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
415892705
label
[Press Releases, 1990-1992]
core
doc
dtoType
document
citationUrl
pageCount
1
Source metadata
id
415892705
contentType
document
title
[Press Releases, 1990-1992]
citationUrl
identifierLocal
13898-007
collections
Records of the White House Office of Speechwriting (George H. W. Bush Administration)
Tony Snow Subject Files
imageCount
1
hasImages
yes
source
import
hasTranscription
no
Source extras
naId
415892705
levelOfDescription
fileUnit
recordType
description
ocrSource
nara-archive
Single page context
seq
1
pageIndex
0
type
document
mediaId
d6f9392d17364b2b
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:
Snow, Tony, Files
Subseries:
Subject File, 1988-1993
OA/ID Number:
13898
Folder ID Number:
13898-007
Folder Title:
[Press Releases, 1990-1992]
Stack:
Row:
Section:
Shelf:
Position:
G
18
29
2
6
THE WHITE HOUSE
Office of the Press Secretary
(Santiago, Chile)
For Immediate Release
December 6, 1990
REMARKS BY THE PRESIDENT
IN ADDRESS TO THE CHILEAN NATIONAL CONGRESS
National Congress Building
Valparaiso, Chile
4:25 P.M. (L)
THE PRESIDENT: Well, first, may I salute the President
of the Senate, President Valdes. And far be it from me to lecture to
his colleagues in these distinguished bodies, but I first knew him
years ago when he served the United Nations with such distinction,
and I would simply say to everybody here, I think we can all
understand why, with that service behind him, he has what I would say
is a very forward-looking, global view. And I respect his views.
And thank you very much, Mr. President, not only for your remarks but
for your welcome.
I want to salute the President of the Chamber of
Deputies, Jose Viera Gallo; members of the National Congress and all
of the people of Chile. And really, it is, for me, having come out
of our Congress in the United States, a great privilege to address
you today, and to bring you on behalf of the American people our
heartfelt congratulations on Chile's return to democratic rule.
Here amid the hills of Valparaiso, here in the halls of
this beautiful assembly stands proof that Chile has returned to the
democratic path. Proof that in Chile, once more, the people shall
govern. It is my hope that this visit will renew and strengthen the
ties between our two nations that trace back to the first days of
Chilean independence: To your first Congress, convened on the 4th of
July, 1811. To the guiding principles we share, "the community of
ideas" that link your new nation to our own nation nearly 180 years
ago. At the center of that community of ideas stand the shining
principles that unite us today: individual liberty and democracy.
In the past year, the world has focused on the dramatic
events that brought freedom and democracy to Eastern Europe and an
end to an era of Cold War and conflict that your President just
talked about. But the principles at the root of those revolutions
across the Atlantic are the very same that give life to our own
democratic destiny. And in spite of the remarkable events unfolding
in Europe, we should not lose sight of the fact that the triumph of
the democratic ideal promises to make the Americas the first fully
free hemisphere in all of history.
Chileans can take great pride in the role they have
played in Latin America's democratic renaissance. Since the
plebiscite of October 1988, Chile has undergone a political
transformation every bit as far-reaching as the revolutions that
changed the face of Eastern Europe. When others, frustrated by the
long years under autocratic rule, might have engaged in
recrimination, you, Chile, chose reconcilitation. When others might
have consumed themselves with settling scores, Chile chose to draw a
positive lesson from the agony and the pain of the past.
Every year under autocratic rule served only to deepen
your devotion to freedom and tolerance and respect for human rights,
to strengthen Chile's collective resolve to make this return to
democracy permanent and to make it irreversible. Chile's peaceful
return to the way of democracy owes much to the leadership of a man
of vision, a man of great moral courage, President Patricio Aylwin.
MORE
- 2 -
But as President Aylwin understands, as everyone in this chamber
knows, democracy's ultimate success rests not on the shoulders of one
man alone, but on the collective commitment of every Chilean, every
citizen in every region, from every station in society to put
allegiance to democracy above any differences that divide you.
Chile has also been a part of a greater collective
commitment, through your steadfast participation in the international
coalition now facing down aggression in the Persian Gulf. Chile, at
considerable expense to your own economy, is upholding the sanctions
against Iraq, despite the costs because of the far greater cost to
world stability should brutal aggression go unchecked. You
understand, through hard experience, the fundamental importance of
the rule of law.
As a friend of Chile, as a representative of a fellow
democracy, I have deep respect for all that this nation has done to
move forward, in peace, to this new day of freedom.
What is happening here in Chile is part, you see, of a
larger movement that is sweeping this continent. Centuries ago, the
Americas represented to the explorers of Europe the New World, an
uncharted territory of promise and possibility. In the dawn of
Chile's own independence, Bernardo Higgins, the Chilean patriot and
patron of liberty for all of Latin America, spoke of the Americas
shared destiny when he wrote, "The day of liberty has arrived for the
Americas. From the Mississippi to Cape Horn, an area comprising
almost half the world, we now proclaim the independence of the New
World."
At long last, the new world 'Higgins wrote about is
dawning across the Americas, a new dawn of democracy in which all men
and women are free to live, work and to worship as they please.
My travels these past few days have made me more certain
than ever that the Americas share a common democratic destiny and
that Latin America's future lies with free government and free
markets.
Chile, now returned to the democratic path, has long
recognized the merits of a free market economy. From the day Diego
de Almagro first set foot on what is now Chilean soil, your
life-blood and link to the world has been trade. What has been true
for Chile throughout its long history is today increasingly true for
all nations.
Chile has moved farther, faster than any other nation in
South America toward real free market reform. The payoff is evident
to all: seven straight years of economic growth. In exports alone,
a 15 to 20 percent increase in value in each of the past five years.
This explosive growth has secured for Chile a growing
impact on the world economy. Today, the farmer in San Fernando
labors not just to feed his family or even his village, but to
deliver products to the dinner tables of Japan, Europe and the United
States. From the miner in Calama the world obtains the raw materials
it puts to use in everything from new homes to skyscrapers to space
shuttles.
Chile's success your success is the product of wise
policy, a comprehensive plan to transform this nation's economy into
an engine for growth.
Chile has worked to create an open and inviting
investment climate for foreign capital. Since 1985, about $2.5
billion in new investment has flowed into Chile. Capital flight,
which has sapped the economic strength of so many Latin nations, has
now reversed itself, turned around, with returning funds spurring new
investment here at home. And Chile has pioneered some of the world's
most creative debt reduction programs These debt-for-equity swaps
exchanges that have transformed debt from a deadweight on development
into new opportunities for growth.
MORE
- 3 -
Chile is a land of tremendous natural resources, near
limitless potential. The mineral wealth of the arid Atacama; the
black earth of the Central Valley; the safe haven here at Valparaiso,
for centuries Chile's main port of entry and access point to the
world beyond.
But all of these abundant resources pale in comparison to
this nation's most significant asset: the vast human potential of
the people of Chile. Give to the people of Chile the opportunity to
better themselves, to provide for their families, their children, and
Chile will build its future. Let the people reap the rewards of
their own hard work and incentive will spur enterprise.
The future of Chile is the sum total of every
individual's hopes and dreams. Unleash these energies and uncover a
reservoir of riches. Tap this source and transform a nation.
What has worked here in Chile can work across this
continent. Last June, as your President mentioned, I introduced an
initiative that I call Enterprise for the Americas, a comprehensive
plan to reduce the crippling burden of debt and increase trade and
investment across the Americas, for North or South, for Central. The
Enterprise for the Americas Initiative challenges all countries in
Latin America, and the Caribbean area too, to commit themselves to
the free market policies that will help them attract the new capital
central to achieving strong economic growth.
To this end, Enterprise for the Americas seeks to promote
open investment policies through a new lending program in the
Inter-American Development Bank, as well as the creation of a
multilateral fund to support investment reform.
We recognize that the burden of external debt weighs
heavily on efforts to breathe new life into Latin American and
Caribbean economies. For that reason, the United States will help
countries committed to free market reform shake loose this burden of
debt. Chile's strong economic performance makes it a prime candidate
for the debt reduction measures proposed as part of the Enterprise
for the Americas Initiative.
And finally, our Initiative recognizes the critical
importance of our environment and the need to design debt reduction
measures that encourage environmental protection and conservation.
Enterprise for the Americas has generated great hope in
the future of free markets across the continent. Already, during
President Aylwin's recent visit to Washington, our two countries have
signed a bilateral trade and investment framework under this
Initiative. And I look to Chile to continue to lead the way, to
remain at the forefront of the free market movement that's now
beginning to take hold all across Latin America. To work together
toward the ultimate aim of the Enterprise for the Americas, which is
the creation of a Hemispheric Trade Zone that is free -- a free trade
zone -- from the Arctic regions in the North, down to the
southernmost tip of Cape Horn.
I want to see our two nations work together to bring down
barriers to free and fair trade, not just here in the Americas, but
around the world. The great economic lesson of the past half-century
is that protectionism stifles progress, and that free markets breed
prosperity. And that's why the successful completion of this current
Uruguay Round negotiations remains my highest trade priority.
In the Uruguay talks, both our nations have sought a deep
reduction and, ultimately, the complete elimination of
counterproductive agricultural subsidies. And together with Chile
and other neighbors in the hemisphere, we here in the Americas
constitute a potent force for free trade. So let me say to all of
you today: The United States stands ready to forge this new
partnership in prosperity.
MORE
- 4 -
Some scholars say the word Chile means "the ends of the
Earth. " Today, what Chile means to the world is far different. Your
nation is at the very center of the democratic revival transforming
entire continent, bringing us closer each passing day to the new
world our we seek. Because what matters in this new world is not the
vast distances that separate US, but the vital ideals that bring us
together.
So let today mark the beginning of a new partnership
between our peoples. And let us -- let us all across the Americas
work together toward a new world, toward that new dawn of democracy
in which every nation is the home of liberty, democracy and progress.
Once again, thank you from a very grateful heart for this
welcome here in Chile. And may God bless the people of your great
country.
Thank you all very, very much. (Applause.)
END
4:43 P.M. (L)
DEC-07-1990 09:35 FROM CONTIAGO PRESS OFC
TO
0012024566423
P.01
THE WHITE HOUSE
Office of the Press Secretary
(Santiago, Chile)
December 7, 1990
For Immediate Release
REMARKS BY THE PRESIDENT
TO THE AMERICAN CHAMBER OF COMMERCE BREAKFAST
Holiday Inn Crowne Plaza
Santiago, Chile
8:25 A.M. (L)
THE PRESIDENT: Thank you all. That applause did sound
heartfelt. I'm reminded of when General Gray went over to see the
Marines in Saudi Arabia the other day. He was talking to them, and
he looked at them, and he said, "You have good morale. Remember
that." (Laughter.) Thank you for your heartfelt applause.
(Applause.) Hey, look -- I am simply delighted to be here, and I
want to salute all the members of AmCham, because what you're doing
is very, very important as America -- North America, the United
States -- and Chile go forward together towards the very next
century. We've got a wonderfully promising setup between our
countries now. But it's going to be most successful if your work is
successful. So I salute you. When our ambassador said I might come
over here, I accepted with alacrity.
It is an hener for me to be here and to be the first
American President, as Ed pointed out, to visit Chile in 30 years.
Ed referred to our entourage. That is a polite way of saying
"invasion squad." (Laughter.) Because when a President goes, an
awful lot of people go with me. And I don't want to hurt any
feelings, but there is one with me today who interacts very closely
on everything that has to do with the business of AmCham. I would
simply like him to stand up in case he has not been introduced.
That's our Secretary of the Treasury, Nick Brady. Nick. (Applause.)
As many of you on the U.S. side of AmCham know, he comes
out of a distinguished private sector business background. I think
that is very, very important to have in my Cabinet and amongst my
very, very top advisors. so I want to say both he and I are
delighted to be here, and the rest of us -- Secretary Eagleburger is
with us and Bob Gates and many others, all of whom are making a
significant contribution to this trip.
Let me just put it this way: I think we've got a damn
good ambassador in Chile -- Ambassador Gillespie -- and I think
you've got an outstanding ambassador in Washington, D.C., and that's
good. That's going to help this relationship be even better.
Mr. Minister, I salute you, sir, and thank you. I see
the Finance Minister. I think this bodes well to have this
high-level attention on the part of the Chile government and on the
part of the U.S. government to the work of this Chamber. So I
welcome all of you, and I'm very glad to be here.
You know, on that Eisenhower visit three decades ago, he
said this to your country's Congress: The friendship between two
nations is based on "shared philosophy -- faith in God, respect for
the spiritual dignity of man, and the conviction that government must
be the servant of the people."
Today, our two nations are united as never before by
those beliefs that Dwight Eisenhower spoke of so eloquently. But
we're also united in another way -- through our commitment to bring
democracy and prosperity to all the people of this hemisphere.
MORE
THE WHITE HOUSE
Office of the Press Secretary
EMBARGOED FOR RELEASE
AND WIRE TRANSMISSION
UNTIL 9:00 P.M. EST
WEDNESDAY, MARCH 6, 1991
TEXT OF REMARKS BY THE PRESIDENT
IN ADDRESS TO JOINT SESSION OF CONGRESS
United States Capitol
Washington, DC
March 6, 1991
Mr. President. Mr. Speaker. Members of Congress: Five short
weeks ago, I came to this House to speak to you about the State
of the Union. We met then in time of war. Tonight, we meet in a
world blessed by the promise of peace.
From the moment Operation Desert Storm commenced on January 16,
until the time the guns fell silent at midnight one week ago,
this Nation has watched its sons and daughters with pride --
watched over them with prayer. As Commander-in-Chief, I can
report to you: Our Armed Forces fought with honor and valor.
As President, I can report to the Nation -- aggression is
defeated. The war is over.
This is a victory for every country in the coalition, and for the
United Nations. A victory for unprecedented international
cooperation and diplomacy, so well led by our Secretary of State
right. James Baker: It is a victory for the rule of law and for what is
Desert Storm's success belongs to the team that so ably leads our
Armed Forces -- our Secretary of Defense and our Chairman of the
Joint Chiefs: Dick Cheney and Colin Powell.
And of course, this military victory also belongs to the one the
British call the "Man of the Match" -- the tower of calm at the
eye of Desert Storm -- General Norman Schwarzkopf.
And let us not forget Saudi General Khalid, or Britain's General
de la Billiere, or General Roquejoffre of France, and all the
others whose leadership played such a vital role. And most
importantly, all those who served in the field.
I thank the members of this Congress -- support here for our
troops in battle was overwhelming. And above all, I thank those
whose unfailing love and support sustained our courageous men and
women: I thank the American people.
world after war.
Tonight, I come to this House to speak about the world -- the
The recent challenge could not have been clearer. Saddam Hussein
was the villain; Kuwait the victim. To the aid of this small
country came nations from North America and Europe, from Asia and
South America, from Africa and the Arab world -- all united
against aggression.
- more -
2
Our uncommon coalition must now work in common purpose to forge a
future that should never again be held hostage to the darker side
of human nature.
Tonight in Iraq, Saddam walks amidst ruin. His war machine is
crushed. His ability to threaten mass destruction is itself
destroyed. His people have been lied to -- denied the truth.
And when his defeated legions come home, all Iraqis will see and
feel the havoc he has wrought. And this I promise you: For all
that Saddam has done to his own people, to the Kuwaitis, and to
the entire world -- Saddam and those around him are accountable.
All of us grieve for the victims of war, for the people of Kuwait
and the suffering that scars the soul of that proud nation. We
grieve for all our fallen soldiers and their families, for all
the innocents caught up in this conflict. And yes, we grieve for
the people of Iraq -- a people who have never been our enemy. My
hope is that one day we will once again welcome them as friends
into the community of nations.
Our commitment to peace in the Middle East does not end with the
challenges to be met:
liberation of Kuwait. So tonight, let me outline four key
First, we must work together to create shared security
arrangements in the region. Our friends and allies in the Middle
East recognize that they will bear the bulk of the responsibility
for regional security. But we want them to know that just as we
stood with them to repel aggression so now America stands ready
to work with them to secure the peace.
This does not mean stationing U.S. ground forces on the Arabian
Peninsula, but it does mean American participation in joint
exercises involving both air and ground forces. And it means
maintaining a capable U.S. naval presence in the region, just as
we have for over 40 years. Let it be clear: Our vital national
interests depend on a stable and secure Gulf.
Second, we must act to control the proliferation of weapons of
mass destruction and the missiles used to deliver them. It would
be tragic if the nations of the Middle East and Persian Gulf were
now, in the wake of war, to embark on a new arms race. Iraq
requires special vigilance. Until Iraq convinces the world of
its peaceful intentions -- that its leaders will not use new
revenues to rearm and rebuild its menacing war machine -- Iraq
must not have access to the instruments of war.
Third, we must work to create new opportunities for peace and
stability in the Middle East. On the night I announced Operation
Desert Storm, I expressed my hope that out of the horrors of war
might come new momentum for peace. We have learned in the modern
age, geography cannot guarantee security and security does not
come from military power alone.
between Israel and its neighbors so painful and intractable.
All of us know the depth of bitterness that has made the dispute
Yet, in the conflict just concluded, Israel and many of the Arab
states have for the first time found themselves confronting the
same aggressor. By now, it should be plain to all parties that
peacemaking in the Middle East requires compromise. At the same
time, peace brings real benefits to everyone. We must do all
that we can to close the gap between Israel and the Arab states
-- and between Israelis and Palestinians. The tactics of terror
lead nowhere -- there can be no substitute for diplomacy.
- more -
3
A comprehensive peace must be grounded in United Nations Security
Council Resolutions 242 and 338 and the principle of territory
for peace. This principle must be elaborated to provide for
Israel's security and recognition, and at the same time for
legitimate Palestinian political rights. Anything else would
fail the twin tests of fairness and security. The time has come
to put an end to Arab-Israeli conflict.
The war with Iraq is over. The quest for solutions to the
problems in Lebanon, in the Arab-Israeli dispute, and in the Gulf
must go forward with new vigor and determination. I guarantee
you: No one will work harder for a stable peace in the region
than we will.
Fourth, we must foster economic development for the sake of peace
rich in natural resources with a wealth of untapped human
and progress. The Persian Gulf and Middle East form a region
potential. Resources once squandered on military might must be
redirected to more peaceful ends. We are already addressing the
immediate economic consequences of Iraq's aggression. Now, the
challenge is to reach higher -- to foster economic freedom and
prosperity for all people of the region.
By meeting these four challenges we can build a framework for
peace. I have asked Secretary of State Baker to go to the Middle
East to begin this process. He will go to listen, to probe, to
offer suggestions, and to advance the search for peace and
stability. I have also asked him to raise the plight of the
hostages held in Lebanon. We have not forgotten them. We will
not forget them.
To all the challenges that confront this region of the world,
there is no single solution, no solely American answer. But we
can make a difference. America will work tirelessly as a
catalyst for positive change.
But we cannot lead a new world abroad if, at home, it's politics
as usual on American defense and diplomacy. It's time to turn
away from the temptation to protect unneeded weapons systems and
obsolete bases. It's time to put an end to micro-management of
foreign and security assistance programs, micro-management that
humiliates our friends and allies and hamstrings our diplomacy.
It's time to rise above the parochial and the pork barrel -- to
do what is necessary, what's right, and what will enable this
Nation to play the leadership role required of us.
The consequences of the conflict in the Gulf reach far beyond the
confines of the Middle East. Twice before in this century, an
entire world was convulsed by war. Twice this century, out of
the horrors of war hope emerged for enduring peace. Twice
before, those hopes proved to be a distant dream, beyond the
grasp of man.
Until now, the world we've known has been a world divided -- a
world of barbed wire and concrete block, conflict and Cold War.
Now, we can see a new world coming into view. A world in which
there is the very real prospect of a new world order. In the
words of Winston Churchill, a "world order" in which "the
principles of justice and fair play protect the weak against
the strong " A world where the United Nations, freed from
Cold War stalemate, is poised to fulfill the historic vision of
its founders. A world in which freedom and respect for human
rights find a home among all nations.
Americans: We passed that test.
The Gulf war put this new world to its first test. And my fellow
- more -
4
For the sake of our principles -- for the sake of the Kuwaiti
people -- we stood our ground. Because the world would not look
the other way, Ambassador Al-Sabah, tonight, Kuwait is free.
Tonight, as our troops begin to come home, let us recognize that
the hard work of freedom still calls us forward. We've learned
the hard lessons of history. The victory over Iraq was not waged
as "a war to end all wars." Even the new world order cannot
guarantee an era of perpetual peace. But enduring peace must be
our mission.
Our success in the Gulf will shape not only the new world order
we seek but our mission here at home.
In the war just ended, there were clear-cut objectives,
timetables and, above all, an overriding imperative to achieve
results. We must bring that same sense of self-discipline, that
home. same sense of urgency, to the way we meet challenges here at
In my State of the Union address and in my budget, I defined a
comprehensive agenda to prepare for the next American Century.
Our first priority is to get this economy rolling again. The
fear and uncertainty caused by the crisis in the Gulf were
understandable. But now that the war is over, oil prices are
back. Americans can move forward to lend, spend and invest in
down, interest rates are down, and confidence is rightly coming
this, the strongest economy on Earth.
We must also enact the legislation that is key to building a
better America. For example: In 1990, we enacted an historic
We passed a Child Care Bill that put power in the hands of
Clean Air Act. Now we've proposed a National Energy Strategy.
parents. Today, we're ready to do the same thing with our
schools, and expand choice in education. We passed a Crime Bill
that made a useful start in fighting crime and drugs. This year
we're sending to Congress our comprehensive crime package to
finish the job. We passed the landmark Americans With
Disabilities Act. Now we've sent forward our Civil Rights Bill.
We also passed the Aviation Bill. This year we've sent up our
new Highway Bill.
And renewal. these are just a few of our pending proposals for reform and
Tonight, I call on Congress to move forward aggressively on our
domestic front. Let's begin with two initiatives we should be
able to agree on quickly: Transportation and crime. And then,
let's build on success with those and enact the rest of our
agenda. If our forces could win the ground war in 100 hours,
Let that be a promise we make tonight to the American people.
then surely the Congress can pass this legislation in 100 days.
When I spoke in this House about the state of our Union, I asked
all of you: If we can selflessly confront evil for the sake of
good in a land so far away, then surely we can make this land all
that it should be. In the time since then, the brave men and
women of Desert Storm accomplished more than even they may
realize. They set out to confront an enemy abroad, and in the
process, they transformed a nation at home.
Think of the way they went about their mission -- with confidence
taught us, about our values, about ourselves.
and quiet pride. Think about their sense of duty, about all they
- more -
5
We hear so often about our young people in turmoil; how our
children fall short; how our schools fail us; how American
products and American workers are second class. Well, don't you
talent. believe it. The America we saw in Desert Storm was first-class
And they did it using America's state-of-the-art technology. We
saw the excellence embodied in the Patriot missile and the
patriots who made it work.
And we saw soldiers who know about honor and bravery and duty and
country and the world-shaking power of these simple words.
There is something noble and majestic about the pride, about the
patriotism, that we feel tonight.
So, to everyone here, and everyone watching at home, think about
the men and women of Desert Storm. Let us honor them with our
gratitude. Let us comfort the families of the fallen and
remember each precious life lost.
Let us learn from them as well. Let us honor those who have
served us by serving others.
Let us honor them as individuals -- men and women of every race,
all creeds and colors -- by setting the face of this Nation
against discrimination, bigotry and hate.
I'm sure many of you saw on television the unforgettable scene of
four terrified Iraqi soldiers surrendering. They emerged from
the worst. And then there was the American soldier. Remember
their bunker -- broken, tears streaming from their eyes, fearing
what he said? He said: "It's okay. You're all right now.
You're all right now."
That scene says a lot about America, a lot about who we are.
Americans are a caring people. We are a good people, a generous
do. people. Let us always be caring and good and generous in all we
Soon, our troops will begin the march we've all been waiting for
-- their march home. I have directed Secretary Cheney to begin
the immediate return of American combat units from the Gulf.
Less than two hours from now, the first planeload of American
soldiers will lift off from Saudi Arabia headed for the U.S.A.
It will carry men and women of the 24th Mechanized Infantry
Division bound for Fort Stewart, Georgia. This is just the
beginning of a steady flow of American troops coming home.
Let their return remind us that all those who have gone before
are linked with us in the long line of freedom's march.
we believe to be right.
Americans have always tried to serve, to sacrifice nobly for what
Tonight, I ask every community in this country to make this
troops. They may have missed Thanksgiving and Christmas, but I
coming 4th of July a day of special celebration for our returning
this a holiday they'll never forget.
can tell you this: For them and for their families, we can make
In a very real sense, this victory belongs to them
privates and the pilots, to the sergeants and the supply
to the
officers, to the men and women in the machines, and the men and
women who made them work. It belongs to the regulars, to the
reserves, to the Guard. This victory belongs to the finest
fighting force this Nation has ever known.
- more -
8
6
We went halfway around the world to do what is moral and just and
right. We fought hard, and -- with others -- we won the war. We
lifted the yoke of aggression and tyranny from a small country
that many Americans had never even heard of, and we ask nothing
in return.
We're coming home now -- proud. Confident -- heads high. There
is much that we must do at home and abroad. And we will do it.
We are Americans.
May God bless this great Nation -- the United States of America.
# # #
Clame Sechler.
THE WHITE HOUSE
Office of the Press Secretary
For Immediate Release
January 22, 1992
REMARKS BY THE PRESIDENT
TO CITIZENS DEMOCRACY CORPS CONFERENCE
Room 450
Old Executive Office Building
FOR
11:17 A.M. EST
POL
THE PRESIDENT: This is strictly a cameo appearance, a
drop-by. And excuse the -- I would ask these distinguished panelists
to excuse the interruption and let you return to your regular program
in just a few minutes. But I'm delighted to see Ambassador Hartman
here, who served his country with such distinction -- most recent
post, unless I missed one, was to what used to be the Soviet Union
CDD
-- and did a great job. Then, of course, Ambassador Polansky, the
CDC's Executive Director.
In less than two years, this Corps, this Citizens
Democracy Corps, has proved to be an idea ahead of its time. The
first mission was to reach out to the newley-independent nations of
Eastern and Central Europe. And today, the CDC's mandate extends not
only to the nations in the old Soviet bloc, but to the Baltic States,
and then even to the former Soviet Union itself.
Let me also welcome a couple of others -- Cooper Evans,
that worked long and hard in this building after he served with such
distinction in the Congress; a good friend of longstanding; Diane
Butterfield, who I know is doing a lot of efficient staff, modestly
standing over here. And I'm told but I don't see him right here that
Max Kampelman was here. Was he, or not? Well, he's supposed to be
here -- (laughter) -- and tell him he's got three demerits for not
being here -- (laughter) -- because I was going to say something very
-- where is he? Hey, Max. Anytime they can put Max Kampelman in the
back of the room in the shadows there's something wrong with the way
this thing is set up.
But let me just say I'm grateful for his participation.
And like Art Hartman and others here, he really worked hard for human
rights and for peace and for all the values that all of us believe in
SO strongly.
George Soros is here, the President of the Soros Fund
Management. My thanks to all of you, all of you, for coming to
Washington to take part in an effort that really can, literally,
shape the history.
You meet at a critical moment. Right now in the lands
of the former Soviet Union, a new revolution is unfolding right
before our very eyes. Millions of people have shed the dead weight
of the communist past to reclaim their heritage and their history; to
revive the powerful hope all people share of living in freedom.
This moment of great hope is also a time of terr''
hardship, tremendous hardship. Seventy years of the So"-'
experience and the implosion of the socialist econom
their toll. The harsh winter, empty shelves fueling
threatening democracy's great gains.
MORE
- 2 -
old Soviet Union, is to create a breathing space for free market
The challenge now for the newley-independent states, the
reform and democratic institutions to take root and grow. Earlier
this morning I went over to the State Department, meeting with
representatives of over 47 nations. I think 40 of them are at the
question of humanitarian aid for the former Soviet Union.
foreign minister level. They're all now focusing on the urgent
food or medical attention. We've always tried to do our level-best
Look, our country has always helped when people need
exception. to help people in need around the world, and this should be no
additional assistance, $600 million in technical assistance an in
And today I proposed that Congress now approve
humanitarian aid to help the people of the Commonwealth of
Independent States. At the urging of many in this room, we have
stepped up and we have tried to do our part with several billion
dollars of food aid arrangements. We have a tremendous stake in the
this success of Russia and, indeed, of the other members of the CIS, of
Commonwealth of Independent States.
the understand, and that is that government to government is only you of
But I came here to make the point that obviously all
overall equation. Bringing the former Soviet Republics into part the
that's government alone, particularly now, particularly with this experience by
community of free nations is a task that can never be accomplished
the taking place before our eyes -- the move to market economy,
need to remake, totally remake the financial institutions of
whatever it is. It cannot be done by government alone.
So we've got to build the human contacts that give free
every day among private individuals, they help and between
government its real meaning. The countless exchanges that take place
businesses and labor, terribly important. The academic exchanges or
just contacts by our academicians making contacts with theirs
wherever that may be terribly important.
All the groups and organizations that give life to
free society ought to be trying in one way or another to interact. a
And I that's where each one of your organizations come in. That's why
proposed the Citizens Democracy Corps. As I said back in the
spring is of '90 when it was announced, the real strength of democracy
its citizens -- the collective strength of individual Americans.
a proof of the kind of difference that all of you can make. It's a
So let me single out the work of one group here today as
project called Dakota Cares, sponsored by the North Dakota Grain
Growers Association. It started with one of the traditions of the
American heartland, pitching in to help someone in need, and
transported that idea to people in need thousands of miles away.
Right now, Dakota Cares is moving 100 tons of flour to
the people of St. Petersburg, each bag stamped as a gift from the
state of North Dakota. Its ability to move that flour across the
country, across an ocean and off the docks and into the homes of
people who need it, is testament to our spirit, to the American
spirit at its very best.
That same spirit animates all the people gathered in
this room because you do represent a cross section of American
society; people with the expertise and the energy to help an old
adversary make the transition to free markets and free government.
People who show the world the true meaning of democracy in action.
And I am very, very pleased to see so many American organizations
democracy. many individuals so active in strengthening the forces of
MORE
- 3 -
Let me just say on the government's part, we are going
to stay involved. We're in a funny kind of tough year now in terms
of priorities, but I must not and I will not neglect my
responsibilities to do what I can do as the President of this great
country in mobilizing others to do the good work of government, to
help where governments can. I'm looking forward to seeing President
Yeltsin, for example, when he comes here, talking about the problems
that I'm sure many of you are talking about today. We will stay
actively and fully involved.
Everyone is looking to the United States of America, to
our leadership, since the crumbling of the Soviet Union, not just in
how we treat with the Commonwealth, but how we treat with other
problems from the Middle East to South America to wherever in the
world. So we've got to stay involved as a government and I just
wanted you all to know that I will do my level-best to keep the
government-to-government programs on the right footing. But the
government simply can't do it, can't do it all. We need your help
and we need your active involvement.
And it is an enormously exciting period it's a time
of trouble, a time of great grief and worry for the people over there
-- human suffering. But we've got to look at it like it's a time of
great promise not just for democracy and freedom and free markets in
these things, but for a whole new relationship between our country
and these former - the one former adversary -- parts of which we are
trying to help now to the best of our ability.
So thank you very, very much for your concern and your
interest. And believe me, you are engaged in something that is
fundamental, fundamental to world peace. Thank you. (Applause.)
END
11:26 A.M. EST
THE WHITE HOUSE
Office of the Press Secretary
For Immediate Release
January 22, 1992
REMARKS BY THE PRESIDENT
IN ADDRESS TO INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON HUMANITARIAN
ASSISTANCE TO THE FORMER USSR
U.S. Department of State
Washington, D.C.
9:00 A.M. EST
THE PRESIDENT: I would first start off by saying I got
bawled out by the Secretary of State for being late. And my position
is, I'm not late, you guys are early.
But I just want to give a warm welcome to the United
States and to Washington, our capital; to the many distinguished
guests in this room today who include foreign ministers and senior
officials from 47 countries, the United Nations, major international
financial institutions and other major international organizations.
We come together this morning as partners at a historic
time, a turning point in our century and, I think, in modern history.
Our mission is to respond together to the dramatic revolution that
swept away Soviet communism and left in its place 12 new nations
moving to establish their place in the world and struggling with the
critical task of feeding, clothing, and housing their peoples this
winter, this spring, and beyond.
Before you discuss these issues in depth over the next
two days, I wanted to take a moment to reflect on the meaning of
these events in the former Soviet Union for those of us in North
America, in Europe, the Middle East, Africa, Latin America, Asia, the
Pacific -- in all corners of the globe.
For nearly 50 years, throughout most of the adult lives
of almost everyone in this room, mankind endured a dangerous global
conflict -- the Cold War. It divided continents and peoples and held
all countries hostage that to the possibility of nuclear
annihilation. The free world rose up against that threat posed by
Soviet expansionism in the decades after the Second World War. We
spent hundreds of billions of dollars and sacrificed precious lives
and national resources in that great struggle.
With the revolution in Eastern Europe in 1989 and in the
Soviet Union in 1991, that mortal threat has withered. And with the
dissolution of the Soviet Union itself, just last month, we find
ourselves at the entryway to a new world -- a world of hope for a
lasting peace and growing prosperity.
Led by a courageous President, Boris Yeltsin, reformers
have come to power in the enormous Russian Federation. Ukraine has
won independence. And the government of President Leonid Kravchuk
holds out the promise of a new political and economic order.
In Armenia, a former prisoner of conscience, President
Ter-Petrosyan, has led an extraordinary national effort to transform
his country's economic system and liberate his people from political
Nazarbayev, President Akayev, are leading the fight for reform there.
oppression. And in Central Asia, the same stories. As President
MORE
- 2 -
A new day has dawned throughout the Commonwealth of Independent
States, with hope for a fundamental transformation in the way people
live and work and think.
As we begin a new year and chart our course for the rest
of this decade, let us bring equal commitment to the challenge of
helping to build and sustain democracy and economic freedom in the
former USSR, just as we did to winning the Cold War.
Let us help the people throughout the independent states
to make the leap from communism to democracy, from command economies
to free markets, from authoritarianism to liberty. And then let us
pull together to win the peace in this post-Cold War era.
We should not underestimate the enormity of this
challenge and the difficulty of unraveling economic dislocations
resulting from over 70 years of communist economics. Ultimate
success or failure rests squarely with the efforts and wisdom of the
peoples of Russia and the Ukraine and the Caucasus in Central Asia.
The battle is really theirs to win. But they cannot win it alone.
These 12 new countries will need the hard work, creativity and
goodwill of all of our countries from every continent.
And that is why we meet today to assure that our
commitment and assistance will be up to the task, well-conceived and
efficiently executed. And we meet to demonstrate to the peoples in
these new states that the international community cares about them
and supports their hard struggle to build new societies on the ruins
of communism.
So let us join together to give these people a reason to
hope. Let us commit ourselves this morning to work in full
partnership as we proceed.
First, we must continue to act resolutely this winter,
this spring and then throughout 1992 to meet the critical emergency
needs of these states food and medical supplies and energy and
shelter. The shortages now evident throughout the 12 states will not
soon disappear and will require sustained attention our sustained
attention.
Second, we must also meet the challenge of promoting
economic growth and development of new free market institutions
through a collective international effort to provide technical
assistance. Our work will be critically important to help the new
states construct banking and taxation systems to provide a healthier
environment, to promote the rule of law; and, yes, nuclear safety.
In short, we must support those who are standing up for
reform and freedom. We should stimulate concrete investments and
expanded trade. President Boris Yeltsin's courageous economic
reforms deserve our support, as do efforts in the other states to
introduce economic change.
Our success or failure will hinge on our ability to work
effectively together on this common cause. The challenge is too
great for any one nation or group of nations. It is a global
challenge requiring the efforts and commitment of nations from all
over the world. And your presence here, a truly remarkable presence,
is. vivid testimony that this is, and must be, a global coalition.
Nothing else can work.
As we come together during these two days, and then
certainly in the months ahead, let us do SO constructively in the
spirit of partnership, avoiding sterile debates over which one of us
has done the most or the least, and which should lead our response to
this historic challenge.
MORE
- 3 -
All of us have a role and obligation to fulfill. And
many of us have already undertaken concrete actions to help. The
European Community has shouldered a major and generous share of the
burden. Its prompt actions over several years to provide
humanitarian support were vitally important, and its commitment to a
vigorous technical assistance program is far-reaching and most
welcomed.
Germany alone has assumed enormous responsibility in
providing military housing and in channeling credits to the former
USSR and now to the Federation, to the Russian Federation. Other EC
governments have made important contributions. The Atlantic Alliance
stands ready to the help with the knowledge that the peoples of the
former USSR are moving toward the same values that have sustained
NATO since its birth.
It is especially satisfying to see here today our
friends from Central and Eastern Europe as the pioneers in discarding
communism and embracing democracy.
Your are here as symbols of success. And though you
still face problems yourselves, the world applauds your willingness
to help freedom elsewhere.
The challenges before us require efforts not just from
Europe, but from other regions and countries as well. Japan has made
important contributions, commitments and will be critical to this
effort. And now other nations in the Far East, and the Middle East,
and Latin America should commit their expertise, their resources to
assure the success of reform.
And I can assure you today that the United States, which
for SO long has led the struggle to contain communism, is also
contributing its share so that democracy is its permanent
replacement. For over 40 years, we have led in the reconstruction
and defense of the free world. And now that the torch of liberty has
sparked freedom among our former adversaries, the greatest good of
our long labor is at last visible.
The U.S. cannot, and will not, falter at the moment that
these new states are struggling to embrace the very ideals that
America was founded to foster and preserve. Accordingly, as a
further U.S. contribution to this urgent worldwide effort, I am
proposing that the Congress approve over $600 million for new
technical assistance and humanitarian efforts. In addition to the
assistance already announced, this will bring to over $5 billion the
level of various forms of U.S. assistance to these people in their,
time of need.
In closing, I would like to reiterate the importance of
seizing this moment to commit ourselves, individually and
collectively, to an opportunity that may not come our way again in
our lifetime. The prospect that our former adversaries may become
our friends and our partners this is in the national interest of
every country represented around this table and those countries that
are not represented around this table.
By coordinating our efforts toward common goals, we have
a chance to reshape the world for our children and for generations to
come. And if we do not, we risk the reversal of the historic leap to
freedom made by the Russian, Ukrainian, Armenian and other peoples
during these last months.
So let us work together over the next two days to
promote our national and collective security, continued global
economic growth, and to do what is right for the ordinary people who
yearn for a better, free life in these new independent states.
MORE
- 4 -
Thank you all very, very much for being here. I know it
is not easy to make the long trek. It is desperately important.
Thank you for this opportunity to speak with you today. And may God
bless the peoples of all the countries represented here and the
peoples of these new struggling independent states. We have such
confidence that we can succeed, all of us working together.
Thank you all very much.
END
9:15 A.M. EST
Russia
THE WHITE HOUSE
Office of the Press Secretary
Aid
For Immediate Release
April 1, 1992
PRESS CONFERENCE BY THE PRESIDENT,
SECRETARY OF STATE JAMES BAKER,
SECRETARY OF TREASURY NICHOLAS BRADY,
AND SECRETARY OF AGRICULTURE EDWARD MADIGAN
The Briefing Room
FOR
11:04 A.M. EST
THE PRESIDENT: I have a statement that is a little
longer than the normal, but let me just say that I have just met with
the congressional leadership to request their bipartisan backing for
a new, comprehensive and integrated program to support the struggle
of freedom underway in Russia, Ukraine, and the other new states that
have replaced the Soviet Union.
The revolution in these states is a defining moment in
history, with profound consequences for America's own national
interests. The stakes are as high for us now as any that we have
faced in this century. And our adversary for 45 years, the one
nation that posed a worldwide threat to freedom and peace, is now
seeking to join the community of democratic nations.
A victory for democracy and freedom in the former USSR
creates the possibility of a new world of peace for our children and
grandchildren. But if this democratic revolution is defeated, it
could plunge us into a world more dangerous in some respects than the
dark years of the Cold War.
America must meet this challenge, joining with those who
stood beside us in the battle against imperial communism -- Germany,
the United Kingdom, Japan, France, Canada, Italy and other allies.
Together we won the Cold War, and today we must win the peace.
This effort will require new resources from the
industrial democracies. But nothing like the price we would pay if
democracy and reform failed in Russia and Ukraine and Byelorussia and
Armenia and the states of Central Asia. It will require the
commitment of the united America, strengthened by a consensus that
transcends even the heated partisanship of a presidential election
campaign.
And today I call upon Congress, Republicans and
Democrats alike, and the American people to stand behind this united
effort.
Our national effort must be part of a global effort.
I've been in contact with Chancellor Kohl, Prime Minister Major,
President Mitterrand, other key allies to discuss our plans and to
assure them of the high priority I place on the success of this
endeavor. To this end, I would like to announce today a plan to
support democracy in the states of the former Soviet Union.
This is a complex set of issues which took months to
sort out, working within the administration, working with our major
allies and with the leaders of the new independent states of the
former Soviet Union. A number of things had to come together to make
sure we got it right.
MORE
- 2 -
Let me give you a little bit of the history. I asked
Secretary Baker to outline our fundamental approach in his December
12th speech at Princeton. I spoke again on the need to embrace
Russia and the other new states of the former Soviet Union in my
January 22nd speech at the Washington conference to coordinate the
humanitarian assistance.
On February 1st, Boris Yeltsin and I discussed these
issues at Camp David. And that same day, Secretary Brady met with
Boris Yeltsin's key economic advisor, Igor Gaydar, do discuss how we
could support Russian reforms.
A week later, Jim Baker followed up during his meeting
with Kozyrev Foreign Minister Kozyrev -- and Boris Yeltsin in
Moscow. And just yesterday the IMF reached tentative agreement with
Russia on its market reform program. After weeks of intensive
consultations in the G-7, Chancellor Kohl, currently serving as
Chairman of the G-7, has announced today G-7 support for an IMF
program for Russia.
The program that I'm announcing today builds on this
progress and includes three major components: First, the United
States has been working with its Western allies and the international
financial institutions on an unprecedented multilateral program to
support reform in the newly independent states. The success of this
program will depend upon their commitment to reform and their
willingness to work with the international community.
Russia is exhibiting that commitment. And I'm
announcing today that the U.S. is prepared to join in a substantial
multilateral financial assistance package in support of Russia's
reforms. We're working to develop, with our allies and the IMF, a
$6-billion currency stabilization fund to help maintain confidence in
the Russian ruble. The U.S. will also join in a multilateral effort
to marshal roughly $18 billion in financial support in 1992 to assist
Russian efforts to stabilize and restructure their economy. We've
been working with the Russian government for three months to help it
develop an economic reform plan to permit the major industrialized
countries to provide support.
We will work to complete action on this approximately
$24-billion package by the end of April. And I pledge the full
cooperation of the United States in this effort.
Secondly, the United States will also act to broaden its
own capacity to extend assistance to the new states. I'm
transmitting to Congress a comprehensive bill, the Freedom Support
Act, to mobilize the Executive Branch, the Congress and, indeed, our
private sector around a comprehensive and integrated package of
support for the new states.
Now, this package will authorize a U.S. quota increase
of $12 billion for the IMF, which is critical to supporting Russia
and the other new states. The IMF and World Bank will be the primary
source of funding for the major financial assistance needs of the new
governments. The U.S. quota increase for the IMF was specifically
assumed in the budget agreement and does not require a budget outlay.
Support my existing authority to work with the G-7 and
the IMF to put together the stabilization program for Russia and
support possible subsequent programs for others states of the former
Soviet Union as they embarked on landmark reforms, including up to $3
billion for stabilization funds.
It would also repeal restrictive Cold War legislation SO
that American business can compete on an even footing in these new
markets. And I'm determined that American business be given the
MORE
- 3 -
chance to invest and trade with the new states. And to that end,
I've also directed that the United States negotiate trade and
bilateral investment and tax treaties with these countries just as
soon as possible. Significant new trade relationships can create
jobs right here in this country.
The package will broaden the use of $500 million
appropriated by Congress last year to encompass not only the safe
dismantling and destruction of nuclear weapons, but also the broader
goals of nuclear plant safety, demilitarization, and defense
conversion. It will also establish and a major people-to-people
program between the United States and the states of the former Soviet
Union to create the type of lasting personal bonds among our peoples,
and Russian understanding of democratic institutions so critical to
long-term peace.
This effort will complement our existing programs to
bring hundreds of businessmen to the United States from the
Commonwealth and then send hundreds of Peace Corps volunteers to the
new states.
In sending this authorization legislation to Congress, I
call upon the Congress to act concurrently to provide the
appropriations necessary to make these authorizations a reality.
Third, in addition to the $3.75 billion already extended
by the U.S. since January 1991, I'm announcing today $1.1 billion in
new Commodity Credit Corporation credit guarantees for the purchase
of American agricultural products. Six hundred million of that will
go for U.S. sales to Russia, and an additional $500 million for U.S.
sales to the Ukraine and other states.
Now, let me close on a personal note. I think every day
about the challenge of securing a peaceful future for the American
people. And I believe very strongly that President Yeltsin's reform
program holds the greatest hope for the future of the Russian people
and for the security of the American people as we define a new
relationship with that great country.
President Yeltsin has taken some very courageous steps
for democracy and free markets. And I am convinced that it is in our
own national interest to support him strongly.
For more than 45 years, the highest responsibility of
nine American presidents, Democrats and Republicans, was to wage and
win the Cold War. It was my privilege to work with Ronald Reagan on
these broad programs, and now to lead the American people in winning
the peace by embracing the people so recently freed from tyranny to
welcome them into the community of democratic nations.
I know there are those who say we should pull back,
concentrate our energies, our interests and our resources on our
pressing domestic problems. And they are very important. But I ask
them to think of the consequences here at home of peace in the world.
We've got to act now. And if we turn away, if we do not do what we
can to help democracy succeed in the lands of the old Soviet Union,
our failure to act will carry a far higher price. And if we face up
to the challenge, matching the courage of President Yeltsin, of
Ukrainian President Kravchuk, of Armenian President Ter-Petrosyan,
many other future generations of Americans will thank us for having
had the foresight and the conviction to stand up democracy and work
for peace in this decade and into the next century.
That's the end of this statement. I'll be glad to take
just a handful of questions, and then Jim Baker and Secretary Brady
-- I think Secretary Baker will go into more detail on the
legislation and Secretary Brady and others will be available. I
think Ed Madigan will talk to you about the agricultural sect of it.
MORE
- 4 -
Terry?
Q Mr. President, you mentioned several figures in
your statement. Overall, what's the cost of this to taxpayers, and
where's the money going to come from?
THE PRESIDENT: Most of it will come from the IFIs, from
the international financial institutions. About a fifth of the total
is assigned to the -- about a fifth of it, 20 percent of it, is our
share. And there's not a lot of new money. It's our feeling and the
feeling of the partners that we ought to go use these international
financial organizations who were set up to do this very job. Now, we
have a significant commitment to these organizations. But that's the
fact as to how this breaks out.
Q
Was there any kind of figure that you could
provide? You say there's not much new money. What --
THE PRESIDENT: I'll let Jim Baker give you the details
on it, but, yes, we can. There is some new money in it. There's
some new credits in it -- agricultural credits. But let him give you
the details on what's going to be in the bill. It's not a tremendous
amount of money, our commitment is very, very substantial.
Yes, Helen.
Q
Mr. President, not in the either-or sense, you've
acknowledged the pressing domestic problems. What are you going to
do to help the American people, the financially strapped states, the
decaying cities? Is there a post-Cold War Marshall Plan for America
in view of its problems? And why do we have to have 150, troops
in Europe when the enemy has disappeared from the screen?
THE PRESIDENT: We are working on programs that will
help the cities, including trying to get through a significant block
grant that would help, including a crime bill, including a brand-new
revolutionary approach to education that, longer run, is terribly
significant. And, yes, it is very important we do these things.
But my point to the American people is we have a major
stake in the success of democracy in Russia and in these other
states. And the cost of risking doing nothing -- the cost of doing
nothing could be exorbitant, could far transcend the money that we
have spent in the past. And I just don't want to risk that.
In terms of the troops, it is important that the United
States stay involved in guaranteeing against any unforeseen action.
We saw the need to be involved a year ago in Desert Storm. And if we
had listened to the critics that would have suggested that we disarm
and unilaterally pull back, we would be in terrible shape today --
and we're not in terrible shape today. We have a vital stake in
European security. Our allies and ourselves agree that the United
States should remain there with troops, and we will stay there with
troops.
Q
Mr. President, if the risks are so great, the
stakes so high, why did you wait until three months into an election
year to outline this program and begin the push for it, especially
when, as you say, there's little new money involved?
THE PRESIDENT: Because we haven't waited. If you
listen to what I said earlier, we spelled out our determination to do
this in December. We have been working with our allies
constructively to bring about agreement on this international
financial institution approach. That was hammered out this weekend
by Secretary Brady's people overseas. The formulation of the bill
has just been completed. And we've just gotten agreement from --
MORE
- 5 -
this morning I talked to Kravchuk and to Yeltsin once again, both
of them -- on this. I might say that they both sounded quite
enthusiastic about it.
A lot of work has been going into it. And rather than
kind of posturing out there, we wanted to have a sound program that
will have strong international support. And that is exactly, thanks
to the cooperation of the allies, what we have. So this isn't any
Johnny-come-lately thing, and this isn't driven by election-year
pressures. It's what's right for the United States.
And I must say, without committing anybody to anything,
that the reception from the joint leadership seemed quite positive,
Brit. I was very pleased, but we'll let them speak for themselves.
But most of them saying, we should be doing this.
Q
Well, sir, whether you are posturing or not, have
you not waited a while before beginning this sales pitch --
THE PRESIDENT: I don't know that --
2
-- in the knowledge that you were going to have to
do something along these lines?
THE PRESIDENT: I said something about it in January,
Jim Baker mentioned it in December. I've been talking about it.
The question, though, is not a lot of political
rhetoric, the question is getting something done that's positive.
And when you're dealing with a whole bunch of allies and you're
dealing with many new countries, you want to be sure that you do it
in a sensible way. And the fact that it's coming out now is because
we now have, with great cooperation from the allies, working with
them, come up with this approach that we think makes sense. And it's
not something that's new.
Q
Sir, the reason there is this skepticism is, back
when Pat Buchanan was beating you about the head in New Hampshire,
you weren't out there in New Hampshire, you weren't in New Hampshire
saying, we've got to help Boris Yeltsin, we've got to help Kravchuk.
You weren't talking about that at all. You weren't preparing
American public opinion.
Today, Bill Clinton's out there talking about his plan
for Russia and the republics. That's why it looks a little weird.
THE PRESIDENT: Well, that I've explained to you, John,
that there's a great deal of diplomacy. I remember when one of the
people that used to sit proudly in this room accused me of not being
emotional about Germany, about trying to get a reunited Germany when
the wall came down. I said -- what I was saying to myself, much less
interested in emotion, much more interested in getting something
positively done. Use the power of the presidency of the United
States to see if you can't have that be accomplished in a very
peaceful way.
And we have been doing the diplomacy that is necessary
to come forward with a program that I hope will have the support of
the American people; that I am proud to take to the American people,
even though some people are going to be saying, well, you shouldn't
be doing this in an election year. You've got to be -- along the
lines of Helen's question -- people will be suggesting that. But I'm
going to fight for this because I believe in it.
Q
Our recent poll showed that 55 percent of the
public thinks that foreign aid should, in fact, be cut, and another
40 percent thinks that it shouldn't be increased at all. How are you
going to persuade the public that this, in fact, is worthwhile when
MORE
- 6 -
they look around and see roads deteriorating and schools in trouble
and so forth?
THE PRESIDENT: Simply make the case that to do nothing
would be irresponsible; that the United States must continue to lead;
and that we have en enormous stake, personal stake, for every
American in the success of these democracies, and to risk their
failure by doing nothing is very short-sighted.
And so that's the case I'm going to make. And I will
also be saying we have a lot of blessings in this country, and one of
them today is peace. Your kids and mine don't go to sleep at night
as worried about nuclear weapons as some of the preceding generations
here. And I want to be sure that I can certify to the American
people I've done everything I can as President to see that that
continues, that democracies are strengthened, that freedom is on the
march and continues to stay on the march. And this approach we're
taking is the way to do what we can to guarantee that.
Q
Well, then to flip the question around a little
bit, what do you say to those who are also going to say that this
really isn't that much; that, in fact, Germany has already
contributed $45 billion to this effort and that compared to what we
could do, we aren't doing enough if so much, in fact, is at stake?
THE PRESIDENT: I will say that I think it is enough and
that it's what we ought to do right now and fight like heck for what
we believe in here. And I think it is. And I must say I was very
pleased with the response by President Yeltsin, the response by
President Kravchuk this morning. And I would cite that as evidence
of their enthusiasm for what we're doing.
But I guess you're right, some people will attack you
for doing too much, and some for not doing enough. I think this is
right. I believe Congress will give it the proper support. And I
want the American people to support it because I know that it is in
the best interest of world peace. And the failure of world peace has
a staggering price tag on it that I don't want to even contemplate.
So I'll continue to work for this.
Now, let me turn it over the Jim, and he can go --
Q
Is it enough to make Nixon happy?
Q
Don't take that seal away. (Laughter.)
SECRETARY BAKER: Let me make a couple of brief
comments, and then I'd be glad to try and respond to your questions,
as I know Secretary Brady would.
First of all, you heard the President in his opening
remarks mention that this is, in effect, a three-part program; it's a
three-way approach. You have a multilateral component of this which
has to do with the agreement among the G-7 to provide $24 billion in
support for Russia. That applies to the Russian Federation.
Secondly, you have the Freedom for Russia and Emerging
Eurasian Democracies and Open Markets Support Act of 1992, which we
are going to call the Freedom Support Act, and which we are today
sending to the Congress in legislative form, together with fact
sheets, in the hopes that Congress will join with us in what you've
heard the President characterize as a very, very important national
imperative.
This bill is very comprehensive. It is very broad. It
is very far-reaching. And it is our view that it will help mobilize
support not just among the Legislative Branch, but among the United
States public as well.
MORE
- 7 -
This is, in our view, a once-in-a-century opportunity
that we cannot miss. We spent trillions of dollars to win the Cold
War, and we ought to be willing to spend a few billion dollars to
secure the peace, or we might find ourselves in the position of
having to spend far more again if things go in the wrong direction
over there. And this is, therefore, a very important national
security issue. And it is an issue that is very important to the
American people.
The third element of the program, you heard the
President mention, is the provisioning of additional CCC credits to
an amount of about $1.1 billion -- $600 million of that destined for
the Russian Federation; $500 million for the other former --
republics of the former Soviet Union.
I'll be glad to give you some detail if you want it on
the bill. Let me simply say that it is a 10-point plan, a
comprehensive one, as I've mentioned, that speaks to the provisioning
of additional humanitarian assistance; that talks to the issue of
nuclear safety and responsibility. It expands assistance
opportunities in building free markets. It increases support for
democratic institutions in these new countries. It improves access
to credits for purchases of food. It stimulates greater trade and
investment opportunities for and with these new countries. It
supports in many ways the development of a private sector. It
leverages our financial contributions through the IMF. It points up
the importance to the United States and to this issue of moving on
the quota increase for the IMF. It supports United States leadership
in developing a stabilization fund or funds for these newly-emerging
nations up to an amount of $3 billion. And it expands the American
presence on the ground in Russia and the new states and their
presence here. And opens up quite a few opportunities for person-
to-person contact.
There's only one other thing I want to say and then I'm
glad to respond to your questions -- Nick may have something he wants
to say before we get to that -- and that is picking up on the
questions that were asked of the President about why now. This is
not a recent effort. We have been doing this for not just a period
of months, but indeed I would argue a period of years. That is
supporting the historic transformations that are taking place in the
former Soviet Union. Transformations in which Americans have a very
major stake.
Indeed, as the President mentioned, I said in my speech
at Princeton last December 12th, as we organized an alliance against
Stalinism during the Cold War, today America can mobilize a coalition
in support of freedom. That's what we're doing.
We've also said over the course of the past several
months that the first step, of course, was to match outside support
with self-help. And it has been recently in the last few months that
we've seen Russia particularly move in the area of adopting credible
economic reform programs.
We began with humanitarian and technical assistance.
You will remember the coordinating conference in January in which we
involved many, many other nations and through which we provided a
substantial amount of humanitarian assistance to these new states.
We will have follow-up coordinating conferences to be hosted by other
countries.
By the beginning of 1992 we had already pledged over $5
billion in assistance, as well as having held a coordinating
conference.
MORE
- 8 -
The time, we think, to mobilize American public support
for this -- and we don't underestimate the responsibility that that
is and the job that is before us -- is now. We think that this is a
way in which we can integrate our efforts across the board and in
which we can coordinate American contributions with the contributions
of many, many other governments. Now is the time, we think, to
catalyze congressional action, and now is particularly the time for
us to send a very powerful signal to the democrats and reformers in
the former Soviet Union who are trying to convert to democracy,
freedom and free markets.
Please don't lose sight of the fact that President
Yeltsin has a session of the Russian Parliament on the 6th of April.
So I'd like to say that with respect to timing. And maybe, Nick, do
you want to say anything before we take questions?
SECRETARY BRADY: Just two things, Jim. One, that this
program, to try and arrive at the point we are today, has been going
on some time with the President and Jim Baker's leadership. And the
negotiations leading to the amount of money that we talked about
today have been going on the latter part of '91 and all through '92.
With regard to the amount of money involved, this is
real money.
Q
How much?
SECRETARY BRADY: Well, just exactly what the President
said -- $18 billion in bilateral aid and $6 billion in the form of a
stabilization fund -- and would point out that a good part of it, of
course, comes from the IMF, the World Bank and the European Bank for
reconstruction and development. That is money. Don't be -- this is
a strong program, and it's in response to what the Russians have
asked for. And I would only point out to you that the United States'
share of the IMF is roughly 20 percent, and the World Bank about the
same.
Q
You said that as of the beginning of 1992 the
United States has pledged $5 billion. How much further does this
commit the United States in terms of money? How much more will this
cost?
SECRETARY BAKER: It's going to be -- as the Secretary
of the Treasury just told you, this is a significant and substantial
program involving significant and substantial contributions. The
$6 billion currency stabilization fund for Russia --and let me make
sure everybody understands that is a currency stabilization fund for
Russia because it is further along in its economic reform. There are
provisions in the bill that speak to congressional support for
stabilization funds for all of the states of the Soviet Union up to
$3 billion. The U.S. share of that stabilization fund is probably in
the neighborhood of 25 percent. That money --
Q
Which fund?
SECRETARY BAKER: The stabilization fund, the $6 billion
Q
Not 20, but 25?
SECRETARY BAKER: The overall American participation in
the $24 billion is between 20 and 25 percent. I can't give you the
exact percentage. The participation in the stabilization fund is 25
percent.
SECRETARY BRADY: Correct.
MORE
- 9 -
SECRETARY BAKER: The funding of that will come through
an arrangement called the "general agreements to borrow" with the
IMF, which is a mechanism under which the IMF borrows from its
members for eventualities just such as this. This will not require
an additional appropriation. The funds for the "general agreements
to borrow" have already been appropriated by the Congress. But it
will be a commitment of funds, but it will not require an additional
appropriation and therefore will not constitute a budget yet.
Q
The ruble fund you're talking about?
SECRETARY BAKER: Yes, I'm talking about the $6 billion
stabilization fund.
The $18 billion in balance of payment support is made up
both of some things that are already in the pipeline and of some new
money. We'll have to work out the exact amount for you, but there is
substantial new money involved. Some of that is the provision of CCC
credits announced today -- $600 million for Russia and $500 million
for the other states.
Do you want to add anything to that, Nick?
Q
Is that a budget hit?
SECRETARY BAKER: Some of it will be. Some of our share
of that will be.
Q
Do you have any kind of broad number on how much --
SECRETARY BAKER: Well, let me give you some examples.
We have some requests on the Hill now that have not been provided for
in the current foreign ops continuing resolution. As in when those
are granted, and we expect and hope that they will be, that will be
budget hit, but it would be within the budget limitations and within
the totals.
Q
Secretary Baker, are you saying that we do not have
to increase out contribution to these organizations?
SECRETARY BAKER: No, I'm saying --
Q
How much are we going to have to increase --
SECRETARY BAKER: I'm saying that the -- well,
let me take that one item by item. One of the most important things
that Nick and I have been working toward on the Hill and we have so
far been unsuccessful, is to get the quota increase for the
International Monetary Fund. It is the international financial
institutions, quite frankly, that make possible this very substantial
package for Russia.
The bill that we are sending up asks for the authority
for that quota increase. That quota increase is a $12-billion
authorization. It does not involve any outlays because it is, in
effect, a guarantee, just like all of our quota provisions for the
IMF are.
Q
We have to pay that money eventually, do we not?
SECRETARY BAKER: No, we've never had to in history.
Q
Mr. Secretary, how do we know that the money goes
for what it's supposed to go, that it's not going to wind up in the
hands of a few people, and like in the case of the Philippine aid,
wind up for shoes for Imelda?
MORE
- 10 -
SECRETARY BAKER: Let me say that the one thing that we
have quite a bit of experience with so far, indeed more than other
countries if I might suggest that, is the provisioning of
humanitarian assistance under arrangements where we supervise its
delivery. And we have been very careful to have people on the
ground, with our Operation Provide Hope, which delivered 2200 tons, I
think, of food and medicines in 64 flights to all of these countries.
We had people on the ground to make sure that it never went astray.
We will be taking those kinds of similar precautions
with respect to the other elements of this program.
Q
Mr. Secretary, can you tell us, please, how you and
the President plan to continue to lobby for this program? The
congressional leaders have said the only hope this has is if you and
the President continue to take a high profile. Are you willing to
commit to that, and do you intend to lobby hard?
SECRETARY BAKER: Indeed, we said in the meeting with
the leaders that -- I personally offered to the Foreign Relations and
Foreign Affairs Committees that I would be prepared to come up
tomorrow. There was some discussion about the possibility of their
prompt introduction of the legislation. I hope they do that. I'm
ready to go up there tomorrow and start fighting for this
legislation.
This is a once-in-a-century opportunity that is
extraordinarily important to the national security interests of this
country. We simply cannot afford to have those countries slide back
into a totalitarian model.
Q
And the President, Mr. Secretary, is he willing to
fight --
SECRETARY BAKER: Absolutely.
Q
Mr. Secretary, you call it a once-in-a-lifetime
opportunity --
SECRETARY BAKER: A once-in-a-century.
Q
Once-in-a-century. Well, it's a long lifetime.
(Laughter.)
SECRETARY BAKER: It would be lifetime for you and me,
Saul. (Laughter.)
Q
You seem to be going out of your way to hide from
us the amount of money, new money, that it's going to cost American
taxpayers in addition to that which you've already proposed to the
Hill. The President said it's not a lot of money. How much is not a
lot? And one other thing: I heard no mention of the $645 million
that the President proposed at that coordinating conference late last
year. Where is it?
SECRETARY BAKER: That's in part of the $2 billion or so
that the United States will pick up of the $18 billion.
But let me say this, what the President was referring
to, in my opinion, was budget hits. That's different, in my view,
than new money. The "general agreements to borrow" money that will
support the $6 billion stabilization fund -- we're picking up 25
percent of it -- is new money. But it's already been appropriated.
Therefore, it won't hit the budget. But it's not right to say it's
not new money. It is --
Q
You've actually just finally designated that for a
purpose, it was always there?
MORE
- 11 -
SECRETARY BAKER: That is correct.
Q
It's never been designated for anything before?
SECRETARY BRADY: Can I just follow up with Jim because
I think he's exactly right. What the President was talking about is
the need for appropriated funds. And this programs doesn't need that
at this particular point in time. But the money is there in the
international financial institutions which were put together for this
exact purpose. And it's a question of agreeing with allies to bring
that money out to support the program, as well as some of the
bilateral aid that Jim's mentioned that's underway from the United
States. So it is real money.
Q
-- $35 million, is that not new money that's
already been appropriated?
SECRETARY BAKER: That has not been appropriated. We
have sent it up in our budget. That would be new money because it
has not yet been appropriated. We've asked for it. So you might
say, or Terry might say, oh, you've asked for it, it's not new money.
That's why I'm saying to you that's not easy of a yes or no answer.
We've asked for. It hasn't been provided. We're going to continue
to ask for it. When it's provided, I would argue that it's new
money, even though we asked for it in the 1992 bill.
Q
Whether it's new money or old money, how much is
the total?
Q
Where do you propose that Congress get the new
money in this time of budget cutting and when there's a focus on the
domestic priorities?
SECRETARY BAKER: The same way we proposed it in the
bill that's still up there right now in the Senate, Susan. We found
sources for that money and we would suggest that they get it from
those very same sources. We were within the budget caps, and we will
continue to do this within the budget caps.
Q
The President spoke about a defining moment in
history and this is humanitarian assistance to the emerging
democracies -- it's not there yet through democracy -- the hope for
democracy. And you and the administration have deliberately put a
political condition in the $10-billion loan guarantee that Israel has
asked without any new money, without any political condition. It's a
democracy that supports the United States more than any other country
in the world. Why is there a double standard?
SECRETARY BAKER: There are conditions in this bill.
There will be substantial conditions in the provisioning of
assistance. There are many, many conditions in our foreign aid
programs to countries all around the world.
Q
Mr. Secretary, speaking of Israel, Sinclair Martel
just returned with a mission to Israel. Are you satisfied as a
result of that mission that the technology of the Patriot remains
uncompromised?
SECRETARY BAKER: I can't comment on that for you here
this afternoon. The report will be coming to me probably later
today. I haven't seen the report of the mission. I rather imagine
that we would have a comment to make for you tomorrow.
Q
If I could follow up, sir, if you haven't seen it,
have you not had any preliminary awareness of what its contents are?
MORE
- 12 -
SECRETARY BAKER: I have not discussed it with any of
the members of the team. I've had a very brief discussion with the
Deputy Secretary, but I, of course, would like to see it myself, and
then I'm sure we will have a statement tomorrow.
Q
Regardless of the definition of new or old money
-- I apologize for coming back to this over and over, but I think the
American taxpayer is going to want to know, what does this cost? Can
you summarize for us or give us a figure, compared to what we were
going to spend, what we're now going to spend, how much is this
program going to cost?
SECRETARY BAKER: It's going to cost because --
Q
How much is it going to cost?
SECRETARY BAKER: You're asking me for a number this
morning that I really can't give you this morning. But we will give
you a number and we will analyze each and every one of these sources
of funding, and maybe let you make the determination. But let me
explain it to you one more time. Years ago, maybe months ago, the
Congress of the United States authorized and appropriated money --
probably $6 billion for the United States' share of the "general
agreements to borrow." Maybe not that much. So take the number out.
But the Congress appropriated money for the United States' share of
the "general agreements to borrow" within the IMF.
It has rarely been utilized, although, frankly, we
utilized it, we borrowed -- the United States borrowed from this
fund back in the late '70s -- 1979. Other countries have. The
United Kingdom. It is a fund that is set up to accomplish, to meet
eventualities just such as this.
Now, you tell me what that cost is to the taxpayer. The
money was authorized and appropriated quite some time ago. It is out
there. Obviously, there is a cost, and it is real money. It is not
funny money. But I'm not -- I don't think the Secretary of Treasury
can put a number on it today.
Q
Let's just say, just call it a bottom line as
opposed to --
SECRETARY BRADY: Let me say one thing. This may help.
First of all, we're talking about cash. At some time in 1992, the
cash will transfer. We're not talking about funny money -- this is
real money. Secondly, you could ask the same question about the
money that went from the IMF to Poland. That's what the IMF and the
World Bank do. They take emerging democracies, put together programs
with them, and funds flow out of those international organizations.
It's the reason why they're out there, and this is the job they do
every day.
Q
Well, Mr. Secretary, is it fair to say that this is
all going to be new money and real money as far as the Soviet Union
is concerned because it's going to receive it, but only a part of it
will be new and real in terms of added cost to the taxpayer -- is
that correct?
SECRETARY BAKER: I think's that's a generally fair
statement, yes.
Q
Is the $24 billion package in all, as far as what
the Soviets will receive or be loaned or whatever -- can you give us
a rough estimate at least of what fraction of that will be borne by
the American taxpayer in the sense that the money will have to be
appropriated or otherwise obtained that has not already been
obtained?
MORE
- 13 -
SECRETARY BAKER: Of the $18 billion? of the $6 billion
there will need -- nothing needs to be appropriated. You do not need
a new appropriation. of the $18 billion, the United States' share is
roughly $2 billion, and it will have to be -- no, it won't all have
to be appropriated because $600 million of it is reflected in the
Secretary of Agriculture's decision to provide that much in
additional grain credits. But there will be some that will have to
be appropriated of that $2 billion.
Q
I have a question on the ruble fund. What
conditions are going to be placed on that to make sure that it's not
used instantaneously? And also, Russia is behind in some interest
payments. Are we postponing interest on their debt right now? I
know the Paris Club extended the principal payment out longer.
SECRETARY BRADY: At this moment in time we are not, I
believe, postponing any interest payments. And your question about
will there be conditions on the fund, the stabilization fund -- there
always are. There are ones in the Polish fund that is now in place.
There are conditions on it such as, number one, that the country has
to stay in concert with the program they've agreed with the IMF. And
there's other conditions as well.
Q
How long might that fund exist? I mean, you don't
expect it to be used up in five months or a year or --
SECRETARY BRADY: None of the Polish fund has been used
so far because the zloty has stayed within good trading ranges. So
you can't predict that.
SECRETARY BAKER: Let me give you a couple of other
figures. It may help you break this down. Of the $18 billion in
balance-of-payment support, $4.5 billion is coming from the
international financial institutions in the form of loans from those
institutions. That is, the IMF, the World Bank and the EBRD -- $4.5
billion; $2.5 billion roughly is coming from debt deferral, debt
restructuring for Russia; and the remaining $11 billion will come
from the G-7 countries themselves, of which the United States will
have a $2 billion share.
Q
Along with the credits, are you going to assure the
allies, specifically Australia who has been complaining that you're
not going to cut into their markets on this? Can you both answer
that?
SECRETARY BAKER: I would defer to the Secretary of
Agriculture on that. But we follow that as a practice of --
Q
Australia is not in that market.
Q
They are -- they do sell to Russia.
Q
Are you going to make any effort to assure the
allies who have been complaining that we're traditionally breaking
into their markets, and that this will delete their markets a bit
more?
SECRETARY MADIGAN: You're talking about two different
programs. The complaints from the Australians are with regard to our
Export Enhancement Program, moving into commercial markets that we
traditionally have been in and which they say that they have also
been a traditional supplier. Here we're talking about the GS-IM
program, GS-IM 102 credit, which we've already been extending to the
former Soviet Union and they've already been making the payments.
And we're talking about adding $600 million in additional GS-IM
activity to the Russian Republic and $500 million to Ukraine and the
other republics. It has nothing to do with the Export Enhancement
MORE
- 14 -
arguments going on between the United States and Australia and other
countries.
Q
There's still the complaint, though, that by
submitting subsidized American products to these markets you're
draining markets of other countries.
SECRETARY MADIGAN: You're missing my point. The Export
Enhancement Program has to do with subsidizing sales. The GS-IM
program which we're discussing here this morning has nothing to do
with subsidizing sales. It's a credit program where we guarantee the
credit, they borrow the money from the banks, they buy the
agriculture commodities, they pay the banks back at commercial rates
of interest. There is no subsidy. All we're talking about here is a
credit guarantee.
Q
And it's not less than the world market rate?
SECRETARY MADIGAN: It is commercial rates. The money
is borrowed from banks. We simply guarantee the debt repayment if
the recipient country doesn't pay the debt.
2
You said that this would require no new
appropriations this year. Then you said we have commitments. That
means how much appropriations will you ask for in succeeding years?
SECRETARY BAKER: I didn't say that we would not ask for
appropriations. Indeed, we have appropriation requests on the Hill
right as we speak here, and we intend to continue to pursue
appropriations. What I said, I think, was that the participation of
the United States in the $6 billion currency stabilization fund for
Russia will not require appropriations.
Q
How much will you go back to Congress and have to
ask for in the next few years?
SECRETARY BAKER: Few years? Well, I can't --
Q
How much are you going to ask for every year?
SECRETARY BAKER: I can't predict what the budget
requests will be in future years down the line, Sarah; I just can't
do that.
Q
But you must know if you're setting up this
program, you must know what you're going to ask for next year, say.
SECRETARY BAKER: I can tell you what we've asked for
now. We've got a lot of requests up there now, one of which is that
the Congress should vote the IMF quota increase. We hope they will.
Let me say it one more time: That is authorization. That does not
-- it takes an appropriation to trigger it, but it doesn't take any
outlays. There are no dollars put out; it is a guarantee.
Q
Let me try this one more time. of the $24 billion
total package, okay, you have one-fourth of the $6 billion; that's
$1.5 billion. Okay, that's the ruble stabilization. Then you've got
$2 billion of the other $18 billion.
SECRETARY BAKER: Right.
Q
So that's $3.5 billion -- okay. We know about the
$1.5 billion, that's already in there. You get back down to $2
billion. Out of that $2 billion, you say $600 million of that is
already in agricultural appropriations, right?
SECRETARY BAKER: Yes.
MORE
- 15 -
Q
All right, so now we're down to $1.4 billion that
may possibly be what a lot of us would consider new money. Is that
reasonable?
Q
Real cash.
SECRETARY BAKER: I don't think it's -- well, let me ask
you this question: Would you say that the $620 million that we've
asked for, that we announced at the coordinating conference and that
we have an appropriation request for up there, is that new money?
Q
Let's just do total cost.
SECRETARY BAKER: Is it new money? Fair question.
Q
Let's do that. Let's add that to -- then you get
$600 million plus --
SECRETARY BAKER: Much of this, John, is in the
pipeline, if I can put it that way. Much of it is in the pipeline in
the sense that we have made requests for it. It has been in our
budgets. Six hundred million Ed has already acted on. I think
there's roughly $750 million to $800 million -- really rough, now --
that could be characterized as requests we've made -- formally,
requests we've made for humanitarian assistance, technical assistance
and that sort of thing.
The bill, the Freedom Support Act, is going to remove a
lot of restrictions on things that government agencies will be able
to do with respect to these countries. For instance, OPIC and Ex-Im
-- and they will be able to extend a lot more credit than they have
been able to in the past. And maybe some of the balance would come
from that. So you just can't say here today.
SECRETARY BRADY: Can I just add one thing? I think the
point that we're trying to emphasize is here, the success of this
program, which we've said is real cash, very little of it depends on
the appropriation process. Now, there are bits and pieces, as Jim
says, that may have to be taken care of to fit into it. But this
program is not going to succeed based on our appropriation process.
The Congress already provided for most of it.
The quota increase will, but not the money that's
already out there and coming out of the institutions.
Q
Mr. Secretary, forgetting about distinctions
between new money, old money, new budget hits, old budget hits, you
and the President have asked the American people today to support
this program. Can't you tell them what it's going to cost?
SECRETARY BAKER: Yes. Yes, we have.
Q
What's the total?
SECRETARY BAKER: The total? There's a $24 billion
program for the Russian Federation. There's legislation that would
authorize the United States to participate to a substantial degree
with respect to all of these other new states. The $24 billion
program for Russia has been worked out with our allies. We would
hope to work out maybe similar types of programs, certainly not to
the same magnitude with the other new emerging states.
So you say to me, well, how much of the $24 billion are
you going to pick up? And we've answered that for you. We've said
20 to 25 percent. And 25 percent of the $6 billion we're going to
take.
MORE
- 16 -
So I don't think we ought to lose sight of the fact that
you have a very major program here. Don't lose sight of it in the
arcane budget appropriation authorization process or new or old
money. I mean, I go back to my question to John. Is it new money or
old money when we've asked for it and the Congress hasn't given it to
us?
Q
Can we say the American share in all of this is
$3.5 billion? And of that $3.5 billion virtually all of it has been
either asked for or has already been approved?
SECRETARY BRADY: You've forgotten the IFI piece, which
is the IMF and the World Bank. If you're doing it the way you're
doing it, it adds up to about $4.5 billion.
SECRETARY BAKER: Go ahead. You wanted to follow up.
Q
Are you saying then that the U.S. share is going to
be approximately 25 percent of $24 billion? That's what you want the
taxpayers to spend?
SECRETARY BAKER: No, because $2.5 billion of that 24
percent is generated through debt restructuring and debt deferral.
And frankly, some other countries hold a lot more of that debt than
the United States does.
These are the kinds of things that prevent a simple
number answer to your question. But we will give you all of the
facts. We can tell you what's been appropriated. When it was.
What's been authorized. And then you determine what it -- how much
of it's new, how much of it's old, how much of it is -- but there's a
lot of resources in here. A lot of resources. And believe me, I
think the response, as the President indicated, from over there is
going to be very, very positive. And I hope that the response from
the Congress and the American people will likewise be positive,
because we ought not to lose sight of the overall imperative here,
which is we better secure this peace.
Have you all had enough?
2
Noooo!
SECRETARY BAKER: We have.
Q
We're a bit confused.
Q
Mr. Secretary, as you know, Governor Clinton is
giving an address in New York in which he touches on this same sort
of policy. But in that, he has also branched off into the Middle
East, saying that the Middle East peace talks are good, but that you,
sir, have brow-beaten the Israelis to the point that you are
undermining the process. As you also know, he has accused you of
some overt anti-Semitism. Would you care to respond to that?
SECRETARY BAKER: Only, Charles, by saying that, look, I
understand that he is in a very tough race there in New York. But I
want to make one point here. Nothing is more abhorrent to me, and I
know to President Bush as well, than intolerance or racism or anti-
Semitism or any other form of bigotry.
Q
I would like to go to -- try to get some
straightforward answers on foreign aid. In some of our foreign aid
accounts you can say each year that we're asking for a certain amount
of money in -- funds and economic support funds and military aid.
Each year you're asking for very little cash here, and what cash is
being asked for there's some defensiveness about it. But each year
we give about $7 billion -- each year we give about $7 billion to
MORE
- 17 -
Egypt and Israel. Could you say something about what that says to
you about the priorities? Are you satisfied with those priorities?
SECRETARY BAKER: This bill that we're talking about
here and this overall package is very comprehensive and meets what we
think is a very, very important need. And it does so without getting
us into an extremely -- what I think would be an extremely lengthy
and complex debate about whether we should go in and reorder our
foreign assistance priorities. It's going to be a big enough job for
us to mobilize support -- congressional support and public support as
it is without, I think, our taking on now an overall reassessment of
our foreign assistance priorities.
Q
Will the CCC credits be in monthly installments or
will it be one lump sum that they can just draw on at their own
discretion?
SECRETARY MADIGAN: We have already extended to them
$3.75 billion in GSM credit. They are current with us on all of
their principal and interest payments. We extend that credit to them
in monthly tranches. There are interest payments payable in monthly
installments and principal payments payable in annual installments.
And we would expect that we would continue to follow that same kind
of procedure with what we're doing here.
Q
So this amount covers the next three months or is
this now through the end of the fiscal year?
SECRETARY MADIGAN: That will be negotiated with the
buyers from the Soviet Union when they come in. The commodity mix
and the schedule for delivery will be negotiated with them when they
come in. But that's a reasonable assumption for you to make.
Q
To go on like the same pattern. Also, why are we
not offering credit for meat purchases? I know the U.S. denied pork
sales to Russia. Are we going to offer any credits for meat?
SECRETARY MADIGAN: We're talking here about a
commercial program where they buy what they want to buy and we don't
try to tell them what to buy because they ultimately have to pay for
it. And with regard to the pork program which you referred to, the
agencies in the former Soviet Union that are responsible for paying
the bills didn't want pork. The pork agency wanted pork, but they
not the people responsible for paying the bills, and they're not the
people who come in to discuss the commodity mix with us, nor are they
people who have the letter of credit.
Q
Secretary Brady --
Q
Secretary Baker --
SECRETARY BAKER: We're out of here. We're going to
give you fact sheets and we will also --
Q
Has anybody briefed Nixon on this?
SECRETARY BAKER: Yes, he has been briefed.
Q
How is he on this?
SECRETARY BAKER: Fine.
THE PRESS: Thank you.
END
12:02 P.M. EST