931217 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.

                 Friday, December 17, 1993
                                      BRIEFER:  Michael McCurry

Subject                                                 Page

    Secretary's Speech Monday in New York ...........   1
    Briefing by Amb. Talbott on Monday ..............   1
    Secretary's Meeting Today with FonMin of FYROM...   1
    Secretary's Aspirations for Today's White House
      Discussion re Budget ..........................   1-4
    Reduction in Israel or Egypt Aid Levels .........   4
    Election Results
    --Reconsideration of Dealing with Russia / Demands
        of International Financial Institutions ..      4
    Return of Aristide / US Actions ...............     5-6
    US Policy on Tougher Sanctions ................     5
    Malval Conference Proposal ......................   5-6
    US Contact with Military Authorities ..........     6-7
    Possible Power-Sharing Arrangement ..............   7
    Disappearance/Abduction of Mr. Kikhya from Cairo /
      US Contacts with Egypt Govt .................     7-8
    Israeli Crackdown on Violence by Settlers .......   8
    Response to US Presentation ...................     8
    Womens' Group Appeal Re Detained Citizens .......   8
    Readout of Fon Min Celso Amorim Meeting w/
      Secretary .....................................   8-9
    Intellectual Property Rights ....................   9
    Secretary's Contacts Re Preparations for
      Clinton/Assad Meeting .........................   9

                      DEPARTMENT OF STATE
                      DAILY PRESS BRIEFING

                                                      DPC #167

             FRIDAY, DECEMBER 17, 1993, 12:46 P.M.

    MR. McCURRY:  Good afternoon, everybody.  I've got a couple 
of very short announcements.  To start with, first of all, on 
Monday -- this coming Monday -- Secretary Christopher will be 
out of town.  I just want to let everyone know that.  He'll be 
up in New York.  He's going to be giving a briefing to a group 
of folks from the Conference of Presidents of major American 
Jewish organizations in New York.  Obviously, he'll be telling 
them a little bit about his recent trip and covering some of 
the points, discussing where we are.  That event is closed to 
the press, but I did want to advise you of the Secretary's 
whereabouts on Monday.

    On Monday we will have here, in my absence, Ambassador 
Talbott to give you an ON-THE-RECORD briefing on Vice President 
Gore's recent trip to Russia and the NIS states.  That will be 
at 12:30 here.  I think we'll also cover, obviously, the recent 
elections and Strobe's assessment of where things are in Russia.

    Finally, I just wanted to advise you -- this was arranged 
too late to get on the Secretary's calendar today, but he will 
be meeting at 3:00 today with the Foreign Minister of the 
Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Stevo Crvenkovski.  That 
will occur at 3:00.  There's no photo op of that because we 
arranged it at the very last minute, but I did want to let you 
know about the meeting.

    With those housekeeping announcements, any questions you 
might have.

    Q    Mike, what's the Secretary looking to achieve in his 
meeting, budget meeting this afternoon with the President?

    MR. McCURRY:  I think several things.  One, they are in the 
final stages of the budget process, I think as you know.  I 
believe all the Cabinet members at various points are going to 
meet with the President as part of the normal budget process to 
argue their department's budget submission and to look at the 
numbers as they are measured with the OMB.

         I think the Secretary's intention, as he said earlier 
today, is to tell the President, outline for the President, 
both the opportunities that exist in the world through the 
conduct of diplomacy and some of the opportunity costs of not 
fully financing those types of diplomatic efforts.  It's a 
discussion he's had with the President before.  This has been 
going on for some time.

         I think many of you will recall in October we had a 
senior Administration official at that time give you a sort of 
an outline of the type of presentation on our thinking on the 
budget as we prepared the FY-95 submission.  I believe earlier 
in December we had both Brian Atwood and Under Secretary Davis 
here again, and I'd say that the rough contours of the 
presentation they made here to all of you is very similar to 
what the Secretary will be arguing to the President.

         As he indicated upstairs earlier, he's working fully 
within the process, arguing the case as the procedure has been 
defined by OMB, and I think that he wants to make the strongest 
possible case that the conduct of diplomacy can pay enormous 
rewards, especially the conduct of preventive diplomacy that 
can head off the types of crises that inevitably end up costing 
the U.S. taxpayer much more money.

         So without revealing any of the specifics of the 
presentation the Secretary will make, that's a rough outline 
which I would point out is consistent with what other officials 
have said here from the podium in the past.

         Q    Is the published report of an additional
$3 billion in foreign aid correct?  Is that what the Secretary 
is seeking?

         MR. McCURRY:  No, that figure is not correct; but I 
don't want to get into the numbers that will be used in this 
submission today.  We're at a point in the budget process in 
which there's a lot of back-and-forth with OMB, and I would 
guide you against that figure.  That's just not a correct 

         Q    I thought that the Secretary and the 
Administration were moving in a direction where so-called 
foreign aid really wouldn't be that, that there would be money 
coming from various and sundry other budgets to be spent on 
what used to be called foreign aid issues.  Is that not being 
done in this session, this round?

         MR. McCURRY:  I'm sorry, Ralph.

         Q    I forgot what you called it.  You know, it's this 
business of claiming that environmental assistance money ought 
to come from somebody else's budget but funneled through the 
State Department to be used in foreign aid -- what used to be 
called foreign aid projects.

         MR. McCURRY:  That's a little too truncated an 
explanation.  I'd say that there are large -- within what are 
now called the 50 and 150 accounts, there are a lot of 
different programs that have sort of cross-cutting jurisdiction 
within the United States Government.  Whichever agency is the 
one that carries it out, the point is -- the argument that we 
made is that you need to look at that overall budget as a whole 
and compare it to some of the other things that we do in the 
area of international affairs and national security and then 
measure up what the differences are.

         It was not an argument that we should get all the 
money as opposed to the other agencies; it was just let's take 
a look at what our relative expenditures are under these 
different budget headings, and then figure out if we've got 
everything correctly prioritized.

         If we believe in these programs that we feel -- we 
call them often preventive diplomacy -- if we believe in these 
programs that can pay a reward down the line and reduce costs 
for security expenditures or national defense expenditures, 
then are we adequately funding them today, and what kind of 
resource base is necessary.  That's the broad outline of the 

         Q    Does the Secretary have an idea as he makes his 
presentation to the President today as to where the additional 
money, however much it is, should come from from the federal 
budget, or is he just going in and saying, "We need more to do 
what we want to do, and you figure out where it has to come 

         MR. McCURRY:  There is one pot of money, and where the 
money comes from is the U.S. taxpayer.  I mean, that's the 
easiest way to say it.  I think the Secretary fully understands 
the enormous pressure that comes to bear on the President, who 
has to judge all of the different competing requests from all 
the agencies and then simultaneously concentrate on a goal that 
the President, as you know, attaches great importance to, which 
is deficit reduction.

         It's not our place to suggest from whence comes the 
money because you have to look at a budget in an overall 
sense.  In fact, I would stress that's exactly the argument the 
Secretary is making, which is that you need to consider sort of 
the global implications of budgeting rather than looking at 
these two little narrow accounts and say, "Can you take all the 
money -- shave all the money off the top of, for example, the 
150 or the 50 account."  You need to take a more global 
perspective if you're looking at foreign policy that's 
conducted in a new way.

         Q    Is it accurate to say that the Secretary is 
geared up for a hard sell today?

         MR. McCURRY:  I think it's accurate to say that he's 
been selling hard for some time.  I think he feels very 
strongly from making the case that diplomacy deserves to be 
funded at adequate levels and that you can't continue to sort 
of nickel and dime the diplomatic function within the federal 
budget -- as this country has over the last decade -- or it 
will have consequences.  I think he feels passionately about 
that, and I think he will argue that.

         Clearly, every Cabinet Secretary feels strongly about 
the programs under their jurisdiction, and that's part of the 
annual budget process.  But, again, I'd stress and as the 
Secretary stressed earlier today, he's doing this presentation 
and making this case totally within the confines of the budget 
process; and he's insisted to all of us who work for him that 
we do so within the confines and the parameters of the process 
that's been outlined by Director Panetta and by the President.

         Q    Just one more on that subject.  I think we would 
be remiss if we didn't ask an obligatory question.  Is the 
Secretary planning in his presentation to suggest any reduction 
in the two largest accounts of the foreign aid budget -- Israel 
and Egypt.

         MR. McCURRY:  No.  There's no change from what we said 
publicly in the past on that.

         Q    Mike, in response to the Russian elections, 
President Clinton mentioned that he thought that the vote for 
Zhirinovskiy was a protest to the economic conditions largely 
caused by the shock therapy policies.  Is there now an ongoing 
reconsideration of how to deal with Russia in that respect?

         Also, with regard to the international institutions, 
even a year ago Secretary Bentsen had encouraged the IMF not to 
go so tough on Russia because of the tenuous situation there.  
Will there be attempts to soften the demands in that respect on 
the part of the U.S.?

         MR. McCURRY:  I think the Vice President spoke very 
clearly to that point in Moscow yesterday, and I don't know 
that there's anything more that you could add to that.  I would 
go back on one point as the premise of the question, though.  I 
don't think, not to my knowledge did the President suggest the 
economic program or the shock therapy of the Russian economic 
reformers that was responsible for the economic conditions that 
exist.  I think he made a general comment saying the economic 
conditions were a motivating factor in the way a lot of people 

         I don't think he analyzed in his comments what the 
effect of the shock therapy program has been on local economic 
conditions.  I don't know that he linked those two up.

         Q    Mike, on Haiti, please.

         MR. McCURRY:  On Haiti.

         Q    The Secretary said this morning that the United 
States still backs the return of President Aristide.  What is 
the United States prepared to do to make that come about?

         MR. McCURRY:  As he outlined in the first instance, 
it's putting pressure, as the Four Friends agreed to do in 
Paris, on the Haitian military authorities, putting pressure on 
them, both diplomatically and through the effect of the 
economic sanctions in place, to have them live up to the 
commitments that have been made under the Governor's Island 

         Additional steps beyond that I don't think have been 
discussed.  But clearly if there is no movement as the 
communique of the Four Friends indicates, there would have to 
be consideration of tougher sanctions; not to say there 
couldn't be other things considered as well, as the Secretary 
indicated today.

         Q    Is the United States prepared to use force to 
restore President Aristide to power?

         MR. McCURRY:  If that is one of the options that might 
even be considered, that's not something I would be discussing 
at this point here.

         Q    But the United States would be prepared to back 
tougher sanctions?

         MR. McCURRY:  We subscribe fully to the statements 
that were contained in that communique issued last weekend.  It 
suggests in that communique that if there is no progress 
towards meeting the conditions set forth in both the communique 
and in the broad outline of the Governor's Island process, 
there would have to be consideration of expanding the current 
embargo that exists on Haiti.

         We've said, on our part for the United States, 
separately from the Four Friends, we've said all along that we 
are certainly cognizant of the humanitarian costs of an embargo 
that impacts on poor and suffering people in Haiti, and we have 
taken steps to try to ameliorate that.  We understand that, for 
example, oil deliveries to hospitals or to those who are trying 
to get medical supplies through to indigent populations is 
something that needs to be addressed.

         Q    Does the United States still back the idea, which 
Prime Minister Malval was putting forward, of a dialogue?

         MR. McCURRY:  Not just a dialogue.  The Prime Minister 
had a very specific proposal for a conference that would 
involve the parties.  It's my understanding it was a fairly 
detailed vision of what a peace conference on the future of 
Haiti would look like.  We did support that.  We thought that 
was a very promising idea.  It may be that that idea can be 
resurrected in some fashion and can prove useful in the 
future.  That's something at this that's unclear.

         Q    Is that invitation to some parties to come 
forward and revive the idea?

         MR. McCURRY:  It was the Prime Minister's initiative, 
and I think it was, in part, promising because it was the 
initiative of the Prime Minister.  I'm not putting forward that 
here.  I'm just saying that we saw that as a promising idea and 
perhaps it could be promising again in the future.

         Q    A lot of the interest in whether the U.S. 
continues to back the return of President Aristide is because 
many people think that he might stand some prospect of 
succeeding in a negotiation with Cedras and others in the 
leadership of military government there if Aristide himself 
were not part of the formula.

         Obviously, the Secretary has said what he said on that 
front.  Is there any reaching out being done now by the United 
States to the military leadership of Haiti to try to find a new 
mechanism in which they will participate, considering that they 
haven't participated in any other so far?

         MR. McCURRY:  We have been in regular contact with 
Haitian military authorities.  I don't know how recently.  I 
know we tend to work closely with the OAS and U.N. Special 
Envoy, Dante Caputo, who maintains regular contact with a 
spectrum of military leaders, and through Ambassador Swing's 
staff in Port-au-Prince.  We also try to keep in regular 
contact with military leadership beyond just the 
Cedras-Francois level but also the junior officers who are a 
factor in the equation, too.  So we do keep a broad range of 

         Whether any of that might build into some dialogue, I 
just don't want to speculate on that.

         Q    Is there any --

         MR. McCURRY:  But clearly, you heard the Secretary say 
earlier that we are going to have to look for ways to 
resuscitate or resurrect some process that leads toward a 
Governor's Island framework agreement, since that clearly is 
the only avenue that promises a return of Aristide and a return 
of democracy to Haiti.

         Q    Is the U.S. suggesting to the military government 
of Haiti some method by which the American or, for that matter, 
the international engineers might be able to return to work on 
Haiti's infrastructure or deal with humanitarian aid or 
whatever?  Is there some discussion of how to get that underway?

         MR. McCURRY:  No, I'm not aware of any, Ralph.  I'm 
just not aware of any.  I know that on the question of a U.S. 
participation in this international presence, that has been a 
regular feature of what's been called for since Governor's 
Island and was in the communique that was issued in Paris last 
week.  They called for creating the proper environment for the 
deployment of the U.N. police and military cooperation mission.

         There was really no specific definition given to 
"proper environment."  But proper environment, obviously, in 
our interpretation, would include the ability of a deployment 
like that to carry out the mission in safety and to do the work 
that they are assigned to do.  It's a non-combat mission, so 
they're there for humanitarian purposes.

         Q    Could the United States and Haiti -- I realize 
this is hypothetical, but could the United States live with a 
power-sharing arrangement?

         MR. McCURRY:  I don't want to speculate on that at 
this point.  We clearly, at this point, are trying to advance 
the Governor's Island process forward.  It's obviously been 
stuck since the provisions that would have lead to the return 
of President Aristide were, in a sense, vitiated earlier in the 

         At this point we see the Governor's Island process as 
the formula that bring us back to a point where we might see a 
glimmer of hope for democracy in Haiti.

         I think, obviously, we've got one -- the next step 
that we're looking at is the meeting that I think this military 
delegation that's been dispatched by the Four Friends will 
have.  I think it's now scheduled to be on Monday.  After that, 
we'll have to assess what type of response there is from the 

         Q    Mike, the family of Mansur Kikhya, the former 
Libyan minister, held a news conference here in town to press 
their case for information from Egypt; and they said the United 
States had been very active and very helpful in trying to get 

         Can you offer us any information or any update on his 
fate or where he might be or --

         MR. McCURRY:  I can't.  I think that's correct, that 
we have been helpful and been, in a sense, making 
diplomatically the same plea that the family made today.  We 
don't have any information on what may have occurred.  It's 
certainly premature to speculate on what's going on with this 
abduction or if there is some overall motive here that might be 

         But as to news on Mr. Kikhya, we certainly remain 
concerned about his disappearance.  We've been in touch with 
the Government of Egypt, urged them to make every effort they 
can to find out about what happened.

         The Government of Egypt has assured us that they are 
looking into the matter, but that their investigation has not 
yet turned up any information that might lead to information on 
Mr. Kikhya's whereabouts.

         Q    Mike, Israeli authorities seem to be cracking 
down to a certain extent on settlers.  There seem to be some 
arrests in the Nablus area and, reportedly, the closing off of 
some settlements.  Any comment on that?

         MR. McCURRY:  We support efforts to stop the violence 
and to end lawlessness.  I think the Secretary made that very 
clear on his recent trip.  As we've said in the past, we 
recognize and welcome the fact that Israeli officials have made 
it clear that lawlessness will not be tolerated.

         We, again, call on Israelis and Palestinians alike to 
respect the law, to promote the work that will lead to national 
reconciliation, to do everything possible to exercise maximum 
restraint and stop violence at a time when the peace process 
itself needs to be nurtured and needs to be advanced.

         Q    Any update on the situation with North Korea?

         MR. McCURRY:  No.  They still have not delivered to us 
a response to our presentation at the meeting on Friday.  
There's been no further meeting scheduled at this point.

         Q    Mike, do you have anything on -- I think there's 
an Ethiopian women's group that has appealed to the State 
Department to step in and help get some people released who 
were arrested on their way to a reconciliation conference there?

         MR. McCURRY:  I'm not aware of that situation, but 
I'll be happy to check into that.  Maybe if you check 
afterwards, we can get a little more of the details so we can 
get a question.

         Q    Would you have anything on the visit today by the 
Brazilian Foreign Minister to the State Department?

         MR. McCURRY:  Yes.  The meeting concluded just a 
little while ago.  If you can bear with me, someone did give me 
a quick readout.  I think the subjects discussed were very 
close and similar to the list that the Secretary gave prior to 
the meeting with the Foreign Minister; but I'm told they 
reviewed and exchanged views on a number of bilateral and 
multilateral issues.

         The Secretary was pleased that Brazil warmly welcomed 
the idea of a hemispheric summit which will be held in the 
United States next year at a time uncertain.  We will continue 
discussing that issue with Brazil as the planning process for 
this summit proceeds.

         They did discuss as well non-proliferation, as the 
Secretary indicated that they would.  The Foreign Minister 
stated that Brazil hopes to have its Senate ratify full-scope 
nuclear safeguards as soon as the end of this month.  So those 
were, I think, the two key points that came out.

         Q    One of the stickiest issues -- there are many, I 
guess, but one of the stickiest issues actually with Brazil is 
intellectual property rights that the Secretary mentioned.  Was 
there any progress made on that front, any pledges from the 

         MR. McCURRY:  Ralph, I don't have anything here 
indicating that they did.  I know they talked about it.  I did 
ask the Secretary very briefly.  He said he covered the points 
and they had a good discussion, but I didn't get a specific on 
that.  If there is anything specific I can add, I will.

         Q    Back to the Middle East for just a second.  In 
advance of the Clinton-Assad meeting, has the Secretary had any 
further contact with Foreign Minister Shara?  Is there any plan 
for another meeting perhaps, or some kind of get-together or 
some --

         MR. McCURRY:  There will be a lot of contacts at 
different levels.  I'm not sure if they will be at the 
Secretarial or Foreign Minister level.  But the Secretary has 
been working very closely with our peace team, with the group 
here in the Department.  They have been working the phones in 
the region pretty deliberately over the last several days.  I 
think the Secretary's last contact in the region was with 
Foreign Minister Moussa earlier in the week.  I did mention 
earlier that he had talked to Foreign Secretary Hurd just prior 
to Foreign Secretary Hurd's meeting with Chairman Arafat.

         The Secretary no doubt will be following up with that, 
particularly as we get into the first week of January in 
advance of the trip.

         Q    Thank you.

         MR. McCURRY:  Thank you.

         (Press briefing concluded at 1:10 p.m.)

To the top of this page