U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE 95/08/11 DAILY PRESS BRIEFING

From: hristu@arcadia.harvard.edu (Dimitrios Hristu)

Subject: U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE 95/08/11 DAILY PRESS BRIEFING

OFFICE OF THE SPOKESMAN

[...]

FORMER YUGOSLAVIA

Reports of Belgrade Plan to Settle Serb Refugees

  from Croatia in Kosovo ................................7

Croatian Treatment of Refugee Population ...............10-11

Lake/Tarnoff Consultations .............................11-13

Arms Embargo/Economic Sanctions ........................12

Report of Yeltsin Efforts to Organize Summit Mtg. ......12

Dole/Helms Legislation re: Funding for Military Aid ....12

President Clinton's Veto of Unilateral Lift ............12

[...]

[...]

Q David, on Serbia. Belgrade has said -- has indicated and maybe has even begun implementing moves to take the refugees from the Krajina region and send them to Kosovo, perhaps as a warning or as a provocation, whatever it may mean. What is the U.S. analysis of this situation, and is there any way for us to convince Milosevic not to make such a move, which would lead to another type of conflict.

MR. JOHNSON: We're concerned by press reports that the authorities in Belgrade plan to relocate Croatian Serb refugees in the Kosovo region. Nearly 90 percent of the Kosovo population is ethnic Albanian. They've come under increasingly harsh repression from the Serb Government in Belgrade since their autonomy was revoked over five years ago.

Long before the current refugee crisis began, Belgrade began what has been a largely unsuccessful effort to "colonize" Kosovo with ethnic Serbs in an attempt to alter the demographics in the region.

The situation in Kosovo is tense. It's long been viewed as a potential flash point which could result in a wider conflict, and we believe any effort to settle significant numbers of Serb refugees from Croatia in Kosovo would be extremely unhelpful.

We've asked our Embassy in Belgrade to look into these reports. We're not in a position to confirm them at this time.

Q Have you got anything on Kurdish mediation? Folks there are saying ask here.

MR. JOHNSON: Okay.

Q All roads lead to the State Department briefing room.

MR. JOHNSON: And then they diverge?

Under United States' auspices, talks have been held in Ireland between the Kurdistan Democratic Party and the Patriotic Union of Kurdistan. The Iraqi National Congress has also participated, and the Government of Turkey has sent observers.

The United States is pleased that the two parties pledged to continue to work for a formal peace agreement ending the hostilities that broke out over one year ago. The parties have also agreed to confidence-building measures such as maintaining the cease-fire, respecting the rights of each other's followers and releasing all detainees.

They've agreed on a set of principles that will guide their next round of talks. These include the demilitarization of Irbil, formation of a neutral commission under Iraqi National Congress auspices to monitor the cease-fire, agreement to place customs and other revenues in bank accounts under the supervision of a neutral commission, and a reconvening of their regional parliament.

We're going to work with the parties to convene a summit between the two leaders in September. Prior to that summit, we plan to have another meeting at this same level as this meeting in Ireland has been.

Q Where?

MR. JOHNSON: I don't think the location's been fixed.

Are we through with Kurdistan? Yes, sir.

Q Another subject. Do you have any comments on the second round of missile and, I think, artillery testing to be conducted by the People's Liberation Army near Taiwan?

MR. JOHNSON: The New China News Agency has announced a new set of military exercises which will include the firing of guided missiles and live artillery in the area of the East China Sea located approximately 72 nautical miles or 133 kilometers north of Taiwan.

We believe this test does not contribute to peace and stability in the area. It's been the policy of the United States to seek to promote peace, security and stability in the area of the Taiwan Straits, because we believe this is in the interests of the United States, the People's Republic of China and Taiwan.

Q Are you prepared, like you did the first time around, to raise this with the Chinese?

MR. JOHNSON: The Chinese are aware of our position regarding this type of exercise. The Secretary reiterated our position in his meeting last week in Brunei with the Chinese Foreign Minister.

Q Is the U.S. concerned at all about the disruption of navigation and civilian aviation at all?

MR. JOHNSON: I think our principal concern has to do with the affect this could have on a contribution or not a contribution to peace and stability in the area and not so much on the civil aviation aspects.

Q A week or so ago, when Deputy Secretary of State for East Asian and Pacific Affairs testified on the Hill, he was asked about whether the tests posed a threat to the security of Taiwan. His response was that the NSC, the State Department and Pentagon assessed the situation and came up with the conclusion that it did not really pose a threat to Taiwan. Is that still the same position of the Administration with regard to the second round of testing?

MR. JOHNSON: I don't have any reason to find fault with Mr. Lord's assessment.

Q I'm sorry. I said Mr. Wiedemann.

MR. JOHNSON: Excuse me. His either.

Q The same position?

MR. JOHNSON: I don't have any reason to believe that our position will have changed.

Q On China, if I could go to the larger issue, David. There's an article from the Los Angeles Times this past Monday -- Jim Mann's article -- and if I could just briefly quote: "Chinese Foreign Minister Qian Qichen made it abundantly clear during the conference of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations that just ended here that it is time for the United States to stop regarding itself as the savior of the East." This is what Qian told reporters. "We do not recognize the United States as a power which claims to maintain the peace and stability of Asia," which is basically the message is, "America, go home."

I would just ask if this is not a very fundamental and extraordinary -- fundamental change of extraordinary importance, as Jim Mann terms it, in the relations between China and the United States? Does the United States Government have an explanation for the motivation of the Chinese to be asking the United States to militarily withdraw from the Western Pacific and Asia?

MR. JOHNSON: I'd make two points for you. First, the United States is a Pacific power. We have significant interests in and we have significant Alliance responsibilities in the Pacific. We intend to honor those responsibilities.

The second point I would make is the Secretary made extensive comment on his bilateral meeting with the Chinese Foreign Minister, and with others while he was on his trip, and I don't think I will give you a recapitulation of all those today. If you would like, I would be pleased to provide you with copies of everything that we have.

Q Thank you, David. And then just to follow. Is there still a news blackout on the two American military attaches and their experience in that area, where those missiles were being fired? Can you tell us, are they back in the States, or what?

MR. JOHNSON: I wouldn't call it a news blackout, but, as I've said before, we've said what we have to say about them, I believe.

Q They haven't been debriefed?

MR. JOHNSON: I can say that we've had what we want to say said about them already.

Q What did you say exactly?

MR. JOHNSON: I'll be pleased to provide you with copies of all of our transcripts which reveal that. (Laughter)

Q Do they ever get outdated -- these transcripts? (Laughter)

MR. JOHNSON: Occasionally, but it takes some time. We have a carbon-dating --

Q Because policy never changes, right?

Q Going back to Bosnia, the other day, as you know, the United Nations protested some of the Croatian attacks -- mob attacks on fleeing Serbs from Krajina, and on Wednesday you said that the United States didn't have people on the ground, so you really couldn't comment on these reports. I was just wondering what you have to say today about some of these reports.

MR. JOHNSON: I'd say that our Ambassador in Croatia went out personally and in fact escorted some of these fleeing refugees. We have made our position very clear to the Government of Croatia that we believe that it is not only an obligation of theirs under international law and simple human decency to protect these people and to keep them from harm. But is also in the fundamental best interests of Croatia that they observe the norms that one would expect for treatment of any fleeing refugee population.

Q What do you make of these reports? I mean, what do you think --

MR. JOHNSON: We believe that the Croatian Government has a responsibility to protect these people and to keep them from harm as they try to leave the area in which they've lived.

Q Go back to China, if I may.

Q Can we stay on Yugoslavia. Going back and forth. Do you have anything to say on the Lake mission, and I have a follow-up on that.

MR. JOHNSON: Okay. I think you will have seen from reporting in the region, by the Governments with whom they have met, that they've been pleased in both London and Bonn with the type of consultations which have been undertaken. They are in Paris today, and they are planning additional stops in Spain, Italy and on the Black Sea Coast city of Sochi, where they will meet with Foreign Minister Kozyrev before returning to London and then onward to the United States on Sunday.

Q When is that? Kozyrev on Saturday?

MR. JOHNSON: I'm not sure that they have all their stops and times exactly lined up.

Q (Inaudible)

MR. JOHNSON: On Sunday.

Q What is the name of that city?

MR. JOHNSON: Sochi.

Q Spelling?

MR. JOHNSON: I believe it's Suichi.

Q S-O.

MR. JOHNSON: Sochi. I stand corrected.

Q The meeting with Kozyrev -- is that due to concern that there's a widening split between the Russian view and the possible Russian unilateral lifting of sanctions on Belgrade?

MR. JOHNSON: It's due to our belief that it would be very helpful to consult with the Government of Russia and in particular Foreign Minister Kozyrev, having completed our talks in London, Paris, Bonn and other capitals, including likely Spain and Italy before that. We believe that Russia has a very significant role to play in the negotiation of peace in this area. They're a member of the Contact Group with whom we've worked, over the last several years, to try to bring a negotiated settlement.

Q Do you have anything to say about Yeltsin's statement that Russia may unilaterally lift sanctions against Serbia?

MR. JOHNSON: I think we've made clear whether we're talking about an arms embargo or the economic sanctions against Serbia that the effective and durable approach to pursuit of peace in this area is through multilateral means, and we would hope to be able to come to agreement on that, as respects any potential lifting of economic sanctions.

Q Back to China for a moment.

Q More on that. What do you think of the Yeltsin efforts to get a summit meeting in Moscow among the parties involved?

MR. JOHNSON: I'd think the same thing I've said a couple of times this week: that we certainly appreciate the goals that President Yeltsin has, but right now we're concentrating on the efforts of Mr. Lake and Tarnoff and their party to try to pursue these new ideas and try to take advantage of a negotiated settlement now. Such a conference could play a role. We're certainly not foreclosing it, but I'm not in a position to react to it directly right now.

Q Do you have any reaction or comment to the legislation that was introduced yesterday by Senators Dole and Helms in terms of funding for military aid?

MR. JOHNSON: I do. I would note that such funding would take place and essentially implement a U.S. unilateral lifting of the arms embargo against Bosnia-Herzegovina. We've made very clear that the Administration is opposed to unilateral lift and therefore would certainly be opposed to implementation of it. I'd also note for you that the President has vetoed the Dole bill today.

Q Is the Administration confident that you can sustain the veto?

MR. JOHNSON: We believe that we can work with the Congress and come to an agreement on moving forward in a multilateral manner.

Any more questions on Bosnia?

Q One other thing. Do Lake and Tarnoff carry any message on lifting sanctions on Belgrade as well. Do they have a whole package or do they have just the Bosnia side and Map and that kind of side?

MR. JOHNSON: I have declined over the course of the last several days to get into specifics about what their discussions are. I'm going to continue to do that and let them do their work. They're trying to negotiate something. I'd like for them to have an opportunity to do that. You get the gold star anyway.

[...]

(Press briefing concluded at 2:01 p.m.) END