US DEPARTMENT OF STATE DISPATCH
VOLUME 4, NUMBER 9, MARCH 1, 1993
PUBLISHED BY THE BUREAU OF PUBLIC AFFAIRS

ARTICLES IN THIS ISSUE:
1.  American Leadership and Global Change -- President Clinton
2.  NATO and US Foreign Policy -- Secretary Christopher
3.  Statements Related to Secretary Christopher's Visit to the Middle 
East
     Joint US-Russian Statement, Israel, Kuwait, Lebanon, Saudi Arabia,
      Syria, Jordan, Egypt
4.  President's Meeting With UN Secretary General


ARTICLE 1:


American Leadership And Global Change
President Clinton
Address at the Centennial Celebration, American University, Washington, 
DC, February 26, 1993 (opening remarks deleted)

Thirty years ago in the last year of his short but brilliant life, John 
Kennedy came to this university to address the paramount challenge of 
that time:  the imperative of pursuing peace in the face of nuclear 
confrontation.  Many Americans still believe it was the finest speech he 
ever delivered.  Today, I come to this same place to deliver an address 
about what I consider to be the great challenge of this day:  the 
imperative of American leadership in the face of global change.

Over the past year, I have tried to speak at some length about what we 
must do to update our definition of national security and to promote it 
and to protect it--and to foster democracy and human rights around the 
world.  Today, I want to allude to those matters but to focus on the 
economic leadership we must exert at home and abroad as a new global 
economy unfolds before our eyes.

Twice before in this century, history has asked the United States and 
other great powers to provide leadership for a world ravaged by war.  
After World War I, that call went unheeded.  Britain was too weakened to 
lead the world to reconstruction.  The United States was too unwilling.  
The great powers together turned inward as violent, totalitarian power 
emerged.  We raised trade barriers.  We sought to humiliate rather than 
rehabilitate the vanquished.  And the result was instability, inflation, 
then depression, and, ultimately, a second world war.

After the second war, we refused to let history repeat itself.  Led by a 
great American President, Harry Truman, a man of very common roots but 
uncommon vision, we drew together with other Western powers to reshape a 
new era.  We established NATO to oppose the aggression of communism.   
We rebuilt the American economy with investments like the GI Bill and a 
national highway system.  We carried out the Marshall Plan to rebuild 
war- ravaged nations abroad.  General MacArthur's vision prevailed in 
Japan, which built a massive economy and a remarkable democracy.  We 
built new institutions to foster peace and prosperity--the United 
Nations, the International Monetary Fund, the World Bank, the General 
Agreement on Tariffs and Trade, and more.

These actions helped to usher in four decades of robust economic growth 
and collective security.  Yet the Cold War was a draining time.  We 
devoted trillions of dollars to it, much more than many of our more 
visionary leaders thought we should have.  We posted our sons and 
daughters around the world.  We lost tens of thousands of them in the 
defense of freedom and in the pursuit of a containment of communism.

We, my generation, grew up going to school assemblies, learning about 
what we would do in the event a nuclear war broke out.  We were taught 
to practice ducking under our desks and praying that somehow they might 
shield us from nuclear radiation.  We all learned about whether we 
needed a bomb shelter in our neighborhood to which we could run in the 
event that two great superpowers rained nuclear weapons on one another.  
And that fate, frankly, seemed still frighteningly possible just months 
before President Kennedy came here to speak in 1963.  Now, thanks to his 
leadership and that of every American president since the Second World 
War from Harry Truman to George Bush, the Cold War is over.

The Soviet Union itself has disintegrated.  The nuclear shadow is 
receding in the face of the START [Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty] I 
and START II agreements and others that we have made and others yet to 
come.  Democracy is on the march everywhere in the world.  It is a new 
day and a great moment for America.

Yet, across America I hear people raising central questions about our 
place and our prospects in this new world we have done so much to make.  
They ask:  Will we and our children really have good jobs, first-class 
opportunities, world-class education, quality affordable health care, 
safe streets?  After having fully defended freedom's ramparts, they want 
to know if we will share in freedom's bounty.  One of the young public 
school students whom [American University] President Duffey just 
introduced was part of the children's program that I did last Saturday 
with children from around America.  If you saw their stories, so many of 
them raised troubling questions about our capacity to guarantee the 
fruits of the American dream to all of our own people.

I believe we can do that, and I believe we must.  For in a new global 
economy, still recovering from the after-effects of the Cold War, a 
prosperous America is not only good for Americans, as the Prime Minister 
of Great Britain reminded me just a couple of days ago, it is absolutely 
essential for the prosperity of the rest of the world.

Washington can no longer remain caught in the death grip of gridlock, 
governed by an outmoded ideology that says change is to be resisted, the 
status quo is to be preserved like King Canute ordering the tide to 
recede.  We cannot do that.  And so, my fellow Americans, I submit to 
you that we stand at the third great moment of decision in the 20th 
century.  Will we repeat the mistakes of the 1920s or the 1930s by 
turning inward, or will we repeat the successes of the 1940s and the 
1950s by reaching outward and improving ourselves as well?  I say that 
if we set a new direction at home, we can set a new direction for the 
world as well.

The change confronting us in the 1990s is in some ways more difficult 
than previous times because it is less distinct.  It is more complex and 
in some ways the path is less clear to most of our people still today, 
even after 20 years of declining relative productivity and a decade or 
more of stagnant wages and greater effort.

The world clearly remains a dangerous place.  Ethnic hatreds, religious 
strife, the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, the violation 
of human rights flagrantly in altogether too many places around the 
world still call on us to have a sense of national security in which our 
national defense is an integral part.  And the world still calls on us 
to promote democracy, for even though democracy is on the march in many 
places in the world, you and I know that it has been thwarted in many 
places, too.  And yet we still face, overarching everything else, this 
amorphous but profound challenge in the way humankind conducts its 
commerce.

We cannot let these changes in the global economy carry us passively 
toward a future of insecurity and instability.  For change is the law of 
life.  Whether you like it or not, the world will change much more 
rapidly in your lifetime than it has in mine.  It is absolutely 
astonishing the speed with which the sheer volume of knowledge in the 
world is doubling every few years.  And a critical issue before us, and 
especially before the young people here in this audience, is whether you 
will grow up in a world where change is your friend or your enemy.

We must challenge the changes now engulfing our world toward America's 
enduring objectives of peace and prosperity, of democracy and human 
dignity.  And we must work to do it at home and abroad.  It is important 
to understand the monumental scope of these changes.  When I was growing 
up, business was mostly a local affair.  Most farms and firms were owned 
locally, they borrowed locally, they hired locally, they shipped most of 
their products to neighboring communities or states within the United 
States.  It was the same for the country as a whole.  By and large, we 
had a domestic economy.

But now we are woven inextricably into the fabric of a global economy.  
Imports and exports, which accounted for about $1 in $10 when I was 
growing up, now represent $1 in every $5.  Nearly three-quarters of the 
things that we make in America are subject to competition at home or 
abroad from foreign producers and foreign providers of services.  
Whether we see it or not, our daily lives are touched everywhere by the 
flows of commerce that cross national borders as inexorably as the 
weather.

Capital clearly has become global.  Some $3 trillion of capital race 
around the world every day.  And when a firm wants to build a new 
factory, it can turn to financial markets now open 24 hours a day, from 
London to Tokyo, from New York to Singapore.  Products have clearly 
become more global.  Now, if you buy an American car, it may be an 
American car built with some parts from Taiwan, designed by Germans, 
sold with British-made advertisements, or a combination of others in a 
different mix.

Services have become global.  The accounting firm that keeps the books 
for a small business in Wichita may also be helping new entrepreneurs in 
Warsaw.  And the same fast food restaurant that your family goes to--or 
at least that I go to--also may well be serving families from Manila to 
Moscow and managing its business globally with information, 
technologies, and satellites.

And most important of all, information has become global and has become 
king of the global economy.  In earlier history, wealth was measured in 
land, in gold, in oil, in machines.  Today, the principal measure of our 
wealth is information--its quality, its quantity, and the speed with 
which we acquire it and adapt to it.  We need, more than anything else, 
to measure our wealth and our potential by what we know and what we can 
learn, and what we can do with it.  The value and volume of information 
has soared; the half-life of new ideas has trumped.

Just a few days ago, I was out in Silicon Valley at a remarkable company 
called Silicon Graphics that has expanded exponentially, partly by 
developing computer software with a life of 12 months to 18 months, 
knowing that it will be obsolete after that, and always being ready with 
a new product to replace it.

We are in a constant race toward innovation that will not end in the 
lifetime of anyone in this room.  What all this means is that the best 
investment we can make today is in the one resource firmly rooted in our 
own borders.  That is, in the education, the skills, the reasoning 
capacity, and the creativity of our own people.

For all the adventure and opportunity in this global economy, an 
American cannot approach it without mixed feelings.  We still sometimes 
wish wistfully that everything we really want, particularly those things 
that produce good wages, could be made in America.  We recall simpler 
times when one product line would be made to endure and last for years.  
We're angry when we see jobs and factories moving overseas or across the 
borders or depressing wages here at home when we think there is nothing 
we can do about it.  We worry about our own prosperity being so 
dependent on events and forces beyond our shores.  Could it be that the 
world's most powerful nation has also given up a significant measure of 
its sovereignty in the quest to lift the fortunes of people throughout 
the world?

It is ironic and even painful that the global village we have worked so 
hard to create has done so much to be the source of higher unemployment 
and lower wages for some of our people.  But that is no wonder.  For 
years, our leaders have failed to take the steps that would harness the 
global economy to the benefit of all of our people.  Steps such as 
investing in our people and their skills, enforcing our trade laws, 
helping communities hurt by change--in short, putting the American 
people first without withdrawing from the world and people beyond our 
borders.  The truth of our age is this--and must be this:  Open and 
competitive commerce will enrich us as a nation.  It spurs us to 
innovate.  It forces us to compete.  It connects us with new customers.  
It promotes global growth without which no rich country can hope to grow 
wealthier.  It enables our producers, who are themselves consumers of 
services and raw materials, to prosper.  And so I say to you, in the 
face of all the pressures to do the reverse, we must compete, not 
retreat.

Our exports are especially important to us.  As bad as the recent 
recession was, it would have gone on for twice as long had it not been 
for what we were able to sell to other nations.  Every $1 billion of our 
exports creates nearly 20,000 jobs here, and we now have over 7 million 
export-related jobs in America.  They tend to involve better work and 
better pay.  Most are in manufacturing and, on average, they pay almost 
$3,500 more per year than the average American job.  They are exactly 
the kind of jobs we need for a new generation of Americans.

American jobs and prosperity are reason enough for us to be working at 
mastering the essentials of the global economy.  But far more is at 
stake.  For this new fabric of commerce will also shape global 
prosperity or the lack of it, and with it, the prospects of people 
around the world for democracy, freedom and peace.

We must remember that even with all our problems today, the United 
States is still the world's strongest engine of growth and progress.  We 
remain the world's largest producer and its largest and most open 
market.  Other nations, such as Germany and Japan, are moving rapidly.  
They have done better than we have in certain areas.  We should respect 
them for it, and where appropriate, we should learn from that.  But we 
must also say to them, you, too, must act as engines of global 
prosperity.

Nonetheless, the fact is that for now and for the foreseeable future, 
the world looks to us to be the engine of global growth and to be the 
leaders.  Our leadership is especially important for the world's new and 
emerging democracies.  To grow and deepen their legitimacy, to foster a 
middle class and a civic culture, they need the ability to tap into a 
growing global economy.  And our security and our prosperity will be 
greatly affected in the years ahead by how many of these nations can 
become and stay democracies.  All you have to do to know that is to look 
at the problems in Somalia, to look at Bosnia, to look at the other 
trouble spots in the world.  If we could make a garden of democracy and 
prosperity and free enterprise in every part of this globe, the world 
would be a safer and a better and a more prosperous place for the United 
States and for all of you to raise your children in.

Let us not minimize the difficulty of this task.  Democracy's prospects 
are dimmed, especially in the developing world by trade barriers and 
slow global growth.  Even though 60 developing nations have reduced 
their trade barriers in recent years, when you add up the sum of their 
collective actions, 20 of the 24 developed nations have actually 
increased their trade barriers in recent years.  This is a powerful 
testament to the painful difficulty of trying to maintain a high-wage 
economy in a global economy where production is mobile and can quickly 
fly to a place with low wages.

We have got to focus on how to help our people adapt to these changes, 
how to maintain a high-wage economy in the United States without 
ourselves adding to the protectionist direction that so many of the 
developed nations have taken in the last few years.  These barriers in 
the end will cost the developing world more in lost exports and incomes 
than all the foreign assistance that developed nations provide, but 
after that they will begin to undermine our economic prosperity as well.

It's more than a matter of incomes, I remind you--it's a matter of 
culture and stability.  Trade, of course, cannot ensure the survival of 
new democracies, and we have seen the enduring power of ethnic hatred, 
the incredible power of ethnic divisions--even among people literate and 
allegedly understanding--to splinter democracy and to savage the nation 
state.

But as philosophers from Thucydides to Adam Smith have noted, the habits 
of commerce run counter to the habits of war.  Just as neighbors who 
raise each other's barns are less likely to become arsonists, people who 
raise each other's living standards through commerce are less likely to 
become combatants.  So if we believe in the bonds of democracy, we must 
resolve to strengthen the bonds of commerce.

Our own nation has the greatest potential to benefit from the emerging 
economy, but to do so we have to confront the obstacles that stand in 
our way.  Many of our trading partners cling to unfair practices.  
Protectionist voices here at home and abroad call for new barriers.  
Indifferent policies have left too many of our workers and communities 
exposed to the harsh winds of trade without letting them share in the 
sheltering prosperity trade has also brought, and without helping them 
in any way to build new ways to work so they can be rewarded for their 
efforts in global commerce.

Cooperation among the major powers toward world growth is not working 
well at all today.  And most of all, we simply haven't done enough to 
prepare our own people and to produce our own resources so that we can 
face with success the rigors of the new world.  We can change all that 
if we have the will to do it.  Leonardo da Vinci said that God sells all 
things at the price of labor.  Our labor must be to make this change.

I believe there are five steps we can and must take to set a new 
direction at home and to help create a new direction for the world.  

First, we simply have to get our own economic house in order.  I have 
outlined a new national economic strategy that will give America the new 
direction we require to meet our challenges.  It seeks to do what no 
generation of Americans has ever been called upon to do before:  to 
increase investment in our productive future and to reduce our deficit 
at the same time.

We must do both.  A plan that only plays down the deficit without 
investing in those things that make us more productive will not make us 
stronger.  A plan that only invests more money without bringing down the 
deficit will weaken the fabric of our overall economy such that even 
educated and productive people cannot succeed in it.

It is more difficult to do both.  The challenges are more abrasive--you 
have to cut more other spending and raise more other taxes.  But it is 
essential that we do both--invest so that we can compete; bring down the 
debt so that we can compete.  The future of the American dream and the 
fate of our economy and much of the world's economy hangs in the balance 
on what happens in this city in the next few months.

Already the voices of inertia and self-interest have said, well, we 
shouldn't do this or this, or that detail is wrong with that plan.  But 
almost no one has taken up my original challenge that anyone who has any 
specific ideas about how we can cut more should simply come forward with 
them.  I am genuinely open to new ideas to cut inessential spending and 
to make the kinds of dramatic changes in the way government works that 
all of us know we have to make.  I don't care whether they come from 
Republicans or Democrats, or I don't even care whether they come from 
home or abroad.  I don't care who gets the credit, but I do care that we 
not vary from our determination to pass a plan that increases investment 
and reduces the deficit.

I think every one of you who is a student at this university has a far 
bigger stake in the future than I do.  I have lived in all probability 
more than half my life with benefits far beyond anything I ever dreamed 
or deserve because my country worked.  And I want my country to work for 
you.  The plan I have offered is assuredly not perfect, but it is an 
honest and bold attempt to honestly confront the challenges before us; 
to secure the foundations of our economic growth; to expand the 
resources, the confidence, and the moral suasion we need to continue our 
global leadership into the next century.  And I plead with all of you to 
do everything you can to replace the blame game that has dominated this 
city too long with the bigger game of competing and winning in the 
global economy.

Second, it is time for us to make trade a priority element of American 
security.  For too long, debates over trade have been dominated by 
voices from the extremes.  One says government should build walls to 
protect firms from competition.  Another says government should do 
nothing in the face of foreign competition; no matter what the dimension 
and shape of that competition is; no matter what the consequences are in 
terms of job losses, trade dislocations, or crushed incomes.

Neither view takes on the hard work of creating a more open trading 
system that enables us and our trading partners to prosper.  Neither 
steps up to the task of empowering our workers to compete or of ensuring 
that there is some compact of shared responsibility regarding trade's 
impact on our people, or of guaranteeing a continuous flow of investment 
into emerging areas of new technology which will create the high-wage 
jobs of the 21st century.

Our Administration is now developing a comprehensive trade policy that 
will step up to those challenges.  And I want to describe the principles 
upon which it will rest.  It will not be a policy of blame but one of 
responsibility.  It will say to our trading partners that we value their 
business, but none of us should expect something for nothing.  We will 
continue to welcome foreign products and services into our markets but 
insist that our products and services be able to enter theirs on equal 
terms.  We will welcome foreign investment in our businesses knowing 
that with it come new ideas as well as capital--new technologies, new 
management techniques, and new opportunities for us to learn from one 
another and grow.  But as we welcome that investment, we insist that our 
investors should be equally welcome in other countries.

We welcome the subsidiaries of foreign companies on our soil.  We 
appreciate the jobs they create and the products and services they 
bring.  But we do insist simply that they pay the same taxes on the same 
income that our companies do for doing the same business.

Our trade policy will be part of an integrated economic program, not 
just something we use to compensate for the lack of a domestic agenda.  
We must enforce our trade laws and our agreements with all the tools and 
energy at our disposal.  But there is much about our competitive posture 
that simply cannot be straightened out by trade retaliation.  Better-
educated and trained workers, a lower deficit, stable, low interest 
rates, a reformed health care system, world-class technologies, revived 
cities:  these must be the steel of our competitive edge.  And there 
must be a continuing quest by business and labor and, yes, by government 
for higher and higher and higher levels of productivity.

Too many of the chains that have hobbled us in world trade have been 
made in America.  Our trade policy will also bypass the distracting 
debates over whether efforts should be multilateral, regional, 
bilateral, unilateral.  The fact is that each of these efforts has its 
place.  Certainly we need to seek to open other nations' markets and to 
establish clear and enforceable rules on which to expand trade.

That is why I'm committed to a prompt and successful completion of the 
Uruguay Round of the GATT talks.  That round has dragged on entirely too 
long.  But it still holds the potential, if other nations do their share 
and we do ours to boost American wages and living standards 
significantly and to do the same for other nations around the world.

We also know that regional and bilateral agreements provide 
opportunities to explore new kinds of trade concerns, such as how trade 
relates to policies affecting the environment and labor standards and 
the antitrust laws.  And these agreements, once concluded, can act as a 
magnet, inducing other countries to drop barriers and to open their 
trading systems.

The North American Free Trade Agreement is a good example.  It began as 
an agreement with Canada, which I strongly supported, which has now led 
to a pact with Mexico as well.  That agreement holds the potential to 
create many, many jobs in America over the next decade if it is joined 
with others to ensure that the environment, that living standards, that 
working conditions, are honored--that we can literally know that we are 
going to raise the condition of people in America and in Mexico.  We 
have a vested interest in a wealthier, stronger Mexico, but we need to 
do it on terms that are good for our people.

And we should work with organizations, such as the Asia-Pacific Economic 
Cooperation forum, to liberalize our trade across the Pacific as well.  
And let me [talk] just a moment about this.  I am proud of the 
contribution America has made to prosperity in Asia and to the march of 
democracy.  I have seen it in Japan after World War II.  I have seen it, 
then, in Taiwan as a country became more progressive and less repressive 
at the same time.  I have seen it in Korea as a country has become more 
progressive and more open.  And we are now making a major contribution 
to the astonishing revitalization of the Chinese economy, now growing at 
10% a year, with the United States buying a huge percentage of those 
imports.  And I say I want to continue that partnership, but I also 
think we have a right to expect progress in human rights and democracy 
and should support that progress.

Third, it is time for us to do our best to exercise leadership among the 
major financial powers to improve our coordination on behalf of global 
economic growth.  At a time when capital is mobile and highly fungible, 
we simply cannot afford to work at cross-purposes with the other major 
industrial democracies.  Our major partners must work harder and more 
closely with us to reduce interest rates, stimulate investment, reduce 
structural barriers to trade and to restore robust global growth.  And 
we must look anew at institutions we use to chart our way in the global 
economy and ask whether they are serving our interests in this new 
world, or whether we need to modify them or create others.

Tomorrow, our Treasury secretary, Secretary Bentsen, and the Federal 
Reserve Board chairman, Alan Greenspan, will meet with their 
counterparts from these Group of Seven (G-7) nations to begin that work.  
And I look forward to meeting with the G-7 heads of state and the 
representatives of the European Community at our Tokyo summit in July.  
I am especially hopeful that by then our economic package here at home 
will have been substantially enacted by the Congress.  And if that is 
so, I will be able to say to my counterparts, you have been telling us 
for years that America must reduce its debt and put its own house in 
order.  You have been saying to us for years we must increase investment 
in our own education and technology to improve productivity.  We have 
done it.  We have done it for ourselves; we have done it for you.  Now 
you must work with us in Germany and Japan and other nations to promote 
global growth.

We have to work with these nations.  None of us are very good at it. 
America doesn't want to give up its prerogatives.  The Japanese don't 
want to give up theirs.  The Germans don't want to give up theirs.  
There are deep and ingrained traditions in all these nations.  But the 
fact is that the world can't grow if America is in recession, but it 
will be difficult for us to grow coming out of this recovery unless we 
can spark a renewed round of growth in Europe and in Japan.  We have got 
to try to work more closely together.

Fourth, we need to promote the steady expansion of growth in the 
developing world, not only because it's in our interests, but because it 
will help them as well.  These nations are a rapidly expanding market 
for our products--some 3 million American jobs flow from exports to the 
developing world.  Indeed, because of unilateral actions taken by Mexico 
over the last few years, the volume of our trade has increased 
dramatically, and our trade deficit has disappeared.

Our ability to protect the global environment and our ability to combat 
the flow of illegal narcotics also rests in large measure on the 
relationships we develop commercially with the developing world.

There is a great deal that we can do to open the flow of goods and 
services.  Our aid policies must do more to address population 
pressures; to support environmentally responsible, sustainable 
development; to promote more accountable government--and to foster a 
fair distribution of the fruits of growth among an increasingly restive 
world population--where over 1 billion people still exist on barely $1 a 
day.  These efforts will reap us dividends of trade, of friendship and 
peace.

The fifth step we must take, my fellow Americans, is toward the success 
of democracy in Russia and in the world's other new democracies.  The 
perils facing Russia and other former Soviet republics are especially 
acute and especially important to our future.  For the reductions in our 
defense spending that are an important part of our economic program over 
the long run here at home are only tenable as long as Russia and the 
other nuclear republics pose a diminishing threat to our security and to 
the security of our allies and the democracies throughout the world.  
Most worrisome is Russia's precarious economic condition.  If the 
economic reforms begun by President Yeltsin are abandoned, if 
hyperinflation cannot be stemmed, the world will suffer.

Consider the implications for Europe if millions of Russian citizens 
decide they have no alternative but to flee to the West where wages are 
50 times higher.  Consider the implication for the global environment if 
all the Chernobyl-style nuclear plants are forced to start operating 
there without spare parts, when we should be in a phased stage of 
building them and shutting them down--building them down, closing them 
up, cleaning them up.  If we were willing to spend trillions of dollars 
to ensure communism's defeat in the Cold War, surely we should be 
willing to invest a tiny fraction of that to support democracy's success 
where communism failed.

To be sure, the former Soviet republics, and especially Russia, must be 
willing to assume most of the hard work and high cost of the 
reconstruction process.  But then again, remember that the Marshall Plan 
itself financed only a small fraction of post-war investments in Europe.  
It was a magnet, a beginning, a confidence-building measure, a way of 
starting a process that turned out to produce an economic miracle.

Like Europe then, these republics now have a wealth of resources and 
talent and potential.  And with carefully targeted assistance, 
conditioned on progress toward reform and arms control and non-
proliferation, we can improve our own security and our future prosperity 
at the same time [that] we extend democracy's reach.

These five steps constitute an agenda for American action in a global 
economy.  As such, they constitute an agenda for our own prosperity as 
well.  Some may wish we could pursue our own domestic effort strictly 
through domestic policies, as we have understood them in the past.  But 
in this global economy, there is no such thing as a purely domestic 
policy.  This thing we call the global economy is unruly; it's a bucking 
bronco that often lands with its feet on different sides of old lines, 
and sometimes with its whole body on us.  But if we are to ride the 
bronco into the next century, we must harness the whole horse, not just 
part of it.

I know there are those in this country, in both political parties and 
all across the land, who say that we should not try to take this ride, 
that these goals are too ambitious, that we should withdraw and focus 
only on those things which we have to do at home.  But I believe that 
would be a sad mistake and a great loss.  For the new world toward which 
we are moving actually favors us.  We are better equipped than any other 
people on earth by reason of our history, our culture and our 
disposition, to change, to lead, and to prosper.  The experience of the 
last few years where we have stubbornly refused to make the adjustments 
[that] we need to compete and win are actually atypical and unusual seen 
against the backdrop of our nation's history.

Look now at our immigrant nation and think of the world toward which we 
are tending.  Look at how diverse and multi-ethnic and multi-lingual we 
are--in a world in which the ability to communicate with all kinds of 
people from all over the world and to understand them will be critical.  
Look at our civic habits of tolerance and respect.  They are not perfect 
in our own eyes.  It grieved us all when there was so much trouble a 
year ago in Los Angeles.  But Los Angeles is a [city] with 150 different 
ethnic groups of widely differing levels of education and access to 
capital and income.  It is a miracle that we get along as well as we do.  
And all you have to do is to look at Bosnia, where the differences were 
not so great, to see how well we have done in spite of all of our 
difficulties.

And look at the way our culture has merged technology and values.  This 
is an expressive land that produced CNN and MTV.  We were all born for 
the information age.  This is a jazzy nation, thank goodness, for my 
sake.  It created be-bop and hip-hop and all those other things.  We are 
wired for real time.  And we have always been a nation of pioneers.  
Consider the astonishing outpouring of support for the challenges I laid 
down last week in an economic program that violates every American's 
narrow special interest if you just take part of it out and look at it.

And, yet, here we are again, ready to accept a new challenge, ready to 
seek new change because we're curious and restless and bold.  It flows 
out of our heritage.  It's ingrained in the soul of Americans.  It's no 
accident that our nation has steadily expanded the frontiers of 
democracy, of religious tolerance, of racial justice, of equality for 
all people, of environmental protection and technology and, indeed, the 
cosmos itself.  For it is our nature to reach out, and reaching out has 
served not only ourselves, but the world as well.

Now, together, it is time for us to reach out again-toward tomorrow's 
economy; toward a better future; toward a new direction; toward securing 
for you, the students at American University, the American dream.  (###)



ARTICLE 2:

NATO and US Foreign Policy
Secretary Christopher
Excerpts from the intervention at the Special Meeting of the North 
Atlantic Council, NATO Headquarters, Brussels, Belgium, February 26, 
1993

It is an honor for me to address the North Atlantic Council and to 
convey greetings from President Clinton.  Since this is our first 
meeting, I thought I might cast my remarks a bit more broadly than is 
customary.  In addition to offering some views on our important work in 
NATO, and Europe more generally, I'd like to outline for you the 
principal elements of President Clinton's foreign policy.  I will also 
report on my trip to the Middle East [see p. 122], my meeting with 
[Russian] Foreign Minister Kozyrev [see Dispatch, Vol. 4, No. 10], and 
address an issue of immediate concern to us all--the tragedy in the 
former Yugoslavia.

Creation and Renewal
We in the Clinton Administration consider ourselves fortunate to have 
been called to leadership at a time of unprecedented change, hope, and 
opportunity.  Only yesterday, the Berlin Wall defined the European 
landscape, and a massive Soviet threat hung over the continent.  In its 
place, however, new dangers have arisen.  Communism's legacy of economic 
and political bankruptcy impedes Europe's integration.  Ethnic 
antagonisms and splintering nations spawn violence.  Today, global 
threats--arms proliferation, environmental degradation, and rapid 
population growth--menace Europe as well.

These new threats remind us of the continuing need for NATO as a 
guarantor of our collective defense.  They also underscore the need to 
continue adapting all of our institutions and policies to meet the 
challenges of tomorrow.

Of course, we must adapt responsibly.  Amid change, we cannot lose sight 
of certain core truths.  If this turbulent century has taught us 
anything, it's that our security is indivisible and that our dreams and 
destiny are linked.  All of us are best served by a thriving 
transatlantic partnership.  NATO and its principles of political 
partnership give us a foundation of strength upon which to build for a 
better tomorrow.  The United States welcomes a strong and integrated 
Europe.  We want Europe to be a real partner:  our partner in democracy; 
our partner in growth; our partner in the maintenance of peace.

For our part, President Clinton intends to conduct what our great post-
war statesman, Dean Acheson [Secretary of State, 1949-52], called "total 
diplomacy"--a diplomacy that views domestic and foreign issues as 
inseparable.  We recognize that only an America that is strong at home 
can act as an effective partner abroad.

President Clinton has identified [see Dispatch Vol. 4, No. 5, p. 57] 
three pillars upon which America's total diplomacy must rest:

    First, elevating global economic growth as a primary foreign
policy goal;
    Second, updating our forces and security arrangements to meet new 
threats; and 
    Third, organizing our foreign policy to help promote the spread of 
democracy and free markets abroad.

Achieving these goals depends on partnership with our allies and friends 
in Europe. 

Enhancing Global Economic Growth
In his economic address, President Clinton put forward a plan for 
America's economic renewal.  The promise of his plan is simple.  America 
must focus more on investment than consumption.  We must take bold steps 
to raise American skills and lower American deficits so that we can 
enjoy a more secure future.

The President understands that a healthy US economy requires a growing 
global economy.  We are taking steps to ensure a return to global 
growth.  The first is the President's domestic plan I just mentioned.  
The second is enhancing cooperation among the Group of Seven [Canada, 
France, Germany, Italy, Japan, United Kingdom, United States].  One of 
our top priorities is ensuring that this summer's economic summit in 
Tokyo leads to better macroeconomic coordination.  We seek renewed 
growth in each of our nations.

Global growth also requires expanding exports; investment; and the 
exchange of technology, culture, and ideas.  That is why the President 
announced that we would seek an extension of fast track authority to 
complete the Uruguay Round [of the General Agreement on Tariffs and 
Trade].

We are determined to have fair and reasonable access to world markets.  
We are also determined to do away with protectionist policies and 
subsidized competition because they undermine growth.  Barriers will 
beget barriers, but prosperity will beget prosperity.  President 
Clinton, at the very outset of his Administration, is taking the 
difficult steps at home that Europe and Japan have long urged.  We 
believe it is now time for our friends and allies to make similarly 
tough choices and to demonstrate the necessary leadership to bring the 
Uruguay Round to a quick and equitable conclusion. 

Updating Security Arrangements To Meet New Threats
For over 4 decades, this alliance has successfully harnessed political 
goals and military power.  Today, in the Cold War's aftermath, NATO 
continues to safeguard the core of the world's democratic coalition.  It 
reaches eastward with a steadying hand to the states of Central and 
Eastern Europe and the former Soviet Union.

America's commitment to Europe's security is undiminished and 
unwavering.  The Clinton Administration will maintain a level of US 
forces in Europe equal to the challenges of the new security 
environment.  And we will work with the Congress to provide adequate 
levels of US funding for NATO's infrastructure program.

We are all reducing our forces, given the reduced threats we face.  But 
we all must continue to field a force structure that is credible, 
capable, and sustainable--one strong enough to deter and, when 
necessary, defeat, any threat to our vital interests.

NATO remains fundamental for preserving our security in a changing 
strategic environment.  That environment includes the important work of 
the Western European Union.  I am pleased to note that Secretary General 
Van Ekelen has joined us today. Working together with other entities, 
NATO must improve its ability to deal with the disorder of ethnic 
conflict and aggressive nationalism, proliferation, and political and 
economic instability.  This would be a logical extension of the 
alliance's traditional and, still, vital collective defense function.

We must also continue our efforts to develop cooperative security 
arrangements with the nations of the former Warsaw Pact.  By enhancing 
their security, we reinforce our own.

There can be no better way to establish a new and secure Europe than to 
have soldiers from Russia, Ukraine, Poland, Hungary, and the other new 
democracies work with NATO to address their most pressing security 
problems.  We believe NATO and our Eastern colleagues should establish 
joint planning and training, and joint exercises for peace-keeping.  
Such cooperation can help ensure that all European peace-keeping 
operations are conducted in accordance with UN and CSCE [Conference on 
Security and Cooperation in Europe] principles. 

Promoting Democracy and Free Markets
Promoting democracy and economic freedom is a strategic element of 
America's national security policy, not a tactic.  Democracy and 
economic freedom are values we share.  Together, we made Europe secure 
by containing communism until it collapsed.  But the absence of 
communist aggression and repression is not enough to secure Europe's 
future.

Europe's long-term security--like America's--requires that we actively 
foster the spread of democracy and market economies.  Democracies tend 
not to make war on each other.  They are more likely to protect human 
rights and ensure equal rights for minorities.  They are more likely to 
be reliable partners in diplomacy, trade, arms accords, and 
environmental protection.

A compelling challenge faces us right here and now.  The states of 
Central and Eastern Europe, and the former Soviet Union, need our help.  
These countries are trying to develop into free market democracies.  
Assisting them is not charity; it is essential to our common security.  
We must provide political support for reform, keep our markets open to 
their products, and target our assistance programs for maximum positive 
effect.  It would be the height of folly to spend hundreds of billions 
of dollars to overcome communism and then refuse to invest in the 
survival of the new democracies that are emerging.

With this background, let me now turn to a discussion of my recent 
meetings with Arab and Israeli leaders, and with Foreign Minister 
Kozyrev.

Discussions in the Middle East
As you know, there has been a growing sense of stalemate in the Middle 
East peace negotiations.  President Clinton asked me to go to the Middle 
East to see if we could help to reactivate the peace process.  In 
sending me, he said that he was prepared to have the United States play 
the role of full partner, provided the parties would come back to the 
tables and negotiate seriously.

My trip to the area, my first as Secretary of State, symbolized our 
commitment and priority to pursuing Middle East peace.  Our willingness 
to change our approach qualitatively and to become more active in an 
"honest broker" role clearly demonstrates our seriousness.

The parties welcomed this renewed American commitment and reaffirmed 
their own commitment to the peace process and their involvement in it.  
All believed that the US partnership role was essential to making 
progress toward peace.  And many of the leaders I spoke to said they 
felt this was a historic opportunity--a-once-in-a-lifetime opportunity 
to make peace.

I firmly believe that you can help build the momentum we have 
established in the region over the last few days.  Together we can help 
promote a new day of hope in the Middle East.

Meeting With Foreign Minister Kozyrev
I had a good first meeting yesterday with Foreign Minister Kozyrev.  He 
welcomed my pledge that President Clinton intends that there will be no 
pause in our relationship with Russia, and I believe we gave meaning to 
the point by what we did in our first session.  Setting a summit date 
was a priority for the meeting, and we agreed to April 4 [1993], with 
the venue to be worked out later.

After I briefed him on my Middle East trip, Foreign Minister Kozyrev 
enthusiastically agreed to join the effort to get the peace talks 
started in April, promising, among other things, to encourage the 
Palestinians and others to be supportive.  On Yugoslavia, he was 
forthcoming in offering political support for our humanitarian airdrops 
and did not rule out possible Russian participation.

We discussed the volatility of the problem of minorities subject to 
mistreatment in states across Europe.  I agreed with him that it is 
important for the United States and the West to stand up for the rights 
of minorities, including the Russian minorities in the Baltic states and 
the former Soviet Union.  We must do this if we are to achieve a more 
stable and just continent and a just peace.

I reiterated the President's commitment to support the Yeltsin program 
at a most difficult time.  Kozyrev underscored the importance for them 
of opening opportunities for Russian industry to find responsible 
customers in the world market.  I expressed understanding for that 
problem but noted we could offer little more than a competitive 
opportunity. 

Former Yugoslavia
Finally, let me turn to the issue that has been at the forefront in 
recent weeks:  the ongoing crisis in Bosnia and other parts of the 
former Yugoslavia.  None of us takes lightly the risks of involvement in 
a Balkan conflict.  But we cannot ignore the risks of letting it rage to 
consume more lives and lands.  A whole new generation is being convulsed 
in violence and condemned to a cycle of brute force and blind hate.  
That cycle must be broken.

I greatly appreciate your thoughtful responses to my letters outlining 
President Clinton's six-point plan of engagement in the effort to 
restore peace.  We have also consulted with Russia and others.  My 
discussions with Foreign Minister Kozyrev were very positive.

President Clinton believes that we must move toward a settlement, 
building on the [former Secretary of State Cyrus] Vance-[Lord David] 
Owen plan, that is just, workable, and durable, and that preserves 
Bosnia as a state. US participation comes with the expectation that 
Europe, which is most directly affected, will play a leading role and 
redouble its concerted efforts.  The addition of the United States 
should certainly not occasion any relaxation by others.

If a viable agreement can be negotiated that all parties accept and that 
has practical enforcement mechanisms, the United States is ready to join 
with the United Nations, the European Community, NATO, and others in 
implementing it.  This includes possible US military participation.  
NATO's special capabilities and command structure can play a key role in 
this regard, in combination with contributions from non-allies.  It 
behooves the alliance to make preparations now.  We must be ready to act 
effectively if and when a viable agreement is accepted by all the 
warring sides.

With respect to humanitarian assistance, I stated on February 10 that we 
were considering steps to ensure delivery of aid to those in Bosnia who 
are starving and in need of medicine.  As you know, we announced 
yesterday that the United States will conduct air drops to the needy in 
eastern Bosnia, in coordination with the United Nations and the UN High 
Commissioner for Refugees.  We would welcome such broad participation in 
this effort.

We must, today, admit frankly a fact that now haunts our search for 
peace.  The West missed too may opportunities to prevent or contain this 
suffering, bloodshed, and destruction when the conflict was in its 
infancy.  The lesson to be learned from this tragedy is the importance 
of early and decisive engagement against ethnic persecution and 
aggressive nationalism.

The treatment of minorities is an issue that begs for the application of 
preventive diplomacy.  Minority concerns exist not only in the Balkans 
but throughout the countries that comprise our new North Atlantic 
Cooperation Council.

Our security interest in resolving minority issues is clear.  When 
democratic institutions are new, memories of historic injustices are 
fresh, and people are undergoing the painful dislocation of market 
reform, we must all be especially mindful of the treatment accorded 
minorities.  We must urge restraint and tolerance on all sides.  We must 
speak out when human rights are violated.  And we must promote early and 
effective problem-solving.

The Clinton Administration is prepared to do its part.  We look to you 
to do yours. 

Moving Forward Together
The great post-war leaders were years ahead of their time.  From 
history's vantage, we marvel at their far-sightedness.  Of course, 
Acheson, Monnet, Schuman, and Adenauer* could not know how kindly 
history would judge their work.  They were struggling to get beyond the 
moment, counter the pressing threat, and craft the policy that would 
serve their nations' long-term interests to speed the dawn of a better 
day.

That day has dawned.  Hard work lies ahead of us.  And we must act today 
to ensure our tomorrows.  But do we have the needed tools at our 
disposal?  Will we use them wisely?  Most important of all, can we 
summon the political will to accomplish our mission?

Those questions go to the heart of our NATO work.  We can--we must-- 
answer them in the affirmative.  We can and we must move forward 
together.  In that spirit, I am pleased to have the opportunity to meet 
here now.  (###)


*Dispatch Editors' Note:  All were proponents of greater European 
integration.  In 1950, French Foreign Minister Robert Schuman proposed a 
plan for the formation of a West European coal and steel organization 
that was the forerunner of the European Community (EC).  This "Schuman 
Plan" was drafted by French economist Jean Monnet and supported by 
Secretary Acheson and West German Chancellor Konrad Adenauer. (###)


ARITICLE 3:

Statements Related To Secretary Christopher's Visit To the Middle East 

February 25, 1993
Geneva, Switzerland
Joint US-Russian statement on the Middle East, released by the Office of 
the Assistant Secretary/Spokesman.

The United States and Russia attach the utmost importance to the Arab-
Israeli peace process launched at Madrid and the need for the parties to 
resume negotiations promptly.  In intensive conversations with the co-
sponsors, the Israelis, Arabs, and the Palestinians have reaffirmed 
their strong commitment to the peace process and emphasized their 
determination to resume the negotiations in the near future.  The 
Russian side notes the positive effect of Secretary Christopher's visit 
to the region.  The co-sponsors are convinced that at this point all 
sides must take additional steps to realize a[n] historic opportunity to 
make progress toward a comprehensive, just, and lasting Arab-Israeli 
peace settlement based on UN Security Council Resolutions 242 and 238.  
Russia and the United States agreed to intensify their role as hon-est 
brokers in the negotiations to promote forward movement in the peace 
process.  Accordingly, the co-sponsors will soon extend invitations to 
the ninth round of negotiations to be held in Washington during the 
month of April. 


February 24, 1993
Jerusalem
Excerpts from opening statements at a joint news conference by Secretary 
Christopher and Israeli Prime Minister Rabin, released by the US 
Information Service.

Prime Minister Rabin:  The Secretary of State of the United States, his 
colleagues, ladies and gentlemen of the media.  We more than appreciate 
the decision of President Clinton and the Secretary of State to have the 
first visit of the Secretary of State after President Clinton took the 
office of the President of the United States to come to the Middle East 
with the purpose to bring about the resumption of the peace 
negotiations.

I believe that the visit of the Secretary of State, the discussions, the 
talks that were held now in Israel, no doubt will serve as a landmark in 
the relationship between our two countries, in the efforts to invigorate 
the peace negotiations and to bring their resumption.  I believe that 
during the visit of the Secretary of State here in Israel,  I had the 
opportunity and the pleasure to have talks, deep to the issues, and I 
hope that . . . we succeeded to establish special relations--relations 
of friendship, understanding, and [candor]. 

I believe that in the talks that were held here, we discussed a variety 
of issues:  first and foremost, what has to be done to bring about the 
resumption of the peace negotiations, how to make sure that once they 
will be resumed, they lead in 1993 to results--results that I believe 
all the peoples, all the countries of this region expect them to 
achieve.  It is to say to have a breakthrough that will lead to peace 
between Israel and its neighboring countries and the Palestinians.

I hope and I believe that the visit of the Secretary of State, not only 
to Israel but also to the other capitals of the Arab countries that are 
directly involved in the peace negotiations . . . will create a new 
atmosphere in the region, an atmosphere that will be conducive to bring 
about more meaningful peace negotiations. We have discussed at length 
the special relations between the United States and Israel, and there's 
no doubt in my mind that these relations will be developed and 
strengthened in the interest of the two countries.  And no doubt, this 
development will bring about and will facilitate many things that we, 
together, try to achieve in this region.

Mr. Secretary, thank you very much for your patience, your readiness to 
listen, to travel, to see.  I believe that we put on you quite a burden 
of work during the two days that you stay[ed] in Israel.  Allow me 
through you to send my thanks and congratulation to President Clinton 
about his decision to give such a high priority to solve the 
difficulties that prevent[ed] until now the achievement of the peace 
negotiations.  Thank you very much, Mr. Secretary.


Secretary Christopher:  Mr. Prime Minister, thank you for those very 
warm words.  I've just concluded the last of my meetings here in 
Jerusalem, and let me say I've tremendously enjoyed my stay here.  The 
detailed discussions that I've had with the Prime Minister, the Foreign 
Minister, and their colleagues were serious and productive and very 
helpful to me.  I've had three separate meetings with the Prime 
Minister, and he and his wife were gracious enough to host me and my 
delegation last night for dinner. And all in all, it was a splendid time 
for me.

Over these last 3 days, we have strengthened and deepened the special 
relationship between our two nations. On a personal note, as the Prime 
Minister so generously said, I am pleased that we've developed a close 
and personal relationship.  I know that President Clinton is looking 
forward to greeting Prime Minister Rabin in Washington in the very near 
future and looking forward to that development of a similar 
relationship.  The relationship that the Prime Minister and I have 
established is symbolic of the friendship between our two nations--a 
friendship that's based upon deep and enduring interest, shared values, 
and common interests.  My stay here was all too short, but it did give 
me an opportunity to learn just a little bit about the rich history of 
this ancient land and to feel a sense of the dynamism of the modern, 
vibrant democracy.

In my visit to Yad Vashem, I was reminded again of the extraordinary 
uniqueness of the Jewish state.  And this morning in my visit to 
northern Israel, I was again reminded that the Jewish state continues to 
face very substantial security challenges.  It's high time for Israel to 
be able to enjoy the acceptance of its neighbors in the security that 
comes from having a just and lasting peace.  I know that the people of 
Israel yearn for that day, and I know that the Israeli Government is 
doing all that [it] can to achieve it.

After visiting with the leaders of the significant parties to the 
negotiations, I have a very real sense that all the parties want the 
negotiations to succeed.  They want them to resume and succeed at an 
early date, and they agree that they should redouble their efforts to 
that end.  I've also had in the last 2 days serious and thoughtful 
discussions with the Palestinians.  The Palestinian representatives with 
whom I spoke emphasized their commitment to seek peace with Israel, and 
they expressed their understanding of the stake that they have in 
seeking that peace.  I leave the Middle East hopeful but cognizant that 
there still are obstacles--obstacles that will have to be overcome.  But 
I sense among all the parties that they want to seek and make peace.  If 
that translates into an early resumption of the peace talks, as I hope 
it will, the United States stands ready to be a full partner.  Before I 
left Washington, I said that I was coming to the region to learn, to 
find the facts, to get to know the leaders in this area.   I have 
accomplished far more in that sense than I'd expected, and I've had 
substantive discussions far deeper than I'd anticipated.

This is a region that has known too much war and too much violence in 
its past.  The parties are at a historic crossroad.  This is an 
opportunity which I hope all the parties will embrace, and we'll do our 
part to help them in that regard.  Thank you very much.


February 22, 1993 Jerusalem 
Joint remarks by Secretary Christopher and Israeli Foreign Minister 
Peres, released by the US Information Service.

Foreign Minister Peres:  Secretary Christopher, I would like to welcome 
you here in our country as a cherished guest, representing a mission of 
the utmost importance for us, for the region, for peace.  We know that 
you are representing an administration that has raised the hopes of the 
whole of the free world, that has started anew the process of peace, and 
we do hope that is the first step in the renewal of the peace 
negotiations--something that we are awaiting anxiously, with great 
expectation.  We welcome you here with great respect, hope, and 
friendship.  You know how dear the relations between the United States 
and Israel are to all of us, and I am sure that you will represent it 
with great devotion and talent.  Welcome to Israel.


Secretary Christopher:  Thank you Mr. Foreign Minister.  It is a great 
honor to be welcomed by the distinguished Foreign Minister who has a 
worldwide reputation as a person who has sought peace for most of his 
adult life and someone who has great respect in my country.  Thank you 
ever so much for the honor you have served me by being out to welcome 
me.

It is a great pleasure to visit Israel on my first trip abroad as 
Secretary of State.  I have much to learn about this ancient land and 
this modern state.  I hope to use this opportunity to begin to know and 
see Israel and its people.  I want to gain a better understanding of the 
challenges and opportunities that you face.  As I arrive in Israel this 
evening, there are several things about which President Clinton and I 
are very certain.

First, the relationship between the United States and Israel is a 
special relationship for special reasons.  It is based upon shared 
interests, shared values, and a shared commitment to democracy, 
pluralism, and respect for the individual.  The ties between our two 
countries have proved strong and resilient, and President Clinton is 
determined to make them even stronger and more resilient. 

Second, I know that to understand Israel--Israel's present and its 
future--it is essential to understand Israel's past.  History has cast a 
long shadow over the people of this Jewish state.  The Israeli people 
have had to fight war and terrorism to defend the state.  I understand 
this struggle for survival.  That's why the United States is unalterably 
committed to Israel's security.  That commitment will not change.

Third, real security can only be brought about by real peace.  But we 
also know that peace won't be possible unless Israel is fully secure.  
The Israeli people want peace--not just peace meaning the absence of 
war, but peace reflected in lasting treaties, normalized relationships, 
and real reconciliation.

It is with this in mind that President Clinton has sent me to this 
region to assess, to consult, and to focus the parties--all the parties-
-on the importance of resuming negotiations at the very earliest date.  
So I am very much looking forward to my meetings with Prime Minister 
Rabin, with Foreign Minister Peres, and later with the Palestinians.

As in the period before Madrid, and now with the help of the United 
States as a full partner, the parties can build on the substance of 
structure of real peace through direct negotiations.  Working together, 
the United States, Israel, and the Arab and the Palestinian negotiating 
parties can turn this process into one of real breakthroughs and 
achievements rather than missed opportunities.


February 22, 1993
Kuwait City, Kuwait
Joint remarks by Secretary Christopher and Kuwaiti Foreign Minister 
Shaikh Sabah, released by the Office of the Assistant 
Secretary/Spokesman.

Secretary Christopher:  Good morning.  Mr. Minister, thank you very much 
for your warm welcome.  Two years ago almost to the day, American 
soldiers liberated this airport, sealing the commitment of the United 
States to Kuwait's independence and security.

President Clinton sent me here on my first trip outside of the United 
States to reaffirm that commitment to the people of Kuwait, to our other 
friends in the [Persian] Gulf, and to any who might be tempted again to 
pose a threat in this region.

I want to take this occasion to stress the importance that the Clinton 
Administration attaches to the full implementation of all the UN 
Security Council resolutions relating to Kuwait as well as the measures 
enacted to monitor and enforce those resolutions.

None should doubt the resolve of the United States to see that the will 
of the United Nations is carried out and carried out fully and 
completely.  Let me be clear about these matters.  We bear no ill will 
to the suffering people of Iraq.  We seek no military confrontation, but 
the pain inflicted on the Iraqi people is the responsibility of [Iraqi 
President] Saddam Hussein's regime, not the international community.

Saddam Hussein's regime is well aware [of] what they must do to meet the 
requirements of the United Nations, including the requirement that it 
end the repression of the Iraqi people.  Saddam Hussein must know that 
there is no substitute for full compliance.  In this regard, I want to 
affirm that we will not forget the hundreds of Kuwaitis and others who 
remain unaccounted for in defiance of UN requirements.

No one who has witnessed the vivid scenes of devastation perpetrated on 
Kuwait by the Saddam Hussein regime could fail to be impressed by the 
remarkable progress which has been made since the liberation.  And those 
who have stood side by side with Kuwait in rolling back Saddam's 
aggression will welcome the restoration of Kuwait's active parliamentary 
system.  We hope to see further steps in this direction of 
democratization.  On behalf of President Clinton, let me say how glad I 
am to have an opportunity to come here and to underscore in person the 
President's commitment to our continued obligations with respect to 
security and stability in the region.

Our friends can rest assured that the United States will be with them in 
the future as we have been in the past.  As long as the people of this 
region are subject to the threat of aggression, our friends can rely on 
the steadfast vigilance of the United States.  Thank you very much, Mr. 
Minister, again for welcoming me here.  I am very pleased to be here for 
a stay that is much too short but, nevertheless, is meaningful to me.  
Thank you, Mr. Minister.


Foreign Minister Shaikh Sabah (Kuwaiti translation):  I am pleased to 
welcome His Excellency, Warren Christopher, the Foreign Minister of the 
United States.  I am pleased as well to praise, on this occasion, the 
excellent relations binding two friendly countries and to laud the stand 
of both President Clinton and the US Administration that supports the 
Kuwaiti just causes and [that] truly reflect[s] the extent of the US 
awareness of its role and its international responsibilities and the 
respect of the principles of justice and right.  We should keep in mind 
the respect of the great role that the United States has played and 
still [plays] with all peace-loving countries in the world to establish 
peace and stability in the world.  [There is] no doubt that this tour by 
His Excellency in the Middle East represents the true and constructive 
role of the United States as a great power and its belief in its 
obligations toward defending international peace and security.

This visit comes while our area still [is] suffering the consequences of 
the brutal Iraqi aggression as a result of Iraqi regime reluctance and 
obstinacy in implementing the [UN] Security Council resolution[s] 
related to its aggression against the state of Kuwait--in particular, 
those related to the Kuwaiti POWs [prisoners of war] and detainees and 
[to] the repeated violations by that regime to the inviolability of the 
international Kuwait borders and his [that regime's] continuance of 
false claims against Kuwait.

This visit is considered a good opportunity to have consultations about 
the current situation in the Gulf area, due to the common faith that the 
security in this area is an integral part of the security and stability 
in accord[ance] with international resolutions [and] is an important and 
vital factor in [the] peace-making process in the world.  We are looking 
to have fruitful relations with the visiting [delegation], just aiming 
at serving the interests of our two friendly countries and enforcing the 
international position and its solidarity in standing against [the] 
Iraqi regime, which [in] its continuity in power represents a deviation 
from the simplest international norms and regulations and a direct 
threat to the international peace and security.


February 22, 1993
Beirut, Lebanon
Opening statement by Secretary Christopher at a news conference with 
Lebanese President Hraoui and Foreign Minister Bouez, released by the 
Office of the Assistant Secretary/Spokesman.

Secretary Christopher:  Thank you, Mr. President.  I'm very happy to be 
here in Beirut tonight.  As the President says, my visit has come at a 
time when the Lebanese people are finally beginning to achieve the 
national reconciliation and economic reconstruction that they have so 
long sought.  This country has been hurried by confrontation and 
violence for much too long.  Its greatest treasure, the resources of its 
people, has been wasted by civil war.  I hope that period is now behind 
us.  My visit to Beirut today is the first for a Secretary of State of 
the United States in a decade.  It symbolizes our commitment and support 
for the Lebanese Government, for its efforts to achieve independence and 
territorial integrity, [and] for the dissolution of the armed militias 
and the withdrawal of all non-Lebanese forces.  We continue to believe 
that the Taif agreement represents the best pathway and the best 
foundation on which to build a better future.

The United States has always had a special relationship with Lebanon and 
a special feeling for the people of Lebanon.  We want to work with 
others--others in the international community--to help Lebanon get back 
on its feet through the strenuous efforts that it is now making.

My visit also reflects the US commitment to moving forward in the peace 
process--the Arab-Israeli negotiations--and I have told the President 
that the United States is prepared to commit itself to be a full partner 
in helping to move this process forward.  As co-sponsor of the process, 
we vow to take an active role.  These negotiations carry great 
importance for Lebanon.  As one of the parties involved in the 
negotiating process launched in Madrid, Lebanon would benefit greatly, 
as would all the people in the region around here, from a just, lasting, 
and comprehensive peace.

I'm glad that I heard today from the Lebanese leaders--the President, 
the Prime Minister, and the Foreign Minister--that they all agree, with 
the other countries in this region that I have spoken to on my trip so 
far to four other Arab countries, that there should be an early return 
to negotiations.  The parties should return to the table as soon as 
possible.

Let me also say how pleased I was to be able to come to Beirut to have 
discussions on some of the substantive issues which have faced the 
negotiations with the President, the Prime Minister, and the Foreign 
Minister.  Our consultations have given me a better sense of the road 
ahead.  It won't be easy, but I think that we've begun a process here 
which will enable us to work effectively together in the future, 
provided the parties are prepared to come back to the negotiations and 
do their part.  The United States will do its part.  Thank you very 
much.


February 21, 1993
Riyadh, Saudi Arabia
Excerpts from joint statements by Secretary Christopher and Saudi 
Foreign Minister Saud, released by the Office of the Assistant 
Secretary/Spokesman.

Secretary Christopher:  I am pleased to be in Saudi Arabia on the eve of 
the holy month of Ramadan, a very special and important time when 
Muslims all over the world reflect on events which occurred not very far 
from here some 1,400 years ago.  I am very much looking forward to my 
meeting with King Fahd and Foreign Minister Saud.  It will be an 
important and very pleasant time for me, I am sure.

The United States has a close and cooperative relationship with Saudi 
Arabia, and my visit here abroad as Secretary of State underscores that 
close relationship.  Our shared commitment was demonstrated most 
recently in our shoulder-to-shoulder defense of peace and security in 
the [Persian] Gulf during our successful Desert Shield and Desert Storm 
operations.  President Clinton's commitment to the security of friends 
in the Gulf, like that of every President since Franklin Roosevelt, is 
firm and constant.

We share with Saudi Arabia a determination to see that Iraq fully 
complies with all the UN Security Council resolutions as well as the 
measures required to monitor and enforce those regulations.  We 
appreciate Saudi Arabia's support for measures undertaken to ensure full 
compliance.  We have no quarrel with the Iraqi people who are long-
suffering under Saddam Hussein's regime.  But no one should doubt our 
resolve in seeing to it that the will of the Security Council and its 
resolutions are carried out.

I also want to convey personally President Clinton's commitment to our 
being a full partner in re-energizing the peace negotiations.  We will 
be asking the Saudis to help us in efforts to establish an early 
resumption of the negotiations and to take other steps to promote peace.

We are gratified by the continuing participation of Saudi Arabia in the 
multilateral peace process and the working groups.  These are very 
important, as they complement the bilateral process.

Thank you very much, Mr. Foreign Minister, for welcoming me, my wife 
Marie, and our delegation.  I am very pleased to be here with old 
friends.  I notice that Ambassador Prince Bandar is here, as well.  We 
look forward to a good discussion, but most of all, I look forward to 
the opportunity to reaffirm old ties and [a] shared commitment.


Foreign Minister Saud:  I would like to welcome the Secretary to our 
country, as an old friend and not only to renew our acquaintance but 
also to continue the fruitful endeavors between our two countries in 
many areas that he touched upon, whether it regards peace in the region 
or the stability of the region.  I hope that the Secretary will himself 
touch the strong relations that bind our two people[s].

We look forward to his discussions.  He will meet this evening with the 
Custodian [of the Two Mosques of Medina and Mecca], and we look forward 
to a very fruitful discussion.  We also appreciate the fact that the 
Secretary has taken his first trip abroad to the region, and this 
indicates to us further commitment of the United States to the pursuit 
of peace in this region.


February 21, 1993
Damascus, Syria 
Opening remarks from a news conference held by Secretary Christopher and 
Syrian Foreign Minister Shara, released by the Office of the Assistant 
Secretary/Spokesman.

Foreign Minister Shara:  Let me say in brief that the discussions which 
Minister [Secretary] Christopher had with President Asad were positive 
and fruitful, and I can describe them as good discussions.  The topics 
and the issues which were discussed--probably you are aware of--is the 
peace process and how and when to resume the peace talks [and] the 
obstacles that stand in resuming the peace talks, mainly the deportees 
issue.  The bilateral issues between the United States of America and 
Syria have been discussed, all of the regional situation, in general.  I 
will give it to Secretary Christopher to describe his talks with His 
Excellency, President Asad.


Secretary Christopher:  As the Foreign Minister has said, we had very 
good and productive discussions today with President Asad.  Earlier, I 
had a bilateral discussion with the Foreign Minister.  Our discussions 
were quite wide-ranging.  We had a candid and useful exchange on 
bilateral and regional issues.  The principal focus of our discussion, 
however, was on reactivating the Middle East peace process.  Syria has 
played and continues to play a central role in that process, and it must 
do so if they are to be successful.  We talked about the desirability of 
an early resumption of the negotiations and the need to make substantive 
progress.  To that end, I conveyed to President Asad President Clinton's 
commitment to have the United States play the role of a full partner in 
the negotiating process.  Of course, to be able to play that role, the 
parties must return to the negotiations soon.

President Asad emphasized his commitment to the process of direct 
negotiations that were launched at Madrid, and he welcomed the US role 
as a full partner in the process.  Also, and very importantly, I think 
President Asad agreed that the negotiations should be recommenced soon.

My discussions with President Asad have been very useful to me in 
gaining a fuller understanding and assessing the key substantive issues 
involved in the negotiations.  Frankly, I can say [that] I have been 
encouraged by our substantive discussions.  From here, I'll travel 
tonight to Saudi Arabia, where I'll continue my discussions on the peace 
process and will again address regional and bilateral issues.

I look forward to ongoing contact with both President Asad and Foreign 
Minister Shara and will continue to work to try to invigorate the peace 
process.


February 20, 1993
Damascus, Syria
Joint remarks by Secretary Christopher and Foreign Minister Shara, 
released by the Office of the Assistant Secretary/Spokesman.  

Secretary Christopher:  I'm very pleased to be here in this great and 
venerable city of Damascus.  I look very much forward to meeting with 
President Asad and Foreign Minister Shara to discuss the Middle East 
peace process and a number of bilateral and regional issues.  I've come 
here to convey, personally, President Clinton's strong commitment to 
working as a full partner in trying to reactivate the peace process.  
We're in the region to encourage the parties to return to negotiations 
and to ensure that the negotiations produce results.  

The United States remains determined to help the parties to achieve a 
just and lasting solution based upon UN Security Council Resolutions 242 
and 338.  We're quite prepared to do our part as sponsors of these 
bilateral and multilateral negotiations provided that the parties do 
their part.  We look forward to working with the parties to sustain 
their strong commitment to meaningful negotiations so that the progress 
can be made in a very timely manner.  

In recent years, the United States and Syria have worked together to 
advance the peace process and regional security.  We anticipate that 
this cooperation will continue, and we look forward to it.  Syria's 
agreement to attend the Madrid peace conference was essential to 
launching it.  

We're very pleased that Syria joined with us and other nations in 
reversing Saddam Hussein's invasion of Kuwait.  Syria and Israel have 
already engaged substantially on core issues in the peace process, and 
we look forward to their continuing this progress.  

To repeat my ambitions for tomorrow, I look forward to our discussions 
with both President Asad and foreign Minister Shara.   I thank the 
Foreign Minister and his wife for welcoming me and my wife, Marie, and 
our delegation to Syria.


 Foreign Minister Shara:  Just a few words to welcome Secretary 
Christopher and Mrs. Christopher in Damascus.  I hope that his visit 
will be a success.  We and the United States and the other parties 
concerned hope to be able to achieve a just and comprehensive peace in 
the region and to remove the obstacles standing in the way.  We hope 
that the discussion tomorrow between Secretary Christopher and His 
Excellency President Asad [will]  prove to be positive and constructive 
and to help in implementing all UN Security Council resolutions.  That 
is, the deportees issue as an obstacle so far.  We hope that all the 
deportees will be able to go back home, and that the parties concerned 
[will] be able to resume the bilateral peace talks as soon as possible.


February 20, 1993
Amman, Jordan
Opening statements at news conference by Secretary Christopher and 
Jordanian King Hussein, released by the Office of the Assistant 
Secretary/Spokesman.

King Hussein:  Mr. Secretary, ladies, and gentlemen, it is a very great 
pleasure for us to welcome Secretary and Mrs. Christopher and the 
accompanying delegation here in Amman.  I do so on behalf of the 
Government and the people of Jordan and Queen Noor.  It is a wonderful 
opportunity for us to re-establish contact and to welcome an old and 
dear friend to this country again.  We are, indeed, hopeful and 
encouraged by the genuine desire to (inaudible) which we know we have 
and we hope that our friends have in the United States to renew and 
reinvigorate the friendship of many, many years between our two 
countries and nations and--certainly in my case--one that has prevailed 
over the last 4 decades based on trust, a feeling of partnership, mutual 
respect, and a desire to cooperate in all fields and areas.

Mr. Secretary, your visit at this time has given me the opportunity, 
together with my colleagues, to discuss with you once again frankly and 
openly and to hear from you views, ideas, and concerns at this critical 
juncture in the life of this area and this region.  And it has been a 
pleasure for me to restate our total commitment to the cause of a just 
and durable peace that future generations can enjoy, live with, and 
protect in the region.  I would like to say that the United States, 
without a doubt, is the most powerful nation in the world of today.  And 
I feel greatly encouraged at this point in time with President Clinton 
and the new Administration assuming their responsibilities; and, 
hopefully, it will be far greater in terms of its impact on the world--
on our large global village--when it can, hopefully, in the times ahead 
put together its physical and material strengths together with the 
principles and ideals on which the United States was founded, which had 
such an impact on our world and which, hopefully, again will be the case 
in the times ahead.

I thank you, and I will leave it to you, sir, to make any comment you 
would make, and then we will take it from there and see what we will 
face from our friends [members of the media].  Thank you very, very 
much.  And you are most welcome.


Secretary Christopher:  Your Majesty, ladies, and gentlemen, this 
morning I had very good and wide-ranging meetings here with His Majesty, 
the King, and with the Prime Minister and with the Foreign Minister.  We 
have discussed a number of issues:  the peace process, our bilateral 
relations, [and] regional issues, and we discussed at some length, and 
with great pleasure on my part, the progress of His Majesty's government 
toward democratization and broader political participation--subjects 
[in] which I found great interest as I've moved around the country.

President Clinton sent me to this region to convey personally his strong 
commitment to play a full partnership role in the peace process, to re-
energizing [and] reactivating that process, and to assess the 
commitments of the parties in this region to that important process.  I 
am here to encourage the resumption of the negotiations, particularly 
because I think all of the countries in this region are committed to 
positive results in the long run.

I'd like the people of Jordan to know--and, of course, I have told His 
Majesty, the King, with as much emphasis as I could summon--that the 
United States intends to play an active, full partnership role in this 
process to help the parties to the maximum extent to achieve an 
important result for this region.

I am very pleased to have heard from His Majesty, the King, an important 
commitment to the peace process in which Jordan has played such an 
important role.  No country was more important, I believe, in the Madrid 
conference, and no country has made more progress--or, indeed, as much 
progress--as Jordan has in the bilateral and multilateral negotiations.  
We look forward with great anticipation to working closely with His 
Majesty to seek a comprehensive, just, and lasting peace based upon UN 
[Security Council] Resolutions 242 and 338.  I'll be leaving here for 
Damascus [Syria] tonight.  I do want the government here to know--and 
particularly His Majesty, the King--that we'll stay in close touch, 
contacting him after I have completed my rounds or earlier if that 
should serve the process of peace.  Thank you very much.


February 19, 1993
Amman, Jordan
Joint remarks by Secretary Christopher and Jordanian Foreign Minister 
Abu Jaber, released by the Office of the Assistant Secretary/Spokesman.

Foreign Minister Abu Jaber:  Ladies and gentlemen, I am very pleased to 
welcome you, sir, to Jordan, as well as your accompanying delegation.  
Your visit at this particular moment illustrates the depths of US 
commitment to the cause of peace in this region.  It also provides us 
with the opportunity to discuss with you our bilateral relations and to 
explore the ways to further strengthen peace.  We look forward to our 
talks seeking how best to advance and accelerate the peace process and 
to ensure its success, currently facing serious threats.  It is our 
hope, sir, that your offer will bring about the viable solution that we 
all seek.

Mr. Christopher, I would like to reiterate, on this occasion, Jordan's 
firm commitment to the process that was launched in Madrid with the aim 
of achieving comprehensive, just, and lasting peace to the Arab-Israeli 
and the Palestinian-Israeli conflicts on the basis of [UN] Security 
Council Resolutions 242 and 338 and the concept of land for peace.  This 
commitment has been clearly demonstrated, especially in the efforts 
leading to Madrid as well as all the rounds of both bilateral and 
multilateral negotiations.

However, sir, since Madrid, the tension in the region has not subsided, 
with the level of Israeli violence in the occupied territories 
increasing--the current [Palestinian] deportees problem being 
demonstrative.  We will listen attentively to your assessment of the 
situation in the whole region, and we will share with you our views 
regarding the need for a comprehensive peace--a comprehensive peace that 
will enhance regional security, that will enhance democratization, that 
will enhance human rights, and [that] also will end the suffering of all 
the people in this part of the world.

Once again, sir, I welcome you and Mrs. Christopher as well as your 
accompanying delegation.  I wish you all a pleasant and productive stay 
in Jordan.  Thank you.


Secretary Christopher:  Foreign Minister, thank you very much for that 
warm and thoughtful welcome.  It's a great pleasure to be in Amman 
tonight as I go about my process of trying to reactivate the peace 
process.  President Clinton has sent me to this region--as you 
recognized and acknowledged, Mr. Foreign Minister--as a sign of his 
commitment to the cause of Middle East peace.  He said--and I want to 
reiterate this upon my arrival here in Jordan--[that] the United States 
is prepared to be a full partner in pursuit of that cause, provided 
[that] the other parties share our determination to resume the 
negotiations and to promote peace.  We will do our part if they do 
theirs.

I look forward to my discussions with you, Mr. Foreign Minister, and 
with King Hussein, knowing the critical role that Jordan has played in 
connection with the Madrid launching of the peace negotiations and in 
carrying them forward.  I am interested in hearing the King's views and 
yours on what Jordan and the United States can do together to re-
energize the peace negotiations.  Of course, also, we will be discussing 
a wide range of other issues of mutual interest--regional issues, local 
issues, and global issues.  In particular, I look forward to discussing 
the King's commitment to democratic values and to a broadened political 
participation, a commitment that we very much applaud.

Mr. Foreign Minister, Jordan is a long-time and valued friend of the 
United States, and I look forward to discussing ways that we can 
strengthen and improve that long-standing friendship.  Thank you so much 
for greeting me tonight, Mr. Foreign Minister, and I look forward to a 
good day with you tomorrow.  Thank you.


February 19, 1993
Cairo, Egypt
Opening statements at news conference by Secretary Christopher and 
Egyptian President Mubarak, released by the Office of the Assistant 
Secretary/Spokesman.

President Mubarak:  I had a very good meeting with the Secretary, and we 
discussed lots of issues--mainly the Middle East problem--and I'm sure, 
after I had these talks with the Secretary, that the United States is 
committed to peace and is giving great attention for the peace process 
to move forward.  We are very eager, and we are willing to help, because 
peace in this area is very important, and [it] is very precious--which I 
said several times--to have any kind of concessions.

I had an invitation from President Clinton, and I accepted it; and [a 
visit] will take place in the first 10 days in April.  I find it a very 
good opportunity to exchange views with the President and to see what 
could be done in the peace process so as to move forward.  We are very 
keen for the peace process to continue and the negotiations to start as 
soon as possible.  We discussed, also, the problem of the [Palestinian] 
deportees, and we are working so as to resolve and solve this problem so 
[as] not to hinder the negotiations for the peace process.  Thank you.

Secretary Christopher:  Thank you, Mr. President.  First, let me say how 
honored I was to be received by President Mubarak today and to have a 
chance to have a wide-ranging discussion with him and to have luncheon 
with him and his colleagues.  I also greatly enjoyed a wide-ranging 
discussion with Foreign Minister Moussa.  On behalf of President 
Clinton, I was pleased to extend an invitation to visit the United 
States to visit with President Clinton, and I'm very pleased that 
President Mubarak has accepted that invitation.  As I said yesterday, 
President Clinton and President Mubarak have already been working 
together, and I am sure that this meeting in the first part of April 
will enable them to deepen their relationship and provide further 
leadership for the peace process and many other aspects of world peace 
and order.

The United States and Egypt share a common interest in promoting peace 
and tackling the broader problems of regional instability.  We've today 
agreed, as the President said, to intensify our joint efforts to re-
energize the peace process, to encourage the partners to return to 
negotiations, and to ensure that these negotiations are fruitful and 
produce results.

We've also agreed that we would work together to achieve an early 
resumption of the next round of talks.  I'll be leaving here tonight for 
Amman [Jordan] and other capitals in the region.  As I go there, I'll be 
personally conveying  President Clinton's commitment, as I did here 
today, to moving the peace process forward.  I leave here knowing that 
President Mubarak and Foreign Minister Moussa will be working with the 
parties to promote our common agenda for peace in the region.  Mr. 
President, thank you ever so much for your warm hospitality.  I've 
greatly enjoyed my visit here to Egypt and especially with you, sir.


February 18, 1993
Cairo, Egypt
Joint statements by Secretary Christopher and Egyptian Foreign Minister 
Moussa, released by the Office of the Assistant Secretary/Spokesman.

Foreign Minister Moussa:  I wish to welcome the Secretary of State and 
Mrs. Christopher on their first visit to Egypt and to the Middle East.  
We look forward to the consultations and talks with the Secretary, 
exchanging views, [and] coordinating our activities in order to push 
forward the peace process and ensure a smooth and successful resumption 
of the talks.  The presence of the Secretary of State of the United 
States here today and tomorrow will give us an opportunity to exchange 
views about a lot of issues of mutual concern.  I welcome again the 
Secretary and give him the floor.  


Secretary Christopher:  Thank you very much, Mr. Foreign Minister.  It's 
no coincidence that President Clinton chose to send me to Egypt as the 
first stop on my first journey outside the United States as Secretary of 
State.  Egypt's ancient society has made an enormous contribution to 
modern life, and Egypt plays a pivotal role in this region.  Today, 
President Clinton and I are proud to count Egypt as a close and 
important friend of the United States.  After a gap of 14 years since my 
meeting with President Sadat in 1979, I want to tell all the people of 
Egypt how pleased my wife, Marie, and I are to be back in your country.

I have undertaken this trip to the Middle East to personally underscore 
and demonstrate the commitment of President Clinton and the United 
States to re-energizing the Middle East peace process.  We believe that 
there are important opportunities that the parties should not miss.  We 
have come to the region ready to do our part, and we will be assessing 
whether the other states and parties here are prepared to do theirs.  I 
will be spending the next week or so personally meeting with the leaders 
of countries of this region, trying to obtain their views on how best to 
move the peace process forward.  

The issues I have come to discuss here are certainly difficult and will 
demand the close cooperation of all the parties involved.  Egypt plays 
an invaluable leadership role in the search for peace and in helping the 
parties to understand each other and their positions.  In achieving its 
peace treaty with Israel, Egypt has proven that commitment and diplomacy 
can work to the betterment of all.

I am particularly looking forward to meeting with President Mubarak and 
Foreign Minister Moussa.  We have appreciated greatly their wise counsel 
and leadership on the many issues faced by the two countries together.  
President Clinton, President Mubarak, Foreign Minister Moussa, and I 
have already worked directly on several issues, and we've demonstrated 
the value of the close partnership between our two countries.

We look forward to seeing and learning more about this great country, 
and we look forward to productive meetings over the next several 
days.(###)


ARTICLE 4:

President's Meeting With UN Secretary General
Joint statement released by Office of the Press Secretary, Washington, 
DC, February 23, 1993.

During their meeting on February 23, the President and the Secretary 
General of the United Nations [Boutros Boutros-Ghali] discussed the role 
of the United Nations and the support of the United States, Somalia, 
Haiti, and a wide range of other issues.

They also discussed the tragic situation in the former Yugoslavia.  They 
agreed on the urgent need for an end to the fighting and the violations 
of international humanitarian law.

In this regard, the President and the Secretary General urge the leaders 
of the parties involved in the peace talks on Bosnia and Herzegovina to 
come to New York immediately to resume discussions in pursuit of an 
agreement to end the conflict.

In view of emergency humanitarian needs in Bosnia, the Secretary General 
welcomed the President's explanation of the possible use of airdrops 
into isolated areas that are in critical need of relief and cannot be 
reached at this time by ground. They agreed that such drops would be 
temporary and supplemental to land convoys in accordance with existing 
procedures. The President stressed the US intention to coordinate such 
operations closely with the UN relief effort. (###)

END OF DISPATCH VOL 4, NO 9

To the top of this page


Index of Dispatch Magazine Archives 1993 Issues|| Index of Dispatch Magazine Archives|| Index of "Briefings and Statements"
Index of Electronic Research Collections ERC Reference Desk || Alphabetic Index || Sitemap || ERC Homepage
Last modified: Jun. 3, 1999
Designed by: Lin Dou