Topic: trkn
Subject: U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE DAILY PRESS BRIEFING (March 28, 1995)
From: "Demetrios E. Paneras" <dep@bu.edu>
 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE
OFFICE OF THE SPOKESMAN
DAILY PRESS BRIEFING
MARCH 28, 1995



                      U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE
                        DAILY PRESS BRIEFING

                              I N D E X

                      Tuesday, March 28, 1995

                                       Briefer: Christine Shelly


[...]

HUMAN RIGHTS
   U.S. Appearance before HR Committee of UN ..........6
   Amnesty International Report re: HR Abuses in U.S. .6-9

ARGENTINA
   Reported Investigation into Arms Shipment to 
     Croatia ..........................................7-8  

TURKEY
   Possible Communication w/U.S.
     re: Detained Amers. in Iraq ......................8
   Upcoming Exchanges/Turkish Proposals
     re: Prevention of PKK Incursions into Turkey .....8
   Turkish Incursion into Iraq ........................8
   --Possible Arab League Request for U.S.
       Intercession ...................................9
   --Withdrawal of Troops/Territorial Integrity of
       Iraq ...........................................14-16

FORMER YUGOSLAVIA
   Contact Group Meeting in London ....................10-11
   UN Resolutions re: Macedonia, Bosnia, Croatia ......12

GREECE
   Report of Pressure to Improve Relations w/Turkey
     by U.S./Great Britain/Germany ....................12

[...]
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                       U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE
                         DAILY PRESS BRIEFING

                                               DPC #41

                  TUESDAY, MARCH 28, 1995, 1:22 P.M.
                (ON THE RECORD UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED)


     MS. SHELLY:  Okay.  Let's have a briefing.

     No questions?  No problem.  Okay.  (Laughter)

[...]

     Q     On another subject, do you have any response to the criticism
by Amnesty International about the U.S. capital punishment policies?

     MS. SHELLY:  I've got a little bit of information on that.  As I
mentioned a couple of days ago, the U.S. is beginning this week, as I
think you know, up in New York our appearance before the Human Rights
Committee of the U.N.  This is the requirement under the International
Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.

     We became a party to this covenant in 1992, and each state party to
the covenant is required to prepare and submit an initial report on its
implementation of the provisions of the covenant and to appear before
the committee to review that report.

     Our process of appearing before the committee is beginning tomorrow
up in New York and will also continue on Friday, so I expect that we'll
probably have a little bit more to say about that at the time.

     As to your specific question regarding the recent Amnesty
International Report and accusations regarding human rights abuses in
the U.S., I think much of what we're going to have to say in this area
is likely to come out in the context of our appearances in New York on
Wednesday and on Friday.

     I would just make a few general comments.  One is that we greatly
respect Amnesty International and the human rights community generally.
It does extremely important work all around the world.

     We have not yet had an opportunity to review in great detail the
contents of the Amnesty International report, and so we're not today
prepared to comment on some of the specific things in it.

     We would anticipate, however, that many of the issues that are
raised in the report, of course, don't specifically fall within the
purview of the Department of State, and that many of the questions, I
think, are going to have to be directed to places such as the Department
of Justice.

     We have, of course, an interagency participation in our appearance
which will take place.  We have, as you know, John Shattuck from the
State Department.  We have Conrad Harper, our Legal Adviser, and then
I'm told that there is also Department of Interior and Department of
Justice participation in that.

     So I think that's about all I can say on that generally, with a
view to coming back maybe on some of the specifics that you've
mentioned, maybe at a later date.

     Q     The U.S. is reporting cooperating with the Argentine
Government investigating a 75-ton shipment of arms from Buenos Aires to
(inaudible).  Papers in Buenos Aires report today and yesterday that
part of that shipment was diverted to Croatia.  It also more
significantly says that there were shipments from Buenos Aires to
Croatia since April of last year.  Do you have any comment on this?

     Is it true that the United States Government is cooperating in this
investigation, and what exactly is U.S. policy in regards to arms
shipments to Croatia or also Bosnia as was reported.  Some Argentine
officials indicated that it could also have been sent to Bosnia.

     MS. SHELLY:  The Argentinian angle on this, I confess that this is
not an issue that I'm familiar with, and so I'd like to do that as a
taken question and give you the information that we have once those more
familiar with the details have had a chance to study it.

     But our position regarding the provision of arms to the countries
of the former Republic of Yugoslavia is unchanged.

     Q     I have two questions.  The first one, has there been any
communication with the Turkish Government concerning the fate of two
Americans in Iraq?

     MS. SHELLY:  Concerning?

     Q     Two Americans in Iraq.

     MS. SHELLY:  I've been asked that once before, and I think I have
to give you the same answer on that, which is simply that the Turkish
authorities had said that they would try to be helpful, and I'm not
aware of anything else in specificity about that channel.

     Q     Okay. And you have also said that Turkish Government did not
seem to have a very clear idea as to, you know, what they would like to
see in northern Iraq in terms of bringing about a new structure --
security structure.  Do you have a better idea as of today?  Did you
hear anything from Turkish Government on this?

     MS. SHELLY:  No.  In fact, it's not the sort of issue that I'm
expecting to hear anything really as we speak.  We will have some
opportunities for exchanges with the Turks that are coming up before too
long.  As you know, the Prime Minister intends to make a visit to the
United States.  I'm also told that there is a joint economic committee
meeting between the U.S. and Turkey which is coming up, and I think it's
expected that there will be some further discussion of this point.

     So it's not something that we're expecting a response to imminently
regarding their ideas about how to try to seek over the longer term to
prevent the PKK incursions into Turkish territory proper.  But I expect
that it's going to be some days, if not actually a couple of weeks,
before we have a more detailed understanding about some longer term
proposals that the Turks would put forward.

     Q     On the Amnesty International report, do you think that a
report like this diminishes a little bit of the authority of the State
Department's report on human rights, especially on the Third World
countries -- why are you criticizing us if you have the same problems?

     MS. SHELLY:  No, we think that reports of this type contribute to
the openness in the dialogue internationally about human rights concerns
and considerations, and, as I've mentioned, it's a process that we also
support very strongly for the United States, which is why we signed the
covenant and agreed to also open up our own situation to international
scrutiny.

     Q     Christine, did you receive from the Arab League any
communication or request that United States intercede with Turkey as a
member of the NATO ally to withdraw from north Iraq or cease its
operation there?

     MS. SHELLY:  Not that I'm aware of.

     Sid.

     Q     Christine, go back to Yugoslavia.  There was a Contact Group
meeting apparently in London yesterday.  Did it accomplish anything?

     MS. SHELLY:  I have a short readout on that.  Members of the
Contact Group expressed a great deal of concern of the deteriorating
security situation on the ground.  They called upon all sides to adhere
to the current cease-fire and to extend it beyond the May 1 deadline.

     The Contact Group recommitted itself to trying to bring about early
negotiations in Bosnia.  They called upon the Bosnian Serbs to accept
the Contact Group plan as a starting point.  They also emphasized the
importance of mutual recognition by all states in the former Yugoslavia.

     On Croatia, the Contact Group welcomed the Gore-Tudjman agreement
for continued U.N. presence in the country and called for continued
normalization of economic relations and the start of negotiations on a
political settlement between Zagreb and Knin.

     It's my understanding that the group expects to get back together
again for another round of consultations sometime within the next week
or two.

     Q     There is more rhetoric and basically rhetoric -- the same
kind of rhetoric we've heard many times in the past.  Was there no new
initiative, no new ideas as to how to actually get these negotiations
back on track?

     MS. SHELLY:  I think the feeling once again is that the basic
elements are there, and the basic stumbling block still continues to be
the unwillingness of the Bosnian Serbs to get engaged in any kind of
meaningful discussion regarding -- and also, obviously, to accept the
Contact Group Map and Plan.

     So I'm not sure that there's very much different regarding the
Bosnian equation, but what I think what would be worse than having
meetings where there might not be a dramatic outcome would be for the
international community to cease to be engaged in their efforts to try
to bring that about.

     Q     Last week in Geneva and Paris the Secretary and the French
Foreign Minister and then the Secretary and Kozyrev all emphasized the
urgency of trying to reinvigorate this process, but it sounds like they
weren't able to do that.

     MS. SHELLY:  I think that there are lots of different things that
are in play right now, not the least of which, of course, is the
deadline as it's approaching in the U.N. Security Council for renewal of
the UNPROFOR mandate.  We mentioned yesterday, of course, that there
would be three separate resolutions regarding Macedonia, Bosnia and
Croatia.

     Certainly, a great deal of attention has focused on the Croatian
track and the need to bring the new Croatian mandate to the Security
Council and to get all of the Security Council parties to agree.

     Certainly, Bosnian still remains, I think, in a very worrisome --
the developments there are very worrisome. Particularly as I went
through yesterday a kind of chapter and verse and where fighting has
worsened in many different areas in Bosnia.

     There also is the time pressure associated with the cease-fire
deadline which is coming up on May 1.  So I think that there needs to be
a bigger effort to try to continue working the Bosnian track.  I think
that's exactly why the Contact Group members were meeting in order to
determine what additional things they could do to try to bring the
parties closer to reaching a solution at the peace table and not on the
battlefield.

     Q     Does the Clinton Administration support the Bosnian
Government's latest efforts to reclaim land lost through an action
condemned by the United Nations?

     MS. SHELLY:  Sid, I just answered that question, which is we'd like
the agreements to be reached through negotiations and not on the
battlefield.

     Q     So the Bosnian Government doesn't have a right to defend
itself?

     MS. SHELLY:  I don't think it's very productive here to get into
the Bosnian Government's rights to defend itself.  The problem is they
certainly, overall are the disadvantaged party.  They have lost a
substantial portion of their land to Bosnian Serb control.  I don't
think there's any question about the facts.

     The problem is with any of the parties seeking to recapture
territory; it starts another cycle of violence and fighting, and then it
causes the cease-fire to become unraveled.  But then, of course,
threatens the entire region with the kind of fighting which is taking
place.

     We would like to try to come up with a solution which is more
durable and one which doesn't get caught up in the cycle and counter-
cycles of military activities.

     Q     (inaudible) Greek Government reports that the United States,
Britain and Germany together have been pressing Greece to improve its
relations with Turkey due to some strains within NATO?

     MS. SHELLY:  I'm not specifically aware of the grouping of
countries that you've talked about.  There is certainly a lot of
evidence that Greek-Turkish tensions, which I think in the more recent
time-frame in the last several weeks or months, has been on the rise

     It is very often the case that the United States and other NATO
allies try to work quietly with both Greece and Turkey to try to remove
the sources of tension and friction between them.  So as a general
proposition, I wouldn't outrule that there would be efforts by NATO
countries to try to improve the general tone in their relationship, but
I don't have anything more specific.

[...]

     Q     Secretary Christopher yesterday said that the U.S. support
would be forthcoming only if the troops are withdrawn promptly.  What's
your understanding of a "prompt withdrawal," and do you still see the
northern Iraq operation as a self-defense act?

     MS. SHELLY:  On the first point, we would like to see the troops
withdrawn as rapidly as possible.  The Secretary said that very clearly
yesterday, and that has continued to be our position.

     We do not have any precise indication about when those troops might
be withdrawn.  It is certainly up to Turkey, I think, to signal how
long.  I think that they, themselves, do not specifically know how long
they feel it's going to take to actually achieve their military
objectives.

     I believe that they have made some statement suggesting that the
operation is going well, and I think that they also have said -- Turkish
authorities have said publicly that their troops will leave as soon as
it's feasible.

     On the second part of your question, I've gone back to check what
we have said within the last few days.  what we've said before in
response to that question is that we have acknowledged that a country
has the right to use force to protect itself from attacks from a
neighboring country if the neighboring state is unwilling or unable to
prevent the use of its territories for such an attack.

     So that's the first point that we have made.  We've also said that
before and during this operation the Turkish Government very strongly
reasserted its respect for Iraq's territorial integrity.  So I don't
that issue is in question.

     I don't think it's under dispute that the PKK uses northern Iraq as
a sanctuary and a staging area for actions which take place against
Turkey; and, of course, we do continue to stress to the Turkish
Government the importance of observing standards of international human
rights during the operation and the need to make a maximum effort to
protect civilians.

     I might also just note that there are, of course, U.N. resolutions
which also relate to this issue.  The Iraqi Government agreed in 1992 to
comply with U.N. Resolution 687.  That resolution requires Iraq not to
allow any terrorist organization to operate within its territory.
Baghdad still maintains contacts and provides sanctuary to several
groups and individuals that practice terrorism, and it's certainly well
known that the PKK specifically has held hundreds of people in attacks
inside Turkey from actions which have been mounted from Iraqi territory.

     Q     How can you say that Iraq allows the PKK to -- provides
safehaven to the PKK in northern Iraq, when Iraq has no control
whatsoever of that area of their country.

     MS. SHELLY:  I mean, I don't think that I have to argue the case.
I think the facts are very clear.

     Q     What, that in the area protected by United States, France and
Turkey the PKK is allowed to operate with impunity?

     MS. SHELLY:  The fact of the matter is that the PKK is there, and
the operations of a terrorist nature do take place from Iraqi territory
going into Turkey.

     Q     But do you claim that Iraq has any control -- that Baghdad
has control over this?

     MS. SHELLY:  Again, this is Iraqi territory, and the issue of the
administrative vacuum that exists in certainly some of those areas is a
point of great concern for the Turks.

     Q     The administrative vacuum exists because the United States
and its allies have basically put that territory off limits to Baghdad,
if Baghdad even wanted to do something.

     MS. SHELLY:  It's not entirely all of the same territory.  There
are areas where there are concentrations of Turkish Kurds, and then
there are also the areas which specifically relate to the "no-fly" zone
and to the area where Operation Provide Comfort is occurring, which is
where there are the concentrations of the Iraqi Kurds.

     Maybe I'm misinformed on the facts, but it's my understanding that
even though there is some overlap between those areas, they're not
entirely contiguous areas.

     Q     Would you like to see the Iraqi Government to send troops up
into northern Iraq to get rid of the PKK?

     MS. SHELLY:  I think the actions that Iraq would need to take to
comply with U.N. Security Council resolutions would be up to Iraq to
determine.  I'm not going to specifically engage on how they could do
that.

[...]

     Q     A follow-up on Iraq.  You said that the issue will be taken
up, among others, with the visiting Prime Minister -- Ms. Ciller.  Since
her visit is three weeks away, can we say that there's a sign of
realization on the part of the Administration that this thing will take
more than just days and weeks and probably more?

     MS. SHELLY:  I'm not going to speculate about how much time it
would take.  I think Turkey is the country that has indicated its
interest to possibly look at some kind of international approach to the
problem along the border.  It's up to Turkey to now come forward with
something more concrete in terms of how that might be done.

     I don't know how long it's going to take Turkey to develop its own
thinking  but I'm not expecting some kind of answer to that question
within the next day or so.
I'm simply saying that I think it's going to take more time than that.
How long, I don't know; and I'm certainly not in a position to
speculate.

[...]
     (The briefing concluded at 2:04 p.m.)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
