June 26, 1998

PRESS BRIEFING BY MIKE MCCURRY AND NATIONAL SECURITY ADVISOR SANDY BERGER

4:08 P.M. (L)

                               THE WHITE HOUSE
                        Office of the Press Secretary
                      (Xian, People's Republic of China)
______________________________________________________________
For Immediate Release                                     June 26, 1998     
                              PRESS BRIEFING BY 
                              MIKE MCCURRY AND 
                    NATIONAL SECURITY ADVISOR SANDY BERGER
		
                               Shangri-la Hotel
                      Xian, People's Republic of China 	  		       
4:08 P.M. (L) 
		
		MR. MCCURRY:  Good afternoon.  One program note before I bring 
Sandy up.  During the course of the tour, the very interesting tour the 
President had of the Terra Cotta Warriors, your print pooler was with him and 
had an opportunity to talk to the President afterwards, so you're going to get 
a pool report that has him commenting with some color on his tour.  I won't 
attempt to do that now.
		Q     All color, no substance?
		MR. MCCURRY:  All color, no substantive comments.  Mostly just 
about the tour itself.  
		Sandy, very graciously, will do a little preview of tomorrow 
and discussion today.
		MR. BERGER:  There are a few comments in the pool report about 
the construction of the Terra Cotta Warriors, the President's perspective on 
that.  So it is substantive.  I was kidding.  (Laughter.)  Mistake.  
(Laughter.)
		Let me talk briefly about today, a little bit about tomorrow, 
and then if there are any questions I will be happy to try to answer them.
		I think in day one here in China we have seen that China has 
many faces, and we have seen several of them over the past 24 hours.  In the 
village this morning that we visited, both in the roundtable with the 
villagers and then just generally, listening to the Mayor, this is one of a 
half a million villages 
in China that have had multicandidate, genuine elections.  About 
500,000 of China's one million villages have gone through this 
process.  And these have generally been real elections,  
Incumbents have often been defeated, and the Carter Center, for 
example, has a project here in China that both assists in this 
process and observes it and has generally found the process to be 
quite a good one.
	     I thought it was particularly noteworthy, the 
President's comments at the end of the remarks to the village -- 
and I think, obviously, deliberately so, that "I have run in 
elections, I have won, and I have lost, I prefer winning, but 
when there is a democratic process, then everybody is a winner."  
And I think you'll see in all of the President's statements an 
effort to draw from the specific to make the general point of 
encouraging and reinforcing the processes of change that are 
taking place.
	     I thought it was also particularly interesting in 
terms of this morning, the question, the one question from I 
believe the teacher, the gentleman, to the President's -- sitting 
to the President's left, when the First Lady asked if there were 
any questions -- he said, why are you here, why did you come to 
our village?  This is obviously not a general practice of Chinese 
officials, just as we found when we went to South America, that 
the President doing this has been quite a dramatic difference 
from the way in which they're used to relating to their national 
officials.  
	     The President's answer, as you know, was because he 
thinks it's important for people who run countries to understand 
how what they do affects the average people in those countries 
and because he wants the American people to see various aspects 
of Chinese life.
	     This afternoon the President saw what is clearly one 
of the most extraordinary archaeological sites in the world, and 
an enormous statement about China's past.  The President's 
comment to me was that he was impressed by the awesome nature of 
the site, but equally impressed by the care and meticulousness 
with which the Chinese people are reconstructing what they have 
found and what they have been working on now for about 25 years.
	     Before Emperor Qin, whose tombs those were of 
course, the soldiers were buried alive.  Qin instituted the 
policy apparently of having them simply replicate themselves, I 
think thus being the first "third way" emperor in history.
	     China is changing.  There are still forces that are 
pulling the other direction, that are resisting.  That change 
--we've seen that in the episodes over the last day of dissidents 
who have been detained, obviously, the Chinese apparatus, Chinese 
security apparatus doing what comes naturally for them.  People 
are not debris to be swept up for a visitor, and we have 
expressed our concern about this to the Chinese government.  
	     Their response so far has not been terribly 
satisfactory.  They dispute the facts or otherwise explain these 
incidents away.  But we will continue to make clear, and the 
President will make clear in his meetings tomorrow, that this is 
simply, as he said today, China looking backward, quite at odds 
with the China that we see all around us here in the last 24 
hours; a China that is moving in leaps and bounds into the 21st 
century.
	     Let me talk a little bit about tomorrow.  After the 
arrival ceremony, the President will meet with President Jiang.  
There will be, the first day, a larger meeting and then a smaller 
meeting.  There then will be a press availability      , joint 
press availability, between President Jiang and President Clinton 
with a -- a brief press availability -- they will each make a 
statement and take a few questions.  And then there will be a 
lunch with Premier Zhu Rongji.
	     In terms of the substance, we've obviously been 
working on this over some time.  There are some matters that are 
still under discussion, the outcome of which, I think at this 
point, unclear and obviously will not materialize unless it is 
satisfactory to us.
	     On the issue of detargeting, for example, the 
Chinese traditionally have linked that issue to our unwillingness 
to accept a doctrine of no first use of nuclear weapons.  That is 
not something that we're prepared to do.  And we continue to 
discuss this with them.
	     With respect to other security areas, we will be 
talking to them, we have been talking to them since the 
Secretary's trip, my trip, Sandy Kristoff's trip, discussions 
over the last few days in Beijing with Jim Steinberg and Sandy 
Kristoff -- a number of issues, missile issues in particular, 
where we would hope that we would make some progress.
	     On human rights, this is something we've talked 
about very extensively with the Chinese.  We have made a number 
of suggestions relating to dissidents, relating to Tibet.  I 
would not anticipate that we would see the fruits of those 
discussions while we're here.  As you'll recall, when President 
Jiang came to Washington and we had very extensive discussions 
with him on a number of human rights topics, it was not until he 
returned to China, until some weeks or even months later that 
they announced the release of Wei Jingsheng and Wang Dan and 
Bishop Jin and intention to sign the U.N. Covenant of Political 
Civil Rights.  I would anticipate the same pattern in this case.
	     On rule of law, an area that we are placing 
increasing importance on, I believe we will be able to conclude 
an agreement to intensify a process that's begun over the last 
year of training Chinese judges and lawyers, of working with 
Chinese jurists and judicial, legal officials on legal assistance 
to the poor, working with the Chinese on making sure that the 
process of rule of law includes personal rights as well as 
property rights -- human rights as well as intellectual property 
rights.
	     On energy and the environment, a process begun well 
over a year ago by the Vice President, it is moving along very 
nicely.  We will be undertaking a number of projects with the 
Chinese as we help them move away from a heavy coal-based economy 
to a clean energy economy.  When you get to Beijing tomorrow, if 
you haven't been there recently, look up in the sky, and you 
will, simply looking up in the sky, believe that you were in Los 
Angeles 10 years ago.  It is a rather dramatically polluted city, 
and obviously extraordinarily important to them and to us, since 
they will become the largest emitter of greenhouse gases in the 
next 10 years.  
	     We will be undertaking with them specific projects 
on coal gassification, involving American technology and we'll be 
working with them on a nationwide air quality monitoring network 
with the help of EPA.
	     Finally, in the science and technology area, an area 
where we have been working with the Chinese for 20 years and 
which has produced some extraordinary developments, including 
breakthroughs in the treatment of spina bifida, including 
cooperative projects in detecting natural disasters before they 
occur, we will be undertaking some collective projects in the 
health area, particularly concentrating on the area of birth 
defects, polio, and the effects of tobacco use.
	     There are other areas, but that reflects the broad 
range of issues that this relationship now embraces, and we will 
be, hopefully, making progress on a number of them while we're 
here.
	     Q	  Sandy, you said that in their response the 
Chinese government was disputing the facts on the dissident 
arrests.  Can you tell us what the facts are as you know them?  
It's very hard to get a handle on what's going on.
	     MR. BERGER:  I can't give you a definitive version 
of the facts.  We have heard the reports from you folks and in 
some cases the Chinese have had a different version of facts; in 
some cases -- their response has not been satisfactory, let me 
just leave it at that. 
	     Q	  Sandy, what have the Chinese been saying?  What 
is their version of the facts? 
	     MR. BERGER:  As I say, I don't want to get into 
enormous specifics here.  They have basically not adequately 
explained the situation, as far as we're -- 
	     Q	  Well, how hard have you been protesting?  And I 
mean by that, with Ambassador Sasser -- he's the one?
	     MR. BERGER:  Among others.
	     Q	  Well, he has presented these protests.  What 
has he said to the Chinese?
	     MR. BERGER:  He has said to the Chinese, this is 
thoroughly unacceptable, as the President will say to the Chinese 
tomorrow, as I have said to the Chinese today, as I expect my 
deputy, Mr. Steinberg, will say to the Chinese today.  So this is 
not in China's interest.  The fact that we're obviously focused 
on this as opposed to the other things that are happening in 
China.  We've made this point to the Chinese.  It's not in their 
interests.  But -- 
	     Q	  What does "unacceptable" mean?  That's a strong 
word.  What's behind it? 
	     MR. BERGER:  It's unacceptable, in my judgment, for 
people to be detained in connection with an event like this -- 
this is not surprising, but it's not unacceptable.  Those of you 
who have been here before, that have traveled with President Bush 
or traveled with Secretary Christopher or others, know that the 
security apparatus often undertakes these kinds of steps.  They 
see a trip like this with a combination of, I think, anticipation 
and some fear.  But if China is going to make that next step into 
really being a nation whose practices are fully acceptable to the 
international community, then this is a step -- this is not a 
step in that direction. 
	     Q	  Sandy, on that point, are you trying to 
separate the security apparatus from the folks you will see in 
Beijing tomorrow?  They're all the same thing, aren't they?
	     MR. BERGER:  I'm not trying to make any -- I can't 
tell you where these decisions are made.  I know in the planning 
of this trip there have been very large decisions that have been 
made at a local level and sometimes very small decisions that 
have been pushed to Beijing.  So it's hard to know exactly what 
the line of responsibility is here.  It really doesn't matter.  
As I say, people are not debris to be swept up for visitors.
	     Q	  Do the Ambassador's comments to the Chinese 
represent a formal objection? 
	     MR. BERGER:  Certainly.  
	     Q	  Are we suggesting that there is something that 
the United States will withhold in terms of cooperation as a 
result of this? 
	     MR. BERGER:  I think it is just as effective for the 
President to speak about it forthrightly and directly today, for 
us to speak to them about it directly.  I think -- we will 
certainly not accept this, but as I say, this is a not unusual 
pattern, although not an acceptable pattern.  And as China 
increasingly moves into the international community, it has to be 
less fearful of its own people. 
	     Q	  Yeah, but, Sandy, what's the "or else"?  What 
are we going to do except stomp our feet? 
	     MR. BERGER:  I think there has already been -- you 
speak almost as loudly as Sam does, Bill.  Not quite, but almost.  
I think there has been change in China over the last five to 10 
years, even in the area of the options that people have in their 
lives and the general freedom of expression that they have 
overall.  And many of your correspondents have written about it.  
So the movement is in the right direction.  And I think part of 
the reason for that has been the presence and pressure of the 
international community.  I think that's effective.  
	     Q	  Sandy, the Chinese in Beijing are indicating 
that the President will not have an opportunity to speak at large 
by television to the Chinese people.  Is that your understanding? 
	     MR. BERGER:  I have not heard one way or the other 
on that. 
	     Q	  So you think it's still an open question? 
	     MR. BERGER:  It was open as far as I know. 
	     Q	  And what does the United States want?  Is it 
tomorrow's event, Monday's speech?  What are you seeking?
	     MR. BERGER:  Well, we'd like the most exposure for 
the President as we can.  Tomorrow, I think you know the 
logistics.  The President arrives in front of the Great Hall of 
the People adjacent to Tiananmen Square, and there will be a 
brief arrival ceremony, which I understand will last about 15 
minutes.  He will then go in for the meetings.  There then will 
be a brief press availability after that meeting.  He will speak 
on Monday at Beijing University	   		       .  He will 
speak in Shanghai.  There are a number of opportunities for the 
President to speak.
	     Q	  To follow on that point, Sandy, it seems that 
in the summit preparations, all the flexibility has been on the 
U.S. side regarding the arrival ceremony in Tiananmen Square, 
where the U.S. delegation stays, the guest house versus the China 
--- all the flexibility on the U.S. side, none on the Chinese 
side.  Are you getting anything?
	     MR. BERGER:  I think that's just wrong, John.  I 
think if you --
	     Q	  What are you getting, can you give me an 
example?
	     MR. BERGER:  Can I answer?  
	     Q	  Yes.  I was wondering if you can give me an 
example of the Chinese flexibility --
	     MR. BERGER:  Anything else?  Okay.  First of all, I 
think it's hard to make a judgment about what is the net result 
of the summit on day one.  So for starters, I think the premise 
here is a little difficult.  Second of all, I think all of the 
things that I have indicated are areas that we have wanted to see 
progress on from China.  I think that with respect to a hundred 
issues involving logistics, involving Secret Service, involving 
other issues, the Chinese have done things that they have not 
done before -- even, in fact, ironically, in terms of visas. 
Except for the foolishness of the Radio Free Asia, they have 
allowed people into China that have never been permitted into 
China before.
	     Again, even with respect to the actions they've 
taken on dissidents, which I think, as I say, are thoroughly 
unacceptable, I think that they probably are not of the scale 
that has happened before.  
	     So I think that there is an effort on the part of 
the Chinese to make this successful, and I think that in the end, 
if our objective is to advance America's national interest across 
a range of issues and to make sure the President has an 
opportunity with the Chinese officials to raise very directly his 
concerns, I think that will happen.  And the last thing I would 
say is, if you just look over the last year or two, the things 
that have been accomplished, I think you have to say that by and 
large China has moved in our direction, whether it has been 
giving up nuclear testing, signing the Comprehensive Test Ban 
Treaty, giving up their nuclear cooperation with Iran, giving up 
their nuclear cooperation with Pakistan -- those are big deals.  
And I think signing the Chemical Weapons Convention and all of 
those things -- they have not done it for us, but they've done 
what we have asked them to do.
	     With respect to South Asia, an area of enormous risk 
and danger at this point, China has played a very constructive 
role since the tests.  So I think you have to look at the overall 
picture and I think if you simply look at where the President 
stays or take one fact out of it, I think that's a snapshot.
	     Q	  What are the prospects of a detargeting 
agreement?
	     MR. BERGER:  I don't know the answer, Wolf.  We 
certainly -- we would like such an agreement.  I think such an 
agreement would be useful in two respects.  Number one, it would 
be a commitment by the Chinese to us that they would not target 
our cities and, therefore, would preclude the danger of an 
accidental launch, which is not insubstantial.  There was a time 
when entire movies were based on swans going across radar 
screens.
	     And second of all, I think it would be an important 
statement about -- a confidence-building measure and a statement 
about the evolution of our relationship since adversaries point 
their missiles against each other and not countries that are 
working to build a better relationship.
	     Q	  Where does it stand right now --
	     MR. BERGER:  I cannot tell you that we will have 
--we are unwilling to, and have been, to change our doctrine on 
no first use, and that's a bottom red line for us.
	     Q	  Is that what you meant when you were talking 
about you were looking for progress on missile issues, the 
detargeting thing?  Or what are you talking about?
	     MR. BERGER:  No, I think beyond detargeting -- 
divide the nonproliferation world into two areas, nuclear and 
delivery systems.  On the nuclear side we've made a lot of 
progress.  As I said, on Iran, in connection with Jiang's 
meeting, they agreed they had no plans to assist the Iranian 
nuclear program.  They've said that they would not assist 
unsafeguarded nuclear facilities -- read that Pakistan.  And they 
have recently adopted in their law most of the nuclear export 
controls of the so-called Zanger Committee, which are kind of the 
internationally recognized nuclear technology no-nos.  That's a 
technical term.  (Laughter.)  So that's the nuclear side.
	     On the missile side their commitments have been more 
ambiguous and more subject to differing interpretations.  They 
have said that they would adhere to the MTCR guidelines.  They 
have not talked about looking ahead towards a day when they might 
join the MTCR itself, where they would actually undertake not 
just the principles of restraint, but also the obligations of 
restraint.  If we could make some progress in moving them in that 
direction I think that would be a plus.
	     Q	  Sandy, you've said that the Chinese are 
generally moving in the right direction on the issue of human 
rights and that these dissident roundups, such as they are, are 
probably not on the scale that we've seen before.  Are you 
concerned that your comments might be interpreted by the Chinese 
as sort of a tacit approval of what they're doing, despite what 
the U.S. saying --
	     MR. BERGER:  No.
	     Q	  -- and, Sandy, if not, if you don't believe 
that, then why do you think that the Chinese would do this if 
they're not afraid of our response?
	     MR. BERGER:  Well, first of all, I think China's 
human rights record is terrible.  I think China is an 
authoritarian nation, as I've said before.  I think there's been 
some progress in human rights, but it has been not nearly enough.  
So I, by no means -- I think that what I said, or at least 
intended to say was that the choices the Chinese people have in 
their lives today were unimaginable 10 years ago, 20 years ago.  
You saw those people out there today -- where to work, where to 
live, where to travel.  Two and a half million Chinese went 
abroad last year.  The choices that come from the cable 
television -- I love the fact that the income that they derive 
from the community companies was plowed back into that village 
into cable television.  I think that's a step in the right 
direction.
	     So, in that sense, when I say -- I think that the 
degree of options that the Chinese people have today are greater 
than they were.  I think in the area of public dissent, they are 
still totally unacceptable.  And I don't think this is directed 
-- the implication is that this directed at President Clinton.  
This is -- the fact that this happens generally in connection 
with these kinds of visits does not make it acceptable.  It is 
not appropriate.  It's not necessary.  It is also not the first 
time it's happened. 
	     Q	  How does this roundup affect the chemistry of 
the summit?  How does it push up the issue of human rights above 
other issues that you intended to put forward? 
	     MR. BERGER:  I think human rights -- I think human 
rights was, is, and will be a very high priority for the 
President in his conversations with President Jiang.  I think -- 
that these episodes I think simply reinforce that priority. 
	     Q	  So will the President specifically raise the 
detaining of those dissidents when he is talking with Jiang 
Zemin?
	     MR. BERGER:  I expect that they will be raised in 
connection with that meeting.  I'll give you a readout after the 
meeting rather than -- 
	     Q	  Sandy, by staging this roundup now, on the 
occasion of the President's visit, doesn't it show that the 
Chinese authorities, or at least some of them, just don't care 
what the American President thinks about these matters?
	     MR. BERGER:  No, I think -- I don't think that's the 
case.  I think they have anticipated this visit with great 
excitement.  I think they -- look at the number of people who 
have been here in Xian.  I'm not a great crowd counter, but there 
have been certainly hundreds of thousands of people, if not more. 
 There is enormous excitement here, as I saw when I came twice in 
the last two months, about the President's visit.  As I said 
before, I think the Chinese face these things with the 
combination of excitement, anticipation, and fear.  And their 
instinct -- the instinct of some at least -- is to let their 
desire for order overwhelm their ability to permit expression.  
And that is something that has to change. 
	     Q	  A question on the Zhu Rongji meeting.  What are 
you expecting to get out of the Zhu Rongji meeting, and will 
there be any announcements coming out of that?
	     MR. BERGER:  The Zhu Rongji meeting I think will be 
largely about the economy, both the Chinese economy, the Asian 
economy.  I expect we'll have some discussion of trade, although 
I don't expect anything concrete to come out of that.  There are 
a number of larger issues the President wants to raise, the trade 
deficit being one; a number of specific sectoral issues the 
President wants to raise.  But I think the President wants to 
hear about Jiang's sweeping economic reform program, what he sees 
the consequences of it being.  And also how he sees the Asian 
financial situation and the impact that that will have on China.
	     Q	  Sandy, is the idea of lifting sanctions, even 
relatively minor ones like trade and development assistance, now 
off the tables for the summit?
	     MR. BERGER:  Well, we have always said that that 
would happen only in the context of the fundamental requirements 
and the national interests being served by doing that.  
	     Q	  Mr. Berger, can you clarify a couple of points 
about an issue in Taiwan?  This morning the President was asked 
about whether or not he's going to reinterpret, reinstate the 
three nos of the one China policy.  Based on his answer I get the 
impression he's not going to do so.  Can you tell us --
	     MR. BERGER:  What he said was our policy will not be 
changed here.  I'd refer you to Secretary Albright's comments 
when she was here.  Our policy has been that we support the one 
China policy and that we don't support the independence of Taiwan 
or one China, one Taiwan, or Taiwan's admission into 
international organizations that depend on statehood.  But we 
believe there ought to be a peaceful resolution of the Taiwan 
issue and we will encourage the Chinese towards that end.
	     Q	  But, Mr. Berger, my question to you is really 
whether the President will restate the policy in his meetings 
with Jiang Zemin?
	     MR. BERGER:  Well, I just stated the policy.  
Secretary Albright has stated the policy.  The President may 
state the policy.
	     Q	  Arms sales -- they don't want arm sales to 
Taiwan.
	     MR. MCCURRY:  This is the last chance on any other 
subjects.  Hearing none, thank you.
	     Q	  Can you explain why the President didn't 
express these outrages publicly in his remarks to the Chinese 
people?  He has said that he wants to speak with them directly.  
Why didn't he ask them if they'd ever been harassed by police or 
has anyone ever experienced these types --
	     MR. MCCURRY:  The President, speaking both to U.S. 
press members and Chinese press members very directly, addressed 
the situation this morning.  Maybe you haven't seen the 
transcript.
	     Q	  What, if anything, is the President planning on 
doing on the line item veto now that it's unconstitutional?
	     MR. MCCURRY:  The White House Legal Counsel's Office 
is reviewing the opinion, but, clearly, the President believes 
this authority is important to protect taxpayers in the United 
States.  It's an authority that he believes he has used correctly 
and constitutionally to protect the American people from wasteful 
spending.  We will clearly work with those who believe that the 
President needs this authority to find some constitutional way in 
which the President can use the same tool available to governors 
around the United States to protect taxpayers.
	     Q	  But he won't defy the court, will he?  The 
court --
	     MR. MCCURRY:  Clearly, we're not going to defy the 
court or the ruling of the court.  But there are many who believe 
there ought to be an effort to continue to find some 
constitutional way to make this authority available to the 
President, and that's why the White House Legal Counsel's Office 
is examining the opinion very carefully at this point.
	     Q	  Mike, is HHS looking into possibly suing the 
tobacco companies?
	     MR. MCCURRY:  I'd have to check into that.  If 
that's happening, that's happening a long ways away from here.  
I'll see if I can find out anything about that. 
	     Q	  Can you add anything to what Sandy said about 
the possibility of a live address by the President?  What is the 
hang-up there?
	     MR. MCCURRY:  No, I can't.  
	     Anything else?
	     Q	  What about on the Supreme Court decision on the 
Vince Foster attorney-client privilege?  Does that suggest that 
the other attorney-client privilege involving Bruce LIndsey might 
move in the right direction?
	     MR. MCCURRY:  I think you know that White House 
Legal Counsel Chuck Ruff has been quoted saying that they'll have 
to see how the court considers the arguments that will be made 
with respect to the other attorney-client privilege issues that 
have arisen.  Clearly, the court's reaffirmation of the 
importance of that principle yesterday was something that was 
welcomed by Mr. Ruff.  Whether or not it has a bearing on the 
case that's pending with respect to Mr. Lindsey remains to be 
seen.  Certainly the White House would hope so, given the 
argument that we'd make, but we'll have to see.  We were not a 
party to the litigation over the notes involving Mr. Foster, but 
we are a party to the litigation that's pending and that will be 
argued, I believe, next week.  
	     Q	  Mike, do you know what at point of the visit 
the President will give the American flag and the American 
historical documents to Chinese leaders?  And will it be to 
President Jiang himself?
	     MR. MCCURRY:  I believe that will be presented as 
the official presentation of gifts as made through our protocol 
channels when we arrive in Beijing, either tonight or tomorrow.  
But it's not customary in any state visit for the heads of state 
to directly exchange gifts; it's done through their protocol 
departments.  
	     Q	  Did you have to clear that the Chinese would 
accept these gifts? 
	     MR. MCCURRY:  It's not necessary as far as I know.  
We can present any gift we so choose, and it will be a part of 
the gift presented by the President to the people of China.  
	     Q	  Mike, can you talk about his schedule tonight 
when he arrives in Beijing?  Can you rule out any impromptu visit 
to Tiananmen or anything like that? 
	     MR. MCCURRY:  I haven't heard of any consideration 
of that type of visit. 
	     Q	  Any reaction to the recently announced merger 
of -- Trust and the deeply troubled -- Credit Bank?
	     MR. MCCURRY:  No.  
	     Anything else?
	     Q	  Mike, what are the logistics for the ceremony 
tomorrow in the square.  Will he review troops?  Are there 
national anthems?  What are the two or three elements? 
	     MR. MCCURRY:  I'm not sure exactly -- let me consult 
are handy-dandy book.  The way I have it listed currently -- but 
these things have been on a number of issues, a number of matters 
pending and subject to change right down to the last minute -- it 
is currently listed as:  The President is introduced by President 
Jiang Zemin to the Chinese delegation.  President Clinton 
introduces President Jiang Zemin to the American delegation.  The 
two anthems are played.  The two Presidents proceed to the dais.  
They review the troops.  They march and review the Honor Guard.  
Then they bid farewell and go into the Great Hall of the People 
for the meeting.  
	     Q	  All of these are comments just between the two 
leaders.  They're not public comments, right? 
	     MR. MCCURRY:  That's correct.  And a way of thinking 
of it is, it's more similar to the way state arrivals are done in 
most of the places in the world.  We have a rather unique element 
in our state arrivals which includes speaking points.  But as you 
know if you've seen the President arrive elsewhere, that's not 
the custom in most countries. 
	     Q	  When the President arrives at Tiananmen Square, 
is he expected to talk about -- 
	     MR. MCCURRY:  He will address the events of June 
1989 at some appropriate point, but, as I just indicated, it 
won't be during the course of the arrival ceremony because there 
are no speeches given during the arrival ceremony.
	     Q	  Would you say, Mike, that the speech on Monday 
at Beijing University will not be carried live by Chinese 
television? 
	     MR. MCCURRY:  Twice now in response to questions, I 
don't have any further information on that. 
	     Q	  Mike, just let me follow up on that.  If the 
President's comments either in Beijing on Monday or in Shanghai 
aren't televised, isn't he just here in a bubble, in a vacuum, if 
the Chinese people never hear him -- 
	     MR. MCCURRY:  No, of course not.  We have -- number 
one of the changes occurring throughout China is the way that 
information is disseminated and information proliferates -- 
through the Internet, through a variety of sources.  This is 
becoming a complex culture in part because of all the influences 
that are beginning to penetrate through what in the past has been 
a great wall of disinformation.
	     So I think the President's remarks will certainly be 
distributed widely through a variety of news sources represented 
here in this room, and obviously our embassy will make a great 
effort to translate them and distribute them appropriately.  And 
the best of all worlds would be to have the address carried live 
so that the people of China can hear it, and I think there is 
sufficient demand in China here for it if anyone is going to make 
the judgment based on news value.
	     Q	  What are the expectations that the talks 
between President and Jiang Zemin extend beyond the rather small 
window tomorrow?
	     MR. MCCURRY:  Well, they have a private dinner.  I 
mean, they will see each other again on Sunday and have a private 
dinner.  And I suspect, just as when Jiang Zemin visited the 
United States and a very substantial part of the conversations 
between the two Presidents occurred privately in the White House 
residence, I suspect that the private dinner that they have 
Sunday night will be important and be a continuing part of the 
effort to deepen and nurture the relations between both 
countries.
	     Q	  Mike, regardless of the Chinese plans whether 
they broadcast the President's speech at Beijing University, will 
VOA carry that live and broadcast it on Radio Free Asia?
	     MR. MCCURRY:  That's a good question.  Well, VOA and 
Radio Free are separate, but there will be a variety of ways in 
which we could try to get broader interest in coverage of the 
speech.
	     Q	  But there's not a plan that you're aware at 
this point?
	     MR. MCCURRY:  Both of those organizations may have 
plans for coverage.  You should ask them -- they make their 
decisions independently.
	     Q	  What's the briefing time tomorrow?  Will you do 
a feedback --
	     MR. MCCURRY:  I think that everyone -- just in terms 
of logistics needs to understand, particularly print people, that 
you're in a real crunch deadline because the two Presidents are 
going to come out, they will presumably say something.  There's 
some interest in having at least a few questions taken by both 
sides.  That's all going to happen presumably right around 
midnight Eastern Time.  So, for print people, you have to be 
conscious of the fact you're going to be on deadline trying to 
cover the results of the initial rounds of meetings.  
	     We will tip as much as we can in advance what we 
know about the substantive outcome of the discussions and some of 
the negotiations occurring up in Beijing now, as we get into the 
morning hours tomorrow, so we can protect those of you who would 
be right on deadline tomorrow.
	     Q	  Mike, you had mentioned that the President is 
still intending to receive a 21-gun salute from the PLA.  Is that 
correct?
	     MR. MCCURRY:  I don't see that listed in my book.  
I'd have to check further and see.  I don't know whether that's 
part of their custom or not.
	     Q	  You say you're going to give us a tip some time 
during the morning, but when are the formal agreements announced 
or whatever happens at this summit -- when does that happen?
	     MR. MCCURRY:  Right on deadline tomorrow.
	     Q	  Does that all happen -- everything happens in 
the --
	     MR. MCCURRY:  Whatever happens, happens.  That's 
what I'm trying to convey to you, that you need to be alert to 
that, and we're obviously conscious of that.  And we're going to 
try to begin reading out substantively whatever we can as soon as 
we can even if there's going to be any delay before the two 
Presidents come out and make their joint statements, particularly 
for print folks who are right up against their deadline at that 
point.
	     Q	  So, are you going to be doing that in the 
filing center or to the pool or --
	     MR. MCCURRY:  We're figuring out how to do that -- 
probably have to be a phone call into a filing center where you 
all are is my guess.  I don't know.  I mean, we're open to 
suggestions on that because some of you presumably will want to 
be there and be wherever the two Presidents are going to come 
out.  But others of you are going to need be writing on deadline.
	     Q	  -- give it to us tonight?
	     MR. MCCURRY:  We don't have it, as you just heard.
	     Q	  -- from dissident groups indicated that if 
there's an opportunity they might -- and under those 
circumstances, how would the President --
	     MR. MCCURRY:     They may do what?  I'm sorry, I 
missed the question.
	     Q	  They might try to take an opportunity that they 
can find in order to see the President.
	     MR. MCCURRY:  I'm not aware of any plans for a 
meeting. 
	     THE PRESS:  Thank you. 
            END                        4:52 P.M. (L)