    [Public Papers of the Presidents of the United States: George H. W. Bush (1991, Book I)]
    [April 6, 1991]
    [Pages 334-339]
    [From the U.S. Government Publishing Office www.gpo.gov]

    The President's News Conference With Secretary of State James A. Baker
    III in Houston, Texas
    April 6, 1991

        The President. Well, we haven't had our discussion yet, and I'm very
    anxious to talk to the Secretary about his upcoming trip. In just a
    second I'm going to ask him to make a comment on that trip. But let me
    just say that I'm very pleased with the reception so far to our refugee
    relief program for those that have been brutalized and turned into
    refugees by the Government of Iraq. And it's a good program. It's
    strong. The air drop will be starting very, very soon. It's just a
    question of the exact timing I'm not sure of yet, but it will start
    very, very, very, very soon. And the program is, I think, comprehensive.
        We have not heard from Iran on how the part will work that affects
    refugees along the Iranian border. But I am very pleased that we and
    others have stepped up to the plate on this one. As a matter of fact, I
    think we've already, over the period of the last few weeks, spent
    something like $35 million, and that's prior to this new program that
    we've announced. So, the United States is doing its part, should do its
    part, always has done its part.
        But now I'd like to ask the Secretary just to comment on
    his trip. Then we'll take just

    [[Page 335]]

    a few questions and then head on in and do some work because he's got to
    go have supper in Turkey in not many hours from now.
        The Secretary. The President has asked me to return to the Middle
    East in order to see if we can take advantage of what I think the United
    States and everyone else believes is a window of opportunity with
    respect to the possibilities on the Arab-Israeli conflict in the
    aftermath of the Gulf war.
        We were planning this trip when the President asked me as well to go
    by Turkey. I will be having dinner Sunday night with President Ozal, and
    then proceeding down to the Turkish-Iraqi border to assess the situation
    and report back to the President what we find and what we see.
        We will then go to Jerusalem and meet on Tuesday with the Israeli
    Government leadership. We will go to Egypt, to Syria, and I will meet in
    Egypt with the Foreign Minister of Saudi Arabia. King Fahd is at Mecca
    for the end of Ramadan. We will then come back through Geneva where I
    will meet with the Foreign Minister of Jordan and where I will brief the
    President of the EC 12.
        The President. I might add one more comment before the questions. A
    letter addressed to the Secretary-General of the United Nations has been
    received. We have a copy of it in the State Department. It's 26 pages
    long. It is being translated. It relates to the U.N. demand that Iraq
    accept certain conditions in order to finalize the cease-fire. It
    appears to be positive, but I don't want to get too far out in front on
    that until we get the total analysis of the letter. But it appears to be
    a positive response, and that's good. That's a good step. And that will
    enable us to move more quickly to remove our forces from southern Iraq.
        Incidentally, a good many of those forces have started out or are
    out or are coming out. But when these Blue Helmets, this international
    force, gets in there, it is my intention to take our forces out just as
    quickly as possible. And we're talking a matter of days, not a matter of
    months or weeks or anything of that nature. So, that will be a positive
    step, something we've said we're going to do. It will send a good
    signal, I think, to the rest of the world, and it will fulfill what I've
    stated was a major, major intention of the United States Government.

    Iraq

        Q. Mr. President, fears have been raised by some people described as
    Iraqi dissidents, essentially rebels, that when the American troops move
    out, perhaps 100,000 people will face retribution and vengeance at the
    hands of Saddam Hussein. In fact, some people who came to see people at
    the State Department asked that the troops stay a little longer. Do you
    have fears about some bloodbath there?
        The President. I'm concerned about it. We are already--incidentally,
    speaking of help for refugees, our forces are already taking care of
    some 40,000 in the south, and we will make arrangements to see that
    those people are taken care of. But I have no intention of leaving our
    forces. We made very, very clear from day one so that everybody would
    understand it, these forces were coming out.
        But I'm hopeful that this positive action in response to the United
    Nations resolutions will then spill over, and we'll get a little more
    tranquility inside of Iraq itself. But we'll watch the situation very,
    very carefully, but I want to keep my commitment to the American people
    in terms of their sons and daughters and in terms of what our objectives
    were. And that's exactly what I'm doing.
        Q. There are reports out of the United Nations, though, that members
    of the Security Council including the United States are volunteering
    forces for the peacekeeping effort that Secretary Javier Perez de
    Cuellar is organizing. Is that true? Would you commit U.S. troops to the
    peacekeeping force?
        The President. Well, it's possible that the United States will have
    a contribution there, but that has not been finalized. It is essential
    that there be a force in there. Historically, we've not been in these
    peacekeeping forces, but it depends on what the whole makeup of the
    force is. And if that will enhance the peace, why, I'd be openminded on
    that question.
        Q. If I may, sir, wouldn't that run

    [[Page 336]]

    counter, though, to the very promise that you're making to sons and
    daughters?
        The President. No--I see your point--no. I think it would not
    because I think we're talking about an international force. We have--you
    remember Colonel Higgins. Now, he was a member of a peacekeeping force,
    a UNIFIL force. So, there is some precedent. But we're not talking here
    about a lot of troops or anything of that nature. When I said we weren't
    in it, I now think of the Higgins case and I'm sure there are others,
    other people involved from the United States. I guess to clarify it, I
    should say there would not be a lot of U.S. troops involved in something
    of this nature.
        Q. Mr. President, about the cease-fire resolution, two things. One,
    does your analysis so far show that the various objections that the
    Iraqis have raised are simply just rhetoric and that they don't
    interfere with the fact that the Iraqis are actually accepting the
    cease-fire?
        The President. We're not sure yet, Rita [Rita Beamish, Associated
    Press]. And thus, I'm not going to comment further. I talked to Jim
    earlier, and neither of us have the final word on that. Dennis Ross just
    went and checked so I could give you the latest answer, but we do not
    have the final interpretation of this. There is some griping about the
    severity of the U.N. conditions, but that is just too bad, because the
    United Nations has acted and Iraq--Saddam Hussein is in no position, in
    my view, to barter on something of this nature.
        And so, I hope that there's just a lot of front-end rhetoric and the
    answer is that they do that which the international community has called
    on them to do, and that is to accept all terms of the cease-fire, all
    the terms that were put down for them.
        Q. And the second thing, sir, just on that point: If it's true that
    they are accepting the cease-fire, should the sanctions then be lifted
    against Iraq, or should that wait until the Kurdish situation--until
    Iraq stops----
        The President. We'll take a look here at all of that, but we want to
    see full compliance, and we want to see a cessation of the brutality in
    Iraq.
        I recognized Ann [Ann Compton, ABC News], and then we got crossed
    over.
        Q. ----anything less than total compliance of the U.N. resolution
    acceptable? If it takes 26 pages to say yes, don't you worry that they
    aren't going to embrace all of the aspects?
        The President. I'm just not going to comment on it until we see it.
    I don't care how much griping they do. I want to know whether they're
    going to accept it or not. Let them go forth with their rhetoric. We've
    listened to that. The American people heard that for about 6 months, and
    it didn't change one thing. But the answer is: What's the bottom line,
    and when are they going to accept it, and how firm will the acceptance
    be? And that's what the United States and our coalition partners will be
    looking for.
        Q. But they haven't accepted the first 13 resolutions. Do you
    believe that they can be made to live up to this one?
        The President. Well, I think that this one includes fulfillment of
    the others. It talks, for example, about not--we don't call it
    reparations, but what's the technical term we use?
        The Secretary. Compensation.
        The President. Compensation. So, this new all-encompassing step by
    the United Nations takes care of a lot of the outstanding questions
    then.
        The Secretary. Can I just add to that? You're quite right, they did
    not accept the first 13 willingly, and you would think that they might
    have learned by now the wisdom of accepting United Nations resolutions,
    the resolutions of the international community.

    Middle East Discussions

        Q. Mr. President, is Secretary Baker's trip back to the Middle East
    an outgrowth of General Scowcroft's mission last week? Can you tell us
    anything further about that visit?
        The President. That stealth mission? No, I can't tell you anything
    more about it. But there he is, the stealth man himself. But I would say
    this: the United States is doing what we can to foster stability and
    security in the Gulf area, a peace between Israel and the Palestinians.
    Hopefully, our efforts can help the Lebanon. And so, all of these trips
    contribute to our knowledge and to our ability to come up with a
    proposal that

    [[Page 337]]

    can achieve these ends.
        And we are talking to our European friends about this, and trying to
    get their ideas on it. And others are working the peace process. You saw
    where Francois Mitterrand met with King Hussein, and that's a
    contribution. So, I'd just say that all of these things come together.
    And I want to move forward. I want to see us move forward. The United
    States has a newfound and credibility in that part of the world. And I
    want to see that used to enhance the peace, to contribute to a lasting
    peace. And that's a broad objective, but it's a noble goal and it's one
    that we want to try to help attain. And that's why Secretary Baker is
    going back. That's why General Scowcroft undertook a mission. That's why
    you're seeing a lot of other diplomatic action by the United States in
    different capitals.
        You had one for the Secretary. This is one for the Secretary.
        Q. Mr. Secretary, you identified what you called a window of
    opportunity. Can you tell us what are the new facts that you see as
    opportunistic?
        The Secretary. Well, the new factors are generated, of course, by
    what happened as a consequence of the Gulf war. I'm not suggesting that
    there are any new factors. I'm not suggesting new factors--there may be
    some--that have occasioned this trip.
        But let me simply say that I think we owe it to ourselves and we owe
    it to the countries in the region and, indeed, we owe it to the world to
    make every effort possible to deal with this most intractable of all
    problems. And we're not going to be able to deal with it if we're not
    willing to actively engage in work. And that's what the President has
    instructed me to do on this trip.
        Now, if we can't get anywhere, then we'll just have to fall back and
    look at other options and other approaches. But I think and I think most
    people believe that there are changed circumstances in the region, and
    frankly, I found that in the attitude both of Arabs and Israelis on the
    occasion of that first trip I made.
        Q. ----small steps as opposed to large steps?
        The Secretary. Steps. Steps. We need steps. Absolutely.
        Q. The meeting with the Jordanians, though, does that reflect a
    marked change in their attitude or contrition on their part, or is that
    a U.S. judgment that nothing is going to firmly resolve in that region,
    especially the Palestinian question, without some kind of Jordanian
    involvement?
        The President. To whom are you addressing your question?
        Q. If either of you would care to answer that.
        The President. Let me answer it for you. It is a proper step that
    the Secretary meet the Foreign Minister of Jordan in Geneva. And you can
    figure out what I mean by that. It is a proper step. And Jordan
    obviously will have an important role to play in whatever the final
    answer proves to be; there's no question about that. But it is right
    that the Secretary meet the Foreign Minister in Geneva.
        Q. Mr. President, are you still hopeful in taking the trip yourself?
        Q. ----from the very beginning has pursued a very incrementalist
    approach to the Middle East. Isn't it time for you to use the enormous
    credibility you've gained from this war to do something bolder and more
    dramatic? Why not a Bush plan? Why step-by-step confidence-building
    measures? These haven't worked yet; why should they work now?
        The President. Well, one, you've got to crawl before you walk. Two,
    I think that you might well see a comprehensive overall plan. I want to
    treat it kind of like the Brady plan. You remember? The Brady plan,
    until it began to work, and then we called it the Bush plan. So, you've
    got some--[laughter]----
        Q. The Baker plan and then it would be the Bush plan.
        The President. But it's a very important question, and you're
    absolutely right. We do have this credibility, I believe, in various
    capitals where we didn't. I think that's certainly true in the Gulf. I
    understand that it's true in Israel. So, I want to see us use that in
    order to be the catalyst for peace. Now, we're not going to do this
    alone. We have a tremendous amount of consultation, and the Secretary is
    off on another consultative trip.
        But I don't want to--if your question is this--I don't want to waste
    it. I don't want

    [[Page 338]]

    to have so much time go by that everything gets back to the status quo
    ante and despair sets in, because there is hope now. And I am hopeful
    after talking to the Secretary from his last trip.
        So, you may well see what you asked about here, but I do think it is
    very important that when we propose something, that it works, that it
    has a chance to be successful. We could go out with a grand design and
    maybe have nobody want to do it our way. So, there's an awful lot of
    complex diplomacy that needs to be employed right now.
        But I'm not putting aside the idea of a bold plan, but we've got to
    work our way up to that.

    Iran-U.S. Relations

        Q. Mr. President, the one country in the region that there has not
    been a mission to is Iran. Is it now becoming time, you think, for the
    U.S. to make a move in that direction?
        The President. I don't know, I haven't talked to Jim about the
    Velayati comments the other day on one of the news programs--the Foreign
    Minister of Iran--indicating there were still problems. We know what the
    problems are. I have made very clear that we would like to have better
    relations with Iran. It's an important country. We've had enormous
    differences with them. Every American knows what the major stumbling
    block is, and that is the holding of hostages. And I want to see those
    hostages released. And I'm not saying that Iran can wave a magic wand
    and have them all released. They don't hold the hostages, but they can
    be very, very influential in the release of the hostages. And it would
    incur enormous good will for Iran in this country if they did that--
    enormous.
        And they've got difficult problems inside that country; we
    understand that. So, we're working the problem. And you'll notice some
    of the coalition countries now reaching out a little bit to Iran. They
    don't have a hostage barrier. But I'm hopeful that we will have better
    relations with Iran. I like the moderate talk I hear coming from some of
    their people now. I would be hopeful that that would be resolved. But I
    want those hostages out of there. I want them out, every single one of
    them.

    Possible Middle East Trip

        Q. When are you going to the Middle East yourself, sir?
        The President. Middle East myself? Well, my problem is I've wanted
    to go for a long time, but we don't want to do it unless it can be
    contributory. And I'm anxious to do it. But I just have to say I don't
    know the answer to your question. The Secretary's trip will be
    important, what he finds. I had wanted to go early on simply to salute
    the troops on the ground; time is making, maybe, that more difficult.
    And we've tried to show my interest, Barbara's interest in welcoming
    them back here. But as time goes by, that becomes less of a reason, and
    the Middle East peace process becomes more of a reason. So, I want to
    talk to the Secretary when he gets back. But I can tell you there is no
    definite plan at this point to do it. And I've got other trips that I'm
    committed to make, that I will make. So, we'll just have to wait and
    see. I'm anxious to do it.
        I'm going to stay in close personal touch with our partners in the
    Middle East. That includes the Arab countries; that includes Israel. And
    I will be following the Secretary's trip very, very closely because
    we've got a shot now, and we're going to try our level-best to work with
    others to bring peace to this area. And we really feel it. This is
    something we feel very passionately about.
        Well, thank you all very much.

                        Note: The President's 78th news conference began at
                            4:45 p.m. on the grounds of the Houstonian
                            Hotel. The following persons were mentioned in
                            the news conference: President Turgut Ozal of
                            Turkey; Foreign Minister Sa`ud al-Faysal Al
                            Sa`ud and King Fahd bin `Abd al-`Aziz Al Sa`ud
                            of Saudi Arabia; Foreign Minister Marwan al-
                            Kasim of Jordan; President Jacques Delors of the
                            European Community; Javier Perez de Cuellar de
                            la Guerra, Secretary-General of the United
                            Nations; President Saddam Hussein of Iraq; Lt.
                            Col. William R. Higgins, USMC, chief of the U.N.
                            peacekeeping force in southern Lebanon, who was
                            kidnaped in

    [[Page 339]]

                            1988 and executed by pro-Iranian terrorists in
                            1989; Dennis Ross, Director of the Policy
                            Planning Staff at the State Department; Brent
                            Scowcroft, Assistant to the President for
                            National Security Affairs; President Francois
                            Mitterrand of France; King Hussein I of Jordan;
                            and Foreign Minister Ali Akbar Velayati of Iran.