UNITED24 - Make a charitable donation in support of Ukraine!

Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD)

USIS Washington File

19 March 1999

TRANSCRIPT: PRESS CONFERENCE BY PRESIDENT CLINTON, MARCH 19, 1999

(Discusses Kosovo, Bosnia, China) (10,320)
On the question of alleged spying by China at U.S. nuclear
laboratories, Clinton said he was not aware of any espionage during
his time in office.
"I am confident that we in the White House have done what we could to
be aggressive about this," he said. If there was espionage against the
United States in previous administrations, he said, "I will be very
upset about it, as I have been every time there has been. And anybody
who committed it ought to be punished, just as we went after Mr.
(Aldrich) Ames, anybody else who committed espionage against the
United States."
He said that security "was too lax for years and years and years at
the labs, and noted that "a lot of important changes have been made"
including changes announced just March 18 by the U.S. Secretary of
Energy.
Clinton defended the administration's policy of engagement with China
saying that the course he has followed with China "is the one that's
best for America -- disagreeing where we have serious disagreements,
pursuing our common interests where I thought it was in the interest
of the United States."
...............
Following is the White House transcript:
(begin transcript)
THE WHITE HOUSE
Office of the Press Secretary
March 19, 1999
PRESS CONFERENCE BY THE PRESIDENT
The East Room
4:01 P.M. EST
.................
Q: Mr. President, how long have you known that the Chinese were
stealing our nuclear secrets? Is there any trust left between the two
nations? And some Republicans are saying that you deliberately
suppressed the information from the American people because of the
election and your trade goals.
CLINTON: Well, let me try to respond to all those things. First of
all, the latter charge is simply untrue. We were notified -- Mr.
Berger was notified sometime in 1996 of the possibility that security
had been breached at the labs, the Energy Department labs where a lot
of our nuclear work is done, in the mid-'80s -- not in the 1990s, but
in the mid-'80s -- and that there was an investigation being
undertaken by the FBI.
Then, sometime in the middle of 1997, he was notified and I was
notified that the extent of the security breach might have been quite
extensive. So we had the CIA looking into that, the Energy Department
looking into that, and the FBI investigation continued with the
cooperation, the full cooperation of the Energy Department.
In early 1998, I propounded a presidential directive designed to
improve security at the labs. And as you know, Secretary Richardson's
been talking quite a bit in recent days about what has been done since
that directive was signed and what continues to be done today.
Now, I think there are two questions here, that are related but ought
to be kept separate. One is, was there a breach of security in the
mid-'80s; if so, did it result in espionage? That has not been fully
resolved, at least as of my latest briefing. The second is -- there
are really three questions, excuse me -- the second is, once the
Executive Branch was notified and the investigations began, was
everything done in a timely fashion? I am confident that we in the
White House have done what we could to be aggressive about this.
Look, if there was espionage against the United States, I will be very
upset about it, as I have been every time there has been. And anybody
who committed it ought to be punished, just as we went after Mr. Ames,
anybody else who committed espionage against the United States.
In an effort to ensure that there was an independent review of this,
in addition to whatever work is being done by the Senate and House
committees -- who have, as you know, received more than a dozen
briefings over the course of this investigation, going back to 1996 --
I have asked Senator Rudman, former Republican Senator from New
Hampshire, and the President's Foreign Intelligence Advisory Board to
review the chronology, to make an assessment, and to make any
recommendations about what further action also might need to be taken.
So I believe that's the appropriate thing to do.
Now, the third question is, what, if anything, does this mean about
our relationship with China? I don't believe that we can afford to be
under any illusions about our relationship with China, or any other
country, for that matter, with whom we have both common interests and
deep disagreements. I believe the course I have followed with China is
the one that's best with America -- disagreeing where we have
disagreements; pursuing our common interests where I thought it was in
the interests of the United States.
And again, let me say just one or two examples. I think if we hadn't
been working with China, China would not have signed the Comprehensive
Test Ban Treaty, the Chemical Weapons Convention. They would very
likely not have refrained from transferring dangerous technology and
weaponry to countries that we don't believe should get it. I doubt if
they would have helped us as much as they have to try to contain the
North Korean nuclear threat, or that we would have had the level of
cooperation we had in trying to limit the Asian financial crisis,
which is a serious economic and security problem for our country.
And I think we should just take the facts as they come, and do what is
best for the American people. But I can say categorically that it
never crossed my mind that I should not disclose some inquiry being
undertaken by the United States government for reasons of commercial
or other gain. That is not true. I just think we should always pursue
what is in the interest of the United States. And if we think we've
got a security problem, we ought to fix it. Plainly, the security was
too lax for years and years and years at the labs. And a lot of
important changes have been made, and yesterday the Secretary of
Energy announced some others.
I think that if anybody did, in fact, commit espionage, it is a bad
thing and we should take appropriate action. But in our dealings with
China, we should do quite simply what is in the interest of the
American people, and that's what I intend to do.
Q: Mr. President, if I could follow up on this issue of alleged
Chinese spying, you just said that according to your latest briefing,
you've not fully resolved the issue of whether Chinese actually spied
on the United States. Are you meaning to suggest that you're not
certain at this hour whether there was, in fact, Chinese spying?
You also said that you've had the full cooperation of the Energy
Department. How do you explain, sir, then, that in April of 1997, the
FBI made specific recommendations to the Department of Energy about
the need to tighten security and those recommendations were not
followed through on for 17 months?
And, finally, sir, you mentioned the spying in the 1980s, or the
alleged spying in the 1980s. Can you assure the American people that
under your watch, no valuable nuclear secrets were lost?
CLINTON: Well, you asked several questions there. Let me say, first of
all, it's my understanding that the Energy Department has fully
cooperated with the FBI in investigating the alleged breach in the
mid-'80s, including the person who was suspected. That is my
understanding.
On the question of what recommendations were implemented by whom,
when, that's what I've asked for the President's Foreign Intelligence
Advisory Board and Senator Rudman to review, to report to me on, as
well as to make further recommendations.
I can tell you that I have -- what I said about the espionage was that
it is my understanding that the investigation has not yet determined
for sure that espionage occurred. That does not mean that there was
not a faulty security situation at the lab. The security procedures
were too weak for years and years and years, for a very long time. And
I believe that we are aggressively moving to correct that and a lot of
changes have been made. I think Secretary Richardson has been quite
vigorous in that regard.
The chronology about who did what, when, I think it's more important
to have an independent analysis of that, which is why I asked the
Foreign Intelligence Advisory Board to do that.
Now, you asked me another question, which is can I tell you that there
has been no espionage at the labs since I have been President. I can
tell you that no one has reported to me that they suspect such a thing
has occurred.
..................
Q: We're jumping around a lot and I apologize, but I'd like to return
to China for just a minute. Officials with your administration have
said that China's size, it's so big, it's just difficult to ignore,
that you can't just pretend they don't exist. But in terms of human
rights, that merely underscores the magnitude of the problem. That's a
billion people who don't have freedom of worship, freedom of the
press, the right to peaceably assemble, the right to redress their
government, the right to form their government. And you often talk
about values when you talk about public policy. Does our relationship
with China now reflect your values?
CLINTON: I believe our policy toward China does. Our relationship is
not perfect, but I think it is the correct course.
First of all, I believe that the principal problem, human rights
problem in China is the absence of political rights and the civil
rights associated with them. There are some examples of religious --
denial of religious freedom. There's also a lot of religious
expression there. You remember, I went to church in China, to a church
that has regular services every week, whether we're there or not.
And there is the special problem of Tibet, which I engaged President
Ziang about in our press conference and on which we continue to work.
So, to me, it's very important and we have to continue to press ahead
on that. I think the question is, what is the best way for the United
States to maximize the chances that China will become more open in
terms of political and civil rights, that any vestiges of religious
suppression will be dropped, that Tibet will have a chance as soon as
possible to preserve its unique culture and identity -- and all these
questions like that. And it seems to me that the best way to do it is
to work with the Chinese where it's in our interest to do so, and to
frankly and forthrightly state our differences where they exist. If we
were to reach a point where we were convinced that no agreement we
made ever would be kept, where no progress could ever be made, then I
would ask the American people to reassess that.
But I believe that the evidence is -- and I cited some specific
examples earlier in this press conference -- the evidence is that the
Chinese would like a constructive relationship with us. Keep in mind,
the same sort of debate that's going on in this country, there is a
mirror image of that debate going on in China today.
And there are people in China that are not at a press conference, but
they're saying, you know, the Americans cannot exist without an enemy;
you know they've got to have an enemy, they've got to have somebody to
dominate the world against; and what they really want to do is to
contain us; they don't want us to flower economically; they don't want
us to have influence, even if it's nonaggressive influence. And
therefore, we need to build up our military. Therefore, we need to
fight them at every turn. We need to oppose them at every turn.
These sorts of debates are going on in their country. And what I have
said to President Jiang, to Premier Zhu, to everyone who is involved
on the trip -- and I look forward to the Premier's trip to the United
States -- is that we still have to define what kind of future we're
going to have, how we're going to share it, what is the proper arena
for competition, what is the proper arena for cooperation. And we have
to judge China as we would judge anyone else, and as we would expect
to be judged by our actions.
What you have here is a relationship that is profoundly important,
very large and inherently frustrating because it has many different
elements, some of which we like, some of which we don't. And it
requires a constant evaluation to see whether we're on the right
track, whether we're doing the right things, whether we're going in
the right direction. And because it doesn't fit within neat or calming
categories, it can be a source of difficulty.
But I believe that I've done the right thing for America over the long
run by trying to establish a positive but wide-open -- I mean eyes
wide open -- with no illusions relationship with China where we
explicitly put our differences on the table; where we pursue them to a
point of resolution if possible; where we don't give up on what we
believe if we can't resolve them; and where we do work on the things
that we have in common. I believe this is the right thing to do. But
it is inherently frustrating at the points of difference.
Wendell, go ahead.
Q: Mr. President, you said just a short while ago that no one has
reported to you they suspect Chinese espionage at U.S. nuclear labs
during your administration, sir. But sources tell Fox News, and we are
reporting this evening, that China stole the technology for
electromagnetic pulse weapons from several nuclear labs during your
first term in office, sir, and that the Chinese have successfully
tested these weapons in China. And the sources also say that the
administration, at least, was aware of this.
Can you tell us, sir, were you not personally aware? Are you concerned
about this? And what will be your administration's response to the
report?
CLINTON: Well, you didn't say what the source of what they sold was.
You say they "stole," is that the word you used?
Q: Yes, sir, the technology for EMP weapons, from four of the 11
nuclear labs.
CLINTON: To the best of my knowledge -- and, you know, I try to -- not
only do I spend a great deal of time every day on national security
measures, I try to prepare for these things. To the best of my
knowledge, no one has said anything to me about any espionage which
occurred by the Chinese against the labs during my presidency.
I will -- if you report that, then I will do my best to find out what
the facts are, and I'll tell you what they are. And if I have
misstated this in any way because I don't remember something, then I
will tell you that. But I don't believe that I have forgotten.
..................
Thank you very much.
(end transcript)




NEWSLETTER
Join the GlobalSecurity.org mailing list