US Department of State 

Dispatch, Vol 2, No 51, December 23, 1991

Title:

US Commitment to Strengthening Euro-Atlantic Cooperation

Baker Source: Secretary Baker Description: Intervention before the North Atlantic Cooperation Council (NACC), NATO Headquarters, Brussels, Belgium Date: Dec 20, 199112/20/91 Category: Speeches, Testimony, Statements Region: Europe, E/C Europe Subject: Democratization, NATO, CSCE [TEXT] This is a historic day for the alliance and for all of Europe. Not long ago, our meetings focused on a very different business: the nations now assembled around this table were on opposing sides in a cold war. ..........Indeed, my very first trip as Secretary of State, early in 1989, was to consult with our 15 allies about the challenges of this old era. ..........But then the peaceful revolutions of 1989, and the birth of new democracies, revealed possibilities for a totally new era: an era in which we can strive--working together--to create the Euro- Atlantic community of shared democratic values envisaged in the Helsinki Final Act. ..........In 1990, in London, NATO contributed to the extraordinary changes taking place in Europe by creating a new liaison relationship with the nations to the east. ..........In June 1991, in Copenhagen, we proposed a partnership "to promote security and stability in a free and undivided Europe." ..........And only last month in Rome, NATO stated its intention "to develop a more institutional relationship of consultation and cooperation on political and security issues" with our new partners. ..........This meeting demonstrates how far we've come. But it also demonstrates how far we can go together: This first session of the North Atlantic Cooperation Council is a commitment to strengthen and expand the Euro-Atlantic community--to deepen it, to widen it. For while the old dangers have been overcome, we all know that in this new era there are new, historic opportunities--and new dangers. ..........I saw the opportunities and the dangers on my recent trip to five republics of the former Soviet Union. We see them in the Balkans. Old structures are breaking up; new nations are struggling with the political, economic, and security necessities of statehood. ..........I spoke in Berlin earlier this year about the simultaneous devolution and evolution of the nation-state. I observed that in Western Europe, governments were successfully balancing these two trends; they were maintaining a constructive equilibrium. In Eastern Europe and the former Soviet Union, however, devolution-- and the danger of disintegration--has become far more prominent. ..........Therefore, I suggested that we develop ways to extend our experience in developing integrating structures to the east. We need to demonstrate how these structures--founded on the democratic values of the Euro-Atlantic community--can help cope with political, economic, and security problems. ..........This North Atlantic Cooperation Council is an example of the type of integrating structure we must forge and then build on. Through this forum and others, we will not only overcome Europe's ideological division peacefully, but we can join forces to establish democratic values, respect for human rights, and economic liberty across the whole of Europe and North America. This council can play a significant role in the achievement of our shared goals. ..........This approach is both principled and practical. It's principled because a primary purpose of our policies should be to help others as they struggle to establish democracies and market economies. It's practical because our security is inseparably linked--if the dangers overwhelm the opportunities, all of us will be worse off. ..........I believe our logic is also apparent in our approach toward the recognition of new states arising out of defunct structures. As we bring new members into the Euro-Atlantic community, we want to be sure they share the responsibilities the rest of us have accepted regarding democratic processes, the inviolability of borders, respect for human rights including equal treatment of minorities, the peaceful resolution of disputes, and responsible security policies. ..........Of course, this council relates to a much broader effort. As alliance leaders noted in Rome, "the challenges we will face in this new Europe cannot be comprehensively addressed by one institution alone, but only in a framework of interlocking institutions tying together the countries of Europe and North America." ..........NATO, and with it this council, will continue to be one of the primary institutions in this new structure, along with CSCE [Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe] , the European Community, the WEU [Western European Union], and the Council of Europe. Each institution has a special and distinct role to play. But all contribute to our common goal of enhancing security and promoting political and economic liberty in Europe. ..........CSCE is particularly important because it can continue to serve as the "conscience of the continent." Indeed, CSCE can point the way toward creation of democratic, civil societies that operate on the basis of its principles. To do so, CSCE must remain a dynamic political process that engages the participation and imagination of publics as well as governments. ..........I believe that NATO, and this council, can contribute to CSCE's work and to the security of Europe more generally. ..........First, this council could serve as the primary consultative body between NATO and liaison states on security and related issues. The continuing rapid pace of events in Europe makes this consultation essential. ..........Second, the NACC should assume oversight of the liaison program, giving it direction and recommending programs of action. This will ensure that our mutual activities are tailored to fit the real needs of our partners. ..........Third, the NACC could play a role in controlling crises in Europe. It might, for example, serve as a forum for communicating NATO crisis responses to liaison states, as well as give liaison states access to NATO when necessary. I have in mind the special NAC [North Atlantic Council] last August, which we convened during the coup attempt in Moscow. Even as my colleagues and I were meeting here, Boris Yeltsin's phone calls to [NATO Secretary General] Manfred Woerner kept us in close contact with the critical events. ..........In order to fulfill these plans, the council should develop a plan of action. I have written each of you to suggest several areas for such concrete action. Defense conversion is important not only for our common security but also is important politically, economically, and socially as well. NATO can help. ..........So I have suggested that the alliance establish a defense conversion working group to coordinate our efforts and draw on the skills of others, for example, the OECD [Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development]. ..........Existing NATO committees and groups can also contribute. The Atlantic Policy Advisory Group offers an excellent forum for focusing on such issues as civil-military relations and foreign policy-making in democratic societies. I suggest this group convene a special conference this spring in a liaison nation. The Senior Civil Emergency Planning Committee could discuss coordination of disaster relief, including military-to-military planning. Discussions in other committees could be useful, as well. ..........In my letter, I also suggested several concrete initiatives for the NACC which could be implemented without delay. I believe the most useful next step is to agree on a robust and specific work plan at the first ambassadorial-level meeting of the NACC early next year. But committing ourselves today to such a concrete work plan, momentum from this meeting can be assured. ..........In closing, let me say this: For 40 years, we stood apart from one another as two opposing blocs. Now, history has given us the opportunity to erase those blocs, to join together in a common circle built on shared universal and democratic values. Let us use this opportunity to turn the goodwill shared here into new and enduring realities for our peoples. (###)
US Department of State Dispatch, Vol 2, No 51, December 23, 1991 Title:

NAC Meeting Overview

Baker Source: Secretary Baker Description: Excerpt from a press conference at NATO Headquarters following the North Atlantic Council (NAC) meeting, Brussels, Belgium Date: Dec 19, 199112/19/91 Category: Speeches, Testimony, Statements Region: Europe, E/C Europe Subject: Democratization, NATO, CSCE [TEXT] Secretary Baker: Ladies and gentlemen, I heard [NATO] Secretary General [Manfred Woerner] tell you that we have had a very successful meeting. I, too, think we've had a productive meeting and let me give you a brief overview before I take your questions. ..........First of all, I reported on my recent trip to Moscow, to Bishkek, Alma-Ata, Minsk, and Kiev, and we talked at some length about the remarkable transformation of the Soviet Union and the great rapidity with which events continue to move there. ..........I told my colleagues that this trip has served only to reinforce and make more urgent the views that I outlined a week ago at Princeton University in the United States. That is that we must divide our labors and collectively engage the Soviet peoples in this season of need to bring them hope. Hope that life can get better, hope that their experiments with democracy and free markets can work. Hope that they, too, can join the democratic commonwealth of nations. ..........In this effort, the alliance--along with the other pillars of the Euro-Atlantic community, the EC [European Community], and CSCE [Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe]--should play a major role. ..........The need for a coordinated Western effort is clear. Since the coup, the economic situation has deteriorated drastically. In Moscow, the lines in the street for food are very long, and with winter's onset, the public is extremely anxious. Virtually everyone I met was concerned with the danger of a social explosion, especially in Russia, and especially in Moscow, St. Petersburg, and the industrial cities of the Urals. ..........The problems they face are very large. They are asking for our help. They need our help. And we should give it. ..........From Yeltsin to Kravchuk, I was told that only a major humanitarian assistance effort could stave off a social explosion. ..........In short, we think we can offer solutions to their problems and concrete ways to implement those solutions. ..........And that's why last week at Princeton we called for a Western policy of collective engagement, catalyzed by a coordinating conference to help the democrats through this winter and through next year. ..........The conference was the second major issue that we discussed. We do not intend the coordinating conference to become a pledging conference or to become the only mechanism by which the world coordinates its assistance. ..........How NATO can fit into this effort was the third issue that we discussed. In our view, there's no better political signal that we could send to the peoples of Russia and the other republics than to have NATO play a role in coordinating Western humanitarian assistance. It would show these people in a concrete way that what we have said all along is true. And that is, that NATO is a defensive alliance that can support peace just as effectively as it has deterred aggression. NATO-- drawing upon organizations, expertise, and resources already in existence--can help coordinate the logistical support for humanitarian missions. NATO's Senior Civil Emergency Planning Committee, in conjunction with NATO's military logistic structures, contains the core capability necessary to support a successful relief operation. ..........In these organizations and their subordinate bodies, there exists a combination of government and private sector expertise that can be brought to bear and brought to bear quickly. NATO's joint civil-military medical community can do the same to determine the best ways to meet medical needs. ..........Through these efforts, what many people call just a military alliance could show that it truly is a political alliance and one that can provide hope in times of peace--indeed, one that can provide hope that might preserve peace. ..........Fourth, we discussed the request for recognition by various Soviet republics. I mentioned how all of the republic leaders seemed to be trying to run our five principles into not just standards of responsibility but political pillars on which they hope to build new states. ..........I think it is fair to say that the members of the alliance agree on the relevance of the five principles in any discussion of recognition. In addition, we expect any new political entity desiring our acceptance to pursue responsible security policies, including ensuring safe, secure, and reliable control over nuclear weapons and non-proliferation, and to commit to free market economies. ..........The fifth major issue we discussed was tomorrow's inaugural meeting of the North Atlantic Cooperation Council (NACC). Having proposed the liaison program with [German] Foreign Minister [Hans- Dietrich] Genscher, we are pleased to see this idea being turned into a concrete reality with tomorrow's NACC meeting. ..........We are looking forward to a productive meeting tomorrow and feel that the more we can bring the states of the East into the Euro- Atlantic community, the more we can give them hope for the future. ..........Finally, we, of course, discussed the question of Soviet nuclear weapons, particularly command and control. I shared with the allies the assurance I received from the republic leaders and Soviet authorities. We agreed that these were very encouraging and that we should continue our dialogue with the republic leaders and Soviet authorities to see these assurances turned into concrete commitments. ..........Q: Based on your talks there, can you give us your impression of how the political situation in the Soviet Union will crystalize and what form this new commonwealth will take? And on the nuclear issue, did you ask or were you assured in any way that in the period before weapons are dismantled and destroyed, that somehow they would no longer be directed at the United States? ..........Secretary Baker: . . . I wouldn't want to try and pre-judge what's going to happen [at] Alma-Ata on December the 21st, the day after tomorrow. That is a very, very important meeting in terms of whether or not their efforts to create this commonwealth will or will not succeed. It is quite clear that there are extraordinary changes taking place even as we speak. All of these republics have, as you know, declared independence. Some have held free elections. I'm just not going to sit up here today and predict how that meeting is going to turn out day after tomorrow. ..........With respect to the assurances that we sought and received on nuclear safety, and that's a term that I would use to embrace a lot of different things, let me say as I did during the course of the trip that we received very satisfactory assurances from everyone. ..........We asked for assurances in a number of areas, and maybe I'll give you a little bit more specificity than I was able to do when we were in the various republics and in the Soviet Union. First of all, we've asked that we be assured that those republics with nuclear weapons commit to keep them maintained and in a safe, secure, and responsible manner, and under reliable control with one single collective authority. We were assured that that would be the case. ..........With respect to Belarus, Ukraine, and Kazakhstan, we asked for assurance that they would join the NPT [Non-Proliferation Treaty] as non-nuclear states and that they would agree to full- scope IAEA [International Atomic Energy Agency] safeguards. And each of them told us they would do this. ..........We asked each of the nuclear, capable republics if they would participate with us in joint efforts to ensure the disablement and accelerated destruction of nuclear weapons and meet with our experts for this purpose, and they all indicated a willingness to do this. ..........No time-frames, no specific measures agreed to or anything like that. We pointed out to them that the United States was prepared to consider bearing some of the expense of this out of the $400 million appropriation that the Congress recently made for that purpose. And generally, on that issue, let me say, they indicated a complete willingness to sit down with our experts and begin that process. ..........We asked them to give us assurances regarding proliferation and regarding the institution of legislative export controls and an export control policy, and to work with experts who could advise them with respect to what the requirements of such a policy would be--and all indicated a willingness to do that. ..........They each indicated, as well, a willingness to meet with our legal experts in January to look at the questions involved in ratification-accession to the START [Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty] and the CFE [Conventional Armed Forces in Europe] Treaties. There are some complicated legal issues that will have to be addressed, and I heard Manfred tell you about what we agreed to here today with respect to the HLTF [High Level Task Force]. ..........And finally we talked to them about humanitarian assistance and asked them to share with us--give us the names of local republic and city officials with whom we can have a dialogue respecting humanitarian assistance and how it can be distributed effectively-- because this is one of the greatest problems we have now with respect to questions involving humanitarian assistance. ..........On all of these issues we were given assurances that we consider quite satisfactory. We didn't ask for any signed contracts. We don't plan to do that, but we had what we felt were very good meetings with these officials and in every case they indicated an interest in participating with us along the lines I've just mentioned. (###)
US Department of State Dispatch, Vol 2, No 51, December 23, 1991 Title:

Trip to Former Soviet Republics

Baker Source: Secretary Baker Description: News briefing by Secretary Baker before travel to Moscow, Kiev, Minsk, Alma Ata, and Bishkek, Washington, DC Date: Dec 13, 199112/13/91 Category: Speeches, Testimony, Statements Region: Eurasia Country: Ukraine, Belarus, Kyrgyzstan, Kazakhstan, Russia Subject: Democratization, Arms Control, Security Assistance and Sales, Human Rights, Development/Relief Aid [TEXT]. Ladies and gentlemen, this morning President Bush received a call from President Yeltsin. They talked for about 25 minutes. President Yeltsin gave President Bush a full update on the status of the commonwealth. He said during the course of that conversation that he expected that other republics would be joining in the agreement that was reached between the three Slavic republics. ..........As you know, the President has asked me to travel to Moscow, to Kiev, to Minsk, to Alma-Ata, and to Bishkek in Kyrgyzstan. ..........As I said yesterday, events are moving quickly and dramatic decisions are being made as the republics sort out relations among themselves and also seek to define a common entity that can manage and shape an approach to a national security and economic policy. ..........For some time, it has been clear that power and authority has derived increasingly from the republics and not from the center. But those that are determining the new political arrangements of what I referred to yesterday in my speech as the new Russian revolution must come from within and not from outside. We cannot and we must not inject ourselves into this purely political process. And, as the President made clear at the cabinet meeting yesterday and again in comments this morning, we will not so inject ourselves. ..........However, we and others in the international community can and must stand ready to help those who embrace the principles and responsibilities that have become so much a part of the Euro- Atlantic community. ..........We and others must help meet near-term humanitarian needs. And as I said yesterday, given our collective stakes, we must also help the Soviets destroy and control the military remnants of the Cold War, help our former adversaries understand the ways of democracy in order to build political legitimacy out of the wreckage of totalitarianism, and help free market forces stimulate economic stabilization and recovery in the lands of the former Soviet Union. ..........On my trip, I will be meeting with many leaders, focusing on nuclear weapons control, safety, security and elimination; on humanitarian concerns and how best to ensure that assistance can be well-coordinated and targeted effectively to get to those who must need it; identifying the specific kinds of Western manpower and expertise that can be most helpful to local leaders as they seek to improve conditions and respond to local needs. ..........I will report back to the President and then I will consult further with our allies and other friends to plan the coordinating conference in order to make certain that it most effectively responds to the critical challenges. (###)
US Department of State Dispatch, Vol 2, No 51, December 23, 1991 Title:

POW/MIA Bilateral Talks

Boucher Source: State Department Deputy Spokesman Richard Boucher Description: Washington, DC Date: Dec 18, 199112/18/91 Category: Speeches, Testimony, Statements Region: Southeast Asia Country: Vietnam, Laos, United States Subject: POW/MIA Issues [TEXT] US, Lao, and Vietnamese officials held trilateral talks on the POW/MIA issue for the first time on December 18 in Vientiane, Laos. The US Government very much appreciates the Lao Government's cooperation in facilitating these first trilateral talks. The purpose of the talks was to discuss in depth the issue of US service personnel who were lost in areas along the Lao-Vietnamese border during the Vietnam war. The talks followed US-Lao bilateral discussion on the POW/MIA issue in Vientiane on December 17 and preceded US/SRV [US/Socialist Republic of Vietnam] bilateral talks in Hanoi on December 19. ..........During the trilateral discussions in Vientiane, all three sides agreed on the importance of resolving the cases of individuals lost along the Lao-Vietnamese border. The participants expressed the hope that these initial talks would lead to more effective cooperation among the United States, Laos, and Vietnam in resolving the POW/MIA issue. (###)
US Department of State Dispatch, Vol 2, No 51, December 23, 1991 Title:

Medical Shipments To Former Soviet Republics

Tutwiler Source: Department Spokesman Margaret Tutwiler Description: Washington, DC Date: Dec 14, 199112/14/91 Category: Speeches, Testimony, Statements Region: Eurasia Country: Russia, Belarus, Armenia [TEXT] US and Soviet aircraft will leave Andrews AFB on December 15 carrying medical supplies and pharmaceuticals valued at more than $6 million. The shipment will be delivered to children's hospitals in Moscow, Minsk, and Yerevan. Each of the targeted institutions has been visited by Project HOPE assessment teams and determined to be an appropriate recipient with respect to need and professional capability. The shipment with arrive in the Soviet Union on December 17 aboard an American C-5A cargo aircraft and a Soviet Antonov 124 transport plane. Soviet Foreign Minister [Eduard] Shevardnadze is scheduled to meet the planes in Moscow. ..........The shipment is being coordinated by Project HOPE along with the International Foreign Policy Association (IFPA), headed by Jim Garrision, Chief Executive Officer. IFPA is affiliated with the Soviet Foreign Policy Association, of which Mr. Shevardnadze is president. Subsequent shipments are planned for other areas that suffer acute and immediate shortages of medicines. As the President announced in August, a separate program is being set up for the Baltics. ..........Supplies carried by the Soviet and Defense Department planes include: ..........-- Antibiotics, analgesics, anesthetics, intravenous fluids, insulin, and other diabetes medications; ..........-- Multivitamins and pre-natal vitamins; ..........-- Medications to control blood pressure, seizures, asthma, and Parkinson's disease; ..........-- Disposable sterile medical supplies such as intravenous fluid administration sets, bandages, dressings, syringes, needles, gloves, face masks, sutures, and pre-operative scrub sets. ..........The medical supplies, valued at close to $6 million, have been collected by the International Foreign Policy Association (IFPA) and Project Hope, and include donations from the United Way of the Greater Bay Area, UNICEF International, Campus Crusade for Christ, Brother's Brother Foundation, Operation Carelift, the Sabre Foundation, Interchurch Medical and the Russian Orthodox Church. ..........The US aircraft will carry 17 pallets with cots, blankets, and clothing from excess Defense Department property, and 15 pallets of medical supplies donated through Project Hope. The 32 pallets weigh approximately 150,000 lbs. (###)
US Department of State Dispatch, Vol 2, No 51, December 23, 1991 Title:

Brazil and Argentina: IAEA Safeguard Accord

Tutwiler Source: Statement by Department Spokesman Margaret Tutwiler Description: Washington, DC Date: Dec 13, 199112/13/91 Category: Speeches, Testimony, Statements Region: North America Country: Brazil, Argentina Subject: Nuclear Nonproliferation, International Law [TEXT]. We salute Presidents Fernando Collor of Brazil and Carlos Menem of Argentina for signing a historic accord today with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) that will provide for IAEA inspection of their respective nuclear programs. This will help clear the way for both countries to bring the hemispheric Treaty of Tlatelolco into force. ..........Today's Vienna signing marks a milestone for the IAEA as well as the Collor and Menem Administrations. The two South American Presidents have demonstrated exceptional statesmanship in moving to free their continent from the risk of nuclear weapons proliferation. This agreement follows close upon the heels of the Argentine-Brazilian bilateral accord on nuclear safeguards and their joint accord with Chile to ban chemical and biological weapons, signed earlier this year. ..........The example set by President Collor and Menem today is one that serves not only Latin American countries but also many outside the region. President Bush has congratulated both Presidents. We laud their leadership and commitment to hemispheric and global non-proliferation. (###)
US Department of State Dispatch, Vol 2, No 51, December 23, 1991 Title:

US Condemns Arrest Of Burmese Students

Tutwiler Source: Statement by Department Spokesman Margaret Tutwiler Description: Washington, DC Date: Dec 13, 199112/13/91 Category: Speeches, Testimony, Statements Region: Southeast Asia Country: Burma Subject: Human Rights [TEXT] Burmese students and others demonstrated earlier this week in support of detained Burmese opposition leader Aung San Suu Kyi and for democracy. The military government responded by sending in large numbers of troops to clear campuses, arresting a large number of people. The regime has announced the closure of all colleges and universities in Burma. ..........The demonstrations show that years of military oppression have not diminished the Burmese people's desire for democracy and representative government. ..........The United States condemns the arrest of students who were merely peacefully expressing their opinions. We call for the immediate release of those arrested, as well as the release of all other political prisoners in Burma. ..........Universities and colleges in Burma have been open only a few months since 1988. The decision to close them once again demonstrates that the Burmese military junta lacks the popular support necessary for the normal functioning of a productive society. The Burmese military regime should immediately take steps to transfer power to a civilian government elected by the people of Burma. (###)
US Department of State Dispatch, Vol 2, No 51, December 23, 1991 Title:

UN Repeals Zionism-Is-Racism Resolution

Eagleburger Source: Deputy Secretary Eagleburger Description: Statement at the UN General Assembly, New York, New York Date: Dec 16, 199112/16/91 Category: Speeches, Testimony, Statements Region: MidEast/North Africa Country: Israel Subject: United Nations [TEXT] Mr. President, the United Nations was founded in 1945 at the close of one of the darkest chapters in recorded history. Two world wars, the massacre of untold millions, and a hideous attempt to exterminate an entire people formed the backdrop to the San Francisco conference. Mankind's hopes for a different fate in a better future rested almost entirely on the shoulders of the new international body--on its potential as a peacemaker and peacekeeper and on its moral authority as a voice for universal human values. One of the early acts of the United Nations was to assist in the realization of the national aspirations of that people-- the Jewish people--who had so recently been the victims of one of the most barbarous acts known to man. ..........Those hopes for a better future were dashed with the onset of the Cold War. The international landscape was divided right down the middle between East and West. The two blocs stood poised on the brink of thermonuclear war. Totalitarian ideologies spread hatred and turned reality on its head by enslaving men and women in the name of liberating them. ..........And in the United Nations, confrontation replaced cooperation; paralysis prevailed over action. Ideological conflict eroded the UN's most precious asset--its claim to impartiality and moral honesty. The great parliament of mankind had become a forum for sterile rhetoric, feckless name-calling, and the willful distortion of reality. ..........At no time was this more evident than in 1975 when the General Assembly adopted Resolution 3379, which included a determination that Zionism was a form of racism. This determination demonstrated, like nothing else before or since, to what extent the Cold War had distorted the United Nation's vision of reality, marginalized its political utility, and separated it from its original moral purpose. ..........Resolution 3379 was one of this body's most ungenerous acts. It branded the national aspirations of one people, and one people only, as illegitimate--a people which had been homeless, dispersed, and exiled for the better part of 2 millennia. It labeled as racist the national aspirations of the one people more victimized by racism than any other. ..........My government rejected this characterization of Zionism in 1975, and it has hoped for and worked for its revocation ever since. Successive US Administrations--of Presidents Ford, Carter, Reagan, and now Bush--have been supported in this endeavor by our Congress and by our major political parties. And they have been supported overwhelmingly by the American people, who have never understood how the UN could let stand such a blatant repudiation of the charter's call for member states to practice tolerance and live together as good neighbors. In President Bush's call for repeal before this assembly last September, he recognized that the United Nations was at a historic watershed. "By repealing this resolution unconditionally," he noted, "the United Nations will enhance its credibility and serve the cause of peace." ..........Now the endeavors of 16 long years are about to come to fruition--not because of the United States, although we have never wavered in our determination, but because the era which produced Resolution 3379 has passed into history. With that era have gone many of the dictatorships whose repression was based on systematic lying and the distortion of reality. With that era have gone the confrontational ideologies which held much of the world in their thrall. They have been displaced by a revolution in truth- telling and openness which is truly universal in scope. They have been displaced, increasingly, by democratic governments committed to the universal human values for which this body, in principle, stands. Indeed, nothing more eloquently demonstrates the passing of the Cold War era than the fact that many governments whose undemocratic predecessors had supported or voted for the original resolution in 1975 have joined now in cosponsoring its revocation. ..........One of the signal features of the new era we have entered is that the UN is ever more frequently being asked to play a central role in making peace between nations and regions in conflict; in consolidating that peace through the deployment of military observers and peacekeeping forces; and, when it is necessary--as was so recently the case in the Persian Gulf--in leading the world in response to aggression. ..........We believe that with the world's and this body's passage into a new era, it is more than time to consign one of the last relics of the Cold War to the dustbin of history. That is why we are presenting to the General Assembly today--on behalf of 85 co- sponsors--a resolution revoking the determination that Zionism is racism. We believe it is time to take this step, thereby recovering for the United Nations its reputation for fairness and impartiality and reaffirming its commitment to the vision of San Francisco. ..........Mr. President, let me emphasize that this resolution we propose is aimed at no one, at no state, at no region, and at no group. Its sole and simple aim is to right a wrong and to restore the moral authority of this organization. It is not aimed at or linked to the peace process in the Middle East. However, I will say that my government believes that this action can only help, and not hinder, efforts currently underway to bring peace to that region. For 16 years, the existence of the "Zionism-is-racism" determination has stood in the way of those who wish to see the UN play a more significant role in the peace process. It is simply a fact that Resolution 3379 contradicted the spirit of Security Council Resolutions 242 and 338, which are the continuing basis for a peaceful settlement in the Middle East. ..........Even more significant, however, was the message which Resolution 3379 sent to the people of Israel. I told them that their national aspirations were inspired by racism. It told them that their national existence was illegitimate. It told them that the international community, in all its solemn majesty, had once again subjected the Jewish people to a singular form of persecution. ..........It is almost a cliche to say that there can be no true peace without confidence--mutual confidence on the part of all sides to a conflict. There can be no peace without the recognition by each side of the other's legitimacy. There can be no true or lasting peace without a spirit of brotherhood. ..........The resolution we introduce today would send a different message to the people of Israel from the one this body sent in 1975. But, fundamentally, it is not Israel which needs this action; it is the United Nations which requires it. Its passage will vindicate the universal principles upon which the UN was founded and redeem the hopes which all mankind vested in the United Nations in 1945. (###)
US Department of State Dispatch, Vol 2, No 51, December 23, 1991 Title:

UN Action Applauded

Fitzwater Description: Statement released by the Office of the White House Press Secretary, Washington, DC Date: Dec 16, 199112/16/91 Category: Speeches, Testimony, Statements Region: MidEast/North Africa Country: Israel Subject: United Nations [TEXT]. We welcome today's vote in the UN General Assembly [UNGA] to revoke the 1975 determination that equated Zionism with racism. The United States rejected this determination from the day it was passed because it branded as illegitimate the national aspirations of the Jewish people and the national existence of Israel. This action also worked to undermine the UN's moral standing and its ability to contribute to peace in the Middle East. ..........The President is gratified that his call for repeal in his speech to the UNGA in September has now received the overwhelming support of the international community. We commend those governments that co-sponsored or supported this resolution, and we salute the United Nations. Today's vote has enhanced the UN's credibility and serves the interests of peace that have been advanced significantly by the Madrid [Middle East Peace] Conference and subsequent bilateral negotiations. ..........[Israeli] Prime Minister Shamir called the President to express his gratitude for the President's efforts to revoke the determination. The Prime Minister said the Jewish people are grateful for the President's leadership and rejoice in the outcome of the UN vote. (###)
US Department of State Dispatch, Vol 2, No 51, December 23, 1991 Title:

Update on NAFTA Ministerials

Hills Source: US Trade Representative Carla Hills Description: Opening statement from a news briefing, Washington, DC Date: Dec 13, 199112/13/91 Category: Speeches, Testimony, Statements Region: North America Country: Canada, United States, Mexico Subject: Trade/Economics, North America Free Trade [TEXT] I'm glad to see all of you this morning. We, as you know, launched the negotiations on the North American Free Trade Agreement [NAFTA] on the 12th of June. We've had three ministerials; one at the launch in Canada, one in Seattle in August, and one in Zacatecas, Mexico, in October. ..........I can tell you we are right on track. We are in the second phase of the negotiations, in the process of exchanging texts. It's my hope that we will have a consolidated, bracketed text by the end of January. We have no intention of substituting speed for substance, but I can tell you we are anxious to harvest the gains that we see coming from a North American Free Trade Agreement. ..........This agreement would enable us to stitch together the complementary economies of our first-largest trading partner, Canada, with our third-largest trading partner, Mexico, and create one of the largest, richest markets in the world with 360 million consumers and producers in an annual output of over $6 trillion. ..........And we know that as we reduce trade barriers worldwide, we get an increase of exports, which give us an increase of jobs. The fact of the matter is that Mexico is our largest and fastest growing export opportunity. Mexico buys more from us today--35% more per capita--than the much more affluent European Community. And we have seen that as Mexico has reduced its trade barriers, our exports have zoomed upward. In 1987, they began to dismantle their tariffs, which were at 100%. Today they're at a high of 20%, and in [those] 4 short years, our exports have more than doubled, from $12 billion to $28 billion. ..........And we know that more can occur, because Mexico's trade barriers today in terms of tariffs are 250% higher than our own. So we have a differential that, if we can squeeze it down, we know our exports will go up, and for every billion dollars-worth of additional exports, we generate 20,000 new jobs. ..........So we are on track with the negotiation. We're enthusiastic about the negotiation. And I look forward to the two presidents meeting and discussing the future. (###)