• Military

• WMD Menu                           

• Introduction
• Systems
• Facilities
• Agencies
• Operations
• Countries
• Hot Documents
• News
• Reports
• Policy
• Budget
• Congress
• Links

• Intelligence
• Homeland Security
• Space

U.S. Department of State Daily Press Briefing
Friday, January 10, 1997

CYPRUS
11-14 Reports of Turkish Threats of Military Strike/U.S. Position on Sale of System to Cyprus/Official U.S. Contacts/Effect on Turkey's Security

QUESTION: Cyprus: The Turkish Defense Ministry is apparently looking at the crisis as another case of Cuban missile crisis. That's the analogy that's been used. Now there are words about a possible naval blockade if the missiles were brought through sea lanes. And if through air, then there's talk about closing Turkish air space, to stop it no matter what. Would you care to comment?

MR. BURNS: I would suggest that the Turkish General Staff re-read their history. The Cuban missile crisis is far afield from the current situation in the eastern Mediterranean. There are very few parallels, and we don't see them, frankly.

Let me tell you, we saw some statements by Foreign Minister Tansu Ciller this morning which seemed to up the ante from the tendentious statements made yesterday by the Turkish Defense Minister. If Foreign Minister Ciller is being quoted accurately, we believe such dramatic statements from her or any other Turkish official are uncalled for and most unwise.

As we have made clear this week, the United States does not support the decision by the Government of Cyprus to purchase and in the future deploy the SA-10 anti-aircraft missile system. But, nevertheless, any threat of the use of force, any decision to use force, is absolutely beyond the bounds of acceptable international behavior. We have made this view known directly to the Turkish Government. These public statements concern us because they are inconsistent with the oft-repeated Turkish statements and professions of interest in peace in the eastern Mediterranean and of a negotiated peaceful settlement in Cyprus.

We think that everyone in the eastern Mediterranean - Turks, Greeks, the Cypriots, the parties in Cyprus - should draw back from this type of aggressive public rhetoric. They should sit down together and they should go through the peace discussions on Cyprus and attempt to resolve the problems peacefully. That is why the United States has sent Carey Cavanaugh, our envoy, to the region, to ask that that be the position of all the governments in the region.

QUESTION: Nick, do you see any indication on the part of the Greek Cypriot Government to perhaps cancel the deal or to lower the tensions?

MR. BURNS: The United States has spoken plainly about our opposition to the deal. I think you've seen public statements from President Clerides that Cyprus intends to go ahead with this. That is unfortunate.

Nevertheless, that is not sufficient reason for the Turkish Government to engage in this type of irresponsible public commentary.

Demitri.

QUESTION: Nick, does the U.S. Government believe that there is a potential for a crisis in Cyprus?

MR. BURNS: We have been encouraged by the responsible statements of the Cypriot Government over the last 24 hours in reaction to these Turkish statements. The point that Mr. Cavanaugh will be making is that all of the parties need to pull back from this type of dramatic rhetoric and get down to business at the negotiating table.

Savas.

QUESTION: According to the Turkish Foreign Ministry, under the London agreement, Turkey has the right, as a guarantor, to interfere in this kind of behavior on the island. The Turkish Foreign Ministry is asking if the U.S. has this kind of power to interfere in this subject?

MR. BURNS: The United States is not interfering. The United States is a partner of Turkey and Greece and Cyprus, and the Greek and Turkish communities on Cyprus, in the quest for a peaceful settlement. We are routinely invited by the Turkish Government and the Greek Government and the Cypriot Government to confer with them. We are asked time and again to play a leadership role in trying to resolve the problems. We are not interfering. We are a partner. We are an established, recognized partner so we don't understand that kind of statement.

QUESTION: Also today, the Turkish Government, they sent some diplomatic note to Moscow, explaining how -- against their signature in the United Nations Security Council. Because, if you remember, the latest U.N. Security Council, the resolution mentioned excessive militarization -- against the militarization of the island. Russia has their signature on this subject also, as a Security Council permanent member. Did you convey your concern on this subject to Moscow again?

MR. BURNS: Yes, we did. We've talked to the Russian Government about our disappointment concerning the Russian sale of the SA-10 system to Cyprus.

Yes, Dimitri.

QUESTION: Nick, except Mr. Cavanaugh, does any other U.S. official have contacts with the government in the region?

MR. BURNS: Dimitri, as I said yesterday, in addition to Mr. Cavanaugh, we have Ambassador Grossman and Ambassador

Niles and Ambassador Brill, three of our most senior career diplomats. They are all seized with this problem and are going to be representing U.S. interests throughout the weekend on it.

QUESTION: How can you say that Clerides is making irresponsible statements when, in the first place, it was the Cypriots who ordered the new missiles and who, in a sense, provoked this?

MR. BURNS: I can say it because our view is that the reaction of the Cypriot Government to the unwise public threats of the Turkish Defense Ministry and now the Foreign Ministry was quite measured and calm, and attempted to pull itself back from any kind of sense of crisis. That was responsible.

I would distinguish that from the decision by the Cypriot Government to purchase the anti-aircraft system which we opposed formally and publicly.

QUESTION: You don't consider that a responsible decision, do you?

MR. BURNS: No, we do not. But I'm simply commenting upon the way that the President of Cyprus has reacted to these unwise statements by the Turkish Government.

We have a good relationship with Cyprus. We have a difference of opinion on the anti-aircraft system. It doesn't mean that we reflexively have to criticize the Government of Cyprus on all other issues or other aspects of the same issue. We want to be fair. We want to be judicious in what we say. We certainly want everything that we say and do to contribute to peace, not to the false sense of crisis that is being created by some of these statements.

Chris.

QUESTION: (Inaudible) that the Greek Cypriot Government deliberately manufactured a crisis? They must have known that the Turkish response was hardly going to be measured and calm.

MR. BURNS: We're getting the same question here from a variety of parts of the room. Let me just repeat once, I think, what I hope I have been able to communicate today and in previous days. The United States opposes the decision of Cyprus to purchase and deploy the anti-aircraft system. But that is no justification - that event - for the type of aggressive response that we have seen from the Turkish Defense and Foreign Ministries -- in fact, the two ministers of the Turkish Government over the past 24 hours. There is no excuse for that type of public threat and it simply cannot be condoned given what the antecedent here is, what the offensive event is.

QUESTION: What I'm asking is, do you think the Greek Cypriot Government made a deliberate decision to try and cause a provocation? I know you say you oppose that decision.

MR. BURNS: No. We don't believe that the Cypriot Government is guilty of bad faith. We do not believe that.

Charlie.

QUESTION: Nick, on a different subject. Can you bring us up to date -

MR. BURNS: We still have some here.

QUESTION: (Inaudible).

MR. BURNS: I don't believe it has.

QUESTION: The Russian missile ranges easily reach the southern part of Turkey. The Turkish air force base, they belong to the NATO allies. Cyprus is not a member of NATO. Do you consider this kind of missile, based in Cyprus, as a threat for Turkish security?

MR. BURNS: We have spoken clearly about our concerns regarding the anti-aircraft system. But, again, we do not agree with any kind of justification for these statements by the Turkish Government.

QUESTION: Nick, you said you talked to the Russians. How do you evaluate their behavior? Are there any indications they are fully aware of the seriousness of the situation and they will not back down or perhaps even maybe cancel the contract?

MR. BURNS: You'll have to address that to the Russian Government. We have a disagreement with the Russians but, then again, that's nothing new. We sometimes agree, sometimes disagree with the Russian Government. That relationship will go forward.

QUESTION: Nick, on that point, the Russians said yesterday that the United States was only complaining because it had lost some business?

MR. BURNS: I didn't see that Russian statement, so I can't comment on that specifically. But let me just say on your general point, Sid - or at least your summary of another point - that's ridiculous. The United States, because we believe in constructive behavior in the eastern Mediterranean, would never have sought to allow one of our companies to sell this type of equipment to Cyprus. It's not a question of commercial diplomacy. It's a question of responsible actions by countries like the United States and Russia.

QUESTION: In the course of the responsible statements by the Cypriot Government, have you now gotten a good indication of just why they decided they have to have these missiles and whether they might just pull back from this decision?

MR. BURNS: Again, we have received a private explanation, but I'm going to let the Cypriot Government speak for itself.

QUESTION: Why (inaudible).

MR. BURNS: We disagree with the explanation given to us.