931130 Daily Press Briefing  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.

US DEPARTMENT OF STATE
DAILY PRESS BRIEFING 
TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 30, 1993

                                              BRIEFER:  CHRISTINE SHELLY

Subject                                               Page

YEMEN
Status of Haynes Mahoney ........................1-2

NORTH KOREA
Foreign Ministry Statement re: Nuclear Issues ...2
Response to US Proposals Still Pending ..........2-3
Report of SCUD Shipment to Iran .................3-4

MIDDLE EAST PEACE PROCESS
Trilateral Committee on Economic Development 
  Meeting in the Department Today ...............4

UKRAINE
Kravchuk's Promise to Submit START I Treaty/Lisbon
Protocol to New Parliament/Impact on US Aid ..... 4-7
US Economic Assistance ..........................5-7

FORMER YUGOSLAVIA
Secretary's Speech to CSCE ......................7

(###)



                       DEPARTMENT OF STATE
                       DAILY PRESS BRIEFING

                                            DPC #154

              TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 30, 1993, 1:02 P.M.
              (ON THE RECORD UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED)


         MS. SHELLY:  Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen.  I want to 
begin with a short update which relates to the kidnapping of our Embassy 
employee.  Late yesterday afternoon there was some confusion on this and 
several reports that he had been released.  As it turned out, this was 
based on an erroneous press report emanating from the region, and 
unfortunately it proved not to be correct.

          We are confident, however, that the Yemeni authorities are 
doing all that they can to obtain Mr. Mahoney's release.  We remain in 
close contact with the Yemeni Interior Minister and other Yemeni 
officials.

          I can confirm that Mr. Mahoney did receive the package I 
mentioned yesterday containing clothes and other personal items.  We 
have received a tape from him.  Although the quality of the tape is very 
poor, his voice sounds strong, and we believe that he remains in good 
health and good spirits.

          I'd be pleased to take your questions.

          Q    Do you know who's holding him exactly?

          MS. SHELLY:  No.  We still don't have anything precise on 
that.

          Q    What's the basis of your confidence that he'll be 
released soon?

          MS. SHELLY:  I think that just the sort of blow-by-blow 
reports that we have been getting from our Embassy there.  It seems to 
be sort of fine-print questions, and still the mood is very positive, 
and the expectation is that the release will be made very shortly.

          Q    Are these people asking anything of this Government, or 
is it more an internal Yemeni situation?

          MS. SHELLY:  My understanding is it is still very much an 
internal Yemeni dispute, and that there has been nothing that has been 
requested of the U.S.

          Q    What did he say on the tape?  I mean, was it just, "Hi, 
I'm fine."  You know, "good wishes."

          MS. SHELLY:  I don't have the contents -- any kind of 
indication as to what actually was on the tape.  I just know it was poor 
quality, but they could tell that it was definitely him speaking, and 
his voice sounded good and strong, and he seemed good.  But apparently 
it was very difficult to hear the precise things on the tape.

          Q    Could I change the subject?  Have we heard anything -- 
has the United States heard anything yet from the North Koreans on the 
nuclear issue?

          MS. SHELLY:  You're referring to the statement yesterday I 
think -- also public statements yesterday by the North Korean Foreign 
Ministry on the nuclear issue.

          We have taken note of this statement.  I don't have a 
particular reaction to offer at this time.  There really isn't any 
change in the U.S. position at this point as it was articulated by the 
President last week.

          We are still waiting to receive a formal response from the 
North Koreans.  We are certainly expecting one and expect it within the 
near future.  No meetings have been scheduled on this subject for the 
time being, and the ball still remains very much in North Korea's court.

          Q    The ball is still in the North Korean's court.  That 
means it's up to them to act first?  Or, as I understood it from the 
briefings last week, that what's been decided on is some sort of 
scenario or some sort of arrangement where one side moves and then the 
other side moves, and that the North Koreans have been waiting for the 
United States to make some overtures or some suggestions.  The United 
States did this.  Are we simply now waiting for them to make a move or 
to simply say this arrangement sounds okay?  I don't know what they have 
to -- what the North Koreans have to do.

          MS. SHELLY:  Last Wednesday, the 24th, we had a meeting with 
them to convey our latest thoughts and proposals on how to resolve the 
current impasse.  They took these proposals back with them and were 
going to discuss them.  They owe us a formal response to our proposals.

          Yes, they have addressed this publicly, but that's not 
inconsistent with past practice.  We have seen those statements, but we 
don't consider that the public statements so far are in any way their 
response to our proposals.  This is something that we expect them to 
come back to us on formally, and they have not done so yet, and no 
request for any meeting has been received.

          Q    At the White House briefing on the issue, there was also 
described how there's not much time before the inspections process is 
deteriorated to some point where there is a large gap in our knowledge 
-- and they said "prompt," "soon."  Is there any time period that you're 
putting on for their reply?

          MS. SHELLY:  There's not any fixed deadline.  It's a 
determination which is made by the IAEA.  I understand that they 
consider this -- I think it is monthly, something like that.  So I 
expect that some time -- based on when the last meeting took place, 
which I think was somewhere in the first half of November -- my guess is 
that it would probably be coming up again in the IAEA for another look 
some time in the first half of December.  I don't have anything precise 
on that.

          But on that point, there isn't any fixed date by which 
anything happens.  It's a determination made on a series of factors made 
by the IAEA.

          Q    I understand what you're saying about this not being a 
formal response, but would you agree that the tone of what they're 
saying does not sound very conciliatory?

          MS. SHELLY:  I don't have anything precise for you on that.  
We've read very carefully the statements we get -- the text from FBIS.  
We certainly do look at it very carefully -- what the content is, what 
the tone is, any particular words in it.

          I think that it indicates that there's serious discussion 
going on, and that they haven't reached a final conclusion in their own 
minds about how to respond.

          We don't react and we're very careful not to overreact to any 
particular word or phrase that they use.  I think that they wanted to 
send some messages via the public statements, but we don't take their 
public statements as indications of their formal response.  We take 
their formal response as indication of what their position is.

          So we've seen them.  We've taken note of what they've said 
publicly, but we're still waiting for the official response.

          Q    Are you aware of reports that North Korea is preparing or 
is already shipping another delivery of Scuds to Iran?

          MS. SHELLY:  I have not seen any reports to that effect.

          Q    Could you take that question, though, and see if you have 
anything?

          MS. SHELLY:  I'll be happy to look into it and see if we have 
anything.

          Q    This meeting today with Ambassador Ross and the 
Jordanians and the Israelis -- the trilateral meeting -- what are your 
expectations for it, and why is there a photo op with cameras but not 
reporters?

          MS. SHELLY:  I'm sorry.  What was the last part of the 
question?

          Q    Why is there a photo op scheduled with cameras but not 
reporters?

          MS. SHELLY:  The very last part of your question, I'm not 
sure.  I can check into that for you.  I do have some details for you 
about the meetings, though.

          The joint Israeli-Jordanian economic committee is meeting 
today in the Department.  It is one of the committees which was formed 
when President Clinton hosted Crown Prince Hassan and Foreign Minister 
Peres at the White House on the first of October.

          As to specific details about the positions -- more on the 
bilateral talks -- I'd have to refer you to the parties.  I'm sorry, 
this was yesterday's meeting.

          Today's meeting is the trilateral committee.  That's U.S., 
Israel, Jordan -- trilateral committee on economic development.  That is 
what is meeting in the State Department today.  As you've noted, the 
U.S. delegation is headed in this session by Ambassador Ross.

          The committee is expected to discuss economic cooperation and 
the whole range of trade and finance issues.  They build on the concept 
of face-to-face negotiations established at Madrid; they deal with the 
economic issues which directly affect the quality of life of the peoples 
in the region.  That's really, I think, all I can tell you at this 
point.

          Q    Can we go to another nuclear issue.  The response 
yesterday -- the White House statement yesterday on the President's 
conversation with Kravchuk.  In addition to the President calling 
Kravchuk, is the State Department or Secretary Christopher doing 
anything to further enhance, or to further urge the Ukrainians to do 
something?

          If the problem is not Kravchuk -- the problem is allegedly 
with the parliament -- is there something that the United States intends 
to do between now and March to convince the incoming Rada to approve 
START without any such conditions?

          MS. SHELLY:  I don't really have much to add to what the White 
House said yesterday.  I think the characterization is the exchanges.  A 
very positive one came from the specific statement by the Ukrainian 
President that Kravchuk promised to resubmit the START Treaty and the 
Lisbon Protocol as a package to Parliament, and that this would be 
occurring after the Parliament takes office after the elections which 
are to occur in March.

          I don't really have any details to add.  I just know that the 
general feeling from that was that it was a very positive exchange and 
there is still a full commitment on everything that Kravchuk has 
outlined to senior Administration officials before.

          I think that this is certainly going to be a subject of 
conversation, regular conversation, between the U.S. and the Ukraine at 
probably nearly all levels.  It will very much remain on the agenda.  
They certainly want to work with us very actively and constructively to 
try to smooth over the difficulties that this action has created.

          I think the important point here is letting them get on with 
the task that they've identified for themselves, which is working with 
their own Parliament and try to get the right kind of action on this 
when they resume in March.

          Q    But the problem has not been Kravchuk, if he's to be 
believed.  The problem has been the Parliament.  He made the pledge, the 
last time the Secretary was there, that he would submit it for 
ratification.  He did, and now we see what we've got.

          What I'm asking is whether the Secretary, say, on the road 
now, plans to raise the issue with NATO allies so that they might help 
in convincing the incoming Ukrainian Parliament to do something 
different than they've already done?

          MS. SHELLY:  We have said before that we always expected that 
the Rada ratification was going to be a difficult process.  I certainly 
can't say that the action came as a complete surprise to us.  Certainly, 
President Kravchuk himself characterized his own disappointment in the 
action.

          I can't go much beyond what I've said, which is simply that he 
and his administration will endeavor to work with their Parliament and 
then try to get the situation sorted out.  I'm really not in a position 
to address specifically whether or not this is likely to come up in 
Brussels.  I think you'd really have to direct that question to the 
party.

          Q    Is there any change in our view of the aid that we've 
promised -- that the United States has promised to the Ukraine?

          MS. SHELLY:  I can give you sort of a brief update, if you'd 
like, where we are on the aid -- economic aid and economic programs 
question, if you'd like.  I've got a little bit on that.

          During his visit to the Ukraine last month, Secretary 
Christopher reiterated the U.S. commitment to provide additional 
bilateral economic assistance, and to support substantial aid through 
international financial institutions, when Ukraine takes steps toward 
promoting fundamental economic reform.

          As I'm sure you're aware, in the current fiscal year, the 
United States has increased its bilateral economic assistance to the 
Ukraine to a total of $155 million.  The U.S. and Ukraine signed the SSD 
-- Safe and Secure Dismantlement -- Umbrella Agreement in October.  This 
document provides the legal framework for the dismantlement and non-
proliferation assistance to the Ukraine.  The U.S. has pledged a total 
of $175 million for this.

          The U.S. and the Ukraine plan to conclude the implementing 
agreements necessary for this in the very near term.

          The U.S. has also proposed specific implementing agreements 
involving $135 million in missile and bomber dismantlement assistance, 
as well as assistance for export control, government-to-government 
communications, material control, and accounting for civilian nuclear 
material and for emergency response equipment.

          I don't believe there's any change in the game plan on any of 
these types of assistance at this point.

          Q    And none of this is dependent or linked in any way to 
what the Rada might do in March?

          MS. SHELLY:  Not that I'm aware of.  I'd be happy to look into 
that, see if there's anything else to add on that, but not that I'm 
aware of.

          Q    The reason I ask is McCurry, the last time, seemed to 
hint that it was one of the things that was on the table in assessing 
relations with Ukraine and this issue.  That's why I'm asking.

          MS. SHELLY:  I just don't have anything further to add.

          Q    You confuse me on your figures, though.  A hundred and 
fifty-five million, is that for dismantling warheads?

          MS. SHELLY:  My understanding is that under the SSD Umbrella 
Agreement, the amount pledged under this is $175 million.  The bilateral 
economic assistance, which is through a variety -- for other uses -- 
that's what's the $155 million.

          Q    And then there's $135 in addition to the $175 for 
missiles and bombers?

          MS. SHELLY:  My understanding is that there are specific 
implementing agreements involved that total that amount -- $135 million 
-- and that's for the missile and bomber dismantlement assistance and 
the other things I mentioned.

          Q    That's in addition to the $175, as mentioned?

          MS. SHELLY:  I think so, but I'll check on that specifically.  
If that's not the correct understanding, I'll post something on that 
this afternoon.

          Q    The President said today that he hoped that Muslims would 
not take offense at the fact that he met with Salman Rushdie.  I was 
wondering if the government, officially, has heard any protest from 
Muslim governments beyond what the Iranians have said for the fact that 
he did meet with Rushdie?

          MS. SHELLY:  Not that I'm aware of.

          Q    Christine, do you have any more information about the 
offer that the Secretary made this morning at CSCE of increased flights 
and food into Bosnia?

          MS. SHELLY:  I don't really have anything specific to add to 
that.  I believe that we have circulated the text of the Secretary's 
speech.  Questions on that, I really have to specifically direct you to 
the party.

          Q    Thank you.

          MS. SHELLY:  Thank you.

          (Press briefing concluded at 1:20 p.m.)

(###)

To the top of this page