U.S. Department of State 
Dispatch Volume 7, Number 20, May 13, 1996 
Bureau of Public Affairs 
 
ARTICLES IN THIS ISSUE: 
1.  Advancing America's Critical Interest in the Asia-Pacific Region--
Secretary Christopher 

2.  Council of the Americas: Supporting Economic Growth and Democracy--
Secretary Christopher 

3.  American Businesses: Removing Barriers and Building Bridges in 
Mexico--Secretary Christopher 

4.  U.S.-German Relations: Cooperative Discussions--Secretary 
Christopher, German Foreign Minister Kinkel 
 
5.  Pursuing Peace in Liberia--George E. Moose 

6.  Treaty Actions 
 
 
 
ARTICLE 1: 
Advancing America's Critical Interests In the Asia-Pacific Region 
Secretary Christopher 
Remarks before the Business Council, Williamsburg, Virginia, May 10, 
1996 
 
Thank you for that kind introduction. I want to thank Ed Woolard and 
John Bryan for their invitation to appear before the Business Council, 
which has done so much to deepen the dialogue between business and 
government. It is a great honor to be on the program with Senior 
Minister Lee Kwan Yew of Singapore, my distinguished predecessor Henry 
Kissinger, my former Carter Administration colleague Zbig Brzezinski, 
and Treasury Secretary Robert Rubin. Appearing in this company before 
this powerful audience is enough to make me look forward to another 
relaxing round of Middle East shuttle diplomacy. 
 
I am particularly pleased to have the chance to speak with you about the 
dynamic Asia-Pacific region. As a young naval officer in the Pacific in 
World War II, chairman of a Los Angeles-based law firm with Asian 
offices, a one-time trade negotiator with Japan, and now Secretary of 
State, I have had the opportunity to witness--up close and personal--
many of Asia's remarkable changes over the last half-century. 
 
With all due respect to the proponents of a coming "Asian century," I am 
bold enough to believe that it will also be the second American century 
as well. As a global power with global interests, the United States has 
a great stake in the region's dynamism, and we have the greatest ability 
to sustain it in ways that benefit the American people and the world. 
Let me make a few observations about the impact of this new era on the 
way in which we pursue our national interests. 
 
First, accelerated change means that no company or country can take its 
leadership for granted. The United States won the Cold War, but, as 
Peter Drucker has written, no company--or country--is automatically 
destined to be a permanent economic superpower in the new global 
marketplace. We have to keep on our toes and be light on our feet. 
 
Second, one of the most dramatic changes I have seen is the erasure of 
the line between domestic and foreign policy--just as in the corporate 
world you no longer see a bright line between a company's domestic and 
foreign operations. The Clinton Administration recognizes that our 
strengths at home and abroad are inseparable and that our ability to 
create jobs and growth here depends on our ability to open markets 
overseas. I believe that one of the signature accomplishments of our 
Administration will be a landmark set of market-opening agreements--from 
GATT and NAFTA to APEC and the Free Trade Agreement of the Americas. 
 
Third, our economic diplomacy is not only essential to advancing our 
commercial interests but is also a powerful tool for achieving other 
core foreign policy goals. Economic development is essential to 
undergird peace, stability, and progress toward democracy--whether in 
the Middle East, Haiti, or the New Independent States of the former 
Soviet Union. Just as surely as our military might and our embassies 
overseas advance our interests, your companies' global presence extends 
American power and influence. Our late and much-admired colleague Ron 
Brown understood this concept well, and we will certainly miss him for 
that and for many other reasons.   
 
Nowhere is the mutually reinforcing relationship between our economic 
and security interests more apparent than in the Asia-Pacific region. 
For the last half-century, America's military presence in Asia has 
provided the foundation of stability for nations to build thriving 
economies for the benefit of all.  
 
There should be absolutely no doubt that we intend to remain a Pacific 
power. During the last three years, President Clinton has taken a number 
of key strategic decisions to reinforce our engagement in the region--
through our five active security alliances, our forward-deployed 
presence, and our commitment to maintain approximately 100,000 troops in 
the Pacific. 
 
The cornerstone of our engagement in the region, of course, remains our 
relationship with Japan. Here as elsewhere, this Administration has 
defied the skeptics and demonstrated that we can promote America's 
economic interests while strengthening our vital security relationships 
at the same time. 
 
The Joint Declaration signed by the President and Prime Minister 
Hashimoto in Tokyo last month provides the firm foundation to ensure 
that our alliance can meet the challenges of the next century. Japan has 
agreed to increase its financial and material support for our troops 
stationed there. In addition, we are working well with Japan in areas 
such as Bosnia and the Middle East. 
 
Our economic relationship with Japan is also becoming more balanced. 
Since 1993, U.S. exports to Japan have risen by 34%, with increases as 
high as 80% in the sectors where trade agreements have been reached. Our 
trade deficit fell last year by almost 10% from its level in 1994--the 
first time since 1990 that our bilateral trade deficit has decreased. 
 
This progress is due to a variety of factors, including the persistent 
efforts of your companies to gain footholds in Japanese markets. But 
there can be no doubt that it is also due to our determined efforts to 
open markets. Over the last three years, we have reached 21 separate 
market access agreements with Japan in sectors as diverse as autos and 
auto parts, agriculture, telecommunications, and medical technology. We 
will be vigilant in ensuring the implementation of existing agreements 
and in resolving outstanding trade disputes in areas such as film, 
semiconductors, and insurance. We will press for further deregulation of 
Japan's economy, which will benefit Japanese consumers as well as 
American and other foreign businesses. 
 
Of course, no nation is playing a larger role in shaping the future of 
Asia than China. How our relationship with China develops will have a 
vast impact on our future. Nobody should have any illusions about the 
difficulty of dealing with this emerging power during a time of 
transition. But nobody should have any doubt about how important a 
stable, open, and prosperous China is to our interests. What is vital is 
keeping a clear eye on our strategic interest in moving China in that 
direction. Your companies' capital, technology, and ideas are already 
playing a critical role in integrating China into the mainstream of the 
global economy and the international community.  
 
The United States shares an array of important interests with China, and 
we have worked hard over the last three years to advance them. I have 
met with my counterpart Vice Premier and Foreign Minister Qian Qichen 13 
times since I became Secretary of State. We have been able to work 
together to extend the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and to resolve 
the threat posed by the North Korean nuclear program. We have engaged 
with China in our effort to ban nuclear testing, to fight drug 
trafficking and alien smuggling, and to protect the environment. 
 
When we have problems with China's actions, we have pressed our 
interests candidly and forcefully. As you know, we have stressed to 
China the importance of fully implementing the agreement on protecting 
intellectual property rights that we concluded in March 1995. The piracy 
of CDs, videos, and software is growing, causing billions of dollars in 
losses to American companies. The President has made it clear that if 
the Chinese do not deal with this IPR piracy, we will have no choice but 
to go ahead with a carefully targeted but quite substantial list of 
sanctions provided for by U.S. law. 
 
We will continue to pursue our interests vigorously, whether the issue 
is security, trade, non-proliferation, or human rights. Last month, for 
example, we sent an unmistakable signal to China that the use of force 
across the Taiwan Strait would be a matter of grave concern to the 
United States. But we reject the counsel of those who seek to contain or 
isolate China. Far from protecting our interests, such a course would 
harm them.  
 
It is in this broad context that we will be supporting the continuation 
of MFN for China once again next month. The President and I will make 
the case that the best way to advance our interests is to maintain our 
engagement--an approach pursued by six presidents and now endorsed, I am 
pleased to note, by Senator Dole. Revoking or conditioning MFN now would 
not advance human rights in China. But it would damage our economy and 
harm Hong Kong, Taiwan, and other Asian allies and friends. That is why 
Hong Kong legislative leader Martin Lee and Governor Chris Patten, with 
whom I met yesterday morning, support MFN's unconditional renewal. 
 
Our alliance with South Korea is also another vital relationship. During 
the last three years, we have developed an unprecedented degree of 
cooperation. Our strong partnership enabled us to forge an agreement to 
freeze North Korea's dangerous nuclear program and put it on course for 
dismantlement. We have also made great commercial progress in what is 
now our fifth-largest export market. We expanded our exports last year 
by 40% and now have a trade surplus.  
 
As you know, to reach a durable peace on the peninsula, President 
Clinton and President Kim Young Sam recently offered a proposal for 
four-party talks among the United States, South Korea, North Korea, and 
China. China has said that the proposal is "reasonable" and that it will 
participate if North Korea does. North Korea, for its part, has 
indicated that it is seriously studying the proposal. 
 
The nations of ASEAN--Singapore, Indonesia, Malaysia, Thailand, the 
Philippines, Brunei, and now Vietnam--are essential to our security and 
economic interests in Asia. Their rapidly growing markets collectively 
represent our fourth-largest trading partner. We are working hard in 
Southeast Asia to protect intellectual property rights, promote U.S. 
investment, and expand U.S. exports, which rose by more than 10% in 
1994. 
 
As in any other region, the Asia-Pacific region has its share of 
problems that make the business environment difficult. As Secretary, one 
of my top priorities has been to fight the corrupt practices that I know 
cost American companies billions of dollars in orders and contracts 
every year. In late 1993, I launched a global initiative through the 
OECD to unite supplier nations to end illicit payments. I am delighted 
that we have reached agreement to prevent bribes paid to foreign 
officials from being tax-deductible as a business expense. I hope they 
will soon be outlawed altogether. In a parallel effort, I have also 
intensified our efforts through APEC to increase the transparency of 
bidding practices in government procurement in this region where, as you 
know, there will be such massive demand over the next two decades. 
 
During the past three years, this Administration has placed an 
unprecedented emphasis on our interlocking strategic and economic 
interests in Asia and around the world. We will continue to work with 
you to seize the opportunities that Asia has to offer--opportunities 
that are so critical to America's future.  
 
Thank you very much.  

(###) 
 

 
ARTICLE 2: 
 
Council of the Americas: Supporting Economic Growth and Democracy 
Secretary Christopher 
Remarks to the Council of the Americas, Washington, DC, May 6, 1996 
 
Thank you. I am very glad to have the chance to meet with you this 
morning. I am honored to be back in the distinguished company of Council 
of the Americas founder David Rockefeller, as well as Chairman John 
Avery and President Ted Briggs. I especially want to welcome my NAFTA 
colleagues--Trade Secretary Blanco of Mexico and Trade Minister Eggleton 
of Canada.  
 
I also want to take this opportunity to welcome and introduce Acting 
Assistant Secretary of State for Inter-American Affairs Jeffrey Davidow. 
As our former ambassador to Venezuela and a diplomat with wide 
experience, he is eminently qualified to help realize the bold vision of 
economic growth and integration set out by President Clinton at the 
Miami Summit of the Americas. 
 
This council and its members have played an invaluable role in 
supporting the triumph of open markets and democracy in our hemisphere. 
Through your commitment to dialogue, you have helped foster a deeper 
understanding among leaders throughout the Americas. As a channel 
between the U.S. Government and the business community, you have helped 
ensure that our policies meet the real needs of our companies and our 
workers. 
 
Since the day he took office, President Clinton has placed job creation, 
open markets, and fair trade at the center of our economic strategy. He 
fought to ratify NAFTA and to complete the GATT Uruguay Round. He united 
the leaders of the Asia-Pacific to forge a strong commitment to open 
trade. He and the leaders of the European Union have committed to build 
a new Transatlantic Marketplace. At the Miami summit, he shaped the 
consensus to negotiate a Free Trade Area of the Americas that will 
encompass a $12-trillion market of 850 million consumers. His aim is to 
make this hemisphere an even more dynamic hub of the global economy and 
to open markets, create jobs, and raise living standards for all the 
citizens of the region. 
 
We remain on track to achieve a Free Trade Area of the Americas--FTAA--
by 2005. At trade ministerials in Denver and Cartagena, we laid the 
foundations for negotiations. Working groups covering everything from 
market access to intellectual property are developing a database of 
trade practices throughout the hemisphere and negotiating strategies for 
each of their disciplines. We will consider their recommendations at the 
third trade ministerial next year in Brazil, where we will discuss how 
to open formal negotiations on an FTAA. 
 
I cannot stress enough the importance of your advice and support through 
the Business Forum and other mechanisms. As I told business leaders two 
months ago in Sao Paulo, you must be engaged and intensely involved in 
developing the FTAA if we are to meet our goals on the road to 2005. 
 
Through the continuing implementation of NAFTA, the United States, 
Canada, and Mexico are strengthening the basis for regional prosperity 
and economic integration. NAFTA is benefiting all the citizens of the 
region. U.S. exports to Mexico last year were 11% higher than in any 
pre-NAFTA year. In the first two months of 1996, they have risen to 
record levels. 
 
NAFTA is the most dramatic symbol of the new era of cooperation that the 
United States and Mexico have entered. From the beginning, President 
Clinton has recognized that the United States has a vital interest in a 
stable, prosperous, and democratic Mexico. One year ago, the President 
stood with Mexico during its peso crisis because he realized that 
immediate action was necessary to secure the financial stability of our 
closest Latin neighbor--and that of emerging markets across our 
hemisphere. President Zedillo also acted decisively to pursue an 
economic program that has sustained Mexico's commitment to open markets 
and helped its economy return to the path of long-term growth. 
 
Our two nations have broadened and deepened our cooperation in many 
other critical areas. Later today, I will lead the largest-ever U.S. 
Cabinet delegation to Mexico City for the 13th meeting of the U.S.-
Mexico Binational Commission. The Binational Commission is both a 
reflection of the growing breadth of our relationship and a mechanism 
for helping us to meet shared challenges. Let me briefly highlight some 
of our top priorities. 
 
We will bolster efforts to fight drug trafficking and crime. With Gen. 
Barry McCaffrey in charge, we are developing a coordinated drug strategy 
through our new high-level Contact Group. Mexico's recent action to make 
money-laundering a crime will help our joint efforts. We are also 
improving our law enforcement cooperation by strengthening extradition 
procedures. 
 
In recent days, Mexico has taken the historic step of extraditing three 
Mexican nationals to the United States. We hope that this unprecedented 
action will help persuade other Latin American countries to overcome 
their aversion to extraditing their nationals. 
 
We will also continue to cooperate on the difficult issues surrounding 
migration. We will seek to improve the enforcement of U.S. immigration 
laws and to crack down on alien smuggling, while protecting the rights 
and dignity of all individuals.  
 
This year's Binational Commission will launch an initiative enabling 
local officials on both sides of the border to cooperate in protecting 
the air and water supplies that their communities share. We have also 
expanded the commission to cover public health issues and to study new 
cooperative energy policies.  
 
Broad as it is, the Binational Commission represents only a portion of 
our extraordinary cooperation. As two of the hemisphere's biggest 
economies and most influential nations, we can be a strong force for 
achieving common goals in the Americas and around the world. 
 
When I met with you one year ago, some observers pointed to Mexico's 
financial crisis and the fighting between Peru and Ecuador and 
proclaimed the death of the spirit of Miami. They underestimated the 
strength of our hemisphere's new consensus. Working together, the 
region's democracies have proved them wrong. Instead of wavering in the 
face of Mexico's crisis, Latin American nations reacted by deepening 
their own economic reforms. The fighting between Peru and Ecuador was 
stopped with the key help of the United States, Argentina, Brazil, and 
Chile--an effort that is also moving the conflict to a lasting solution. 
 
Just two weeks ago in Paraguay, our 34 democracies again demonstrated 
their determination to defend the hemisphere's hard-won gains. With the 
strong support of the United States, the Organization of American 
States, and MERCOSUR, President Wasmosy and the Paraguayan people faced 
down a threatened coup by Paraguay's dismissed army commander. 
 
Since we last met, there has also been substantial progress toward 
ending Central America's last remaining internal conflict--Guatemala's 
35-year-old civil war. The Government of President Alvaro Arzu and 
Guatemala's guerrillas have stepped up their peace talks. This morning, 
in Mexico City, they are expected to sign an accord that sets out 
principles under which Guatemala can attain greater economic benefits 
and a better standard of living for its citizens. The private sector has 
played an important role in this peace process. We look to businesses to 
invest in the expanding opportunities that a peaceful and democratic 
Guatemala will offer. 
 
During my recent trip to the region, I was struck not just by these 
positive trends, but by the warmth and broad scope of our relationships. 
Less than a decade ago, the nuclear programs of Argentina and Brazil 
posed serious proliferation risks. Now those nations are important 
global partners against proliferation. As Foreign Minister Lampreia of 
Brazil told me during the signing of nuclear and space cooperation 
agreements, issues that were once on the negative side of the agenda are 
now on the positive side. 
 
One of the most moving moments on my trip came in Buenos Aires, when I 
reviewed a contingent of Argentine troops bound for peacekeeping duties 
in the former Yugoslavia. Argentina has now become the leading South 
American contributor to international peacekeeping as its armed forces 
have adjusted to civilian authority. Across the hemisphere, we are 
working with a new generation of elected leaders who are not only 
dynamic, outward-looking, and of the highest caliber themselves, but who 
are surrounding themselves with first-rate cabinet officials. 
 
Let me comment briefly on two other areas where our cooperation has 
entered a new era--fighting corruption and protecting the environment. 
 
The nations of the hemisphere just negotiated an unprecedented anti-
corruption convention through the OAS that requires countries to adopt 
laws on bribing foreign officials roughly equivalent to the standards of 
the U.S. Foreign Corrupt Practices Act. As you know, we have reached 
agreement with the OECD for countries to prevent bribes paid to foreign 
officials from being tax-deductible as a business expense. We are 
pushing for the next step--to ensure that bribery is treated as a crime. 
I have been deeply involved in such efforts since my days as Deputy 
Secretary in the 1970s, and I am gratified to see our efforts finally 
paying dividends. 
 
We will advance our hemispheric efforts to help preserve the environment 
when the Summit's Conference on Sustainable Development meets in Bolivia 
later this year. At Stanford University three weeks ago, I stressed the 
importance of integrating environmental issues into the mainstream of 
our foreign policy. Whether in confronting the costs of climate change 
or the impact of deforestation on the consolidation of democracy in 
Haiti, addressing these issues is squarely in America's interest. That 
includes helping American companies expand their commanding share of a 
$400-billion market for environmental technologies. We all need to 
recognize that pitting economic growth against environmental protection 
is what President Clinton has called "a false choice." 
 
This broad cooperation in Latin America would not be possible without 
the great progress that our hemisphere has made toward democratic 
governments and open markets. As we have seen from Mexico to Paraguay, 
that great progress, in turn, would not have been possible without 
American leadership and the budget resources that we need to support our 
diplomacy. 
 
The private sector has an essential role to play in making the vision of 
Miami a reality. It is your companies' investments and innovations that 
are breaking down barriers between our economies and building bridges 
between our people. In the coming months, I look to the continuing 
advice and support of the council--and the dynamism of its members--to 
ensure that the United States leads the way toward the creation of a 
stable, democratic, and prosperous Western Hemisphere. 
 
Thank you very much.  

(###) 
 

 
ARTICLE 3: 
 
American Businesses: Removing Barriers and Building Bridges in Mexico 
Secretary Christopher  
Remarks to the American Chamber of Commerce, Mexico City, Mexico, May 7, 
1996 (introductory remarks deleted) 
 
I must say I approach these remarks with some trepidation. I heard your 
executive director say that there are evaluation forms. Well, I don't 
want to see them. I also heard the Ambassador speak about four-minute 
unscripted speeches, and that gives me quite a target, too. I'm not sure 
I can stay within four minutes, but I do want to commend this Chamber. I 
know you have long played a constructive role. I've been here before, 
met your executive director before. You are not only the largest Chamber 
outside the United States, but I think you are the most active and, 
certainly, one of the most valued. I think about how much you had to do 
to bring NAFTA from just a vision to a reality. 
 
Let me say just another word about someone who should have been here at 
the head table today. Ron Brown was well known to many of you and highly 
regarded and respected, I know, by all who knew him. He worked hard to 
promote trade and investment between the United States and Mexico, and 
he earned enormous good will here and throughout all of Latin America. 
 
I want to make sure you get to know Stuart Eisenstat, the Under 
Secretary of Commerce, who is here today standing in for Ron. Of course, 
no one could really do that, but Stuart will carry Ron's work forward. 
He was our ambassador to the European Community, so he brings a wealth 
of not only Washington experience but of world trade experience to his 
task. 
 
Ron's mission to Bosnia and Croatia epitomized our Administration's 
approach to international diplomacy, as well as our nation's tradition 
of practical, pragmatic idealism. Ron and his government colleagues and 
the business leaders who were accompanying them--the 12 leaders who died 
on that plane--were opening up opportunities for American business while 
promoting our strategic goals in an area of critical interest to the 
United States. That happens many, many times. Our strategic interest is 
convergent with our business interest, and that is why I so highly value 
my relationships with the business community and the opportunity the 
President has given me to have a State Department that is business-
friendly--to change the culture of the Department to make sure it is on 
the side of American business around the world. 
 
This morning, I want to call your attention to an opportunity to invest 
in peace and reconciliation in Mexico's immediate neighbor to the south. 
I am sure you have read the morning paper, or heard yesterday about the 
very important step that was taken yesterday in bringing an end to 
Guatemala's internal conflict, the last internal conflict in Latin 
America. Yesterday, the parties signed an accord here, setting out 
principles which will lift their country's economy and the living 
standards of all its people. I encourage U.S. and Mexican businesses to 
take a good look and to invest in the new opportunity that a democratic 
Guatemala at peace offers. 
 
This is the fourth meeting of the Binational Commission that I have 
attended. In that time, I have seen the emergence of a new 
understanding--an understanding that the common challenges we have can 
best be met through cooperation with mutual respect. 
 
This particular binational summit is turning out to be extraordinarily 
productive. We have been welcoming progress in our common fight against 
drug trafficking and agreed to crack down on money-laundering--in both 
countries--and to strengthen our control of precursor chemicals. Today, 
we will sign an agreement assuring full consular protection for our 
nationals in both countries, and we will reaffirm our commitment to 
preventing abuses at our borders, whether by alien smugglers or law 
enforcement officials. 
 
We will also sign what is called Border XXI, a new framework that will 
strengthen our environmental cooperation and our ability to solve 
pollution problems locally. We have agreed to  cooperate in research and 
development of renewable energy and energy-efficient technology. That 
reflects two new working groups inaugurated this year in the Binational 
Commission. 
 
Indeed, our cooperation through the Binational Commission reflects how 
far our partnership has come. I think it is fair to say that it is now a 
mature partnership. I could not have said that in earlier years. Our 
partnership was sternly tested by last year's crisis, and, frankly, I 
think it was strengthened by the response to the crisis. President 
Clinton immediately recognized the vital interest of the United States 
in stability and prosperity in Mexico and the threat posed by the crisis 
here--not only here but to the emerging markets throughout the 
hemisphere. He acted decisively. It was not an easy thing to do, but it 
was the right thing to do. I feel confident that history will judge it 
that way. 
 
The tough measures taken by President Zedillo have earned the confidence 
of the world and have put Mexico's economy back on the road to long-term 
growth. Interest rates and inflation are down; reserves are up. Mexico 
is paying off its loans on time, decisively reestablishing its 
international credit-worthiness, and, I think, giving the lie to so many 
in the United States who said the money would never come back. 
 
All this evidence indicates that the courage of the Mexican people, the 
determination of the Mexican people in the face of hardship will be 
rewarded. The economy is expanding again, and I feel sure dividends will 
come to the people of Mexico in due course. 
 
The cost of the adjustment arising from the crisis would have been more 
severe without NAFTA and without our close cooperation. The contrast 
with the 1982 debt crisis is striking: United States exports to Mexico 
fell 50% after the 1982 crisis and did not recover for almost a decade. 
This time, Mexico's NAFTA status allowed it to eliminate its trade 
deficit by raising exports rather than restricting imports, and as a 
result, trade has increased in both directions. 
 
I am confident that Mexico will continue to offer growing opportunities 
for U.S. exports and investments in the coming years. As you know so 
well, helping U.S. companies expand their presence in this dynamic 
economy is a top priority of Ambassador Jones and his team here in 
Mexico City and the eight other consulates around the country. 
 
Their work helped bring about last week's contract signing that will 
allow construction of the large electrical power-generating plant near 
Ciudad Juarez to go forward with U.S. participation. We just concluded a 
telecommunications agreement that will pave the way for U.S. firms to 
offer satellite transmission services in Mexico for the first time. We 
are working closely with the Government of Mexico to enable U.S. firms 
to participate in sectors of the economy recently opened to private 
investment. 
 
We are focusing on overcoming other obstacles to entering the Mexican 
market of which I know many of you are aware. We are working to 
strengthen protection of intellectual property rights, especially 
trademarks and copyrights. We are working to harmonize product standards 
so they do not restrict U.S. exports. Progress in these and other areas 
will improve the quality and efficiency of Mexico's business environment 
and will benefit companies and consumers in both countries. 
 
Our team here in Mexico has gone to bat for American business. We are an 
administration which has as a top priority commercial diplomacy, but our 
success in this mission and other missions around the world depends upon 
our getting adequate resources from the Congress to enable us to carry 
out this new, aggressive, commercial diplomacy. We welcome your help to 
ensure that the United States does not retreat into protectionism and 
isolation--a real risk in this period of stringency in the United 
States. We simply cannot compete if we cannot put a full team on the 
field. We welcome your help in making sure that we can do that. 
 
From the day he took office, President Clinton has placed open and fair 
markets at the center of American foreign policy. That is why he pushed 
so hard for NAFTA and for the Uruguay Round of GATT and pushed so hard 
to open markets in the Pacific through APEC and across the Atlantic 
through the European Union. And that is why he made such a priority at 
the Summit of the Americas of the Free Trade Area of the Americas, which 
we will be working on together. 
 
We remain on track to achieve the Free Trade Area by the year 2005. At 
the trade ministerial in Denver last June and in Cartagena this March, 
we laid the foundation for negotiation and working groups--hard at work 
now. We look forward to receiving their recommendations at the third 
trade ministerial in Brazil next year and then discuss opening formal 
negotiations for an FTAA. 
 
The stakes, you all know, are just immense. This hemisphere provides a 
great opportunity for the United States, with a $12-trillion market of  
850 million consumers. The private sector must lend its advice and 
support to ensure that every step of the way, what we do has practical 
relevance. Let me tell you what I said to the Council of the Americas 
yesterday as well as to the American Chamber of Commerce at Sao Paulo 
two weeks ago: Without the intensive involvement of the private sector 
in the Miami process, we simply will not be able to meet our goals of an 
FTAA by 2005. 
 
The United States and Mexico share great opportunities and great 
responsibilities. If our governments continue to deepen our cooperation, 
as reflected by this binational meeting, then we can lift the lives of 
millions of people on both sides of the border.  
 
If our businesspeople continue to strengthen our ties, as you are doing 
here this morning, then we can create jobs and spur growth in both our 
countries. I am confident that this Chamber will do its part. Your 
companies are breaking down barriers and building bridges. That really 
is the best investment that anybody can make in our shared future. 
 
I appreciate the opportunity to share these thoughts with you, and now I 
look forward to your questions.  

(###) 
 
 
 
ARTICLE 4: 
 
U.S.-German Relations: Cooperative Discussions 
Secretary Christopher, German Foreign Minister Kinkel 
Opening remarks at a press conference, Washington, DC, May 8, 1996 
 
Secretary Christopher. Good afternoon. It's a pleasure to welcome 
Foreign Minister Kinkel back to Washington. It's always good to see him. 
We have an important set of issues to discuss today. 
 
First, of course, we'll review our progress in implementing the Dayton 
Agreement and in trying to help the people of Bosnia build a lasting 
peace. I want to express my appreciation to Germany for the 
unprecedented role it is playing in IFOR. Of course, Germany is also 
crucial in the civilian implementation. We're all working hard together 
to ensure that elections take place on schedule this year. 
 
We'll be talking about the Bosnian Federation Forum, which is going to 
take place here next week. We appreciate Germany's cooperation on that 
and I, particularly, Mr. Minister, want to commend your colleague, 
Michael Steiner, for his efforts to help build a solid federation. 
 
On our agenda today, of course, will be the NATO ministerial meeting 
early next month in Berlin--the first ministerial meeting of NATO in an 
undivided Berlin and a unified Germany. One of our main objectives at 
that meeting will be to intensify our efforts on what is called the 
adaptation of NATO's internal structure to strengthen the role of our 
allies in ensuring Europe's security. On the agenda there, as usual, 
will be the strengthening of the Partnership for Peace and pursuit of 
our steady and transparent process toward NATO enlargement. 
 
The Minister is taking a leading role in the Transatlantic Agenda, which 
we announced last year. We'll be talking about that and stressing, in 
particular, cooperation to protect the environment in which Germany has 
taken a leading role. 
 
Finally, we're going to be talking briefly about the preparations for 
the meeting between President Clinton and Chancellor Kohl next month 
here in the United States, including in Milwaukee. The Minister and I 
have been very fortunate to be able to build our own close relationship-
-building on the relationship that President Clinton and Chancellor Kohl 
have, which, I think, symbolizes the strong alliance that the United 
States has with Germany. 
 
So, Mr. Minister, always nice to have you here. Welcome back. 

 
Foreign Minister Kinkel. Thank you. [Through interpreter.] I've come 
here from a visit to Birmingham, where we've just concluded a 
ministerial meeting of the Western European Union. After a brief 
stopover in Canada for a meeting with the Prime Minister and the Foreign 
Minister, I've come here now to an almost regular, annual spring visit 
of the German Foreign Minister to the United States. I'm very much 
looking forward to my meetings and my talks here today with the 
Secretary of State and with Defense Secretary Perry. 
 
The center of my visit to Washington today, of course, is the speech 
that I will be delivering later on today to the annual assembly of the 
American Jewish Committee. That is to say, today is the 8th of May--the 
51st anniversary of the end of the Second World War. 
 
I think that this visit comes at a very interesting point in time, 
indeed, four weeks before the NATO Ministerial meeting in Berlin--really 
a very memorable, incredible event, to think that it is now going to 
take place in Berlin. NATO is the organization that supported us while 
we were a divided country, while Berlin was the divided capital of a 
divided country. 
 
Now we have a NATO Ministerial meeting, a meeting of the NACC--the North 
Atlantic Cooperation Council--right in that city, in Berlin. [Russian 
Foreign Minister] Primakov will be there, as will the other Foreign 
Ministers of those central and east European countries that are members 
of NACC. I think it is also important to use this opportunity to once 
again thank our American friends for the fact that they provided a 
protective shield over Germany during that most difficult period in our 
history as a divided country with a divided capital.  
 
Our meeting here also takes place only six weeks before the general 
elections in Russia are to take place, and it also takes place at about 
the mid-term of the IFOR operation in Bosnia. So these are going to be 
the central issues that we will have to discuss here today. As I said, 
I'm very much looking forward to the talks with my counterpart. 
 
There are also a number of other serious issues that we will have to 
discuss. We in Europe are very concerned about the effects of the Helms-
Burton bill and the possible extension of that bill to include Libya and 
Iran. 

(###) 
 
 
 
ARTICLE 5: 
 
Pursuing Peace in Liberia 
George E. Moose, Assistant Secretary for African Affairs 
Statement before the House International Relations Committee, May 8, 
1996 
 
Good afternoon. I appear before you today at one of the bleakest moments 
in Liberia's history. Monrovia, once a safe haven for more than 1 
million civilians, lies in ruins, the result of fierce fighting by 
Charles Taylor's National Patriotic Front of Liberia--NPFL--and Alhaji 
Kromah's United Liberation Movement for Democracy--ULIMO-K--rebels 
against Roosevelt Johnson's break-away faction of ULIMO--ULIMO-J, 
comprised primarily of ethnic Krahns. More than 80,000 Liberians have 
been left homeless. Thousands have fled or are trying to flee the 
fighting in the capital. At least 100 peacekeepers have lost their lives 
attempting to restore security in the city and its environs. At this 
point we do not know how many Liberian fighters and civilians have been 
killed. 
 
A U.S. airlift has evacuated more than 2,300 people from Monrovia, 
including 461 American citizens. The U.S. embassy staff has been drawn 
down to 22 official Americans. All of the United Nations agencies, 
international organizations, and non-governmental organization compounds 
have been looted and their staffs forced to leave the country. In just 
three weeks the fighters, many of whom are child soldiers, have caused 
an estimated $40 million in damages, including $20 million in equipment 
and supplies lost by relief organizations.  
 
I want to take a moment to commend Ambassador William Milam and his 
staff at the U.S. embassy in Monrovia and the Department of Defense's 
task force for successfully carrying out the evacuation under very 
difficult circumstances. The task force was remarkably effective in 
getting the assets necessary for an effective evacuation in place in the 
region on very short notice. I also want to commend Ambassador Milam and 
his courageous staff for immediately stepping in to help deliver food, 
water, and medical supplies to the homeless and displaced after almost 
all NGOs were forced to leave. Since April 10, the U.S. embassy and the 
World Food Program have delivered nearly 2,000 metric tons of food in 
Monrovia and surrounding areas, thereby averting a humanitarian 
disaster. 
 
The Abuja Accord: What Went Wrong? 
 
All of the Liberian warring factions signed the Abuja Accord on August 
19, 1995. Although it was one in a long series of Liberian peace accords 
which have attempted to resolve the civil conflict begun in 1989, it 
held such promise. Charles Taylor and the Nigerians had resolved their 
differences and were on board, the faction leaders were beginning to 
work together on the Council of State to implement the accord's 
disarmament provisions, and the ECOWAS countries were committed to the 
peace process. What went wrong? 
 
First and foremost, we now know faction leaders did not wholeheartedly 
commit themselves to the peace process but apparently pursued multiple 
strategies--one for peace, the other for war. While pursuing a political 
solution as members of the new Council of State in Monrovia, they 
continued their high-stakes warfare in the countryside for control and 
exploitation of Liberia's rich resources--timber, diamonds, gold, and 
rubber. In the meantime, faction leaders hid large caches of arms and 
munitions in Monrovia and brought hundreds of their armed fighters into 
the city as "bodyguards." 
 
The West African peacekeepers--ECOMOG--who have been in Liberia since 
1990 and are largely supported by troop-contributing countries, are 
responsible for providing security for Liberia and accomplishing the 
encampment and disarmament of combatants. ECOMOG troop size, which was 
around 10,000-12,000 when it successfully defended Monrovia in 1990 and 
1992 from attacks and fended off a coup attempt by a Krahn general in 
September 1994, has been substantially reduced to about 5,000-6,000 
troops. Some of the unpaid ECOMOG troops have gone into business for 
themselves. In December, ECOMOG troops were attacked and defeated by 
ULIMO-J rebels at Tubmanburg. ECOMOG suffered heavy casualties--as many 
as 60 soldiers may have been killed--lost much of its heavy equipment, 
and suffered a terrible blow to its morale. 
 
Another significant factor was that overall support for the peace 
process, including support for ECOMOG, was slow in coming and has not 
been at the level we had hoped would be committed. At the October 27  
UN Donors Conference, we pledged $75 million for the peace process, 
including $10 million for logistical support--leased trucks and 
helicopters--for ECOMOG. Other potential donors were leery of committing 
significant resources up front, given the failure of 12 previous peace 
accords. Still other donors had prohibitions on assistance to non-UN 
peace-keeping operations. 
 
What We Are Doing 
 
We consider the Abuja Accord--an interim government, disarmament, 
demobilization, and the holding of free and fair elections--the best 
framework for a permanent solution. Despite its current difficulties, we 
believe ECOMOG can again become an effective peacekeeping force. 
 
We have strongly condemned the recent outbreak of fighting--both in 
private conversations with faction leaders and in public statements--and 
urged all the factions to restore the cease-fire, withdraw their 
fighters and weapons from Monrovia, and return to the peace process. 
 
On April 21, we dispatched a high-level diplomatic team comprised of 
representatives from the State Department, National Security Council, 
and the Joint Staff to work with Ambassador Milam and an ECOWAS 
delegation sent by Ghanaian President Rawlings to put the peace process 
back on track.  
 
We also have initiated an International Contact Group on Liberia --ICGL-
-which held its first meeting in Geneva April 26. The focus of the 
Contact Group's discussions was on how the international community could 
respond to recent developments in Liberia in a way which could 
positively influence the peace process. Representatives of 12 nations 
attended the first meeting, and I was heartened by their commitment to 
continue to work for the cause of peace in Liberia. 
 
From Geneva I went to Accra, where I consulted with President Rawlings 
on how to get the peace process back on track. On April 30, I went to 
Monrovia to urge faction leaders to pursue their political objectives 
through negotiation, not force. Due to the fighting and uncertainty of 
the security situation, I was unable to leave the embassy compound. 
Although I did speak with Roosevelt Johnson, I was unable to reach 
Charles Taylor or Alhaji Kromah despite repeated efforts. They thereby 
missed an opportunity to demonstrate their commitment to peace. 
 
On May 3, in response to renewed fighting in blatant disregard of the 
April 19 cease-fire, we announced the reimposition of visa restrictions 
barring entry into the United States of Liberians, their families, close 
associates, and others who obstruct the peace process. We are asking 
other members of the international community to implement a similar 
travel ban. We are also prepared to consider other measures to 
demonstrate our intolerance of the faction leaders' obstruction of the 
peace process. We have told faction leaders that we will not recognize 
any government coming to power by force, and we will actively work with 
the international community to isolate, ostracize, and reject--both 
politically and economically--any leader who comes to power by force. 
 
Next Steps 
 
The challenge that confronts the United States and other friends and 
supporters of Liberia is to give the Abuja peace process another chance 
to succeed. The situation in Monrovia must be stabilized. Fighters must 
withdraw from the capital, and Monrovia must once again become a safe 
haven. Faction leaders must agree to abandon violence in favor of a 
political process for settling differences. 
 
We will continue our vigorous support for ECOWAS' efforts to achieve a 
negotiated solution to the current crisis and to reaffirm a peace 
process which encompasses disarmament, demobilization, and the holding 
of free and fair democratic elections. As we speak, Special Presidential 
Envoy for Liberia Ambassador Dane Smith is representing the United 
States at a special ECOWAS emergency summit meeting in Accra to which 
all members of the Liberian Council of State have been invited. This 
meeting is a critical step in putting the peace process back on track. 
We hope the Accra summit will reaffirm the Abuja Accord as the best 
framework for settlement of the Liberian crisis, that ECOWAS countries 
will commit to applying even greater pressure on the factions to respect 
the peace process, and that there will be serious discussion of 
bolstering ECOMOG's peacekeeping capabilities. 
 
Ending arms flows into Liberia remains critical to halting the current 
fighting. We are pressing for tougher enforcement of the 1992 UN arms 
embargo and are asking other countries to join us in this effort. 
 
We are also looking at ways to increase our support for ECOMOG. If 
ECOMOG can demonstrate a renewed capacity to play a neutral and 
effective peacekeeping role, we would be prepared to make available 
approximately $30 million from existing resources in equipment and other 
additional assistance. Although some ECOMOG troops failed to do their 
duty during the recent fighting and may have participated in the 
looting, others performed commendably. I want to note again that more 
than 100 ECOMOG soldiers have died in the past three weeks in Liberia 
defending the capital. 
 
In conclusion, Madame Chairman, for moral, humanitarian, and political 
reasons, we choose to remain deeply engaged, even though we realize just 
how formidable the challenges have become. I want to stress the high 
priority this Administration places on returning Liberia to civilian, 
democratic rule. The people of Liberia have suffered too long from this 
tragic conflict. The time for peace has come. I want to thank you and 
other members of your subcommittee for your support for peace and 
democracy in Liberia and throughout Africa. 
 
Liberia is an example of the risks and hardships faced by our people in 
the field every day as they seek to advance U.S. interests and protect 
American citizens. These are among the major issues at stake in the 
foreign affairs budget. If we are going to continue to be a leader in 
world affairs, we need the resources necessary to do so. (###) 
 
 
 
ARTICLE 6:  
 
Treaty Actions 
 
Multilateral  
 
Chemical Weapons  
Convention on the prohibition of the development, production, 
stockpiling, and use of chemical weapons and on their destruction, with 
annexes. Done at Paris Jan. 13, 1993.1 [Senate] Treaty Doc. 103-21. 
Ratification:  Brazil, Mar. 13, 1996. 
 
Judicial Procedure 
Convention on the service abroad of judicial and extrajudicial documents 
in civil or commercial matters. Done at The Hague Nov. 15, 1965. Entered 
into force Feb. 10, 1969. TIAS 6638; 20 UST 361. Accession:  Estonia, 
Feb. 2, 1996.2 
 
Convention on the taking of evidence abroad in civil or commercial 
matters. Done at The Hague Mar. 18, 1970. Entered into force Oct. 7, 
1972. TIAS 7444; 23 UST 2555.Accession:  Estonia, Feb. 2, 1996.2 
 
 
Bilateral 
 
Angola 
Economic, technical, and related assistance agreement. Signed at Luanda 
Apr. 9, 1996. Entered into force Apr. 9, 1996. 
 
Argentina 
Agreement extending the agreement of Aug. 6, 1991, for cooperation in 
civil uses of space. Signed at Buenos Aires Feb. 29, 1996. Entered into 
force Feb. 29, 1996, with effect from Aug. 6, 1996. 
 
Bolivia 
Agreement regarding the consolidation and rescheduling of certain debts 
owed to, guaranteed by, or insured by the U.S. Government and its 
agencies, with annexes. Signed at La Paz Jan. 23, 1996. Entered into 
force Mar. 7, 1996. 
 
Brunei 
Agreement on aviation security. Effected by exchange of notes at Bandar 
Seri Begawan Jan. 24 and Feb. 26, 1996. Entered into force Feb. 26, 
1996. 
 
Croatia 
Agreement regarding the consolidation and rescheduling of certain debts 
owed to, guaranteed by, or insured by the U.S. Government and its 
agencies, with annexes. Signed at Zagreb Feb. 1, 1996. Entered into 
force Apr. 3, 1996. 
 
Czech Republic 
Agreement concerning exchange of scientific and technical information, 
with appendix. Signed at Washington Mar. 1, 1996. Entered into force 
Mar. 1, 1996. 
 
Denmark 
Basic exchange and cooperative agreement concerning mapping, charting, 
and geodesy cooperation, with glossary. Signed at Fairfax and Vedbaek 
Dec. 20, 1995 and Feb. 7, 1996. Entered into force Feb. 7, 1996. 
 
French Polynesia 
International express mail agreement, with detailed regulations. Signed 
at Papeete and Washington Nov. 30, 1995 and Apr. 5, 1996. Entered into 
force June 15, 1996. 
 
International Tribunal for the Prosecution of Persons Responsible for 
Genocide and Other Serious Violations of International Humanitarian Law 
Committed in the Territory of Rwanda Agreement on surrender of persons, 
with statement of understanding. Signed at The Hague Jan. 24, 1995. 
Entered into force Feb. 14, 1996. 
 
International Tribunal for the Prosecution of Persons Responsible for 
Serious Violations of International Humanitarian Law in the Territory of 
the Former Yugoslavia Agreement on surrender of persons. Signed at The 
Hague Oct. 5, 1994. Entered into force Feb. 14, 1996. 
 
Italy 
Protocol amending the Memorandum of understanding to the agreement of 
June 6 and 27, 1984, concerning development of the Tethered Satellite 
System to include a reflight of the Tethered Satellite System on the 
Space Shuttle. Signed at Washington and Rome Feb. 9 and 12, 1996. 
Entered into force Feb. 12, 1996. 
 
Japan 
Agreement concerning the furnishing of information from the Government 
of the United States to the Government of Japan, which will be necessary 
for the effective conduct of the studies on ballistic missile defense by 
the Government of Japan. Effected by exchange of notes at Tokyo Feb. 23, 
1996. Entered into force Feb. 23, 1996. 
 
Interim arrangement relating to the civil air transport agreement of 
Aug. 11, 1952, as amended (TIAS 2854, 7333, 8882, 10434, 11999; 4 UST 
1948, 23 UST 677, 29 UST 1375), with attachment. Effected by exchange of 
notes at Washington Feb. 26, 1996. Entered into force Feb. 26, 1996. 
 
Laos 
Investment incentive agreement. Signed at Washington Mar. 8, 1996. 
Entered into force Mar. 26, 1996. 
 
Luxembourg 
Convention for the avoidance of double taxation and prevention of fiscal 
evasion with respect to taxes on income and capital, with related 
exchange of notes. Signed at Luxembourg Apr. 3, 1996. Enters into force 
on the day of exchange of instruments of ratification. 
 
Palau 
Memorandum of agreement concerning assistance in developing and 
modernizing Palau's civil aviation infrastructure, with annex. Signed at 
Washington and Koror Dec. 11, 1995 and Jan. 17, Feb. 7 and 8, 1996. 
Entered into force Feb. 8, 1996. 
 
Spain 
Memorandum of understanding concerning the Sonseca Seismographic 
Station, with annexes. Signed at Madrid Jan. 18, 1996. Entered into 
force Jan. 18, 1996.  
 
Memorandum of understanding concerning scientific and technical 
cooperation in the earth sciences. Signed at Reston and Madrid Sept. 1 
and Dec. 18, 1995. Entered into force Dec. 18, 1995. 
 
Trinidad and Tobago 
Agreement concerning maritime counter-drug operations. Signed at Port of 
Spain Mar. 4, 1996. Entered into force Mar. 4, 1996. 
 
Extradition Treaty. Signed at Port of Spain Mar. 4, 1996. Enters into 
force when both parties have notified each other through an exchange of 
notes of the completion of their respective requirements. 
 
Treaty on Mutual Legal Assistance in Criminal Matters, with forms. 
Signed at Port of Spain Mar. 4, 1996. Enters into force when both 
parties have notified each other through an exchange of notes of the 
completion of their respective requirements. 
 
Ukraine 
Agreement regarding international trade in commercial space launch 
services, with protocol, annex, and exchange of letters. Signed at 
Washington Feb. 21, 1996. Entered into force Feb. 21, 1996. 
 
United Arab Emirates 
Agreement amending and extending the agreement of Jan. 26 and Feb. 5, 
1991, as amended and extended, relating to trade in textiles and textile 
products. Effected by exchange of notes at Abu Dhabi Dec. 30, 1995 and 
Feb. 6, 1996. Entered into force Feb. 6, 1996. 
 
Venezuela 
Agreement regarding grants under the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, as 
amended, and the furnishing of defense articles, related training and 
other defense services from the United States to Venezuela. Effected by 
exchange of letters at Caracas Feb. 26 and 27, 1996. Entered into force 
Feb. 27, 1996. 
 
1Not in force. 
2With declaration(s).  

(###) 
 
[END DISPATCH VOL 7, NO 20] 

To the top of this page