Return to: Index of 1994 Daily Briefings || Electronic Research Collections Index || ERC Homepage

OCTOBER 14, 1994

                       U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE
                        DAILY PRESS BRIEFING

                            I N D E X

                       Friday, October 14, 1994

                             Briefer:  Christine Shelly

   Presidents Clinton/Aristide's Remarks ...........1
   Aristide's Return/Official Schedule .............2
   Current Situation ...............................2
   US Conditions for Departure of Military Leaders .2-10
   US Unfreezes Assets .............................2-4
   Security of Aristide ............................7
   Voluntary Returnees .............................10

   Talks with US in Geneva .........................11-12
   --  Comment by Assistant Secretary Lord .........11-12

   Kozyrev's Visit/Statement .......................13,15-16
   Kozyrev's Visit to UN ...........................13
   US Efforts re:  UN Resolution on Gulf Crisis ....14-15

   Boatpeople Picked Up/In Safe Havens/Returnees ...15


DPC #147


MS. SHELLY: Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen. First, I want to draw to your attention that at 2:00, for those of you who might decide that the quality of the material here is not high enough for you, you might want to go running over to the White House Briefing Room where there's going to be an on- camera briefing on "Haiti: Next Steps" by the Deputy National Security Advisor, Sandy Berger and William Gray.

I'm not taking Haiti off my screen, and a fair amount of information on "next steps" and what's going to be happening tomorrow, and things like that, which I'll be going through. Just in case anybody decides they are inclined to run over there, I'll certainly understand if you have to get up and leave. I did want to mention that.

I want to take a minute, at the top of the briefing, just to go over a little bit on events surrounding Aristide's return and a little bit on what I've picked up from the State Department's correspondent down in Port-au-Prince today, who is well and favorably known to you, and then also get into one other point in the context of having seen some of your reporting over the last 24 hours.

On the first -- events surrounding Aristide's return -- as I'm sure you're all aware, President Aristide was at the White House this morning with President Clinton. After a short meeting in the Oval Office, President Clinton and President Aristide made brief remarks to the invited guests.

There will be a dinner, with the U.S. as host, for President Aristide this evening at Blair House.

President Aristide will depart Washington tomorrow morning for Port-au-Prince. The Secretary and other members of the Presidential delegation will attend a ceremony at the National Palace during which President Aristide will address the Haitian people.

Following this, President Aristide will host a luncheon. During the afternoon, he will meet with various members of his government, various political parties and invited guests.

As to the situation on the ground, according to our Embassy in Port-au-Prince, preparations for the return of President Aristide are well underway. The government offices continue to be set up for returning ministry officials. The National Palace is being prepared for President Aristide, and a general clean-up in the city is underway.

The mood is very festive with spontaneous outbreaks of almost carnival-like activity in anticipation of President Aristide's return.

There was a mass today at 10:00 this morning marking the first anniversary of Guy Malary's murder. We have no indications at this point that there will be any problems, but we'll continue to watch the situation very, very closely. Specifically, from my colleague and our correspondent, David Johnson: He comments on the very large force presence in the streets of Port-au-Prince, which is highly visible and certainly significant that it is there to establish a safe and secure environment for tomorrow's activities.

The final point that I just wanted to touch on before I will move onto your questions is that I think in reading some of the stories in the newspapers of today, there is a certain amount of reporting which suggests that somehow the United States has been involved in sending the coup leaders off to some kind of life of luxury in exile. Not all of the reporting, of course, has had that kind of a lead or headline. But I think that that is certainly a gross overstatement of what the situation is on this, and I just want to address a couple of points on this.

You also asked me some questions yesterday about the holdings that were unfrozen and various things regarding the holdings that we might or might not have known about the coup leaders. So I've got a little bit of additional information on that for you today.

First of all, as a general point, as you're all aware, the overriding policy of this Administration was the return of President Aristide and democracy to Haiti. President Aristide will return tomorrow. The process of reconciliation, renewal, and rebuilding has already begun.

I understand now from the Treasury Department that whereas they did not maintain information on individual bank accounts, we don't have any reason to believe that the coup leaders -- I was asked about yesterday -- have any assets of any consequence in U.S. banks.

When the possibility of putting some of the sanctions into effect was first considered, this was something that we looked into. We tried to be able to make some kind of an appreciation about what types of accounts there might be by the coup leaders. I think there has been, frankly, some rather wild speculation about what type of assets the three individuals in question might have held.

As I said, we looked into this before. At that time, as best as were able to determine, we could not ascertain that there were any U.S.-based assets, banks accounts, things like that, of any consequence whatsoever for the three coup leaders.

I'm also told that in the final discussions leading up to the moment of departure, particularly for Generals Cedras and Biamby, there was a considerable amount of discussion related to financial issues. I addressed it yesterday, and I have few more details for you if you want to get back into it.

For example, the issue related to the one-year lease of the properties. Our people were left with the impression that the financial issue was an issue of concern to them. They told us, in the context of those discussions this past week, that they did not have foreign bank accounts, apart from what has been certainly alleged and speculated on very heavily in the press. I certainly am not in a position to be able to verify that claim. I tried to give you the best information I could about what we've been able to ascertain here regarding holdings in the United States.

When the Treasury Department issued their regulations, they asked commercial banks and other types of financial institutions to provide information on the individuals that we have named, and the list, as you know, has grown to a point where it has reached somewhere in the range of 600 people. They were asked to provide this information on a voluntary basis.

So the figure that they put out -- about $79 million in blocked Haitian accounts -- we don't profess that this is an absolute number. This is the number that was based on voluntary reports coming banks. But it also represents holdings by a very broad category of people; as I said, something more or less in the range of 600 people, many of whom are still in Haiti and many of whom, I think, can be expected to participate in the economic future and reconstruction of Haiti.

So I think there has been a fair amount of wide speculation on this. But as I said, we don't have any reason to believe that there were any assets of consequence in U.S. banks.

So with that point, I'd like to open the floor for your questions.

Q You're not ruling out the possibility that Mrs. Cedras could have had a few million dollars -- right? -- as opposed to Raoul Cedras?

MS. SHELLY: I think that the immediate family members were also looked into. I can't vouch for every single family member of the coup leaders. But, again, it is certainly our overall impression that there were not assets of consequence in the United States.

Q Why did the government leave that impression, then? You made a big deal about freezing assets in public statements by a number of officials. You yourself were asked yesterday whether they had assets or not.

Why, suddenly, today say, "Well, they really didn't have any money here?"

MS. SHELLY: We're not saying that they didn't have any money. I think that $79 million, based on voluntary reports, is not an inconsequential sum. But, as I said, it comes from a broad --

Q (Inaudible) to Cedras -- right? -- or Biamby or Francois?

MS. SHELLY: To my knowledge, based on those three, we did not come up with hard evidence. In fact, because of the voluntary nature of the reporting, I'm not professing it's necessarily a completely accurate picture.

But there was concern about that and the use of sanctions, of freezing of assets, and things like that. Those are tools. Those are political tools which we have available to make a political point. I think that we felt that it was necessary -- at various points in time, those leaders did not step aside, as they had committed themselves to do -- that it was necessary to use the instruments of pressure that we had to try to encourage them to step aside.

Q How about the issue of rents? I saw a statement the other day where a U.S. official in Haiti apparently said that Cedras was paid for those leases before he left. Is that true? And what are we talking about --

MS. SHELLY: I've got more details on this, so let me take a minute to go through that. I know this is a thing in which there is great interest, so let me go through what I've got on that.

As I mentioned yesterday, during the final negotiations leading to the departure of General Cedras from Haiti, the Embassy did make a verbal agreement with General Cedras' representatives to lease three properties for diplomatic and consular purposes. This is from the Cedras family and this is a lease of one year.

There have been a lot of speculations about what all of these are, how much money was involved, and all that. The total price for the entire year for all three properties together is $60,000. That's $5,000 per month -- again, including all three of the residences.

To give you a little bit more information on this. One property is a compound with three residences on a one-acre lot. While the fair market value of the property is $6,000 per month, the Embassy obtained a rental rate of $4,000 per month.

The second property was located downtown. It's a mixed- office, residential building, on a one-third acre plot. This is being rented for $600 per month.

The third property is located one hour outside of town. It has two buildings, or two structures. This property is being rented for $400 per month.

As I also mentioned yesterday, I think we have the right to sub-lease these properties to other diplomatic entities if we wish.

Our plan at this point is to follow up with General Cedras' representatives to sign a formal lease, using the standard State Department overseas leasing format. The verbal agreement provides that this, of course, gives space at this juncture for what is obviously an increasing number of U.S. personnel in that region. As we have also said -- completely up front -- it also provided a further incentive for General Cedras to leave.

You probably also have some questions about how you determine fair market value and things like that. The agreements that we tend to negotiate of this type -- standard rental agreements -- are normally based on such things as calculations of the amount of money which could be paid per square foot. The cost per square foot is consistent with the amounts being paid for other properties in various places around the world. I can really get into the weeds on this one.

But, for example, a DCM's residence, which might have 4,600 square feet, something like that would currently rent for approximately 50 cents per square foot per month. I know you want to spend absolutely enormous amounts time going through this, but I did try to pull together as much as I could.

Clearly, because of this substantial increase at present in the number of American personnel -- and mostly official personnel -- we do at this point have a tremendous increase need for office, for housing space. It will be needed around the country by U.S. Government entities and by other entities. We believe that we can make full use of all of this space. I think we can certainly make use of this and other space as well.

But again there is nothing here that we are not being completely up front about. It will all be in leases whose details will be completely available; but there are not other payoffs involved. There are not other buyouts involved. This is an arrangement which, as I just said, I've covered the reasons for doing that and also indicated our intention to use that.

Q Christine, Ambassador Swing said this morning there was an option to buy at the end of the one-year period. Do you know if a total value has been placed on the properties by the government, and if the United States plans to exercise that option?

MS. SHELLY: I do not know. My understanding of this is that of the three properties which I've mentioned, it's only the largest property on which we have an option to buy. Determining what also constitutes a fair-market value for that house, I think the process of that is a little bit longer than the process for determining it on a rental basis.

So I don't have that information at this point, and certainly there's no commitment on that and no decision yet. But in the case of the first property, that is a possibility, but it's not anything on which there's anything more concrete at this point.

Q I know you tried very hard yesterday to produce the information that you were able to provide at yesterday's briefing, but --

MS. SHELLY: And I have even more today, see?

Q But why was the price unavailable yesterday?

MS. SHELLY: I honestly don't know. We have lots of things going on and, as you know, with the Secretary's trip and with some of our own resources down in Haiti, we're chasing down as many things as we can. We're also trying to concentrate our energies on the things that we think are most likely to come up.

I did try to get that information, but that particular detail I simply wasn't able to get by yesterday's briefing.

Q Christine, you've enumerated bank account information. Do you have any other information about other assets like property Cedras was supposed to own -- a house down in Miami?

MS. SHELLY: I don't have any information on that. I don't know. I will certainly look into that and see. We are trying to provide as much information on this as we can. I don't have information on that, but I will certainly check.

Q Do you have a list? Are you able to produce a list now of the 23 people who were given parole?

MS. SHELLY: I don't know yet. I'll see. I asked on that yesterday. I'm told that the list is physical property of the INS. Frankly, I don't see why we wouldn't be able to make it available, but let me keep checking on that.

Q Christine, with regard to the security of Cedras and specifically the disposition of the army whose heads have fled, what can you tell us about making the new government safe from coup or other kinds of actions by the military?

MS. SHELLY: As you know, that's one of the major reasons for the presence of, first, a multinational force and then ultimately the United Nations force. I put up actually an answer to a question yesterday that gave a little bit of details about President Aristide's security detail, I think in response to a question by George yesterday.

On that particular point, I can just give you a very little bit more information on that. Regarding President Aristide's security once he returns to Haiti, the U.S. Government awarded -- this was late last week -- a contract to MVM, Incorporated, to assist the Haitian security force in the protection of President Aristide.

The cost of the contract ranges from $850,000 to $1.95 million, and the reason for the range in that is because it depends entirely on the duration of the contract. My understanding is it involves somewhere in the range of 20 to 25 people, and the expectation is it would be for at least three months, probably running up a few more months than that. I don't think that there's an absolute limit at this point on the contract, but that's why we're giving a contract range there.

AID is paying for this contract with foreign assistance funds. They have transferred the money to the Department of State for this purpose.

There is the broader question about what the Department is doing to try to improve Aristide's security. The Bureau of Diplomatic Security has provided, as I think you know, protective security training to a group of 53 Haitians who will constitute the protective security detail for President Aristide.

The training was initially conducted last fall. The Haitians received a refresher training course that ended last week. Diplomatic Security Special Agents will travel to Haiti to continue training the Haitians until they're able to assume full responsibility for the protection of President Aristide.

Are we concerned about threats to President Aristide once he returns? Obviously. That's why we've taken the measures that I've just described. Haiti is in a transitional state. The atmosphere, we are aware, is conducive to potential violence. We do not have any specific information at this point, suggesting that there is a particular threat against him. It's obviously a situation we'll be watching very carefully, and it's a situation if the circumstances change, relative to what we perceive now, we will certainly address that if that is the case.

Q But what is the disposition of the army? Are they going to be allowed to maintain their arms? Will the U.S. military be supervising them? In other words, that that army might not take action against the new government.

MS. SHELLY: You're touching on lots of issues and lots of other people also have questions, too, but just in short let me say, as you know, a key element in this program is the professionalization of the army and of the police force; and, of course, the separation of those two through legislation enacted by the Haitian Parliament.

As you also know, there was a weapons collection program which has been underway. The Pentagon has the lead on that and certainly you can get the actual numbers on that from them. And, finally, I think your last point was on the disposition, is that it?

Q Just --

MS. SHELLY: Okay, and then finally the last point, of course, touches back on presence of multinational force and the presence of the United Nations Mission in Haiti, which is to work with those forces, over the period of time that first parliamentary elections take place and presidential elections take place, to try to make sure that there can be as secure and as stable an environment in Haiti as possible.


Q Is there any other way that the U.S. has provided money for Cedras or Biamby or Francois? We have rented Cedras' homes from him which provides income and provided him transportation to Panama. Is there anything else that we have done?

MS. SHELLY: Not that I have been able to affirm in any kind of way. I am told that there were not payoffs. There were not buyouts. I am unaware that there is any other kind of arrangement which has been made. I know that we are helping them get their household effects into storage under some kind of arrangement. I'm also told that that will be at their expense and not at U.S. Government expense, and I have absolutely no other information suggesting that there is anything else out there at all.

So standing up here and having checked on that very thoroughly, I do not believe that there were other payments involved.


Q What do you say to members of the Haiti exile community, including those who sort of risked their lives over treacherous waters to get to the United States, and now they are just sort of furious that these 23 Cedras cronies have come to a nice life in the United States?

MS. SHELLY: Again, I don't think I'm in a position to comment on quality-of-life issues for them, either in the United States or in Panama.

Q But how do you end up allowing them into this country?

MS. SHELLY: Because it was always anticipated that the upper echelon of those involved in the coup would leave, and that would also encompass family members and perhaps a number of closest associates, which I believe it has; and I believe that those judgments, the decisions on that, were made, keeping in mind the future of Haiti, the domestic environment, and what would reduce, over the longer term, the potential for violence and trouble within Haiti.

I think it was the considered view of all those involved in working this issue that Haiti would be a better place, a more stable place, if the departure of those people was facilitated.

Let me just also touch on one other thing, because you've also mentioned the boat people. I want to also bring you up to date on that, because we haven't covered that recently.

Haitians at Guantanamo continue to request to return home. I would note that for those of you who watch this very closely, that the departures for Port-au-Prince have been temporarily suspended for a couple of days in connection with the preparations for President Aristide's return tomorrow.

We expect the departures of the voluntary returnees to Haiti to resume early next week. We did have 752 Haitians return voluntarily to Haiti on October 12. That brings the number of voluntary returns to Haiti since the military operations began to 3,740. That brings the overall total of voluntary returns to Haiti from Guantanamo since the safehaven policy went into effect to 9,523.

I should say what that leaves at the moment is that there are 10,480 Haitians presently at Guantanamo, and that compares against a total figure of migrants whom we've picked up at sea of 21,717.

Q Are any still going out?

MS. SHELLY: Let me see, what do I have. The last Haitians rescued at sea were the 22 who were picked up off Savannah, Georgia, on October 2. They had been at sea, actually, for eight days. They appeared not to have come from Haiti but actually came from the Bahamas, because those migrants were in extremely poor physical condition and in need of emergency and medical attention. You may remember from press reports, one child aboard had already died. A decision was made to bring that group of people into the United States.

Q You mentioned at the outset that you could talk about next steps. What do you have on that subject?

MS. SHELLY: Next steps, meaning what was going to happen tomorrow. I think that's what the White House briefing, which is an ON-THE-RECORD briefing, is going to cover at 2:00 o'clock, so I think I'll have to let them do that one.

Q Armenian rebels from the Nagorno-Karabakh, according to Reuters wire report, issuing (inaudible) and has refused entry to Turkish officials from the CSCE; and according to report, the rest of the delegation made up of U.S. and French nationals was refusing to make the trip to Karabakh in a gesture of solidarity with their Turkish colleagues. Do you have any reaction about this event?

MS. SHELLY: I don't, and in fact that's a kind of detailed question, and it certainly is the type of question that we would endeavor to try to get an answer to; and for any of you who might have a very particular question you'd like to raise at the briefing, please feel free to give us a call in the morning and let us know, and we'll try to have an answer ready by the briefing.

I don't have any answer on that. I'm not informed, but I'll take the question.

Q Christine, this morning at the APEC seminar downstairs, Assistant Secretary Winston Lord said, and I think I'm quoting him precisely, "We think that we are on the brink of a significant breakthrough in the Geneva talks with North Korea." Can you give us any more details on that?

MS. SHELLY: Yes. I'm aware of the remarks. They were drawn to my attention fairly quickly after they were made, and I think that created quite a bit of excitement; and I hate to temper the excitement, but he was, I think, referencing some reports that were coming out of South Korea from some backgrounding.

I'm not in a position to confirm that today. What I can tell you is the two delegations consulted through written communications on Wednesday. There were working level talks which resumed yesterday. They're also continuing today.

We're still in our mode that we're not going to get involved in discussions of specifics while the negotiations are underway. The round has not ended yet. I don't have a prediction at this point about how much longer they're going to be talking, so we will certainly do our usual, giving you a very full and complete readout and the best briefing that we possibly can at the moment that this round of talks is concluded. But we're not there yet.

Q You said Lord was misled, is that what you're saying?

MS. SHELLY: No. I'm saying that he was keying off of some other press reports that I think were based on some background and coming out of South Korea. I don't want to get into qualitative judgments about progress, not progress, satisfied, not, are we close, not close, because once I get into that it's very difficult to then decide where you draw the line.

So the talks are still going on -- that's what I can tell you -- and we will certainly keep you posted on how things go.

Q Are the talks due to end today?

MS. SHELLY: They're not due to end on any particular date.

Q No deadline. Then there was another -- in the Reuters report that was in the Washington Times this morning, there was a hitch with regard to some factions in South Korea, criticizing -- and I believe it was specifically that we would have a five-year -- offering a five-year moratorium to North Korea. Is there any basis in fact to that?

MS. SHELLY: That's getting into the substance of the negotiations, and I can't comment.

Q But Lord is quoted as saying that it's a significant breakthrough. Is that --

MS. SHELLY: I know what he said, and I also told you what I have to say.

Q Are you saying that an Assistant Secretary in this Department is basing public comments on press reports when he has access to a colleague in Geneva who's actually doing the negotiations?

MS. SHELLY: Mark, I've said what I have to say. I'm sorry, I can't help on any further questions on this.

Other subjects.

Q Christine, do you have any public reaction to the Nobel Peace Prize awards?

MS. SHELLY: I don't have a specific reaction from the State Department. I would draw your attention to some remarks that the Secretary made earlier today, because in his press conference following the meeting that he had with President Mubarak, that subject came up.

He said in that, "We have to step back from the tragic events of the last few days and remember the tremendous progress initiated by Prime Minister Rabin, by Chairman Arafat, and certainly also that includes Foreign Minister Perez, and the great accomplishments of these men in initiating the peace process between Israel and the Palestinians."

I don't know if we'll have more of a reaction on this later in the day. He's addressed that, but I don't have anything on that at this point.

Q On Kuwait.


Q There are reports in the wires that the talks are finished with Saddam Husayn and Foreign Minister Kozyrev, and that Foreign Minister Kozyrev will then go to Kuwait, where I presume he will brief the Kuwaitis and the U.S. officials. Have you any further information? First, can you confirm that Kozyrev is going to Kuwait, and who will he speak to?

MS. SHELLY: As to where Kozyrev is going and with whom he's going to speak, that's a question you'd have to ask the Russians. It's not a question for us. I expect there will be other travel, and I mentioned, I think, at yesterday's briefing, that we expect him to end up in New York some time over the weekend. And he has asked to address the Security Council on Monday. So that's the information that I do have on his travel.

I just would also draw your attention to a statement which we issued last night, which is available in the Press Office if you didn't get it, which addressed our reaction to Foreign Minister Kozyrev's trip to Baghdad. I understand also from the party that the Secretary has also put out his own statement on this just a short while ago. I don't have the text on that statement yet, but we may even have it by the end of the briefing, but you can get that from the Press Office later this afternoon.

And in a surprising development, I am very pleased to draw to your attention a piece of paper which says "The Gulf Crisis- -Highlights U.N. Security Council actions." (TO STAFF) Julie, am I happy? I am happy.

Anyway, this was put in my hands -- since I've been on the hook since Monday that we would pull together for you a resolution-by-resolution -- it's a brief kind of summary of what the resolution numbers were, when they were adopted, and what the major elements are. This is also available in the Press Office after the briefing.

Q Can you do the same for Haiti? (Laughter)

MS. SHELLY: George, you know what I've been through this week trying to produce this from our system. I'll take it under advisement, but I think I'm not going to commit myself on precise dates.

Q Is the Secretary going to go to New York?

MS. SHELLY: Is the Secretary . . .?

Q Going to go to New York?

MS. SHELLY: He could. I don't have anything on that to announce at this point.

Q Is the U.S. hoping to accomplish anything at the U.N. before Kozyrev arrives?

MS. SHELLY: The state of play up in New York, as you know, during the past week we've been working in the Security Council, and intensively engaged on trying to work out a response to the provocative actions by Iraq.

On October 8, at the outset of the crisis, the Security Council adopted a statement expressing its grave concern. Since then, our primary objective has been to end the threat to Kuwait, which was posed by the movement of Iraqi troops to the southern area and then to ensure that such a situation does not recur.

We're presently consulting with Security Council members on a resolution that is designed to accomplish both of those objectives. I'm told there were some informal P-5 type exchanges this morning. There may be an informal meeting of the Security Council this afternoon, but we are pushing forward for early adoption of a resolution. I don't have a prediction at this point about when a vote might take place.

Q Is there anything on meetings tomorrow?

MS. SHELLY: On meetings tomorrow?

Q On Iraq at the U.N.?

MS. SHELLY: I don't know if they're going to be in continuous session over the course of the weekend. But I think probably at the end of this afternoon's meeting, they'll decide whether or not they want to meet tomorrow. Certainly, we know they'll meeting on Monday morning.

Q Concerning some Cubans in Guantanamo, is there a plan to bring children without their parents -- otherwise called "orphan children" but somewhat different than that category -- the elderly and the sick -- are these categories of people going to be allowed to go either to Puerto Rico or to come to this country?

MS. SHELLY: I'm told on that subject that there had been some recent discussions of the humanitarian categories related to some of the populations down at Guantanamo and in Panama. I certainly don't have anything to announce on this yet, but there might be an announcement to this effect coming either later today or very shortly.

My understanding is that if this comes to closure, and there may be some announcements in this regard, I think the announcement will actually not come out of here. I think it's going to come out of the White House.

Q Christine, Kozyrev was quoted by CNN's Baghdad reporter this morning as saying that Christopher had encouraged him to settle the Iraqi crisis through dialogue. It doesn't seem to square with the American position. Do you know whether, in fact, Secretary Christopher encouraged him?

MS. SHELLY: I've seen the remarks. Without getting into a discussion of a detailed exchange, I'm sure the Secretary has addressed this question already today with this traveling party. I can only answer it in generality, which is that the Russians informed us of their intention to travel -- first, it was in the context of sending a couple of emissaries and then ultimately the decision to send Foreign Minister Kozyrev.

We had several exchanges, several high-level contacts, including several telephone calls between Secretary Christopher and Foreign Minister Kozyrev about that travel. Our principal concern -- and we relayed this to the Russians -- there is absolutely no question that Foreign Minister Kozyrev could have been under any illusions about that -- was that we wanted to diffuse the immediate crisis and get Iraqi troops pulled back to where they were prior to this deployment, and we also wanted to make sure that there was absolutely no question about the need for Iraq to achieve full compliance with all U.N. Security Council resolutions.

So that certainly still remains our position, and our position was very clearly related to Foreign Minister Kozyrev prior to his departure.

Q Thank you.

MS. SHELLY: Thank you.

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


To the top of this page