US DEPARTMENT OF STATE DISPATCH
VOLUME 4, NUMBER 1, JANUARY 4, 1993
PUBLISHED BY THE BUREAU OF PUBLIC AFFAIRS

ARTICLES IN THIS ISSUE:
1.  Signing of the North American Free Trade Agreement -- President Bush
2.  Country Profile:  Canada
3.  Country Profile:  Mexico
4.  President's Remarks on START II and Somalia Trip -- President Bush  
5.  START II Treaty
6.  Implementation of Peace Accords in El Salvador -- Vice President 
Quayle 
7.  Department Statements
            Murder of Israeli Policeman
            Cuba:  Continuing Crackdown on Human Rights Activists
            Secretary Eagleburger Meets With Kosovo Leader
            Israeli Deportations 
            Presidential Decision on Military Sales to China
            Equatorial Guinea 
            Burmese Rohingya Refugees in Bangladesh
            Joint US-Russia Statement on El Salvador
            Elections in Serbia and Montenegro


ARTICLE 1:

Signing of the North American Free Trade Agreement
President Bush
Address at signing ceremony of the North American Free Trade Agreement, 
Organization of American States (OAS), Washington, DC, December 17, 1992 
(introductory and closing remarks deleted)

Throughout history, the destiny of nations has often been shaped by 
change and by chance.  When I say chance, I'm talking about things that 
happen to them.   Then there are those unique nations which shape their 
destinies by choice, by the things that they make happen.  Three such 
nations come together today:  Mexico, Canada, and the United States.

By signing the North American Free Trade Agreement, we've committed 
ourselves to a better future for our children and for generations yet 
unborn.  This agreement will remove barriers to trade and investment 
across the two largest undefended borders of the globe and link the 
United States in a permanent partnership of growth with our first and 
third largest trading partners.   The peace and friendship that we've 
long enjoyed as neighbors will now be strengthened by the explosion of 
growth and trade let loose by the combined energies of our 360 million 
citizens trading freely across our borders.  

I want to pay a personal tribute to my partners in this endeavor; two 
rare and gifted leaders, two special and valued friends without whose 
courage and leadership and vision this day could not possibly have come 
about.  When the history of our era is written, it will be said that the 
citizens of all the Americas were truly fortunate that Mexico and 
Canada--two great nations, two proud people--were led by President 
Carlos Salinas and Prime Minister Brian Mulroney.

For Mexico, particularly, the NAFTA is a bold undertaking, made possible 
by President Salinas' brave reforms to reinvigorate the Mexican economy.  

It's especially fitting [that] an American president sign this agreement 
in this great Hall of the Americas, the home of the Organization of 
American States.  NAFTA represents the first giant step toward 
fulfillment of a dream that has long inspired us all--the dream of a  
hemisphere united by economic cooperation and free competition.

Because of what we have begun here today, I believe the time will soon 
come when trade is free from Alaska to Argentina; when every citizen of 
the Americas has the opportunity to share in new growth and expanding 
prosperity.

I hope and trust that the North American free trade area can be extended 
to Chile, other worthy partners in South America, and Central America 
and the Caribbean.  Free trade throughout the Americas is an idea whose 
time has come.  A new generation of democratic leaders has staked its 
future on that promise, and under their leadership, a tide of economic 
reform and trade liberalization is transforming the hemisphere.

Today, as a result, the hemisphere is growing again.  For the first time 
in years, more capital is flowing into the Americas for new investment 
than is flowing out.  Every major debtor nation, from Mexico to 
Argentina, has negotiated a successful agreement to reduce and 
restructure its commercial bank debt under the Brady Plan.

Let me just offer a brief aside about the Brady Plan, if I might.  I 
remember telling my good friend, Nick Brady, our Secretary of the 
Treasury:  Okay, we'll call it the Brady Plan; but if it's successful, 
we're going to call it the Bush Plan.  [Laughter.]  And he reluctantly 
accepted that guidance.

I think history will show that the leadership of our distinguished 
Secretary of the Treasury did pay off and [that] the plan has been 
highly successful.  By the way, the name will always be, appropriately, 
the Brady Plan.  That's the way it's going to stay. 

Now, under the Enterprise for the Americas [Initiative (EAI)], many 
nations--Jamaica, Bolivia, Chile, Colombia, El Salvador, Uruguay--have 
reduced, or shortly will reduce, their official debt with the United 
States.  EAI is working.  The initiative allows interest payments on 
official debt to be channeled into trust funds that protect the 
environment and support programs for child survival.

To those in other regions struggling to reform statist economies, Latin 
America shines as a solid example of hope that hyperinflation can be 
tamed.  Growth can be revitalized, and new investment and trade can 
accelerate if developing nations stay the course through the difficult 
challenge of economic restructuring.

These profound economic changes are a tribute to a courageous group of 
democratic leaders in Latin America and the Caribbean.  Their 
revolutionary vision has altered forever the face of the Americas.  
Their friendship and counsel have been enormously gratifying to me as 
President.  But these profound changes, along with the NAFTA itself, 
reflect a broader and, I believe, more fundamental change in relations 
between the United States and the nations of this hemisphere.

For many decades, we've proclaimed ambitious goals for ourselves of a 
good neighbor policy, of an alliance for progress, of a partnership 
built on mutual respect and shared responsibility.  And those goals now 
are rapidly becoming a reality.

My talks with the hemisphere's leaders, in recent weeks, show a strong 
consensus that relations between the United States and its neighbors 
have never in our history been better and that this development is 
working to benefit all of our peoples.  I take great pride in the fact 
that, working with those leaders, we've been a part of all of that.

I believe that, in the future, America's relations with Latin America 
and the Caribbean will grow even stronger.  I was pleased to hear 
President-elect Bill Clinton affirm that same goal in his remarks 
recently, both to the Rio Group and to the Caribbean/Latin American 
Action conference.

This century's epic struggle between totalitarianism and democracy is 
over.  It's dead.  Democracy has prevailed.  And today, we see unfolding 
around the world a revolution of hope and courage, propelled by the 
aspiration of ordinary people for freedom and a better life.

The world will long remember the images of that struggle:  a citizen of 
Berlin, sitting atop the Wall, chipping away with his hammer and chisel; 
Boris Yeltsin and his followers waving the flag of free Russia and 
defying the tanks and coup plotters.  And here in this hall, it is worth 
remembering that those images were preceded by a democratic revolution 
in Latin America.  No people struggled for freedom against oppression 
more bravely than the people of this hemisphere.  And, here, too, in the 
Americas, we are constructing a hopeful model of the new post-Cold War 
world of which we dream.

This is the first hemisphere, and the OAS is the first regional 
organization in the world to take on, through the Santiago Declaration, 
the formal collective responsibility to defend democracy.  In this 
hemisphere, the weapons of mass destruction--strategic missiles as well 
as nuclear, chemical, and biological weapons--have been rejected 
voluntarily.  In this hemisphere, we've created new models of 
multilateral cooperation and success in resolving the conflicts that 
have tormented Central America.

As recent proof of the progress we've made,  just 2 days ago we 
celebrated--and I'm sure everyone did--the end of the war in El Salvador 
[see p. 8].  In this hemisphere, we have forged a new partnership to 
defeat the global menace of narco-trafficking, and we must succeed in 
that effort.  Still, we're not satisfied.  The birth of democracy has 
raised expectations throughout the Americas, and now democracy must 
deliver.  The communications revolution has opened the eyes of this 
hemisphere's citizens to the wider world.  We're no longer blind to 
limits on legitimate political participation, to official corruption, or 
to economic favoritism.

If democracy is to be consolidated, the gulfs that separate the few who 
are very rich from the many who are very poor, that divide civilian from 
military institutions, that split citizens of European heritage from 
indigenous peoples--these gulfs must be bridged, and economic reform 
must ensure upward mobility and new opportunities for a better life for 
all citizens of the Americas.

To fulfill its promise, democratic government must guarantee not only 
the right to regular elections but human rights and property rights, 
swift and impartial justice, and the rule of law.  Democratic 
governments must deliver basic services.  Their institutions must be 
strengthened and must be modernized.  To defend democracy successfully, 
the OAS must strengthen the tools at its disposal.   I commend the new 
steps that you took this week to suspend non-democratic regimes.  
Together, we must also create new means to end historic border disputes 
and to control the competition in conventional weaponry.

In all of this, I believe my country, the United States of America, 
bears a special responsibility.  We face a moment of maximum 
opportunity, but also, let's face it, continued risk.  And we must 
remain engaged, for more than ever before our future is bound up with 
the future of the Americas.

This is the fastest growing region in the world for US products.  In the 
struggle to defend democracy, our most cherished values are at stake.  
Travel to Miami or El Paso, Los Angeles or Chicago or New York, and 
listen to the language of our neighborhoods.  We are tied to the 
Americas--not just by geography, not just by history, but by who we are 
as a people.  No one knows that more profoundly than this proud 
grandfather.

This year marks the 500th anniversary of a voyage of discovery to the 
New World.  Let this also be a time of rediscovery for my country, the 
United States, of the importance of our own hemisphere.  If we are equal 
to the challenges before us, we can build in the Americas the world's 
first completely democratic hemisphere.  Just think about that:  think 
of the importance; think of the significance; think of the example for 
the rest of the world.

This hemisphere can be as well a zone of peace, where trade flows 
freely, prosperity is shared, the rule of law is respected, and the gift 
of human knowledge is harnessed for all.

More than 150 years ago, Simon Bolivar, the liberator whose statue 
stands outside this hall, spoke about an America united in heart, 
subject to one law and guided by the torch of liberty.  My friends, here 
in this hemisphere we are on the way to realizing Simon Bolivar's dream.  
And, today, with the signing of the North American Free Trade Agreement, 
we take another giant step toward making the dream a reality. (###)


ARTICLE 2:

Country Profile:  Canada
Official Name:  Canada

  Geography
Area:  10  million sq. km. (3.8 million sq. mi.); second-largest country 
in the world.  
Cities:  Capital--Ottawa (pop. 833,000). Other major cities--Toronto (4 
million), Montreal (3 million), Vancouver (1 million).  
Terrain:  Varied.  
Climate:  Temperate to arctic.

  People
Nationality:  Noun and adjective--Canadian(s).  
Population (1991 est.):  27 million. 
Annual growth rate (1991):  1%. 
Ethnic groups:  British 25%, French 24%, other European 16%, indigenous 
Indian and Eskimo 1.5%, mixed background 28%.  
Religions:  Roman Catholic 47%, United Church 16%, Anglican 10%.  
Languages:  English, French.
Literacy:  98% of population aged 15 and over have at least a ninth 
grade education.  
Health:  Infant mortality rate--7/1,000.  Life expectancy--73 yrs. male, 
80 yrs. female.  
Work force (13.8 million, 1991):  Community/business/personal service--4 
million.  Manufacturing--2 million. Public administration--800,000. 
Agriculture--400,000. 

  Government
Type:  Confederation with parliamentary democracy.  
Independence:  July 1, 1867. 
Constitution:  The amended British North America Act of 1867 as 
"repatriated" in 1982, charter of rights, and unwritten custom.
Branches:  Executive--Queen Elizabeth II (head of state, represented by 
a governor general), prime minister (head of government), cabinet.  
Legislative--bicameral parliament (104-member Senate, 295-member House 
of Commons).  Judicial--Supreme Court.
Political parties:  Progressive
Conservative (ruling party), Liberal, New Democratic, Reform, Bloc 
Quebecois.
Subdivisions:  10 provinces, 2 territories. 
Suffrage:  Universal over 18.
Flag:  A red maple leaf on a white background flanked by vertical red 
bands.

  Economy
GDP (1991):  $580 billion. 
GDP growth rate (1991):  -1.7%.  
Per capita GDP (1991):  $21,500.
Avg. inflation rate (1991):  5.6%.
Natural resources:  Petroleum and natural gas, hydroelectric power, 
metals and minerals, fish, forests, wildlife.
Agriculture:  Products--wheat, livestock and meat, feed-grains, 
oilseeds, dairy products, tobacco, fruits, vegetables.
Industry:  Types--motor vehicles and parts, fish and forest products, 
processed and unprocessed minerals.
Trade (1991):  Exports--$127 billion: motor vehicles and parts, lumber, 
wood-pulp and newsprint, crude and fabricated metals, natural gas, crude 
petroleum, wheat.  Partners--US 75%, EC 8%, Japan 5%.  Imports--$122 
billion: motor vehicles and parts, industrial machinery, crude 
petroleum, chemicals, agricultural machinery.  Partners--US 61%, EC 10%, 
Japan 7%.

  Principal Government Officials
Prime Minister--Brian Mulroney
Secretary of State--Barbara McDougall
Ambassador to the US--Derek Burney
Ambassador to the UN--Louise Frechette (###)



ARTICLE 3:

Country Profile:  Mexico
Official Name:  United Mexican States

  Geography
Area:  2 million sq. km. (764,000 sq. mi.); about three times the size 
of Texas. 
Cities:  Capital--Mexico City (est. 20 million).  Other major cities--
Guadalajara, Monterrey, Puebla de Zaragoza, Leon. 
Terrain:  Coastal lowlands, central high plateaus, and mountains up to 
18,000 ft.
Climate:  Tropical to desert.

  People
Nationality:  Noun and adjective--Mexican(s).  
Population (1991):  89 million. 
Annual growth rate:  2%. 
Ethnic groups:  Indian-Spanish (Mestizo) 60%, American Indian 30%, 
Caucasian 9%, other 1%.
Religions:  Roman Catholic 90%, Protestant 5%, other 5%. 
Language:  Spanish.
Education:  Years compulsory--8. Literacy--90%.
Health:  Infant mortality rate--30/1,000.  Life expectancy--68 yrs. 
male, 76 yrs. female. 
Work force (30 million):  Services--30%.  Agriculture, forestry, 
hunting, fishing--24%.  Manufacturing--19%.  Commerce--13%.  
Construction--7%.  Transportation and communication--4%.  Mining and 
quarrying--0.4%.

  Government
Type:  Federal republic.  
Independence:  First proclaimed Sept. 16, 1810; republic established 
1822. 
Constitution:  Feb. 5, 1917.
Branches:  Executive--president (chief of state and head of government).  
Legislative--bicameral.  Judicial--Supreme Court, local and federal 
systems.
Political parties:  Institutional Revolutionary Party (PRI), National 
Action Party (PAN), Party of the Democratic Revolution (PRD), Popular 
Socialist Party (PPS), Authentic Party of the Mexican Revolution (PARM), 
Party of the Cardenist Front of National Reconstruction (PFCRN).
Suffrage:  Universal at 18. 
Administrative subdivisions:  31 states and a federal district.
Flag:  Green, white, and red vertical bands.  Centered is an eagle 
holding a snake in its beak and perching on a cactus.

  Economy
GDP (1991):  $282 billion. 
Per capita GDP:  $3,200.
Annual real GDP growth:  3.6%.
Avg. inflation rate:  19%.
Natural resources:  Petroleum, silver, copper, gold, zinc, lead, natural 
gas, timber.
Agriculture:  Products--corn, beans, oilseeds, feedgrains, fruit, 
cotton, coffee, sugarcane, winter vegetables.
Industry:  Types--manufacturing, services, commerce, transportation and 
communications, petroleum and mining.
Trade (1991):  Exports--$27 billion: manufacturing 59%, petroleum and 
derivatives 30%, agriculture 9%. Imports--$38 billion:  intermediate 
goods 63%, capital goods 22%, consumer goods 15%.  Major trading 
partners--US, EC, Japan.  US imports--$30 billion.

  Principal Government Officials
President--Carlos Salinas de Gortari
Foreign Minister--Fernando Solana Morales
Ambassador-designate to the United States--Jorge Montano Martinez
Ambassador-designate to the United Nations--Manuel Tello Macias
Ambassador to the OAS--Alejandro Carrillo Castro   (###)


ARTICLE 4:

President's Remarks on START II and Somalia Trip
President Bush
Opening remarks before the press at the White House, Washington, DC, 
December 30, 1992

I have just spoken this morning by telephone with Russian President 
Boris Yeltsin, and I am very pleased to announce that we have completed 
agreement on the START II Treaty [the Treaty Between the United States 
of America and the Russian Federation on Further Reduction and 
Limitation of Strategic Offensive Arms].

US and Russian expert teams are remaining in Geneva now to complete the 
formal work on the treaty text.  This historic treaty will reduce by 
two-thirds current nuclear arsenals and will dramatically lower the 
numbers of strategic nuclear arms permitted by START I [the Strategic 
Arms Reduction Treaty signed on July 31, 1991].  In my view, this treaty 
is good for all mankind.

President Yeltsin and I have agreed to meet in Sochi, Russia, on January 
2 and 3 [1993], where we will sign the treaty.1  I want to take this 
opportunity to congratulate the team standing here with me today--
[Secretary of State] Larry Eagleburger, Secretary [of Defense] Cheney, 
Chairman [of the Joint Chiefs of Staff] Powell, and others who have done 
a superb job on this treaty.

We're going to use the occasion of the meeting in Sochi to consider a 
number of bilateral and regional issues and then to discuss ways to 
fulfill the promise and the potential of US-Russian relations.

Let me just say a word about our trip to Somalia.  The trip, I hope, 
will show the concern that all Americans feel for the people of Somalia 
and for their condition.  These are humanitarian concerns.  In my view, 
it is proper that the President show this concern to the people over 
there.

I also want to make very clear how strongly we support our troops that 
are over there.  They're doing a first-class job.  I've had a good 
briefing from General Powell and Secretary Cheney.  I just can't tell 
you how proud I am of the young men and women that are serving halfway 
around the world in this great humanitarian cause.

We've tried to keep Governor [President-elect] Clinton closely advised--
informed--on the Somalia trip and, obviously, on the arms control 
agreement.  So I think these are both important events--the trip to 
Sochi and the trip to Somalia.  


1  Editor's note:  Location subsequently was changed to Moscow, Russia. 
(###)



ARTICLE 5:

START II TREATY

START II Treaty To Be Signed
Fact sheet released by the White House, Office of the Press Secretary, 
Washington, DC, January 1, 1993. 

On January 3, 1993, Presidents Bush and Yeltsin will sign the Treaty 
Between the United States of America and the Russian Federation on 
Further Reduction and Limitation of Strategic Offensive Arms.

The treaty, often called START [Strategic Arms Reductions Treaty] II, 
codifies the Joint Understanding signed by both Presidents at the 
Washington summit on June 17, 1992.  It will eliminate the most 
destabilizing strategic weapons--heavy intercontinental ballistic 
missiles (ICBMs) and all other multiple independently targetable reentry 
vehicles (MIRVed) ICBMs.  It also will reduce by two-thirds below 
current levels the total number of strategic nuclear weapons deployed by 
both countries.

The treaty includes a Protocol on Elimination or Conversion concerning 
heavy ICBMs and heavy ICBM silos, a Protocol on Exhibition and 
Inspection concerning heavy bombers, and a Memorandum of Attribution.

Relationship to the START Treaty
START II builds upon the START Treaty signed on July 31, 1991, between 
the United States and the Soviet Union but calls for far greater 
reductions in strategic nuclear forces.  All START provisions will 
pertain, except as explicitly modified in the new treaty.  Because of 
the close relationship between the two treaties, START II cannot enter 
into force before the START Treaty [see Background on START, p. 7].  It 
also will remain in force throughout the duration of START.

Central Limits
The treaty sets equal ceilings on the number of strategic nuclear 
weapons that can be deployed by either side.  Ceilings are set for two 
phases:  Phase One to be completed 7 years after entry-into-force of the 
START Treaty [START I] and Phase Two to be completed by the year 2003.  
Phase Two may be completed by the end of the year 2000 if the United 
States can help finance the elimination of strategic offensive arms in 
Russia.  The treaty sets ranges for some of the central limits.

Phase One.  By the end of this phase, each side must have reduced its 
total deployed strategic nuclear warheads to 3,800-4,250.  These include 
the number of warheads on deployed ICBMs and submarine-launched 
ballistic missiles (SLBMs) as well as the number of warheads for which 
heavy bombers with nuclear missions are equipped.

Of the total 3,800-4,250 warheads, no more than 1,200 may be on deployed 
MIRVed ICBMs, no more than 2,160 on deployed SLBMs, and no more than 650 
on deployed heavy ICBMs.

Phase Two.  By the end of the second phase, each side must have reduced 
its total deployed strategic nuclear warheads to 3,000-3,500.  Of those, 
none may be on MIRVed ICBMs, including heavy ICBMs.  Thus, all MIRVed 
ICBMs must be eliminated from each side's deployed forces; only ICBMs 
carrying a single warhead will be allowed.  No more than 1,700-1,750 
deployed warheads may be on SLBMs.  There will be no prohibition on 
MIRVed SLBMs.

Downloading
The treaty allows for a reduction in the number of warheads on certain 
ballistic missiles.  Such "downloading" is permitted in a carefully 
structured fashion, modifying the rules agreed in START.

--  Each side is able to download two existing types of ballistic 
missiles by up to four warheads each, in addition to the US Minuteman 
III and the Russian SS-N-18.  There are no aggregate limits on the 
number of warheads that can be downloaded.

--  A limit of 105 ICBMs of one of those types may be downloaded by up 
to five warheads each.  Such an ICBM may only be deployed in silos in 
which it was deployed at the time of START signature.

Thus, the three-warhead US Minuteman III ICBM, the four-warhead Russian 
SS-17 ICBM, and 105 of the six-warhead Russian SS-19 ICBMs are able to 
be downloaded to a single warhead, to comply with the requirement to 
eliminate all MIRVed ICBMs.  The US Peacekeeper ICBM and the Russian SS-
18 heavy ICBM and SS-24 ICBM, each of which carry 10 warheads, and the 
remaining SS-19 ICBMs must all be eliminated, in accordance with START 
procedures.

Missile System Elimination
In START, deployed SLBMs and most deployed ICBMs may be removed from 
accountability either by destroying their launchers (silos for fixed 
ICBMs, mobile launchers for mobile ICBMs, and launcher sections of 
submarines for SLBMs), or by converting those launchers so that they can 
carry only another type of permitted missile.  The one exception is the 
SS-18.  Under START, the requirement to eliminate 154 deployed SS-18s 
must be met through silo destruction, not conversion.

In the START II Treaty, those rules generally continue to apply.  The 
major exception is the SS-18.  Ninety SS-18 silos may be converted to 
carry a single-warhead missile, which Russia has said will be an SS-25 
type.  The treaty lays out specific procedures, including on-site 
inspections, to ensure that those converted silos will never again be 
able to launch a heavy ICBM.  The remaining 64 SS-18 silos subject to 
this treaty will have to be destroyed.

In exchange for the right to retain up to 90 converted SS-18 silos, the 
treaty requires that all SS-18 missiles and canisters, both deployed and 
non-deployed, be eliminated no later than January 1, 2003.  This is a 
major change from the START Treaty.  Generally, START did not seek 
destruction of missiles. In START II, the Russians have agreed to 
eliminate all SS-18 missiles, both deployed and non-deployed.  This 
fully achieves a long-standing US goal to eliminate completely heavy 
ICBMs.

Heavy Bombers
In START, nuclear heavy bombers are subject to more flexible counting 
rules than are ballistic missiles.  Each heavy bomber equipped to carry 
only short-range missiles or gravity bombs counts as one warhead.  US 
heavy bombers equipped to carry long-range nuclear air-launched cruise 
missiles (ALCMs) each count as 10 warheads, and Soviet heavy bombers 
equipped to carry long-range nuclear ALCMs each count as 
8 warheads.

In START II, heavy bombers will be counted using the number of nuclear 
weapons--whether long-range nuclear ALCMs, short-range missiles, or 
gravity bombs--for which they are actually equipped.  This number is 
specified in the treaty's Memorandum on Attribution and will be 
confirmed by a one-time exhibition and by routine START on-site 
inspections.

Another new feature of this treaty is the provision that a maximum of 
100 heavy bombers that have never been accountable under the START 
Treaty as long-range-nuclear-ALCM heavy bombers may be reoriented to a 
conventional role.  Such bombers will not count against the treaty 
warhead limits.  They will be based separately from heavy bombers 
equipped for nuclear weapons, will be used only for non-nuclear 
missions, and will have observable differences from other heavy bombers 
of the same type that are not reoriented to a conventional role.  Such 
heavy bombers may be returned to a nuclear role after 3 months' 
notification, but then may not be reoriented again to a conventional 
role.

Verification
The comprehensive START verification regime continues to apply to the 
new treaty.  In addition, START II includes some new verification 
measures, such as observation of SS-18 silo conversion and missile 
elimination procedures, exhibitions, and inspections of all heavy 
bombers to confirm weapon loads, and exhibitions of heavy bombers 
reoriented to a conventional role to confirm their observable 
differences.


Background on START
Fact sheet released by the White House, Office of the Press Secretary, 
Washington, DC, January 1, 1993. 

On July 31, 1991, the United States and the Soviet Union concluded 
almost a decade of arduous and complex negotiations by signing the 
Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty.  The treaty was the first to call for 
significant reductions in the deployed strategic nuclear forces of the 
two countries.

The START Treaty includes a number of Agreed Statements; Protocols; the 
Definitions Annex; a Memorandum of Understanding on data; and related 
agreements, letters, and supporting documents.  Together, they cover not 
only weapons limits but also counting rules; conversion or elimination 
of weapons; verification and inspections; cooperative measures; the 
creation of the Joint Compliance and Inspection Commission; and 
procedures for the treaty's entry-into-force, amendment, duration, and 
withdrawal.

On December 25, 1991, the Soviet Union ceased to exist, and the 
Commonwealth of Independent States was established.  Four independent 
states with strategic nuclear weapons on their territory also came into 
existence--Russia, Ukraine, Kazakhstan, and Belarus.

Following extensive high-level negotiations, these four newly 
independent states and the United States reached agreement on May 23, 
1992, in Lisbon, Portugal, on how they would all adhere to the START 
Treaty.  The agreement was codified in a new Protocol to START that 
makes all five states parties to the treaty.  Under the terms of the 
Protocol, the four new independent states will make the necessary 
implementing arrangements among themselves to carry out their 
responsibilities under START.  In addition, Ukraine, Kazakhstan, and 
Belarus committed to join the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) as 
non-nuclear weapon states in the shortest possible time.  Russia remains 
a nuclear weapon state party to the NPT.  In legally binding letters to 
President Bush, Ukraine, Kazakhstan, and Belarus also committed to 
eliminate all nuclear weapons and all strategic offensive arms from 
their territories within the 7-year START reduction period.

The US Congress and the parliaments of the Russian Federation and 
Kazakhstan have since consented to START ratification.  We look to early 
similar action by the parliaments of Ukraine and Belarus, and to the 
rapid adherence by Ukraine, Kazakhstan, and Belarus to the NPT as non-
nuclear weapon states. (###)


Comparison of Central Limits Set by START Treaties I and II
                                             START            START II             
START II
                                                                   Phase 
One           Phase Two
Total strategic warheads     6,000             3,800-4,250       3,000-
3,500
                                            accountable     actual                 
actual
Ballistic missile warhead    4,900             No specific          No 
specific
                                                                    
sublimit              sublimit
MIRVed ICBM warheads           N/A               1,200                         
0
SLBM warheads                       N/A               2,160                
1,700-1,750
Heavy ICBM warheads          1,540                   650                        
0
Mobile ICBM warheads         1,100         START applies         START 
applies
Total Strategic Nuclear       1,600        START applies         START 
applies
    Delivery Vehicles (###)


ARTICLE 6:

Implementation of Peace Accords In El Salvador
Vice President Quayle
Address at the ceremony concluding implementation of the peace accords, 
San Salvador, El Salvador, December 15, 1992

This is a great moment in the history of this nation and Central 
America.  And it is a great moment for the people of El Salvador.  I am 
enormously proud to be here with you and to bring you greetings from 
President Bush and the American people.

At a time of year when the words "peace on earth" carry such special 
meaning, we meet to celebrate a new commitment to peace in a land that 
has seen too much sadness, too much suffering, and too much loss.

Men and women who once met on the field of battle now stand together as 
one in their devotion to the democratic process.  We share your joy and 
your fresh hopes for the future on this day of national reconciliation.

National reconciliation in El Salvador embodies the hopes of all 
peoples.  With the end of superpower confrontation, and the active 
involvement of the United Nations in the cause of peace, we hope to see 
a further decline in the use of force to solve international problems.  
This is the promise of the new world order.

My country's 16th President, Abraham Lincoln, once said that the ballot 
is stronger than the bullet.  History proves the wisdom of those words.  
Democratic principles are the key to protecting individual rights; 
advancing economic prosperity; and preserving the precious gift of 
peace.

Many observers said this day would never come.  Some said that peace and 
justice could only come from the barrel of a gun; others said peace 
could only be attained by trampling on human rights and liberties.  Both 
were wrong.  The guns are stilled today because democracy and human 
rights have triumphed. 

There are many here who deserve our gratitude for this achievement.  
First, we must thank the negotiators on both sides who stepped forward 
in good faith and carried out their duty with great skill.  And we must 
pay a special tribute to one man who is known around the world as the 
person who brought peace to El Salvador, President Alfredo Cristiani.  
Mr. President, you will be honored in the pages of history for all you 
have done to bring peace to your people.

We thank the United Nations, and Secretary General Boutros-Ghali, for 
patience and determination in this process.  We also salute the 
Organization of American States, and the Four Friends:  Mexico, 
Venezuela, Colombia, and Spain--whose leaders and governments played 
such a crucial role in the success of the peace process.

Finally, we thank the courageous people of El Salvador, who have long 
prayed that this day would come.  Through all your struggles, you were 
sustained by an unyielding determination to be free--and by your deep 
faith in the Almighty.  Today, your hopes for the triumph of democracy 
have been realized.  Today, your prayers for peace have been answered.

The American people are proud to extend the hand of friendship to all of 
you, regardless of which side you took in the past conflict.  We will 
continue to support your efforts to rebuild this nation and fulfill both 
the letter and the spirit of the peace accords.  As a measure of our 
commitment, today I am pleased to sign with your President an agreement 
that forgives 75% of El Salvador's official debt to the United States.  

A very dark era ends today, and a bright new one begins.  You are 
building a new country founded in peace and national reconciliation--and 
a new, more hopeful future in which all your citizens can share.  As you 
take these first steps together, let me again share with you the words 
of our President Lincoln, uttered near the end of America's civil war:

With malice toward none; with charity for all; with firmness in the 
right, as God gives us to see the right, let us strive on to finish the 
	work we are in; to bind up the nation's wounds . . . to do all 
which may achieve and cherish a just and lasting peace among ourselves, 
and with all nations.  (###)


Editor's note:  See Joint US-Russia Statement on El Salvador. 



ARTICLE 7:

Department Statements

Murder of Israeli Policeman
Statement by Department Spokesman Richard Boucher, Stockholm, Sweden, 
December 15, 1992.

We are very troubled and saddened by the violence in the territories, 
the casualties among both Palestinians and Israelis, and now the 
kidnaping and murder of an Israeli border policeman.

Some extremist groups like Hamas want to destroy any possibility of 
peace.  They offer no hope for the future except more violence and 
tragedy.

We should not give in to the extremists.  The pathway to a different, 
more hopeful future for Israelis and Palestinians lies in working out 
understandings and agreements in their negotiations.

The current violence should give everyone a new sense of urgency in 
making progress.


Cuba:  Continuing Crackdown On Human Rights Activists
Released by the Office of the Assistant Secretary/Spokesman, Washington, 
DC, December 16, 1992.

The US Government strongly condemns the Cuban regime's continuing 
crackdown against those who have advocated respect for human rights and 
peaceful democratic change.  This campaign of repression began on 
December 10, UN International Human Rights Day, after activists' 
attempts to call for legalization of human rights groups and a 
democratic opening.  The regime's violent reaction to their desire for 
free speech and the right to organize shows absolute intolerance for 
peaceful dissent and a determination to maintain total control.  We call 
on the Cuban Government to release human rights activists Elizardo 
Sanchez and Rodolfo Gonzalez and to stop its harassment and abuse of 
Cubans who advocate peaceful change.

The latest inhumane outrage in this campaign is the "cordoning off" of 
human rights leaders' homes.  Cuban authorities allow no one to enter or 
leave; those inside suffer de facto house arrest.  This has happened at 
the homes of Elizardo Sanchez, Gustavo Arcos, and Vladimir Gonzalez.  In 
addition to this, water, gas, and electricity were cut off at the homes 
of Vladimiro Roca and Alvaro Prendes.  Cuban police are stationed in 
front of the homes of Francisco Chaviano, Oswaldo Paya, and Aida Valdez.

As we noted on December 11, Cuban police severely beat and arrested 
Elizardo Sanchez, President of the Cuban Committee for Human Rights and 
National Reconciliation, December 10.  Although he reportedly suffers 
from cracked ribs and a broken jaw, he has been moved from a hospital to 
a facility for common criminals.  Sanchez is still in police custody.  
Also last Thursday, plainclothes police directed a mob that severely 
beat Cuban Committee for Human Rights  (CCPDH) activist Jesus Yanes 
Pelletier outside Gustavo Arcos' home.  Rodolfo Gonzalez, and executive 
member of the CCPDH, was also arrested and charged with disseminating 
enemy propaganda and possession of foreign currency. 


Secretary Eagleburger Meets With Kosovo Leader
Statement by Department Spokesman Richard Boucher, Brussels, Belgium, 
December 17, 1992.

Secretary of State Eagleburger met on December 17, 1992, in Brussels 
(following the meeting of the North Atlantic Council) with Dr. Ibrahim 
Rugova, leader of the Albanian community of Kosovo.

Secretary Eagleburger assured Dr. Rugova of the deep friendship and 
respect of the American people for the people of Kosovo.  He emphasized 
the understanding of the American people and government for the 
difficult circumstances of the Albanian people of Kosovo as a 
consequence of the repressive policies followed by the Government of 
Serbia.  

The Secretary emphasized US support for peace and stability in Kosovo.  
He called to Dr. Rugova's attention the strong statement issued earlier 
that day by the foreign ministers of the North Atlantic Council.  
Secretary Eagleburger said this statement demonstrated the growing 
interest of the world community in the situation in Kosovo.  He also 
reaffirmed the US intention to provide $5 million in humanitarian 
assistance to the people of Kosovo.

Dr. Rugova described for Secretary Eagleburger recent developments in 
Kosovo.  He assured the Secretary of State that the people of Kosovo 
would continue to use only peaceful means to gain the restoration of 
their political and economic rights.  Secretary Eagleburger praised Dr. 
Rugova's responsible and moderate leadership under difficult conditions. 


Israeli Deportations
Released by the Office of the Acting Assistant Secretary/Spokesman, 
Washington, DC, December 18, 1992.

We understand that the Israeli Supreme Court decided that the government 
could proceed with the order to deport over 400 Palestinians to Lebanon 
and that the government has now done so.

The United States understands the difficult security problems Israel 
faces with terrorist attacks and that the Government of Israel has a 
right and a duty to protect its citizens.

We are deeply troubled by the recent increase in violence in the 
territories and by the Palestinian and Israeli casualties, including the 
murder of the Israeli policeman by Hamas, and we strongly condemn it.  
We have called on Arabs and Israelis to join us in condemning all forms 
of violence.

At the same time, we believe every government throughout the world has 
an obligation to the fundamental principles of human rights, the rule of 
law, and democratic practices.

We have, therefore, repeatedly urged the Government of Israel 
immediately and permanently to cease deportations and to comply fully 
with the Fourth Geneva Convention as it pertains to the treatment of 
inhabitants of the occupied territories.

The United States believes that charges of wrongdoing should be brought 
against specific individuals in a court of law based on evidence to be 
argued in a fair trial which would afford full judicial process.

We, therefore, strongly condemn the action of deportation.


Presidential Decision On Military Sales to China
Statement by Department Spokesman Richard Boucher, Washington, DC, 
December 22, 1992.

The President has decided it is in our national interest to close out 
four cases of suspended Foreign Military Sales (FMS) to the People's 
Republic of China (PRC).  The President's decision means that, in the 
coming weeks, we will return Chinese equipment sent to the United States 
under the FMS programs, reimburse unused funds in China's FMS account, 
and make available for shipment to China releasable equipment already 
purchased by the Chinese in connection with these cases.  The 
President's decision closes out this arms sales agreement between the 
United States and China.  We have no plans for new arms sales to China.

Consistent with Public Law 101-246, which enacted into law certain of 
the sanctions imposed by the President against China in June 1989, the 
President has notified Congress of his decision.  These four FMS 
programs were suspended to demonstrate our deep concern about the tragic 
events in China.  We have made our point.  We now believe that 
continuing to hold aging items after a 31/2-year suspension hinders 
rather than helps US efforts to promote cooperative PRC behavior in a 
range of areas.

The four suspended programs covered by this decision involve an avionics 
upgrade for the Chinese F-8 aircraft, equipment for a munitions 
production line, four anti-submarine torpedoes, and two artillery-
locating radars.  The equipment will be delivered as is, with no follow-
on support, repairs, maintenance, or training by the United States.  
More specific information about the four programs is available from the 
Department of Defense.


Equatorial Guinea
Statement by Department Spokesman Richard Boucher, Washington, DC, 
December 24, 1992.

The United States is deeply concerned by the continuing repression of 
political opposition in Equatorial Guinea.  Over the last week, scores 
of students, teachers, priests, and opposition activists have been 
rounded up on the pretext that they were involved in a minor student 
disturbance at the Malabo market.  Many of the detainees have been badly 
beaten, often in the presence of high-ranking officials of the Obiang 
regime.  The regime refused permission for the medical evacuation of 
some of the more badly injured detainees.

The Government of Equatorial Guinea has repeatedly pledged itself to a 
process of democratization; it has just as frequently violated those 
pledges.  The arrest and torture of innocent members of a non-violent 
opposition once again demonstrates the government's lack of good faith.

The US ambassador has attempted to protest these latest acts of 
political repression to the Government of Equatorial Guinea, but 
government officials have refused to receive him in the absence of 
President Obiang from the country.

We call upon the Government of Equatorial Guinea to release immediately 
all political prisoners, to cease the torture in the prisons, to punish 
those responsible for these abuses, and to compensate those persons 
unjustly detained.

Further, the United States calls for the Government of Equatorial Guinea 
to cease its thinly disguised threats of violence against US citizens, 
including our ambassador.  The United States reminds the Government of 
Equatorial Guinea that we hold it directly responsible for the safety of 
all resident US citizens, including missionaries, businessmen, 
technicians, and Peace Corps volunteers, as well as diplomats.


Burmese Rohingya Refugees In Bangladesh
Statement by Department Spokesman Richard Boucher, Washington, DC, 
December 24, 1992.

The US Government has received credible reports indicating that 
Bangladesh is coercing Rohingya refugees to return to Burma and that the 
Government of Bangladesh is denying UNHCR [UN High Commissioner for 
Refugees] staff free access to the Rohingya refugee camps, thereby 
preventing the UNHCR from fulfilling its international mandate to 
protect refugees.

Over the past several months, we and UNHCR have repeatedly raised this 
problem with the Government of Bangladesh.  The US Government deplores 
the use of coercion by the Government of Bangladesh. The United States 
also deeply regrets that the Bangladesh Government and the UNHCR have 
not agreed on an effective role for the UNHCR to protect the Rohingyas 
both in the refugee camps in Bangladesh and during the repatriation 
process to Burma.

The US Government calls upon the Government of Bangladesh to refrain 
from coerced repatriation and to negotiate with the UNHCR as soon as 
possible an effective protection role for [the] UNHCR. 


Joint US-Russia Statement On El Salvador
Statement issued by the Office of the Assistant Secretary/Spokesman, 
Washington, DC, December 28, 1992.

The Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation and the United 
States Department of State have agreed to release the following joint 
statement:

The Russian Federation and the United States, whose constructive 
interaction on Central American issues the last several years has helped 
defuse tensions in this area, note with great satisfaction that the 
peace process in El Salvador started at Esquipulas and pursued further 
within the framework of the Chapultepec accords has entered a promising 
new phase.

Russia and the United States applaud the political resolve displayed by 
the Government of El Salvador and the FMLN [Farabundo Marti National 
Liberation Front] leadership, which overcame mutual distrust to 
implement the main provisions of the Chapultepec accords.  Russia and 
the United States are grateful for the role played by the United 
Nations, above all its Secretary General, and for the support given the 
peace process by Mexico, Spain, Colombia, and Venezuela.  The high level 
of representation at the reconciliation ceremony December 15 bears 
testimony to the intention of the international community to continue 
its support of the peace process.

As El Salvador moves forward to fully implement the peace accords and to 
realize the full potential of progress to date, Russia and the United 
States express confidence that the Government of El Salvador and the 
FMLN will continue their dialogue and cooperation with the UN, show 
restraint, and demonstrate renewed determination to achieve their 
country's socioeconomic reconstruction.   They reiterate their readiness 
to continue to assist in this effort and express hope that other 
interested states and international and regional organizations will 
offer their support.


Elections in Serbia And Montenegro
Statement by Acting Department Spokesman Joseph Snyder, Washington, DC, 
December 29, 1992.

Officials in Serbia and Montenegro have issued the final results of the 
December 20 elections.  After examining the pre-election period and the 
con-duct of the elections themselves, American and other Western 
election monitors have concluded that the elections in Serbia and 
Montenegro failed to meet international standards for a free and fair 
democratic process as outlined in CSCE [Conference on Security and 
Cooperation in Europe] documents.  We agree with their conclusions.

Serbia
In Serbia, the CSCE found the pre-election period was highly unfair.  
The ruling party of Slobodan Milosevic abused its position to its own 
advantage and to the disadvantage of the opposition parties.

--  The Serbian-run electronic media did not grant equal access to the 
opposition.  It refused to air some of the opposition's advertisements, 
and it used news and information programs to campaign for the ruling 
party and attack the opposition.  This pattern led the representative of 
the CSCE's Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights to 
conclude that the government-run media in Serbia had been an instrument 
of "shameless propaganda" during the pre-election period.

--  Serbian officials used bureaucratic obstacles to hinder the 
opposition's ability to campaign.

On election day, American and other Western observers found major 
irregularities.

--  Voter lists were manipulated so that many eligible voters were 
excluded from voting.
--  In some places, members of opposition parties were not allowed to 
participate on electoral commissions that processed the votes.
--  Provisions for voter privacy were inadequate.
--  Ballot boxes were not handled properly.
--  Voters were reportedly intimidated by the presence of police.

Montenegro
Electoral conditions in Montenegro, while not free of problems, were 
better. The pre-election period in Montenegro included instances of 
intimidation of the opposition and consistently favorable media access 
and coverage for the ruling party.

Conclusion
We applaud the courage and determination of the democratic opposition 
parties, which conducted vigorous campaigns under very adverse 
circumstances.

We call on the appropriate judicial authorities to review the complaints 
made by opposition parties and take the steps necessary to ensure that 
Serbia and Montenegro meet their international obligations for the 
conduct of free and fair elections. 

We have a long history of friendship with the peoples of Serbia and 
Montenegro.  We are prepared to respond favorably to positive changes in 
Serbian policies.  As long as Serbia continues to pursue its present 
policies, however, it will remain outside the community of nations and 
face increasing pressure from sanctions and other steps from those of us 
who are opposed to the aggression perpetrated by the Serbian Government. 
(###)

END OF DISPATCH VOL 4, NO 1