20 February 1998
[EXCERPTS] TRANSCRIPT: WHITE HOUSE DAILY BRIEFING, FEBRUARY 20, 1998
White House Press Secretary Mike McCurry briefed. Following is the White House transcript: (begin transcript) THE WHITE HOUSE Office of the Press Secretary February 20, 1998 PRESS BRIEFING BY MIKE MCCURRY The Briefing Room ................ Q: Mike, the Chief of Staff was up with Senator Lott today. Do you know if the subject of a resolution on Iraq came up and does the White House want a resolution on Iraq? MCCURRY: I haven't talked to Erskine since then, and there were probably a number of matters. We've had others who have been on the Hill and in discussion on a resolution. As we have said several times, we would certainly welcome an expression of support from the Senate. We believe there is sufficient sentiment of support in the Senate for such a resolution. And we'll remain in contact with the leadership to determine what the Senate will do when it comes back into session -- and the House, for that matter. Q: Mike, the President said yesterday he spoke to Jacques Chirac. Has he spoken to any other world leaders and is he thinking of speaking with Boris Yeltsin? MCCURRY: He has not -- I checked this morning; I haven't checked recently. I'm not aware of any additional calls since the Chirac call. And we have, of course, had communications via embassy and other contacts with the Russian Federation. Q: Has he heard anything from Baghdad in terms of the U.N. mission? Or does he expect to? MCCURRY: I'm not aware that we have heard anything from the Secretary General. Q: This weekend? MCCURRY: It's difficult to predict. Our assumption has been that the Secretary General would want to brief the Security Council at the conclusion of his mission. Q: Speaking of military action, has the decision been made whether to go all the way to Baghdad to go after the National Guard, or will it just be infrastructure -- MCCURRY: I'm not going to speculate in any way, shape, or form on that kind of thing. Q: On the meeting yesterday with Bruce Riedel and the Iraqi opposition leaders, could you tell us about that? MCCURRY: This was a meeting that followed on a similar session they had at the State Department, an opportunity for us to remain in contact with Iraqi opposition figures, whom we have lent public support to on numerous occasions in the past. We think that it is important for any nation to have a vibrant exchange of views, but especially important in a totalitarian state such as Iraq for bona fide opposition figures to be in a position to engage in healthy debate. Q: Is the President's speech to the Arab world, has that been broadcast yet by the Voice of America? MCCURRY: It's USIA, through it's WorldNet services, that would make it available to foreign broadcast entities and it has not been -- has been transmitted? LUZZATTO: It's been released, I'm not sure that it's been transmitted MCCURRY: It's been made available to foreign broadcasters for use as they see fit in their own environments. It is clearly designed to coincide with the Security Council's consideration of an expansion of the Oil-for-Food program so we can get humanitarian relief to the people of Iraq who have suffered through and by the decisions of Saddam Hussein for such a long time. Q: But that has not been acted on yet? MCCURRY: It's pending action. The indication is that they're wrapping up and some delegations were awaiting instructions before they finalize it. But it is clearly moving forward with some likelihood that it will be approved. Q: Mike, are you working to cross purposes there? Wouldn't a sustained bombing campaign cause a massive disruption in the Oil-for-Food program? MCCURRY: It would cause me to speculate on what targets might be; I'm not going to do that. Q: Do you have any idea whether this speech would be broadcast in Iraq? We know around Iraq, but what about in Iraq? MCCURRY: I don't know. It would be available -- presumably it will be on satellite and would be available to Iraqi TV. I rather suspect it won't be made available -- who knows. Q: Mike, if I could follow up on that notion, in planning for all of this is there any concern about the Oil-for-Food program? Is it being taken under consideration with regard to not being damaged in the bombing campaign? MCCURRY: I think that that program exists to help the people of Iraq who are suffering, who need food and medicine and need humanitarian relief. There's enormous concern about the type of damage that would be done to Iraqi citizens, precisely because Saddam Hussein has indicated he would wantonly put them in harm's way. I'm not going to speculate on targets and what infrastructure might be damaged. They've had a good assessment that's been done and is available at the U.N. on how the Oil-for-Food program has worked, what they've done over the course of the last year in two separate phases. Iraqi production facilities seem to be in a position to work to move the oil that has been sold to provide that kind of humanitarian relief. Q: What's your understanding of the schedule of Annan's return? In other words, he comes back, he has to spend a day or two briefing the U.N. Do you know what -- MCCURRY: Our understanding is what he indicated publicly at the U.N. upon departure -- he couldn't predict how long it would take, he didn't think it would be interminable, he thought several days. Q: Several days after he returns? MCCURRY: Several days that he would -- he indicated he would be in a position to have dialogue with Iraqi authorities for several days. Q: No, I'm talking about after he comes back? MCCURRY: What happens beyond that is not clear at this point, but presumably he would return and brief the Security Council. Q: Is the Annan mission the last chance to avoid military action with Saddam Hussein? MCCURRY: It is a very good chance for Saddam Hussein to do the right thing. Q: Mike, can you explain a little more about canceling the Vice President's trip and whether any of the President's travels are being reconsidered? MCCURRY: Well, the President intends to -- at this point intends to go ahead with the trip to California next week, but clearly we will assess that on a day-by-day basis. And we will need to see what assessments are made based on Secretary General Annan's mission. Q: Why was the Vice President's trip canceled? To keep him in the country or near Washington, or can you be any more specific? MCCURRY: To keep him, as the President said, nearby and together with the President's other national security advisors so that we could assess the results of the Secretary General's deliberations in Iraq. Q: I understand Secretary Cohen had a trip to South America and South Africa also. MCCURRY: He was to be a part of the Vice President's delegation and then continue to South America and, as the President indicated yesterday, he wanted his national security team in town. Q: The weekend will be devoted to Iraq? MCCURRY: The President will likely have some more discussions with his advisors tomorrow. They're meeting today, will meet tomorrow. I think both times at least some of the participants in the meeting will talk to the President afterwards. Q: Is the President's decision on whether to launch air strikes still a matter of weeks or days away? MCCURRY: I'm not speculating on time tables. Q: Any plans to evacuate American citizens from Iraq? MCCURRY: There are some discussions at the State Department right now about departures that they're ordering. Q: Travel advisement? MCCURRY: Well, the travel information they have updated I think on a pretty regular basis and made it clear that the United States government is advising American citizens about the need to be cognizant of the environment in which they might travel, particularly in that region. Q: They'd have to go over land, right, unless it's -- MCCURRY: I'm not going to speculate on that. Q: Mike, two things: can you tell us how many Americans there are in Iraq right now and can you do the week ahead? MCCURRY: How many -- say again? Q: Americans there are in Iraq right now? MCCURRY: In Iraq? I don't know that we've got that. The State Department can probably tell you more. U.S. citizens there would be there presumably in connection with nongovernmental organizations and/or U.N. programs that are underway there. You're aware that the United Nations has withdrawn some of its personnel -- non-essential personnel -- from Iraq. The State Department is indicating some ordered departures that they're doing in and around the region at this hour. And it's obviously done with the notion of making sure that we're in a position to protect against any contingencies. Q: Mike, can you do the weekend and the week ahead? MCCURRY: I'll do that at the end. Q: Mike, I'm a little behind on this, are you releasing the President's taped statement to us? MCCURRY: Say again? Q: I'm behind on this. Are you releasing, or have you released the President's taped statement to us. MCCURRY: I think it's been released. Yes, it's been released, both the audio, video, and also the text. ................ Q: Mike, have you seen this Solarz-Perle letter, and any reaction to their proposal? They were talking this morning that the United States should vacate Iraq's seat at the U.N., should establish safe havens in both north and south Iraq? MCCURRY: I'll have to look at that. I have not seen that. Q: Did it sound like a serious proposal? MCCURRY: Well, I'd have to look at it more. You may want to follow up with NSC folks on that. Q: You suggested that you didn't want to give away any bombing targets but you have said that you want to limit precision bombing to locations where weapons of mass destruction are being produced. You're not suggesting a change in that? MCCURRY: I have never suggested that or said that, nor would I suggest one way or another what targets might be limited to or include. Q: Well, you do want to limit civilian death, don't you? MCCURRY: Obviously, we always would want to protect non-combatants and try to reduce collateral damage, but war is war. Q: Has there been any move by Saddam to place civilians -- MCCURRY: I'm sorry? Q: Has there been any move by Saddam in the last day to put civilians in places that might be bombed? MCCURRY: There have been various assessments of that and there have been some public statements coming from Baghdad indicating that they are encouraging delegations. We have a concern that they may be encouraging news organizations to send personnel there, and that's obviously something that is, I think, of very serious concern to us. We don't want people to unnecessarily be in harm's way and we would encourage news organizations and all U.S. citizens to follow very carefully the advice that we're giving on travel in and around that region. Q: Which is what? Stay away? MCCURRY: It's available from the State Department, but it certainly alerts people to the high degree of concern about the status of matters in and around Iraq. .............. Q: Mike, could you elaborate a little on what you were saying before about the Iraqis encouraging news organizations to put their people in dangerous places? MCCURRY: We have had some sporadic reports that they are granting visas to local news organizations, presumably people who maybe are not as experienced as others that work for networks and other news organizations, and operating in dangerous climates. And that's a real concern of ours. Q: What do you mean? Granting visas and then encouraging them to go to some particular location? MCCURRY: Encouraging them to come to the country and -- you know, since we are not describing what's safe and what's not safe in Iraq, our concern would be for any U.S. citizen to be there. Q: There were two non-American journalists taking prisoner yesterday in Iraq because they didn't have visas. Is the U.S. getting involved if they are non-Americans? MCCURRY: I doubt very much that we are. I'm not aware of any involvement. Q: Before the '91 war, Marlin Fitzwater warned journalists in Baghdad, said "take cover." Would you do something like that? MCCURRY: I think at the appropriate time -- not so much me -- but I think in the more formal way, we will raise with news organizations concerns that we might have. We have already talked about doing that and talked about the right way to do that. And we of course don't want to do anything that suggests the President has made a decision he has not made. But we also want to deter people from going there in contravention of the kind of travel information we provide -- particularly if we don't think they know how to keep themselves safe. I mean, experienced journalists who operate in war zones know how to cover a war. Our concern has been there may be a lot of people in this day and age when everyone's got a satellite dish who might not understand the right kind of precautions to take. .................. (end transcript)
|
NEWSLETTER
|
| Join the GlobalSecurity.org mailing list |
|
|
|
