to talk about the venue. I
think he'll have some specific ideas on how that might happen.
Q Has he already invited people?
MR. McCURRY: I believe he's issuing invitations following his
remarks.
Q And the time frame?
MR. McCURRY: Within the week.
Q Oh, within a week?
MR. McCURRY: Within this coming week.
Q So after the Saturday deadline?
MR. McCURRY: Yes. But I'll leave it -- other than to alert
you to that, to let you know in advance that it's something we've been
in close discussions with the Special Envoy about -- I'll leave the rest
of the details to him and to the statement that I think you'll get from
the White House following that.
Q Is it still our position -- the Administration's position
is that the Governors Island Accord is now back open to negotiation?
MR. McCURRY: No. In fact, it will be very clear that that's
not the purpose. Our position is that the Governors Island process has
been blocked, and it needs to be unblocked. I think that we will
welcome the steps that will be announced under the auspices of the
United Nations to return to that process and, in a sense, reinvigorate
the process so that the Governors Island agreement itself can be
implemented and that national reconciliation in Haiti can be achieved.
We continue to feel that the accords themselves represent the
best guiding framework for achieving a restoration of democracy in
Haiti.
Q But all of this implies that you think that the military
rulers of Haiti actually want to do this and would be serious in sort of
continuing this process.
MR. McCURRY: They have made commitments and put their
personal honor on the line, and they know that the failure to achieve
those commitments -- those steps that were outlined in the accord itself
-- will bring significant economic pressure to bear on their own people,
and that the consequences for the failure to implement that process will
be borne directly by them.
So their attitude, as they look to the days and weeks ahead,
is something that's very important, and we would certainly hope they
would reassess any attitude that was contrary to a full implementation
of the accord.
Q But do you really think they care about honor and the
suffering of their own people?
MR. McCURRY: We are exerting pressure on them that we feel
will be influential through the regime of sanctions that have been
adopted by the United Nations, and, as they know and as we know, there
are other options that could be pursued by the United States as well.
Q Do you have any indication that Cedras is interested at
all in sitting down and resuming this process?
MR. McCURRY: There have been fairly regular conversations
between the Special Envoy -- with our participation as well through some
of our representatives -- and we do believe it would be useful for there
to be a reconvening of the participants in the original Governors Island
process.
Q How many ships you have intercepted on the Haitian coast,
and also how many ships you have already turned back for any oil or arms
reason or suspicion?
MR. McCURRY: As of this morning there have been a total of 32
ship boardings. There were two in just the last 24 hours. One of those
vessels was allowed to proceed. The second was diverted. So that
brings to ten the total number of diversions that we've had during our
time of enforcing the sanctions.
I'll tell you a little bit more about the ship that was
diverted today, because I think it's the first time we do have some
evidence of material covered by the resolution itself. But I will
suggest if you need any additional details, it would be good to go to
the Pentagon.
The diversion involved a Cypriot-flag vessel, the Condor,
which was carrying 21 military vehicles equipped with .50 caliber
machine gun mounts. The ship's captain said the vessel was making an
interim stop in Haiti enroute to Peru. The manifest listed the cargo as
humanitarian supplies and auto parts but did not list the 21 military
vehicles. We understand that after we diverted the vessel, the vessel
proceeded to Panama.
There is a Joint Task Force statement, I think, available at
the Pentagon that's got some more information on that.
Q Where did the vessel originate?
MR. McCURRY: It's a Cypriot-flag vessel.
Q It could have been anywhere then?
Q Do you know whose weapons they were?
MR. McCURRY: No. It doesn't say. The ship's manifest
indicated the vehicles were destined for Lima, Peru.
Q You said machine gun mounts, so were there machine guns
as well?
MR. McCURRY: Machine gun mounts. Twenty-one vehicles
equipped with .50 caliber machine gun mounts. I don't have any
information here that indicates the machine guns themselves were on
board.
By the way, the ship involved was the U.S. Navy guided missile
frigate, the U.S.S. Robert G. Bradley. I think the folks at the
Pentagon will have more on the incident itself.
Q There have been stories about a new highway opening up
near the Dominican Republic. How is the embargo going to stop goods
from flowing overland into Haiti?
MR. McCURRY: There are routes that could be used to
circumvent the effect of the sanctions; but it's very important to
remember the Dominican Republic has obligations as a member of the
United Nations. It has obligations pursuant to U.N. Security Council
resolutions, and if they were not taking steps as required by member
states to effectively enforce these sanctions, then they would face
pressure and perhaps further action by the international community
itself.
So it would be very important to note that they play a role as
an adjacent country in direct enforcement of the sanctions voted by the
world community.
Q Anybody monitoring that?
MR. McCURRY: The sanctions are monitored. I can't get into
much detail about how they are monitored; but information about the
sanctions enforcement is assessed regularly by the Secretary General of
the United Nations, and they can act accordingly if they see any
evidence or if any member state brings evidence of a violation of the
sanctions enforcement to the Security Council.
Q So what's your assessment? Have you seen the Dominican
Republic stopping even one vehicle on that road?
MR. McCURRY: I don't have any assessment on that that I can
share.
Q So you have no comment about the continuous flow of fuel
and other goods across the border?
MR. McCURRY: I've said that there are very specific steps
that member states can take to bring violations, or alleged violations
to the attention of the Security Council, and we are very committed to a
full enforcement of the sanctions regime and will act in accordance with
those provisions.
Q So you cannot spell out whether or not you believe that
border is leaking like a sieve. Has there been communications between
the U.S. Government and the Dominican Republic about this issue?
MR. McCURRY: Jack, that I don't know the answer to. I can
check on that. We are, through both the OAS and through the United
Nations, in contact with other governments that are enforcing the
sanctions regime, and I can find out whether we have approached the
Dominican Republic specifically on that. But it is something we are
discussing with other governments in the region.
Q Is there an effort to put any kind of monitors on the
border?
MR. McCURRY: I'm not aware of any, but I'll check. That is a
sanctions enforcement question, I think, that would lie with the United
Nations. But it's something that we would have a strong interest in.
Q Could you also, while you're checking, find out what the
Dominicans did during the period when the OAS embargo was in effect from
October 1991 until last summer?
MR. McCURRY: During the previous embargo, because there were
at that time -- I think you're correct in thinking that at that time
there were also reports of violations of the sanctions regime at that
time. I'll check also to see how we handled that issue last time
around.
Q Since the embargo started, do you think that Haitian
level of trade quantity has been diminished or same?
MR. McCURRY: I think there have been signs, and we have
reports, that there have been some significant effects by these
sanctions already in the economy of Haiti and specifically in Port-au-
Prince. As you know, the U.N. sanctions covered specifically petroleum
products and the increase in the retail cost of gasoline and some of the
associated effects indicate that there has been an impact to these
sanctions already. And of course many of you -- many of your news
organizations have had reporters who have been assessing the effect of
these sanctions in a personal way on the Haitian people, and those
reports square with the information that we have.
Carol.
Q Why have you decided at this point to not go along with
what Aristide said at the U.N. the other day, which is an even more
comprehensive embargo, and instead are turning to more diplomatic
efforts?
MR. McCURRY: We haven't ruled out -- I haven't heard anyone
rule out a stricter and tougher regime of sanctions along the lines of
those suggested by President Aristide, because the address also focused
on the need for national reconciliation which, of course, we warmly
welcome.
Q But you didn't really answer the question. Why did you
choose more talking instead of more action at this point?
MR. McCURRY: I think that the United Nations is acting
consistent with our goal of implementing the Governors Island Accord,
and that it is important to go to those who have commitments that fall
directly on them in connection with that accord and to assess their
willingness to participate in an implementation of their previously made
agreements.
Now, if it's not there, that certainly does not rule out the
type of actions suggested by President Aristide and others.
Q Are you worried, though, that even tighter sanctions may
backfire to the extent that they hurt the Haitian people more than they
do the leadership?
MR. McCURRY: You've heard us talk here before about the
effort to the degree we can to take what is a very blunt instrument of
diplomacy -- economic sanctions -- and try to target them on individuals
that we hold responsible for the blocking of the Governors Island
process.
As you extend the effect of that blockade wider, you make the
instrument even more blunt, and we have tried, to the degree we can, to
take these sanctions and make them more effective by making them an
instrument of pressure on those who we hold responsible.
So, that is a consequence of a stricter regime of sanctions
that the effect begins to move to the Haitian people themselves who have
already paid an enormous price for the obstinacy of the military leaders
in Haiti.
Q Has there ever been a response to the often repeated
question of the frozen assets -- how much were frozen the first time
around, how much is frozen now?
MR. McCURRY: There was something on that, Jack. I don't have
it here, but I'll see if we can get some more. I had seen --
Q What kind of material was it?
MR. McCURRY: I don't know whether it was a posted answer. I
think when they covered -- at the time that we imposed the unilateral
United States sanctions in freezing the accounts, we indicated that -- I
think we had some numbers on how many people were effected and even some
information on who they were.
I will say, by the way, on the previous question, in addition,
President Aristide obviously called for a total blockade, but there are
other steps that might also increase the pressure -- working with other
nations to follow with similar measures to those that have been
suggested by the United States unilaterally; freezing bank accounts,
trying to expand the number of people participating in that type of
sanctions effort, we feel might be another way to bring additional
pressure to bear beyond those sanctions that have already been adopted.
Q But the question is: Would you have new statistics on
the assets that have most recently been frozen, who -- how much are we
talking about?
MR. McCURRY: I'll see. I don't know if we have statistics or
whether we've got some type of summary, but I'll see if we can get that.
Q Narrative description, whatever.
MR. McCURRY: Yes. Some type of narrative description.
Q Going to sanctions somewhere else, do you have anything
new on the --
MR. McCURRY: Hold on for a second. Let's stay on this.
Q It sounds like you're saying that if the Haitian generals
walk away from Governors Island, you will try to internationalize the
sanctions that the United States has imposed. Is that a fair statement?
MR. McCURRY: We have already had discussions on how you could
take those steps that we have taken unilaterally and make them more
effective by getting others to join us. Some of those types of
conversations have already occurred.
Q You say you've had discussions. Is that a goal?
MR. McCURRY: If we see a need for stricter sanctions as a
result of continuing reluctance or failure to meet the commitments in
the Governors Island Accord, we would be prepared to seek stricter
sanctions and to consider ways to make those unilateral measures that
we've already announced even more effective by internationalizing them
in effect.
Any more on Haiti before we move on?
Q Unless you have something new on the boat people.
MR. McCURRY: No, I really don't. Not anything new. Our
Embassy has been monitoring the case of four Haitians that were
repatriated who have been charged for alien smuggling, or we understand
will be charged for alien smuggling. But I don't think there has been
any --
Q No other boats?
MR. McCURRY: No, no other interdictions. The last
interdiction was when the Coast Guard picked up 20 Haitians on the 26th.
It would have been Tuesday. They were repatriated to Port-au-Prince
without incident. And that's it. There have been no interdictions
since then.
Q Anything on contacts with Russia with regard to their
opposition to stricter sanctions against Libya?
MR. McCURRY: Nothing that's as recent as the Secretary's
discussions with Foreign Minister Kozyrev on that point when we were in
Moscow late last week. It was a subject that they did address. They
clearly have got some more work to do, although I think the Secretary
and the Foreign Minister both reported that there had been some progress
made on that issue as they attempt to deal with what the effect would be
of broadening the sanctions on Libya to include certain financial assets
held by Libya outside Libya.
They are continuing that discussion. There will, no doubt, be
additional diplomatic talks even in the coming week on that subject.
Q Mike, in the background briefing yesterday, [an official]
said that the U.S. does not recognize the accession of Kashmir to India.
Now, I don't want to put you on the spot, but could you confirm that
that is official U.S. position?
MR. McCURRY: I can't confirm a comment made by an individual
person in a briefing that occurred on background. What I can tell you a
little bit more about is our policy.
There's nothing that's been said by any senior administration
official in recent days that represents a change in our policy towards
Kashmir, nor any change in our view of India's territorial integrity.
As we have noted consistently since 1947, the United States believes the
entire geographic area of the former princely state of Jammu and Kashmir
is disputed territory.
The United States believes the best way to resolve the dispute
over Kashmir is through direct discussions between the Governments of
India and Pakistan as envisioned in the Simla Agreement, taking into
account the wishes of the Kashmiri people.
We have a productive and wide-ranging relationship with India,
and we're committed to constructive and cooperative dialogue on all
matters of mutual concern to our countries.
Q Follow-up, also on Kashmir. I believe the U.S. Embassy
in New Delhi asked to meet Mr. Abdul Ghani Lone, the Kashmiri leader who
was arrested leading a rally onto the Mosque in Srinagar, and I believe
an official did go and meet him.
Now, could you tell me the basis of this request to meet him?
I mean, it's not as if he's a U.S. citizen for whom you have consular
rights.
MR. McCURRY: I was not aware of that. What I will do is see
if we can check with the post and get some information about that
contact. I can't confirm that that's occurred. I hadn't heard about
that, but I'll find out more on that.
Q And also what the official found about his state of
health.
MR. McCURRY: I'll see what we can find out about that
contact, if it did in fact occur, yes.
Q Mike, could you tell us something about terrorism in
Egypt and Algeria?
MR. McCURRY: I can't. I know that we have worked -- because
there were some U.S. citizens involved in the attack on the hotel in
Cairo the other day -- we have been working on that matter urgently. I
don't know that there has been any follow-up contact and, of course, we
were out of the country at the time of President Clinton's meeting with
President Mubarak.
I don't know whether in the course of describing that meeting
they discussed at all terrorism. I recall that President Mubarak
addressed that subject during the question-and-answer period he had with
many of you following his meeting with President Clinton. So I don't
have anything to add beyond that, other than to say that because of the
attack in Cairo, we have been working on the arrangements and trying to
help the families of those Americans who were involved in that incident.
Q Did you ask to see or to debrief the man charged with the
--
MR. McCURRY: The official from the interior ministry that was
involved, do you mean?
Q No. I mean the man charged with the --
MR. McCURRY: Oh, with the crime itself.
Q With the crime itself.
MR. McCURRY: Not to my knowledge. I'll check and see if we
did. I will post that, but I don't believe that we did ask to see him.
Q I'd like to follow up on Dr. Lone. When he was here a
couple of months ago, he did meet with several State Department
officials, and one of the things they discussed was his safety when he
returned to India after he had heart surgery here, and he was told that
the American Embassy in Delhi would go to special lengths to make sure
that he was not unjustly arrested.
I'm wondering whether we have gone ahead and followed through
with that promise and sort of how it squares with what's happening to
him now?
MR. McCURRY: Yes. I'll include that question within the
response to the earlier taken question.
Q Can I ask you a question on Bosnia?
MR. McCURRY: Sure.
Q There's been a lot of activity on the ground the last
couple of weeks. Are there any U.S. efforts under way to try and get
diplomatic movement going on that again? For example, some Congressmen
have been talking about a Balkan conference like the Middle East peace
process. Is there any support for that here?
MR. McCURRY: I think on two fronts: One on the diplomatic
track, we have continued to have contact with our NATO allies, sharing
information with them about our understanding of the situation on the
ground. We have been doing that on a regular basis ever since the
decisions in August concerning air strikes.
Secondly, on the prospects for a political settlement, I'd say
that we have remained in touch with the parties directly. We have
discussed with them or tried to assess the prospects for some type of
conference or some type of additional dialogue. The United States
continues to feel that the parties themselves must conclude as rapidly
as possible a political settlement that will bring an end to the
fighting and restore the conditions necessary for what will be needed
this winter -- a very significant humanitarian relief to keep people
alive through a harsh winter.
Q Mike, there are reports out of Sarajevo today that Serb
gunners are continuing to pound the city, which suggests to me that it's
still besieged, and the United States had a pretty strong position about
how Sarajevo should not be allowed to be besieged, and how there was
going to be tough measures -- bombing, in other words -- if it
continues. So it's continuing.
MR. McCURRY: What's the question?
Q Well, the question is in the face of this, what are you
doing?
MR. McCURRY: I think exactly what I said before. You know
the process that's required under the August 2 and August 9 communiques
issues by NATO, and that's one of the reasons of many that we continue
to share our assessment of what we see as the situation on the ground
with our NATO allies. Q But the Secretary did make a speech
saying that he was going to share his assessment if this happened. He
said something rather direct. He said that there would be that final
meeting of the North Atlantic Council to authorize action.
Haven't they crossed the threshold? Haven't they crossed the
trip wire that the State Department so specifically laid down?
MR. McCURRY: That would be a question that the North Atlantic
Council would have to address, as you know, from the August 2 and August
9 NATO Communiques.
Q But somebody has to get the Council to meet. Is the
United States calling for a meeting of the Council?
MR. McCURRY: Not that I'm aware of; but, as I say, we are
sharing information with our NATO allies, which is exactly what would
have to happen as the North Atlantic Council reviewed the situation on
the ground in Sarajevo and elsewhere.
Q Could it be -- of course, I never understood what you
mean by "sharing" -- it's as if they don't have information of their
own. They're on the ground and you aren't. But unless you mean you're
sharing information with a point, that you have some interpretation of
the information and you're trying to persuade them to your point of
view. Is it that kind of sharing of information? Because they're
there. They don't need to know that Serbs kill helpless Muslim
civilians. This has sort of been an open fact for some time. You don't
have to inform them of that.
MR. McCURRY: If you talk to people in UNPROFOR, they'd say
that there's the quality of information and intelligence they have
available through NATO and through the United States, specifically,
helps a great deal in assessing the situation on the ground there, and
that's the type of information that I'm referring to.
Q When you talk about -- talking about a conference, can
you be a little more specific? Do you mean something including the
parties, or do you mean -- Madrid, of course, brought the parties
together.
MR. McCURRY: I'm referring to the suggestions that have come
from a variety of places, that there be some type of London II
conference. That's what I meant by that.
Q Can you describe the situation in Sarajevo for us? Are
artillery shells falling on the city on a regular basis? Are supplies
coming in without impedence?
MR. McCURRY: I've got some. I thought I did have a situation
report on Sarajevo. I can tell you the one yesterday referred to the
shelling that had occurred. It abated somewhat. It appeared to be
directed at some of the forward positions of Bosnian Government forces
that have now moved in to replace some of the -- I don't know exactly
how you'd describe them -- but some of the units that were associated
with the two former Bosnian Government military officers who were
arrested during the crackdown over the weekend -- so the shelling
appeared to be directed at some of those positions because there was a
replacement of people along the perimeter line around Sarajevo. That,
as I said, had abated somewhat, although there was still reports of
shelling continuing I think even through the evening.
Q How about food and medicine -- is that flowing unimpeded
to the city?
MR. McCURRY: The humanitarian relief has been flowing. It's
been interrupted mostly by what is described as criminal activity in and
around various parts of Bosnia; that the interruption of supplies has
not been so much due to any action by military units associated with
either the Croatians or the Serbs or the Muslims, but more so with
isolated criminal activity that made the safety and security of the U.N.
relief personnel a real problem.
Q Would it be possible to give us an update at some point
on the warehouse situation --
MR. McCURRY: Where they are on supplies?
Q -- in terms of looking to the winter, how far down the
warehouse supply situation is? Maybe Monday you can --
MR. McCURRY: We've gotten updates on that from time to time.
I had one fairly recently, but I'll see if I can get one for early next
week. We might even see if we can do just a general work up on where
the winterization program is right now and what needs to be done.
I should say, by the way, that Counselor Tim Wirth from the
Department is actually in the region taking a first-hand look at
questions exactly like that now. In fact, he's there through today and
will be returning over the weekend.
One of the things he is looking at specifically is the status
of U.N. relief operations, the effect of our continuing airdrops, and
what the prospects for the winter look like.
Q Is he in Sarajevo?
MR. McCURRY: No. He had been in Croatia. He was intended to
travel to Split today but apparently bad weather detoured that and
instead he was going to eastern Slavonia to a refugee camp near Osijek.
Q Will he go to Sarajevo?
MR. McCURRY: I don't believe he has plans to go to Sarajevo.
Q If you're going to lay on a briefing, could you also try
to have whoever it is that comes down to talk to us describe how
significantly changed the needs of the population are over the course of
-- from last winter to this winter and their fragility, etc.?
MR. McCURRY: I can tell you from things that I've seen and
read, that's a source of very real concern because compared to a year
ago, the population has severely -- their health has been severely
reduced because of malnutrition and the effects of disease. So the
danger of the winter taking a higher toll is something that concerns the
people who have been working on the problem.
Q Mike, given the fact that you acknowledge that there are
still reports of continued shelling, do you consider Sarajevo to be
under siege?
MR. McCURRY: I described, I think a little bit earlier, what
I know about the shelling and the situation report we had.
Q I understand that. Would you answer that specific
question, though? That's a specific term. Do you consider Sarajevo to
be under siege?
MR. McCURRY: The phrase that I think is relevant is, is it
being strangled? That would be an assessment that I indicated earlier
would be rendered by the North Atlantic Council.
Q In terms of the information you're sharing with the
Council, is it the assessment from here that there has been, since this
deadline -- the 15th deadline -- that the Serbs had given the Bosnians
to sign a peace agreement, that there has been a steady escalation or
deliberate escalation in the shelling of the area?
MR. McCURRY: I wouldn't describe it that way. I think there
have been sporadic episodes of shelling and firing. It has not all been
directed by one party against another party. I think, as you know,
there has been considerable fighting between the Croats and the Muslims
in other parts of central Bosnia. It's not clearly an escalation
occurring on one particular front of this complicated war situation.
Q Could I ask you about Somalia and the trip that
Ambassador Oakley is making or is about to make?
MR. McCURRY: I think about to make. He is leaving later
today, I understand. He is going to leave late today. He'll be over in
the region about a week. His intent is to meet with regional leaders,
Somali political leaders, U.N. officials, and U.S. diplomats. He'll be
helping re-energize the political reconciliation process and
consolidating the cease-fire that has been holding with some
interruptions. He has no plans to meet with General Aideed.
Q Does he rule it out?
MR. McCURRY: He will assess the situation when he gets over
there. I hesitate to speak for Ambassador Oakley who knows how to
handle himself precisely in these situations. But it's not within his
portfolio as he goes over there to conduct the meeting, although he will
have contact with members of his sub-clan.
Q Tell us more about his itinerary?
Q Before you do that, is there any prohibition on him
meeting with Aideed? When you say he has no plans, is it appropriate?
He may think the situation is at that point.
MR. McCURRY: I'm not aware of anything that says you cannot
under any circumstances meet with General Aideed. I just have described
his portfolio as being working with others. Of course, he has no plans,
as he goes over there, to meet with Aideed.
His itinerary, I don't have that. I think that he does plan
some additional trips in the region, in addition to a stop in Mogadishu.
That would be consistent with our desire all along to stimulate a
regional dialogue that would address how to structure attempts to bring
about a national reconciliation, but I don't have his specific stops.
Q Can you say where he's going to land tomorrow morning?
MR. McCURRY: He doesn't say where he's going to land tomorrow
morning.
Q Could you take that? Is he landing in Addis?
MR. McCURRY: I'm pretty sure that's a question we can
probably get an answer. But there might be some reasons related to
security that would prevent us from posting an answer.
Q Does he have specific goals other than the sort of
general ones of re-energizing and consolidating cease-fires? He is
trying to set up a meeting? Is he trying to finally get this tribunal,
or whatever you care to call it, in some sort of shape so that it can
begin work?
MR. McCURRY: I'd say he's working on several things. One,
they have a situation now in which you've got to make sure that the
cease-fire itself holds, so he'll be discussing the importance of that.
Two, looking at the relief supply routes and the roads and
whether they are open. That is, as you know, one of the aspects of the
U.S. mission currently deployed in Somalia.
Three, he'll be looking to the regional grouping of African
states that are attempting to bring about a political dialogue. He'll
be in contact with the governments of Eritrea, Ethiopia, and presumably
others, within the Organization of African Unity that have been working
on this problem that we've been in contact with on a fairly regular
basis.
And, lastly, he will be looking specifically at the question
of an independent commission that can formed to bring together facts
necessary to hold those accountable for the death of Pakistani
peacekeepers on June 5, and those responsible for additional violence
since then.
Q How is he doing on even the first phase of setting up an
independent mission?
MR. McCURRY: They have got the idea -- in addition to that,
there are other things, during his last trip, put in place that we're
going to resume -- meetings of representatives of the sub-clan that had
been discontinued last spring. There are some steps like that that he
had encouraged the parties to reactivate during his last trip. I think
he's going to check and see what the status of some of those things are.
He feels there's been considerable progress. There's been
progress. There needs to be more progress in putting together both the
effort by the regional countries to form this commission and then how
you formally structure exactly what the scope and the authority of the
commission itself will be. There's, clearly, additional work that needs
to be done.
Q Mike, when did the UN.-U.S. forces stop seizing heavy
weapons?
MR. McCURRY: I don't know the answer to that. They're not
doing search and seizure operations in various neighborhoods in
Mogadishu, as you know, consistent with the orders that they have been
given.
Q (Inaudible) supply of heavy weapons outside of Mogadishu?
MR. McCURRY: There are weapons outside Mogadishu; that's
correct.
Q What is the recent development of North Korean nuclear
matters? Could you check if Hans Blix met Ambassador Albright
yesterday, and what kind of talk they had?
MR. McCURRY: I believe that Mr. Blix will be making a report
to the IAEA on Monday, giving a review of the current situation in North
Korea as it reflects on the continuity of full-scope safeguards. I
think because of that we will probably have less to say today than we
might following his report.
I would say that there was a report earlier today that some of
you are aware of that North Korea had allegedly refused to allow any or
some types of IAEA inspections. We're not aware that that is true, but
we are and remain deeply concerned that North Korea has not yet accepted
the type of inspections that would be necessary to maintain the
continuity of the safeguards at the declared nuclear facilities that
have been at issue. That remains to be the subject that the IAEA will
have to address. We are awaiting their determination of what the status
of continuity and safeguards is. That's the report that I think we
anticipate getting on Monday.
Q Is there a problem of the length of the inspection?
MR. McCURRY: The length?
Q Yeah. Is there a problem of how long the inspectors
could be out on the premises?
MR. McCURRY: I'm not certain what -- it's not the length.
It's just getting access to the facility and getting access to certain
equipment at the declared facilities that they've been looking at.
Beyond that, there may be technical things as well that they're
concerned about.
I'm not fully familiar with all of the complaints that North
Korea raises against those inspections, but I think you've seen some of
their public comments in the past on how they view the IAEA in that
their objections are consistent with what they've said in the past.
Q In the meantime, are U.S. officials continuing to meet in
New York with the North Koreans?
MR. McCURRY: There have been fairly recent -- I don't know
precisely when in recent days, but there have been meetings at the
United Nations between representatives of North Korea and the United
States of what I would describe as sort of a mid-level or technical
level. Those are not to be confused with a third round of high-level
talks which have not been scheduled because there's insufficient
progress to warrant the scheduling of those types of talks.
Q And these mid-level talks have produced no resolution at
all?
MR. McCURRY: No, they have not produced a resolution.
Q What is your understanding of the deadline that the North
Korean IAEA inspection facilities -- is there anymore planning out of
the film and the battery?
MR. McCURRY: The inspections are necessary very, very soon to
assure the continuity of the safeguards. I think that's what the
director of the IAEA will address on Monday.
But there's a point at which, without those inspections, you
cannot say that the continuity of the safeguards has been guaranteed. I
don't know technically when that time passes, but it's clear that it's
sooner rather than later.
Q Why has the United States resumed a high-level defense
dialogue with China? Is it because China has had such a splendid human
rights record since Tiananmen Square?
MR. McCURRY: No. There are, in fact, issues about military-
to-military cooperation that are consistent with our own human rights
interests that we think can be furthered in those types of discussions.
I believe the Pentagon may have put out a schedule for -- I
believe it's Assistant Secretary Freeman who is travelling to China.
But that was among the high-level exchanges that had been discussed and
agreed to at the time that Secretary Christopher met with Foreign
Minister Qian in New York at the time of the UNGA meeting.
Q So this is not a resumption of regular, high-level
defense contacts with China?
MR. McCURRY: There have been over the years military-to-
military meetings. Our feeling is that there are issues within the
contexts of those meetings that are important and that can be addressed
with the resumption of that type of exchange. That was among those, in
addition to the human rights exchanges, the visit of Secretary Bentsen
-- I think there was one other -- in addition to the visit of Assistant
Secretary Freeman that was discussed by the Secretary with the Chinese
Foreign Minister recently and agreed to as things that were necessary to
work on what are admittedly problems in the bilateral relationship.
I would not indicate that this is anything other than a way to
continue to try to make progress on some of those issues that remain
sore spots in the bilateral relationship.
Q Mike, on Georgia: There's been a reversal there with the
troops going on the offensive. Shervadnadze seems to be turning things
around.
Has the United States provided any kind of assistance to Mr.
Shervadnadze's government?
MR. McCURRY: I'm not aware that we've provided any assistance
to him. It's something that we've monitored very closely, that we've
said things about publicly, that we've raised in diplomatic
conversations. But I think you're probably asking about any type of
military assistance, and I'm not aware that we've provided any type of
military assistance.
Q Even advice on how to and --
MR. McCURRY: Not that I'm aware of. I would freely admit
that I'd need to check a lot more widely within the United States
Government before ruling out any and all types of assistance. I'm just
not aware of any.
Q Mike, while you were travelling, the President and
President Mubarak held a news conference in which President Clinton
called for an early resumption of the Washington talks. Is there any
progress on that front?
MR. McCURRY: I will defer to Ambassador Dennis Ross who, I
understand, may have spoken earlier today. I looked at his remarks very
briefly and I thought he gave a pretty good snapshot of where we stand
right now in the dialogue and where we think things are.
We continue to think that a comprehensive peace in the region
is very, very important and that we continue to believe that the
discussions both under the auspices here in Washington that we sponsor
with the Russians and then those discussions that could be held as a
result of our intermediary role are very, very important, and we're
willing to continue to play that role. But the pacing of those types of
discussions is clearly something that's within the province of the
parties to address.
Q One of the things that Ambassador Ross said today was
that the United States would help Israel defray the cost of the peace
agreement with the Palestinians. He didn't really go into any detail on
that. I just wonder if you could say something about that? Is he
talking about new money? How are you going to get it through Congress?
MR. McCURRY: He's talking about ways in which you can help
Israel defray some of the costs that are associated with taking on the
commitments made in the PLO-Israeli joint Declaration of Principles.
There are costs to Israel associated with those agreements. We have had
discussions both with members of the United States Congress and then
obviously discussions with Israel about how you could help in carrying
some of the burden of those costs.
I don't know that there's been any definitive mechanism worked
out, but it is something that we have had discussions with Congress
about.
Q Can you be specific? Are you looking at an extra
appropriation bill, or --
MR. McCURRY: No, no, no. They're not considering that --
it's not my understanding they're considering any type of supplemental
request. They're not at that point in the cycle, in any event. But
they have talked about other types of mechanisms that would be possible.
Q More money guarantees?
MR. McCURRY: No. I'll just leave it that they've explored
several different ideas on how they can bring that assistance about.
Q You wouldn't use donor's money? That was set exclusively
for the PLO? The billions that you raised at the donor's conference --
Israel is not part of that, is it?
MR. McCURRY: The donor's conference here were costs
associated with implementing the agreement in the West Bank and --
Q On the Palestinian side?
MR. McCURRY: On the Palestinian track, although there are
ways in which Israel, as you know, is among those who committed funds at
that donor's conference.
Q What sort of costs are you talking about, Mike, as far as
implementing peace?
MR. McCURRY: I don't have an exact figure.
Q What are the items that will be costly? Not what will
they cost.
MR. McCURRY: The cost to them?
Q What kind of activities are you talking about?
MR. McCURRY: Redeployments -- I don't have the whole list.
I've seen the list before. But there are things like the redeployment
of security forces away from certain areas within the West Bank and
around Jericho. There is the transfer of certain civilian functions and
transferring personnel. If you're interested in that, I can see if I
can get a little further listing of that. But there are some costs that
they take on as a result of the agreements that they've made.
Q Michael, there is an Israeli report to the effect that
this Administration is trying to omit the conditionality and the
agreement related to the loan guarantees in order to pay back to Israel
what was discounted for the 1994 $10 billion loan guarantee. Do you
have any comment on that?
MR. McCURRY: No, nothing other than the answer I gave to
Carol earlier that we have been exploring with our Congress a variety of
ways in which we can help the Israelis absorb some of the costs
associated with the peace agreement.
Q This doesn't have anything to do with the peace
agreement. I think the --
MR. McCURRY: Well, it doesn't. What you're saying is, is
there a way you could use that off-set that's within the parameters of
the loan guarantees? Is that perhaps one of the ways that you might be
able to provide some assistance? Again, I say that's something that we
have been discussing with Congress.
Q So their agreement is going to be modified?
MR. McCURRY: I can't say that with any certainty.
Q Mike, this might be a -- in fact, this is a housekeeping
thing. But do you have any idea of when and how the declassified
documents from the Vest-Murphy Commission report on El Salvador are
going to be made public?
MR. McCURRY: I know that the vast bulk and majority of those
documents are ready for release. I believe the last I had checked on it
there were one or two things that were preventing an immediate release.
I'll be happy to check again and see when they will be forthcoming.
Q When and where would be very nice information to have,
preferably an hour or two, or more, before it went out.
MR. McCURRY: My understanding is that we typically do a great
deal of that here through the Press Office here. This involves an
interagency effort, as you know, because our interest is having a full
release of documents from all the different parts of government that
were involved in those issues related to El Salvador.
Q You don't see it today, then?
MR. McCURRY: I hope it's not today because I'm not aware of
it if it is today.
Q So do we all.
Q Thank you.
MR. McCURRY: Thank you.
(Press briefing concluded at 1:43 p.m.)
(###)