[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.