Ask the Scholar
Document scope · 1 page
Scholar
Ask about this object, its catalog metadata, its source description, or the page inventory.
For page-specific OCR and visual context, open one of the page chats.
Scholar Source Context
Document identity
localId
323150563
label
Press Conference - Media from Summit Country 7/6/89
core
doc
dtoType
document
citationUrl
pageCount
1
Source metadata
id
323150563
contentType
document
title
Press Conference - Media from Summit Country 7/6/89
citationUrl
identifierLocal
13494-003
collections
Records of the White House Office of Speechwriting (George H. W. Bush Administration)
Speech Draft Files
imageCount
1
hasImages
yes
source
import
hasTranscription
no
Source extras
naId
323150563
levelOfDescription
fileUnit
recordType
description
ocrSource
nara-archive
Single page context
seq
1
pageIndex
0
type
document
mediaId
04d543cbfb69daa7
ocrText
Originally Processed With FOIA(s):
FOIA Number:
S
FOIA
MARKER
This is not a textual record. This is used as an
administrative marker by the George Bush Presidential
Library Staff.
Record Group/Collection:
George H.W. Bush Presidential Records
Collection/Office of Origin:
Speechwriting, White House Office of
Series:
Speech File Draft Files
Subseries:
Chron File, 1989-1993
OA/ID Number:
13494
Folder ID Number:
13494-003
Folder Title:
Press Conference - Media from Summit Country 7/6/89
Stack:
Row:
Section:
Shelf:
Position:
G
25
6
3
7
THE WHITE HOUSE
Office of the Press Secretary
For Immediate Release
July 6, 1989
PRESS CONFERENCE BY THE PRESIDENT
WITH MEDIA FROM SUMMIT COUNTRY
Room 450
Old Executive Office Building
2:00 P.M. EDT
THE PRESIDENT: First I have a brief statement, and then
I'd be glad to take your questions.
Our trip will take us first to Poland, then Hungary --
two countries engaged in unprecedented efforts toward economic and
political reform. The next stop, Paris, to join in the celebration
of France's centennial -- bicentennial -- and to participate in the
15th economic summit. Finally, our journey ends in the Netherlands
for the first ever visit by an American president to one of our
oldest and closest allies.
In Poland and Hungary, our strong support for the
democratic course these nations have chosen will be clear. Their
efforts are not only a new beginning in their own countries, but can
be the beginning of an historic process of European reconciliation,
of ending the artificial division of Europe. We want to help these
countries toward an alternative future, a democratic alternative, and
to help create a Europe that is whole and free.
Certainly, Poland and Hungary face serious economic
problems, and no amount of outside assistance can substitute for
their own sustained efforts. Our challenge is to help create the
condition under which the Poles and the Hungarians can recover
economically and make a successful transition towards democracy.
And, therefore, immediately following this session today, there's
going to be a White House symposium on Eastern Europe. And our aim
is to involve American private sector leaders in the support of
change in Poland and Hungary. In the long run, their participation
is essential if a democracy is to succeed in Eastern Europe.
Our efforts during the economic summit in Paris are just
as critical in helping end the economic and political division of
Europe, and that's why we will propose ways to work together to
assist economic recovery and democratic change in Poland and Hungary.
We believe the Western democracies must coordinate their economic and
technical assistance programs to provide real help at a time of
historic change in these two countries, and help reintegrate their
economies into the global economy.
Our key economic objective at the summit is to sustain
noninflationary growth. And in order to move the international
trading system into the next century, we need to commit to conclude
the Uruguay round negotiations with substantial results in all areas
including agriculture by the end of 1990.
We've already announced new measures to strengthen the
international debt strategy through the Brady plan, with it's
emphasis on economic growth and investment. And to fulfill our
commitment at the Toronto economic summit, beginning October 1, the
U.S. government will forgive official development loans of the
Sub-Saharan countries.
There are other challenges that need to be met. It is
time that a summit address our natural heritage. And let Paris then
MORE
-
2 -
be known as the summit which accepted the environmental challenge.
The U.S. leads the world in environmental protection and research.
We invite others to join in our efforts and to support our goal of a
cleaner, healthier global environment.
Our trip is going to conclude with a visit to the
Netherlands, where we will discuss with Dutch leaders our broad range
of shared interests. This will also be an occasion for celebrating
America's longest unbroken diplomatic relationship and for
reaffirming the vitality of America's roots in Europe and the
strength of our transatlantic ties.
I'll be glad to take questions.
Q
Mr. President, Mr. Gorbachev challenged you again
today to negotiate to eliminate short-range missiles in Europe. Is
the answer still no and always no?
THE PRESIDENT: The answer is to please read carefully
what happened at Brussels, to look at the united NATO position and to
go forward -- and we've had encouraging sounds from the Soviets on
this -- go forward with the agenda at hand -- and that will be the
message. And I don't want to get off track by reopening the SNF
question when we have a good package that has wide support.
The big thing on the post-NATO action is to move forward
in meeting our timetables. And in fairness, I should say I was very
pleased that Mr. Gorbachev made a comment -- I believe it was in
Germany -- that timetable was not too ambitious.
Q
sir, can I follow up on the same question? Mr.
Gorbachev is asking about these tactical forces, who needs them. And
the question does arise, what, if anything, NATO has to fear from
accepting his offer of unilateral cuts on his side, considering that
during the course of any such negotiations NATO would presumably
retain its own tactical capability, as you have suggested, pending
conventional cuts?
THE PRESIDENT: If your question is, would we welcome
unilateral cuts on his side -- certainly. Maybe that wasn't the
question, but that's the answer.
(Laughter.) You left yourself open
by leaving that part of it. Sure
we'd welcome that. That wasn't
what he said, however, over there.
Q
From your remarks, sir, you say you want the Paris
summit to accept the environmental challenge. You want polluters to
pay. Does that mean that you are going with budgetary commitments
and you want the other six nations as well to make budgetary
commitments to make polluters pay?
THE PRESIDENT: Well, I'm not sure we're going to get
into that. I've given our proposals here in the United States for
revisions of the Clean Air Act and things that we feel are important
domestically. By we do support negotiations on other subjects,
leading towards a framework, for example, a framework convention of
global warming. We can focus our efforts on reducing or preventing
pollution at the outset, rather than cleaning it up afterwards.
These are the broad questions we're going to be talking
about. I'm concerned about deforestation and tried to show some
support for that in a trip I took to North Dakota and working with
the head of our environment on reforestation. And I think here's a
question that's going to have enormous interest in the summit. So
it's going to be on these broad tactics, rather than trying to
indicate to our European partners how they should handle their own
domestic pollution problems.
Q
Mr. President, despite your recent success at the
NATO summit, Mr. Gorbachev seems to enjoy far greater popularity in
Western Europe than you do. Why do you think that is, and what can
you do about it?
MORE
- 3 -
THE PRESIDENT: You know something? I don't really care
about that. I'm not interested in that. I am delighted that he
enjoys popularity in Europe. I am delighted when he goes to Germany.
I am pleased when he goes to France. It is good for world peace that
he takes those trips. And I expect he will be delighted when I go to
Poland and when I go to Hungary, for we will be well-received in
those countries.
So we shouldn't view the relationships between East and
West or between the United States and the Soviet Union on who seems
to be popular at the moment. We're not going to get into the
international poll business, even though I read with keen interest a
recent poll taken by the U.S. Information Agency or somebody of that
nature pointing out that the standing of the United States -- I'll
try to be modest -- was pretty darn good in Europe following the NATO
summit. But I would make a tremendous mistake as President of the
United States if I was concerned about Mr. Gorbachev's popularity,
vis a vis my own, in terms of some poll. It's irrelevant.
What's important is how are we going to handle these
major questions that were asked here -- arms control, or economic
recovery, and freedom and democracy in Eastern Europe. These are the
questions. And I might add parenthetically -- you mentioned those
figures or standings -- I don't know whether you're accurate or not.
But even if they are, it doesn't mean I ought to go to Eastern Europe
to try to go one up, try to establish a popularity level in Poland or
Hungary. That's not what sound foreign policy is about. We want to
see these countries in Eastern Europe move more down the road towards
democracy, down the road towards freedom.
And so I have to resist getting into this popularity
thing, other than to say I'm pleased -- I mean it -- I am very
pleased that his standing is good in Europe because that enables us
then to work not only bilaterally, but through NATO and the Pact to
improve things for the people. So it doesn't really concern me.
OF
Mr. President, Solidarity has asked for Western aid
of some $10 billion over three years to fend off what they call
economic disaster. Is there any realistic prospect of the Paris
summit coming up with that kind of sum from the West?
THE PRESIDENT: I do not want to go into sums, but I
doubt that there will be an instant grant of any $10 billion. But
the summit, the G-7, will be addressing itself, themselves, to this
concept of what do we do to help economic recovery. But I said in
these countries -- as I said in my opening statement, though, I think
there is a -- must be a recognition on the part of the Solidarnosc
leaders and the part of the government leaders from all stripes in
Poland that economic reform is essential if the West, through
multilateral institutions or bilaterally, can do its utmost.
Economic reform is essential if we're going to be able to
help the way we'd like. But I hadn't heard the $10 billion figure
from Solidarnosc, but I don't want to raise expectations by saying I
think we can achieve such a number, something of that nature.
Q
Solidarity began as a trade union organization. Do
you see any realistic form of economic reform that is not going to
include the kind of unemployment and inflation which would damage the
interest of its trade union members?
THE PRESIDENT: Well, I would hope I could foresee a kind
of reform that would not include higher inflation. And I think we've
seen in our own country reasoned positions by trade unionists, and I
would hope that those positions would set some example for others.
So economic reform must not encompass ever-higher inflation. It's
got to go just the other way. And that means a restraint on some
demands at someplace along the line. And I have a feeling that the
Solidarnosc leaders understand that -- Solidarity leaders -- and I
expect we will be discussing that.
Q
Mr. President, do you think that --
MORE
- 4 -
THE PRESIDENT: No Americans. (Laughter.) Two
Americans. Go ahead. (Laughter.)
Q
Do you think, Mr. President, that in Paris the G-7
can reach a common position on encouraging democratic reforms in
Eastern Europe? And in your opinion, sir, what will this position --
what should this position be?
THE PRESIDENT: Well,
I think we can have accommodation.
But the last thing we ought to do is appear to be dictating to -- and
fine-tuning the political processes in these countries. I have a
respect, built on some experience in foreign affairs, for the
"internal affairs" of another country. So what we ought to do in the
summit and what I ought to do as President of the United States when
I go to Poland and to Hungary is say, here's what we aspire to. We
find that privatization is the best way. We find that more market
forces in the economy is the best way. Here's our record. Here's
why we feel it is best.
Clearly, if there's
questions -- lingering questions of
human rights and exodus of people
and these questions that the United
States and our Western allies feel very strongly about, we ought to
articulate those. But we ought to stop short of telling them --
because we couldn't get agreement between ourselves, I might add --
on how the political process works.
I'm not going to go over and say, now what you need is a
Democratic Party and a Republican Party and you people over here be
in one and you in another. I don't want to do that and I don't want
to be a part of that at the summit.
But in terms of principles, we
ought to say, here's what works.
Here's what has been effective and
then I can be saying to myself
--
and it's objectively right that you
lighten up as much as you possibly can on human rights -- that you
have as much participation as possible by the people in the political
process.
So it is a fine line here of spelling out what we find,
as the G-7, the best politics and the best way without, on the other
hand, dictating on the internals of Poland and Hungary as they lead
the pack in Eastern Europe towards reform. We want to keep it going,
in other words. So it's a good, tough question and that's -- I'd
leave it fairly general in how we exhort those to go forward with
change.
Q
Sir, the polls show that the Japanese people are
rather upset about your naming Japan as the Super 301 priority
country. Do you still think the Super 301 process is worth the risk
of antagonizing the people in Japan, for example?
THE PRESIDENT: Well, certainly, we don't want to
antagonize the people in Japan. I have certain responsibilities
under our law and I've fulfilled those responsibilities I think.
But let me say this to the Japanese people, if you will.
I am convinced that we can avoid further tension through serious
negotiation on this whole subject,
301 matters. I'm convinced that
if we negotiate openly and fairly, that we can avoid any exacerbation
of these difficulties that you properly say exist. We have plenty of
problems with Japan in terms of access to market. And neither you
nor I have enough time to spell them all out here. But it is because
we have these difficulties in getting access to Japanese markets, for
example, that doesn't mean that we are going to be in some big sulk
around here.
What we're going to try to do is sit down through serious
negotiations and work out the difficulties. And I'm confident that
we can do that. The Japanese-U.S. relationship is very, very
important to the United States. And my interest has to be, above
all, what is in the national interest of the U.S. And one thing
that's in the interest of the U.S. is a strong relationship with
Japan.
MORE
- 5 -
So I don't worry about it. I don't like it when we have
difficulties that arise on this case, or that, or in, as you raise,
this whole matter of 301. But we can overcome that. We're friends
and we've been through a lot together and that relationship will be
strong tomorrow.
Q
Mr. President, what kind of specific economic
measures will you be taking to Poland and Hungary?
THE PRESIDENT: I have to defer because we're not quite
ready to talk about the specifics of -- the specific package that
I'll be discussing with both of those countries -- not finished yet
-- not signed off on it yet.
Q
Surprise, Mr. President -- Oliver North. What did
you think of the --
THE PRESIDENT: Hungarians, is this a -- (laughter.)
Q
What did you think of the sentence imposed on Oliver
North? Are you happy he's not going to jail? Have you ever
considered a pardon?
THE PRESIDENT: One, I'm happy he's not going to jail.
Two, I'm not going to comment further because this matter is under
appeal and it is in the federal courts.
Q
Mr. President, how long do you think -- can you
stick with your S&F position, if we take into consideration that the
pressure of our peoples on both sides of the Atlantic could increase
dramatically on this issue because the allowing of third zero option
is very popular -- it's growing more and more popular?
THE PRESIDENT: Well, that -- I think as long as we have
a solid front in NATO -- as long as the Germans have joined in with
the other countries in NATO behind this common position, we should go
forward to try to implement that common position. And that isn't to
say that someday at some point that other issue will be addressed.
But we've got a good agenda -- an agenda that will be
strongly-welcomed by the German people. This was an agreement that
was hammered out, as you know, from a long -- night-long --
discussions that went on into the night. And I see no reason to
stand here and try to change a collective decision taken by NATO.
Q
You are going to improve your relations with Poland
and Hungary. Do you see any preconditions to improved relationships
with the German Democratic Republic in the forseeable future?
THE PRESIDENT: Yes, I do see preconditions.
Q
What are they?
THE PRESIDENT: A little more democracy. A little more
freedom. A little more openness. Come along with the flow. Things
are changing in Eastern Europe. Don't be lagging way behind -- get
out front. Don't be afraid of democracy and freedom. It isn't going
to hurt anybody. Indeed, it's going to help your people -- that kind
of free advice. And if that happens, why, the United States will be
there. And the same could be said for Czechoslovakia or Romania or
Yugoslavia, of course, having moved in some ways already.
So we're looking for change. We have this policy that we
call differentiation. And it's simply a policy that says, look, if
you can move down that path towards democracy and openness and
freedom of the political process some, why, we'll be there to try to
help you and so will others in the West.
You know, it troubles me in a sense, because I don't want
to, again, get -- dictating the internal affairs, and yet, there are
some principles involved. And I can represent the United States, and
I can say to the leaders in these various countries, if you can move
MORE
- 6 -
in these directions, then we can do more with you. And if you can't,
we can't do more with you and we won't do more with you.
So it's trying to find this common ground and catch this
wave, this wave that's moving through Eastern Europe and, indeed,
around the world of freedom and democracy and things of that nature.
Q
Mr. President, you say that America is leading the
way in environmental issues.
THE PRESIDENT: Yes.
Q All the time, we hear about polluted beaches and air
that's not fit to breathe in the cities. What sort of challenges can
you take to Paris that will be credible?
THE PRESIDENT: I will take the package that I put
forward for domestic consumption, the revisions of the Clean Air Act,
which I think from our preliminary feel have been widely accepted and
received in the countries with whom I'll be meeting -- whose leaders
I'll be meeting with. I will say, look, we all have to do a better
job, and I think the fact that we have been out front on technology
-- I'm not just talking about the billions that we've already spent
trying to clean up the environment and the success we've had in
reduction of emissions, for example, but I'm just talking about our
whole application of science, our whole approach to science has been
out on the cutting edge of environemental reform and making things
better. Again, not preaching or lecturing, but saying, we want to
share this.
I've instructed the head of our EPA, Bill Reilly, a sound
conservationist, to convene a group at the technological level of
scientists and high-tech people to see whether, through sharing
information, we can make things better for countries that can't
afford the science and technology. So it's in this vein that we'll
be talking about it, saying, look, we've got some polluted beaches,
we're trying to do better in getting the -- tracing the flow of
illegal dumping, for example; we're trying to do better. But here's
what we've done, here's how we have approached this problem. If you
have similar problems, we want to share our advice with you and we'd
like to have you give us your advice.
So it will be in that
spirit that I approach the summit
in terms of the environment.
Q
Mr. President, on trade and Super 301, a number of
your summit partners objected to the American actions on the grounds
that America itself maintains a number of trade barriers. I wonder
if you would be able to demonstrate your free trade credentials by
assuring them that you will be reducing trade barriers, in
particular, the steel quotas -- whether you will be eliminating them
or reducing them.
THE PRESIDENT: I will be discussing our desire to move
toward free trade by a complete success at the Uruguay round. And
there's nobody pure in this field -- not the United States, not
France, not Germany, not England -- not any other country; no one is
pure. Nor Japan, sir -- I don't want to leave you out -- (laughter)
-- when it comes to free trade: But we think we do better than most,
and we will continue to press for the elimination of barriers,
including steel. But we've got to be sure that that playing field is
level.
One I want to get -- that I really want to discuss over
there is this question is agriculture; that one is key. And I think
we can make some real progress there, and I'm very pleased that the
negotiators got agriculture put on the agenda.
So I think they have every right to raise the VRAs, and
then we are loaded with 25 cases over here. And then, our big
message is going to be, come on, let's get rid of all this stuff.
Let's be successful at the Uruguay round, let's compete one with the
MORE
- 7 -
other without barriers. And we go there with a little vulnerability,
but also with an awful lot of strength, compared to some of our
trading partners in terms of this question of who is pure on free and
fair trade. That's the open approach, take a few shots, deliver a
few. We're not getting anywhere here -- let's make this Uruguay
round successful.
Q
Mr. President, Mr. Gorbachev has rejected your call
for a Soviet military withdrawal -- troop withdrawal from Poland as
purely propaganda. How do you plead to that? Is it a dead letter
now, or where do you go with it?
THE PRESIDENT: I didn't know that he rejected it; I just
thought he said it was propaganda.
Q
Well, you don't take that as a rejection?
THE PRESIDENT: Well, a lack of enthusiasm, perhaps.
(Laughter.) I wouldn't say rejection. I mean, he's just taken trips
out of Hungary. And who would have said two years ago that that
would happen? We salute that. We think that is good. And so, I'm
not trying to exacerbate problems for him in Poland. I think I was
asked the question, would you like to see the day when there are no
troops in Poland, or something of that nature, and I said, yes. But
-- and he viewed that as political. It's not political; it's a
visceral feeling I have on the question. I think it would be nice to
aspire to that kind of a situation where troops -- he wouldn't feel
troops were necessary -- put it that way. And I would have a feeling
that, at some point, the Polish people might feel that way.
But we're not trying to, as I say, make things more
difficult for him, just as when he goes to France and Germany I don't
think he's trying to make things more difficult for the United
States. We're in a very interesting period of change, and I have
said we want to see perestroika succeed, and I want to see glasnost
succeed. And I'll repeat it here. And my trip over there is not to
try to, through that statement or anything else, drive wedges between
the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe; that's not what 1989 diplomacy
is about. He's talking about a European home. And I'm saying that's
a good concept, but let's be sure a guy can move from room to room;
let's be sure it's open. Let's be sure people can move around in
this home.
So we can discuss all these things, and I'm sorry he
misinterpreted or elected to characterize my view as what you say is
political, but that doesn't change my view, and I don't expect it
changes the view of the people of Poland. But we're not going to be
there trying to raise tensions. We're going to be there trying to
help the Polish people to encourage Poland towards reform, to express
the friendship and affection for Poland that exists in a tremendous
quantity here in this -- in the United States.
And we will be carefully -- very carefully -- discussing
these other relationships -- mainly, I might add, with our European
partners as we did at the NATO summit. But we'll see eye-to-eye on
that; it's going to take a little while.
This is the last one.
Q
Mr. President, don't you feel that there is a
problem because the president in Poland has not been elected yet, and
you arrive with a -- really, a chief of state there?
THE PRESIDENT: Slight complication. But no, that's a
Polish affair. That's a matter for Poland to decide. It's not a
matter for the United States to say, I'm not going there until you
have this all iron-clad, worked out. It's not our business. We will
deal with the Polish leadership. And it complicates -- you know,
your question is a very good one -- knowing what Mr. Jaruzelski's
plans may be with finality, but we'll have good discussions there
with whoever our interlocutors are. Because we're not trying to sort
out those internal developments. That's not the role of the
MORE
8 -
President of the United States. My role is along the lines of my
answer to my last question -- to extend to them whatever help we can,
to tell them we identify with reform and political openness, to
salute the fact that Solidarnosc, that was outlawed when I was in
Poland not so many months ago, is now legal, and to see how we can
work with them as they move forward towards more reform and more
openness.
So I have to deal with what's there, with who is there,
and do it with respect and not look like, well, if you don't have all
your internal political matters sorted out as you begin this march
down democracy's road, well, we won't come to Poland. I mean, I'm
going to deal with who's over there.
And I salute them. It takes -- these are difficult
changes as they sort out who's going to stand for president and who's
not. We've got. to understand that in this country. And we've taken
a long, long time to get to where we are in terms of the stability
that comes from elections every four years. But we can't impose or
say, if you don't agree with us on this formulation that we're going
to hold back or be reluctant to discuss with you the political
situation with whoever you tell us -- say is going to come meet me or
deal with us.
I really am looking forward to that. I'm looking forward
to our trip to Hungary very, very much. And for those of you who may
be new here, the affection for Poland and the affection for Hungary
in broad communities in the United States is really high, it's really
strong. And if I can do nothing else but explain that and say we
want for you to succeed in the exchanges, that visit will be
worthwhile -- even if they haven't sorted out their internal
political situation, with every "t" crossed and every "i" dotted.
It's going to be a good trip.
Thank you all very much.
END
2:40 P.M. EDT