Return to: Index of 1993 Daily Briefings || Electronic Research Collections Index || ERC Homepage
US DEPARTMENT OF STATE OFFICE OF THE SPOKESMAN DAILY PRESS BRIEFING Tuesday, December 7, 1993 BRIEFER: Christine Shelly Subject Page HAITI Guest Briefers Pezzullo and Swing on Current Situation (Call for All-Haiti Talks/Etc.) .....1-11 RUSSIA POW-MIA Commission Meetings .....................11 US Invitation to Participate in Space Station ...14 NORTH KOREA Future Meetings .................................11-12 US Consultations with South Korea/Others ........11-13 SYRIA Transfer of Boeing 727s from Kuwait .............13 US Policy on Sanctions ..........................13 HAITI Training Military Officers in US ................14 DEPARTMENT OF STATE DAILY PRESS BRIEFING DPC #159 TUESDAY, DECEMBER 7, 1993, 1:04 P. M. (ON THE RECORD UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED) MS. SHELLY: Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen. We will begin our regular press briefing today with a special briefing on Haiti. Your briefers will be the Secretary's Special Advisor on Haiti, Ambassador Lawrence Pezzullo, and the U.S. Ambassador to Haiti, William Swing. They are prepared to make short statements, and then will be happy to take any questions that you might have after. Ambassador Pezzullo, would you like to begin? AMBASSADOR PEZZULLO: Let me begin with the recent events, and later we can take your questions. As you probably know, yesterday Prime Minister Malval announced that he would do two things: One, he would launch a new initiative to call for a conference of all Haitian parties -- I mean by that not political parties but people within the society, private sector, labor, military -- to see if they could bring a modicum of consensus to their thinking so that they can deal with, as he puts it, a situation which has brought the country to the end of its rope. He also announced that he would be stepping down as Prime Minister on the 15th of December, as he had previously said, but would stay on as Acting Prime Minister during this period. This, we find a most intriguing initiative in the sense that what has been lacking in the Haitian issue has been this element of reconciliation -- of the Haitian people actually coming together from all sources and accepting the fact that the society will keep unravelling itself if it doesn't deal with the major problems. As you know, we had an international effort -- which began early this year with the President making a major statement of U.S. support for a negotiated settlement to be conducted under the auspices of the U.N. and the OAS -- that led over a period of time to the Governor's Island meeting at which both the President of the country, Aristide, and the Commander-in-Chief of the Army signed the Governor's Island agreement, which saw a process which would return to constitutional government and ultimately the return of the President himself. That began a process of change within the society, saw the return of a constitutional government with Prime Minister Malval becoming that embodiment of the constitutional government, and then broke down when the military failed to uphold their portions of the agreement. Under the Governor's Island [agreement], there was an automatic return of the sanctions. The sanctions under Governor's Island were suspended, rather than lifted, when the Prime Minister became confirmed. So they were lifted on his confirmation, were suspended, and then reinstituted when the military failed to fulfill their obligations. So we're under the reimposition of those sanctions, which is pressuring the country, creating now a shortage of gasoline and fuel, and responsible in large measure for the end of the rope comment by the Prime Minister. We very much endorse his new initiative. We're hopeful that it will force the military to take cognizance of where they're taking this country and bring about, as I said, a consensus within the society which can see a return to a more peaceful way of life and ultimately the support of the international community for a constitutional government which is serving the people of the country. Let me stop here and have Ambassador Swing touch on two other topics, and then we'll both be here to take your questions. AMBASSADOR SWING: Thank you very much. As the international community -- and our own country, the United States of America -- under Security Council resolutions continues to implement the most comprehensive sanctions and embargo we have known in the Western hemisphere, I know that there are at least two issues uppermost in the minds of all of us and, I suspect, of you. If we look at media reporting, these issues are continually coming to the fore. One, of course, is the effect of sanctions on the Haitian people, especially the most vulnerable groups in society; and, secondly, the effect of sanctions on refugees and migration and what we call often the "boat people," especially as the January period, which is the principal period of exodus, approaches. I thought it might be useful if I said just a little bit on each subject to get our discussion going. First of all, as regards humanitarian relief, I think you know that we are implementing a two-track policy: applying the pressure, as Ambassador Pezzullo has already mentioned, through the sanctions and embargo operation to try to move the democratic process forward; and at the same time, on the other track, to try to protect those groups which are most affected by the sanctions -- particularly small children and babies, mothers, pregnant women, old and infirm people. So we are continuing, and actually increasing, our feeding programs. We feed approximately 680,000 Haitians one meal a day through our own U.S. aid programs. These are matched probably by another 200,000 by other friendly governments and international organizations. At the same time, we are providing access to various medical services -- all the way from medicines to family planning and AIDS prevention -- to another two million Haitians. These programs are on-going. I know there's been a lot of concern on the part of everyone about the effect of the fuel scarcity on our ability to keep these services going. First of all, we prepositioned stocks near the feeding centers well before the sanctions were resumed in late October. Secondly, the private volunteer organizations on whom we depend have already been able to get some relief from the government's 800,000 gallon strategic fuel supply. In addition to that -- and I wouldn't want to go into detail in this forum today because I think it's premature, I think decisions are being taken probably as we talk -- we did send down to Haiti a team from the Office of Foreign Disaster Assistance -- and the United Nations has had its own officials on the spot -- to develop together a fuel distribution plan, which would probably be administered through some form of international cooperative agreement with the Malval government, to ensure that fuel continues to get to the private volunteer organizations on whom our food stocks and our medicines and their distribution depend. You'll hear more about that. We're basically optimistic. It's a good plan. There are some details to be worked out, but we are confident that this will be in place very soon; and therefore we will be positioned for the difficult period ahead as the sanctions and embargo begin to take full effect. The second concern that I know has been reflected in a lot of articles and editorials has to do with the on-going question of the Haitian "boat people." I think you should know -- and I apologize if I'm going over old ground with you -- this Administration has taken a very clear position on the migrant issue. It has essentially said that in addition to the relief measures, which I will outline for you, that it is prepared to review the migrant policy once the democratic system in Haiti is restored. Meanwhile, what we have done is, beginning in February 1992, to establish the possibility of being processed as an immigrant in-land, in Haiti. We opened our first refugee processing center in Port-au-Prince in February 1992, moving from our consular section then to an actual center -- which is separate from the consulate and the embassy now and therefore more politically acceptable -- in October '92. We opened a large center in Les Cayes in April '93, and the next month in Cap Haitien, the second largest city, which is in the northern part of the country. I visited all those centers. They're functioning very well. The numbers are up. We have so far processed about 51,000 people. About something less than 2,000 applications have now been actually approved and more than 1,500 Haitians, under this new system, have arrived in the United States with the assistance of the Red Cross and volunteer organizations in the United States. We will continue that policy, believing that this is a more humane policy than having people strike out to sea in unseaworthy vessels. I should leave it at that at this point, and be happy to take your questions. Thank you. Q Ambassador Pezzullo, going to Prime Minister Malval's statement yesterday about being "at the end of the rope" and describing it as a desparate situation: Some people have compared this to a "Hail Mary" pass in the last seconds of the fourth quarter with very little chance of success, but the only option open. Do you think that has any validity? AMBASSADOR PEZZULLO: No, I think that's a little overdrawn. When we put the sanctions on originally in June to force the military to come to the table, there was speculation then that the military would not respond. The betting then among most people was that the military, under no circumstances, would agree to any kind of an international agreement. Well, they did come to the table, they did come to Governor's Island, and they did sign an agreement. Now, they didn't live up to its terms, but they signed that agreement. The first five steps had been pretty much realized before they stumbled. We're now in a similar situation -- the circumstance is different -- pressure again building up because of sanctions; a very severe pressure. It is that pressure and the circumstances within the country that the Prime Minister is referring to when he says the people of the country -- and he's including the military -- see no future. What we don't know -- and we'll see what the future brings -- is just how far they are in being convinced that they have to reach some sort of an accord here. This is not a "Hail Mary." The fact is, the sanctions are in place. Should this initiative prosper, as I think it has a good likelihood of doing, fine and dandy. If it doesn't, then the military and those in power are still caught up in the same reality; namely, that the sanctions will continue, the country will be in a position of near collapse, and they will be seen as the forces that brought it there. I think he's right in the sense that his initiative is warranted and based on a general concern within the country, and I think it's more than just a last desperate heave. Q He was ambiguous about it yesterday. I think he left us with the impression that there was no commitment from the military that they will join these talks if and when they take place. Is that your understanding? AMBASSADOR PEZZULLO: He's had a series of discussions with the military. These are all confidential talks, and I really don't know the depths of the discussion or just how much they've committed themselves to. But I share his view that he will get a response. Q It's an unfortunate scenario, it's something that you don't want to happen, of course... I don't know what persuades you, that if the country is near collapse and the military is held responsible, that somehow out of this chaos will arise a shift toward democracy. Wouldn't they just go for a man on a white horse... they would be replaced, wouldn't they, by some other repressive regime? Then how do you necessarily benefit if the military rulers are held responsible -- and probably they're so privileged they're not feeling the same pinch that the man on the street is or the man in the alley is. So I don't understand how squeezing them to death is somehow going to promote democracy, ultimately. AMBASSADOR PEZZULLO: It's very interesting psychology in that country. When the military overthrew Aristide, they never put a junta in place. During all the talks we had, they always stood behind the facade that they were not the rulers. I recall conversation after conversation, "Why are you talking to me? Talk to the government." They had a government out there all the time. They love the fiction of not being the ultimate deciders of things. I think slowly that mask is falling off. I don't think there are many Haitians who are thinking that it's the Malval government bringing this problem to them. The fact is, a man with a white horse is not going to resolve this problem. The reality is, this doesn't end. There is no end to this line short of a resolution that is, as we call it, constitutional and accepts the return of Aristide. There is no answer. A shift in military leadership now would mean nothing. The international community would wink at it and say, "We continue on." So they don't have a way out short of agreeing to the support for a constitutional government and a change within the military of leadership. Q Is it your conclusion now that Governor's Island was too narrowly drawn and that, in fact, the government is going to have to be broadened if it's going to lead to some sort of political resolution? AMBASSADOR PEZZULLO: Governor's Island did not state what the government would look like. Governor's Island was followed by another meeting in New York -- which we called the New York Pact -- where, indeed, you had the parliamentarians and the political parties come together. They wrote an agreement in which they talked about a government of national reconciliation. Again, it was not defined; and then they talked about a sort of legislative agenda that had to be fulfilled. Something on the way to the end of that fell down. In other words, the government formed didn't seem to suit or satisfy those parties that had signed the New York Pact; that it, indeed, was a government of national reconciliation broad enough to contain them all. The terms of Governor's Island, which were specifically dates at which different parties would comply with elements in it, were fulfilled until we came to some of the crucial issues of military transition, which is what I would call the gut power issue. But it left vague these other elements of how you reconcile a society, how you get everybody buying into this consensus. Let me just say one thing which I think is crucial in Haiti -- probably crucial in any society. If you don't build a center coalition of some sort of strength that is committed to whatever the program is that they agree with, you're always going to be beset by those at the extremes who will rip at it. The military have represented that extreme for the last two years. The center is still ill-defined. Aristide represented, when he was elected, a choice of the people; but certainly that coalition of forces that would have supported his Presidency never jelled. What this proposal is aimed at is reconstituting, basically, a political coalition in the center which would support democratic processes and ultimately the support of the international community. Q What happened to December 15? Q Sir, if that coalition forms, will it be able to gain control of the frozen assets that I understand are now largely under control of President Aristide? AMBASSADOR PEZZULLO: I would assume that would be a normal function. In other words, those assets belong to the Government of Haiti. Of course, that -- the government that represented Haiti at the end of this process, which would be basically an Aristide government, would draw on those frozen assets. The answer to your question, what he said yesterday -- and I think he's committed to -- is that he would stay on as Acting Prime Minister. Q Beyond the 15th? AMBASSADOR PEZZULLO: Beyond the 15th. His resignation wouldn't be effective until the 15th, and then he would stay on as Acting. Q It's interesting, this question of a central coalition. Aristide got 70 percent of vote. How much more do you have to broaden a base for a government? What's missing? AMBASSADOR PEZZULLO: That's for the Haitians to decide. Q They did decide. AMBASSADOR PEZZULLO: The point is, an election is a stage in a process of governance. What occurred in Haiti was that you had a coup, and that coup unsettled or overthrew a nascent government. The need now is to build a political force sufficient to ensure that the new government that will be formed under Aristide, naturally -- he will be the President -- will have sufficient support among elements within that society to be able to survive. Q What elements are those he needs to survive that he doesn't have already? AMBASSADOR PEZZULLO: That, I say, is something the Haitians will have to decide. I think you better address that to somebody like Malval, who is the man who sees the need for this conference to bring together those forces -- financial survival . This is not an academic exercise that you deal with in a school room. This is something that has to come out of the body politic of the Haitian people. Q Maybe the Ambassador can offer... I realize this is not academic; we're here for a briefing. One of you must have some opinion of what's missing in the coalition to have it survive. AMBASSADOR PEZZULLO: He is saying that what is needed to form a governing coalition, sufficiently strong to bring into being a capacity to govern the country, requires this type of conference. I don't think he knows exactly what these forces will be; but his discussions over the last three weeks or so, and his experience in governing under very adverse conditions, convinces him that that's what's needed. Q On the subject of finances, maybe Ambassador Swing could answer. Malval, yesterday, said that the Central Bank's cash reserves are gone. No money is coming in. The country is broke. Yet, the military continues to operate at some degree of subsistence. The theory has been that, in fact, they're running drugs and they're a waystation between Latin America and the United States. Is that, in fact, the case? AMBASSADOR SWING: I think our reporting that's been in the public domain has generally shown that Haiti has been a transit and storage point for drugs. No one has viewed them as a major player in the Latin American drug trade. It doesn't mean it's not a concern to us. We continue to watch it. We continue to try to develop as much data as we can on it, but we have no hard evidence that would take us beyond that central conclusion that they're, at this point a transit, and storage point. Q Is that where they are getting their money to survive? AMBASSADOR SWING: The question of salaries for the army is an issue, and it's a question every month of where do you get the money to pay the salaries. So you raise the question about the frozen assets; that's not a limitless fund. Of course, with the drying up of everything now, both in the job market where we've lost more than a hundred thousand jobs since the coup, and now with the embargo on where not much is getting in, a lot of the sources of finance, both licit and illicit are simply being cut off as the economy grinds inexorably to a halt. Q Ambassador Pezzullo, is there anything that President Aristide could be doing or should be doing to facilitate this process? For example, what precisely is his position on the broadening of the coalition, or the creation of a center coalition? AMBASSADOR PEZZULLO: He's supportive of this initiative. This goes back to the question before. When you begin this type of -- basically, it's going to be a national dialogue with major forces on the political realm, the public realm, the labor unions, the military, private sector -- something will emerge here in terms of a sense of what needs to be done in various areas. A lot of it is well known. For example, some of the legislation that has been held up is clear. Some of the attitudes that have to be changed within the military on the renovation of the high command, and so on, are known. Some of the other things, I don't think anybody can predict yet. But the point is, out of this conference will come a new series of recommendations and judgments. At that time, it will be the responsibility of Malval to try to put these into some focus, and the President to hopefully accept them, or to work them in such a way that they build what I say is this coalition of forces in the center than can provide stability in the period ahead. Q In the past, as I understand it, the President has resisted the notion of a broader coalition. Has this been an impediment to resolving the issue? AMBASSADOR PEZZULLO: When the Cabinet was formed there was some concern about the breadth of the Cabinet. I think one of the issues that will be discussed will be what kind of participation can you bring into this government that will give it a broader constituency. As I say, I don't know where this will come out, but certainly it will be one of the issues that will be discussed. Q To follow that up, I believe that President Aristide said in the past that once Cedras and Francois step down, then he would consider broadening the Cabinet. Has he changed his position? Is he now willing to broaden the Cabinet before -- AMBASSADOR PEZZULLO: The sequence of events is another thing that's going to have to be worked out. My own sense is that there is such an interlapping of these things that you may have to have almost simultaneity. In other words, a deal stuck at different levels and then a series of things that happen in rapid-fire fashion -- one tied to the other, because there is a great deal of a lack of faith in this society. Nobody will go first for fear that they'll be done in. So I think there's going to be a need for sort of a package approach which will satisfy, after the discussions and the negotiations, all the parties; and then it will just happen -- all these things. The departure of certain military, the transfer of others, legislation, the shape of the government, the program of the government will all have to be brought together quickly. Q My question goes to the safety issue. You had a number of legislators who were afraid to come out of hiding to attend legislation sessions and who, I believe, some of them were in this country or were out of Haiti. Has that situation changed? Is the security situation different? Are these people willing to come home? Can this conference be held with any degree of certainly that people are going to attend and not be killed? AMBASSADOR PEZZULLO: It's a central question. Absent that, you couldn't have a conference that would be meaningful, certainly. Q Right. What do we think will happen to ensure that the conference can take place given that problem? AMBASSADOR PEZZULLO: The military leaders and police leaders in that country are going to have to provide the security conditions that permit people to discuss and meet and participate in this conference. Q Is there any assurance that that will happen? AMBASSADOR PEZZULLO: We will see. I think it will happen. I think it will happen -- aaain, because of the pressure of circumstances. Q Can I ask a question about the refugee policy, the migrant policy? You said that once democracy is restored the U.S. will review that policy. AMBASSADOR PEZZULLO: Right. Q That suggests that even after democracy is restored the policy of forced repatriation may continue; is that the case? AMBASSADOR SWING: No. What we're saying by that is we have done what we could do within the constraints of our own legislation to ameliorate the conditions of persons seeking to flee. In other words, that they not take to unseaworthy vessels but rather go to our refugee processing centers, fill out the necessary forms, talk to a counselor, eventually be interviewed by the Immigration and Naturalization Service officers who are there, and then be processed and receive the assistance of the Red Cross to travel to the United States. I believe all that we meant by saying that we were prepared to review once there was a democratic government is, that once democracy is restored, and if that democratic government comes to us with a proposition, we'd have to look at it. I think that's all we mean by that. MS. SHELLY: One more question. Q Well, my third. But I suppose you could answer this by saying it will be up to the Haitian people. Obviously, I'm intrigued by the U.S. -- you describe a policy that's having an effect because it's crippling Haiti's economy. What I see is a U.S. Government that can't get Aristide back into power and is not willing to cut a deal that broadens his coalition to include military people. I shouldn't be surprised. In Somalia, we're flying Aideed around after we try to get him killed and blamed him for killing peacekeepers. It's a pragmatic time we live in. The question is, who is ineligible -- and don't tell me the Haitian who make that decision -- who is ineligible among the military to be part of this coalition from your view? Can it be the same butchers that have been running the country for years, or -- AMBASSADOR PEZZULLO: Of course not. Q -- just the top three guys -- AMBASSADOR PEZZULLO: Of course not. Q Where are you going to get these democratic military people in Haiti that never existed? AMBASSADOR PEZZULLO: Of course not. Q Impertinently, he asks. AMBASSADOR PEZZULLO: Impertinently, I answer, of course not -- three times. There are military in that country who were not in leadership positions, who have not been part of any repression and don't particularly favor what's been going on. Those are the people who will have to emerge as the military in Haiti. Thank you. MS. SHELLY: Thank you very much to our briefers. Q You know about Malcolm Toon receiving the class ring of a downed -- I don't know if he was a pilot -- American serviceman. Is that the first -- I think Dunham is his name -- is that the first the U.S. Government knew that he was missing in Russia? MS. SHELLY: When we saw the press report on this this morning, we started to look into this. All I can really tell you is the POW-MIA commission has been meeting in Moscow these last few days, and this information has come forward in the context of those meetings. I don't have a specific readout on those meetings. I'd be very happy to take the question and see if we can post something later this afternoon. Q Has another meeting with the North Koreans been arranged? MS. SHELLY: Not so far. Q Are you expecting one? MS. SHELLY: I think you are aware of what the political sequencing on this is now, based on what was said yesterday by the President. The next step on this is that we are going to consult with the South Koreans, and then we will inform North Korea of our response. So that's the political sequencing on this, and I don't have any information on meetings at this point. Q Only the South Koreans, Christine, or also -- I was under the impression also that the Japanese and even the Chinese might be part of the consultation process. MS. SHELLY: I think that the intention is to consult the South Koreans first and to have other consultations with our allies, our normal interlocutors, on this one, and then the idea would be to go back to the North Koreans. As to exactly which countries we would be consulting with when, I don't have any precise information on that. Q As a general proposition, a process like this would take, what -- several days, a week or beyond that? What kind of a timeframe are we looking at? MS. SHELLY: As the intention is to keep the pressure up on this and to keep it moving fairly quickly, I would guess that we are talking about a few days. But there is no fixed deadline of time by when these particular things have to take place. But I think things will proceed fairly quickly. Q Have there been any consultations with the South Koreans up until now -- since the President made his decision yesterday? MS. SHELLY: My understanding is that there was a telephone call this morning between President Clinton and South Korean President Kim Young Sam. I would have to refer you specifically to the White House for details of that, but I understand that this morning there was a telephone call. Q Is that the consultation that was foreseen? Is that what you're talking about? MS. SHELLY: I don't know. I just know there was a telephone call. Whether that is exactly the vehicle by which we are consulting with the South Koreans, I just don't have any further information on that. I just got the information on the call right before we came out. Q Are you in a position to say whether the United States and South Korea are agreed on what to tell the North Koreans? MS. SHELLY: No, I'm not in a position to say that. Q Is China considered an ally, for purposes of this negotiation? MS. SHELLY: I would hesitate to get into definitions of which countries are allies in which situations. We have consulted with the Chinese on this before. We've had consultations with them on this as recently as in Seattle. I would expect that we would continue to consult with them on this. Q If you happen to know, because this gets into "B" copy or into fine print, were there sanctions that somehow the United States could have applied to Kuwait's transfer of commercial planes to Syria? I'm a little confused [about] what the mechanism is that somehow has been set aside, if there is such a thing. If you have it. I mean, the main point is established -- they're to get the planes with the U.S.'s blessing -- but I just wondered if there were sanctions against that. I don't know how there could be. I don't understand. MS. SHELLY: My understanding is that the sanctions themselves that exist still have not been eased and there isn't any change in the sanctions regime; but that in the context of the existing sanctions, the U.S. approved the re-export of these three aging Boeing 727 passenger jets from Kuwait to Syria. Q Having been manufactured originally in the United States must be the point. That's how we keep a string on them? MS. SHELLY: I believe that that is the link. Q Okay. But doesn't that represent an easing of sanctions? MS. SHELLY: The sanctions question really, I think, is a broader policy question; and on the specific angles on that and where this fits into the bigger picture of our policy toward Syria, I really would have to refer you to the [Secretary's] party. Q Can you tell me, if you have it -- I see in the papers -- you know, without attribution, as if everybody knows -- that Syria has not been found to have done anything to support terrorism for something like eight years. Is that the State Department's assessment of Syria? If so, why are they on the terrorist list? MS. SHELLY: That is very definitely a policy question. I'm just going to have to decline to answer that. Q Anything about the participation of Russia in the international space station? MS. SHELLY: I have a little bit more for you on that. Yesterday afternoon, I think you are aware, we did put up an answer to the question about what had occurred at the space station meeting yesterday in the Department. I mentioned specifically in that that an invitation to participate in these talks is being conveyed to the Government of the Russian Federation through diplomatic channels. Q Okay. Thank you. Q Wait. One more. Q There was a report yesterday -- I think it was in the Boston Globe -- that a group of Haitian military officers continued to be trained in the United States after the coup, and it went on well into '92. What would be the justification for continuing a program like that when all aid was cut off? MS. SHELLY: I don't have anything specific for you on that. I'd be happy to take the question. Q Thank you. (The press briefing concluded at 1:10 p.m.)