[Public Papers of the Presidents of the United States: George H. W. Bush (1992, Book I)]
[March 22, 1992]
[Pages 483-490]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office www.gpo.gov]



The President's News Conference With Chancellor Helmut Kohl of Germany

March 22, 1992
    The President. Chancellor Kohl and I had a very productive 
discussion on a wide range of the issues that face us in the new era; 
among them, the American role in Europe, support for the democratic 
revolutions in Russia and Eastern Europe, and world trade talks.
    We agreed that NATO remains the bedrock of European peace and there 
is no substitute for our Atlantic link, anchored by a strong American 
military presence in Europe which the Chancellor and I both agreed must 
be maintained.
    In our review of the Uruguay round negotiations, the Chancellor and 
I reaffirmed 
our determination to reach an early agreement that expands the world 
trading system. This would be a victory for U.S.-

[[Page 484]]

European partnership in promoting free trade, spurring economic growth, 
and creating jobs in the U.S., Germany, and all developing countries.
    We also discussed how we can best support democracy in the East. We 
agreed that as Russia and other new democracies adopt reform programs, 
we and the rest of the G-7 countries should take the lead in expanding 
financial support through the international financial institutions.
    Our talks have shown that the Atlantic partnership is as vital and 
healthy as ever. And I'm especially pleased to see the United States and 
Germany are working as closely now as we did during the period of German 
unification.
    And finally, on a very personal side, Barbara and I were just 
delighted to have this time together with Chancellor Kohl, with his 
wife, and it was also a great pleasure to have their son up there at 
Camp David. It was a good visit.
    Mr. Chancellor, the floor is yours, sir.
    The Chancellor. Mr. President, Mrs. Bush, ladies and gentlemen, I 
would like to take up where you left off, Mr. President, and thank you 
and Mrs. Bush for the very warm hospitality with which you received my 
wife, my son, and the members of my delegation at Camp David. It was a 
very, very friendly meeting, a very personal meeting, a very nice coda 
for these discussions on problems of interest to both of us and which 
will be of interest for the very near future.
    One of these issues which we consider to be a very important one was 
the issue of GATT. Obviously, I did not come here as an official 
negotiator but as a member or as a representative of an EC member 
country. I explained our position on this question once again. The 
negotiations obviously are being weighed by the EC Commission, and the 
EC Commission enjoys the full confidence of the EC member countries.
    President Bush and I are in agreement that it is of paramount 
importance for world economy to come to a successful conclusion of the 
GATT negotiations now. And we are in agreement that we have to prevent 
at all costs a fallback into a policy of protectionism. We know that it 
is, particularly at this juncture, a very important thing that we 
maintain free world trade, that this is very important for a good 
development of the world economy. And this is, indeed, one of the main 
reasons why we intend to strengthen GATT.
    And we are also, both of us, very well-aware of the fact that the 
successful conclusion of the GATT round is also of paramount importance 
for the countries of the Third World. And this is why we want to put all 
our efforts into these negotiations in the coming weeks and why we want 
to come to a successful conclusion of the GATT round at the very latest 
by the end of April.
    In our talks, we talked, obviously, also about the preparations 
leading up to the world economic summit meeting in Munich in July. And 
the President supported me in the endeavor that these talks should focus 
more intensively on informal talks and that we should give room to the 
discussions on global issues that are of interest to all of us.
    Very important issues for the summit meeting in Munich will be, 
first of all, the world economic developments. We want this summit to 
strengthen the trust and confidence in all countries in the world 
economy.
    Another important subject for Munich will be the situation in the 
Commonwealth of Independent States and in the countries of Central and 
Eastern Europe. We will talk in Munich particularly about an overall 
package of so-called ``help for self-help'' where we want to draw up a 
sort of framework for cooperation of the West with the C.I.S.
    And a third very important subject which we talked about is the 
improvement of cooperation of Western industrialized countries with the 
countries of the Third World now after the end of the cold war.
    Another important subject we talked about in view of the very 
dramatic changes in the successor republics of the former Soviet Union 
and the Commonwealth of Independent States was the overall situation 
there, but also the relief activities that our two countries have 
already initiated. We just initiated the second of these assistance 
activities, and it is the second of the kind. But obviously, we cannot 
go on doing this

[[Page 485]]

kind of thing indefinitely.
    What is important now is to give them a sort of a solid program of 
help or self-help where we focus on individual areas, where we focus, 
for example, on agriculture, on improvement of infrastructure, on the 
improvement of transport and communication links, and where we also 
concentrate on improving, for example, the safety standards of nuclear 
power plants in the former Soviet Union.
    These were just some of the subjects that we dealt with during our 
very long and intensive discussions during these past 2 days. But I 
would like to mention the most important subject at the end of my 
remarks here: that once again, during these 2 days, it became apparent 
that the United States of America and reunified Germany are linked by 
very strong bonds of friendship and partnership. No matter what will 
happen in the world, this friendship, this partnership is of existential 
importance for us Germans. In future, too, freedom and security of 
Europe and also, therefore, of Germany can be safeguarded by this 
transatlantic alliance, which is why I would like to underline here in 
Washington, in the White House, that for us it is a matter of course 
that this includes also a substantial presence of American troops in 
Europe.
    But it is our joint desire that our relationship will be deepened 
and widened beyond the mere scope of security and military issues, that 
we come to even closer relations in the cultural field, in the 
scientific field, in research and development, which is why I'm very 
pleased to be able to announce--and we have agreed on this--that this 
year we will inaugurate a German-American Academy of Sciences. This has 
never existed, to my knowledge, in the United States of America, and we 
have never had this sort of link with the United States before or with 
any other country across the Atlantic, for that matter. I think that an 
instrument such as this one is of utmost importance, particularly for 
the young generation, for fostering a mutual understanding of each 
other. And I would now like to issue an invitation to all our American 
friends to participate as guests in the German cultural festival that 
will take place here soon and to understand this as a sign of sympathy 
and friendship with the American people.
     Mr. President, allow me to thank you once again for these days 
where you once again demonstrated your friendship to us, which made it 
possible to meet in this very warm and hospitable atmosphere.
    The President. Now, we'll take questions, and it would be nice to 
alternate between the Chancellor and me. And so, can we start off in a 
spirit of hospitality for a question for the Chancellor? Helen [Helen 
Thomas, United Press International].

Multilateral Trade Negotiations

    Q. Yes, for both of you. It is well-known that you both want a GATT 
agreement. Was anything done? Were any ideas presented to make the 
breakthrough?
    The Chancellor. Obviously, we talked about where we are already in 
agreement and where we still have some questions to solve before we can 
reach agreement. When I get back to Bonn, I will call on my European 
colleagues, and I will call also Jacques Delors, as representative of 
the EC Commission. And once again, I will give a full report of these 2 
days of talks, and we will once again try to find out where there is 
further room for negotiations in order to come, then, at the end to a 
compromise.
    And obviously, we're not going to talk about the content of these 
negotiations because this is, after all, what negotiations are about. 
You first of all negotiate, and then you come to some form of content.
    Q. Do you have solid reason for your optimism?
    The Chancellor. Obviously when we talk about compromise, it means 
that both sides have to move.

Presidential Campaign

    Q. Mr. President, in this room on Friday you spoke a great deal 
about change and spoke of yourself as a person who wants to press for 
change. You have been President and Vice President for 11 years now; 
before that you had a long record as a Washington insider. This being 
the case, how can you convincingly present yourself as a candidate of 
change?
    The President. I thought I spelled out the other day exactly what I 
mean by change:

[[Page 486]]

far better system of education, vast improvement in many domestic 
problems, including the economy. I made suggestions that I have made 
before, and I'll keep making them to try to get the economy moving. And 
so, I do represent that, and I would like to get more cooperation to 
make the changes possible. But I will be prepared to take my case to the 
people in the fall about the future.

Iraq

    Q. Mr. President, did you and the Chancellor have an opportunity to 
discuss what to do with, and to, Saddam Hussein?
    The President. No, we didn't. We discussed about the fact that the 
United Nations resolutions must be implemented in their entirety. But I 
don't think it went beyond that. I thanked the Chancellor for their 
support back during the war; I thanked him for his total understanding 
and his cooperation. But we did not go into any details about what steps 
might next be taken. Is that----
    The Chancellor. Yes.

United Nations Environmental Conference

    Q. Both of you did not mention the summit in Brazil on the 
environment. Did you talk about it, and did you bridge any differences 
which might have existed?
    The Chancellor. Yes, we talked about this subject, too. Obviously, 
my time here was limited, so I didn't mention all the subjects we raised 
during these 2 days of talks. We agreed that we would--obviously also 
with other governments--but first of all we would, namely the Government 
of the Federal Republic of Germany and the Government of the United 
States of America, work very closely together in preparing this 
conference.
    We know how important this conference is for many, many countries in 
the world. And obviously, this importance is increased by the fact that 
this conference takes place only a few days or weeks before the G-7 
summit meeting in Munich. And we all know, I think, about the difficulty 
of having to reconcile here the expectations of the countries of the 
Third World and, on the other hand, the determined effort of the 
industrialized countries to indeed come here to program proposals that 
will preserve what is important for all of us, namely Creation.

[A question was asked in German, and a translation was not provided.]

    The Chancellor. There are no differences. There are certain areas 
where we have to exchange views and deepen our knowledge about each 
other's position a little more, but we are in agreement.

South Africa

    Q. To both gentlemen. I know among your many responsibilities you 
both followed what happened in South Africa this week. I wonder if 
either country has any plans to help South Africa further now? And are 
you confident that foreign investments will be protected?
    The President. Let me just say we did talk about South Africa a 
little bit. I think we both are very pleased at the changes that have 
taken place there. I didn't tell Chancellor Kohl this, but I did call 
Mr. de Klerk the day after the election to salute him for his courageous 
leadership. And all I can think of is that we want to move forward 
bilaterally, the United States and South Africa, just as fast as we can.
    There are some technicalities remaining, but our relationships have 
improved dramatically. And they will improve more under his leadership. 
The job isn't finished, but he has made a courageous start. So, we 
talked about it, and I think we both agreed the progress is dramatic.
    Do you want to add?
    The Chancellor. I would like to underline here what the President 
just said. I think many people have not quite fully understood what a 
wise political course President de Klerk steered here and how courageous 
he was at the same time and how much he risked. And I think if we think 
back to only 5 years ago, then it becomes apparent what a substantial 
step forward this is. And he deserves every support we can give him. And 
we are in agreement that we want to give him this support, each in his 
own way.
    And at our next summit meeting in Lisbon, among the member countries 
of the EC, we will certainly discuss this subject

[[Page 487]]

very thoroughly. Let me say that a failure of de Klerk at the ballot box 
would have been indeed a catastrophe.

Nuclear Weapons

[The following question was asked in German.]

    Q. The question related to the dispute between Ukraine and Russia as 
regards the nuclear weapons and other weapons and the distribution of 
them.
    The Chancellor. This indeed is one of the most pressing issues that 
we have to deal with in our contacts with the Commonwealth of 
Independent States because obviously a number of these republics have an 
enormous amount, an enormous arsenal of weapons, both nuclear and 
conventional. And I should also mention chemical weapons, which 
unfortunately are fairly often forgotten but which also can be used to 
devastating effect. And I think that it must be now in our joint 
interests to come to some form of settlement here of this issue. Russia 
and the Ukraine have to come to some form of arrangement between each 
other so that we achieve a lasting and durable safe situation for all of 
us.
    And I would like to say here for the Federal Government, without 
wanting to create the impression that we want to interfere into the 
internal affairs or infringe on the sovereignty of any state, that this 
subject will indeed play a role when we discuss aid to these former 
Soviet republics, the republics which now form the C.I.S., and that we 
will think of that when we discuss ``help for self-help.''
    The President.  May I only add one thing on that, that I did talk to 
President Kravchuk of Ukraine yesterday. And he, knowing I was going to 
meet with Chancellor Kohl, asked me to assure the Chancellor that he was 
going to do everything he could to satisfy the requirements of the whole 
world on this question of safe disposal of nuclear weapons.
    John [John Cochran, NBC News]?

Presidential Campaign

    Q. A question to both of you about foreign policy during an American 
political year. Mr. President, your interest in foreign policy has 
almost become a political albatross around your neck. If, for example, 
there were to be a GATT agreement, would you use that to say, ``Listen, 
this will prevent a worldwide depression, a worldwide trade war; it 
shows that foreign policy is important''? Would you be able to use this 
as a campaign issue?
    And are you concerned about the level of debate among Democratic 
candidates when they talk about foreign policy? Do you think it's being 
ignored so far?
    And Chancellor Kohl, are you concerned about the level of debate and 
the quality of debate so far in this election year? Mr. Bush's 
Republican challenger, for example, has shown isolationist trends. Does 
that concern you?
    The President.  May I start? Well, in the first place, John, that's 
a very broad question. I am convinced that foreign policy and world 
peace is going to be a major issue in the fall. I was asked the question 
here about change. I think all America rejoices in the fact that Germany 
is unified. I think they rejoice in the fact that our children go to 
sleep at night with a little less fear of nuclear weapons. You talk 
about change, this is significant. I think they rejoice in the fact that 
Eastern Europe is free and democratic. And I think they rejoice in the 
fact, if they think about it, that there is significant change in the 
Middle East, where people that were never willing to talk before are 
talking. This is significant change, and it is in the interest of the 
United States.
    Now, it has not been on the front burner. But clearly, anybody 
aspiring to the Presidency is going to have to discuss these matters of 
world peace, national security, and the domestic policy as well.
    So, I think you raise an interesting question, and I think the 
American people would agree that that subject of foreign policy and of 
world peace and of change that has happened in the last 3 years and, 
indeed, over the last 12 years has been significant. It's been dramatic; 
the world has dramatically changed for the better. And if we're going to 
be talking about problems in one area or another, we're going to be 
talking about them worldwide.
    So, I think the debate has not been joined on that. I think it isn't 
in focus. To some

[[Page 488]]

degree, I can understand it. When people are hurting at home, the 
Chancellor and I talked about this, most of the concentration is on the 
domestic economy. But any Presidential debate is going to be about 
change in foreign policy as well as domestic. And we are very proud of 
the changes that have taken place around the world because of what we've 
done, what other Presidents before me have done in keeping this country 
strong, restoring credibility to the United States.
    So, I think it is an issue. And ironically, the Chancellor and I did 
discuss it in very generic terms, in the sense of what were going to be 
the issues in the fall. And I told him I thought foreign policy was 
going to be one. Is that----

Multilateral Trade Negotiations

    Q. Also, will the GATT agreement help you?
    The President. Well, the GATT agreement will help the world. And 
clearly it will help the United States, and clearly it will help 
agricultural America. And it will help the Third World. Far better than 
aid programs is open trade. And so, it will help everybody.
    But it shouldn't be viewed in a partisan mode. I know we still have 
some isolationists, some protectionists that don't want to go forward 
with these international agreements. They are wrong. It is in the 
interest of our country to conclude the GATT agreement. It is in the 
interest of our country to conclude a North American free trade 
agreement. You talk about change, there's something dramatic.
    So, these things are in our interest, and I will keep pressing for 
them, good politics or not. They are in the best interest of the United 
States.
    Chancellor?
    The Chancellor. George, I would like to add a comment to your 
response to this question which I consider to be of utmost importance 
for us in Germany and in Europe as a whole. Obviously, in an election 
campaign there are a lot of issues that loom large, and a lot of them 
being domestic issues. And I certainly don't want to interfere into your 
internal affairs or into the election campaign. But if an American asked 
my opinion on this, I would give him the following answer: I would tell 
him that a destiny of peoples is being decided on the foreign policy 
front and that each people that does not understand and follow this 
lesson of history, that it will have to pay very dearly for this.
    And for a people such as the American people, that whether it wants 
it or not has this role, this decisive role in world politics to play 
and will have to play this role, this is even more valid. Had President 
George Bush not proved to be such a strong leader over these past years, 
obviously these dramatic changes would not have taken place in the 
world.
    It is true that he was not the only one to bring about these 
changes; there were many others who influenced events. But he played a 
decisive role. I would just like to illustrate this by giving you a 
small example: When I was here 3 years ago and we gave a press 
conference here in the White House, one of the main topics on the agenda 
was the followup to Lance. Now, if you ask anybody what is Lance, what 
is the followup to Lance, they probably wouldn't be able to answer 
because the world has changed so dramatically. What we're talking about 
now are Russia, the Ukraine, building up democracy, promoting market 
economy there, building up free political systems in these countries.
    We invested enormous sums of money in the past in the arms race, in 
building up huge arms arsenals, in trying to meet the Communist 
challenge everywhere. And now we are making a huge investment in peace, 
in freedom. There is no longer any Communist dictatorship in Europe. And 
I don't think that you have to be a prophet to be able to say that in 
the foreseeable future there won't be any Communist dictatorship in the 
world anymore. And I think that this is a fantastic fact.
    The President. I think we have time, Marlin says, for one over here, 
sir, and then Frank [Frank Murray, Washington Times], and that's it.

Nuclear Weapons

    Q. Mr. President, may I come back to that nuclear problem in the 
Soviet Union,

[[Page 489]]

or ex-Soviet Union? What can you tell us about ongoing productions of 
nuclear weapons in the former Soviet Union, and why are they doing that?
    The President. Why are they not starting to get rid of them?
    Q. They are producing.
    The President. I can't answer that question for you, but I can say 
that they as recently as yesterday reiterated, the Ukrainians anyway, 
their conviction to get rid of nuclear weapons. They're having a 
dispute, as you know, or had one inside there with the Russians as to 
how to go about that. But I am confident that they are on the right 
track, that we are going to see substantial reductions.
    And so, it's moving in the right direction, I can't answer your 
question on why they are producing any at all, unless it would be under 
the question of modernization. But we have numbers we're working 
towards. And indeed, in terms of destruction of tactical nukes and all, 
why, I think it's generally moving in the right direction. We still have 
to be sure that it's done safely, that it's done in accordance with the 
safest possible procedures. But I can't answer your question 
specifically, but I can say on a broader sense it's moving in the right 
direction.
    Yes, Frank. This is the last one.

Economic and Tax Legislation

    Q. Mr. President, you discussed here today the need for compromise 
to win a GATT agreement. And yet, your Chief of Staff today said that on 
the major domestic issue right now, the taxes and economic legislation, 
that there will be no compromise. He referred to Senator Bentsen and Mr. 
Rostenkowski as being out of touch with reality. And I'm wondering how, 
with that kind of rhetoric and no compromise, you expect to achieve a 
settlement? Could you tell us what you're going to do about that?
    The President. Just keep pressing for what's right. And I'm 
confident that at some point the pressure from the country will compel 
those that have resisted us to move forward in the right direction.
    But I think most people in this country know that I held out my hand 
to this Congress in an effort to compromise. I've said that, worked with 
them in the past, prepared to work with them in the future. But there 
are certain principles that I can't give in on. And I would also say 
that we're moving into this election year, and I think most people 
recognize that there's going to be a lot more political posturing out 
there. I'm President. I've got to try to keep moving the country 
forward. And I'm going to do that. And most of my time now will be spent 
in doing exactly that, with Super Tuesday and the high concentration of 
primaries behind us.
    But I'm perfectly prepared to work with the Congress. But we've got 
to be realistic about politics. And I might add that far better than 
doing something bad to this economy is doing nothing at all. The best 
thing would be to do something that would stimulate investment. But if 
that can't happen then the next choice would be do nothing, and the 
worst choice would be to pass a tax-and-spend bill. So, we're coming 
into a political year when each side is going to be expressing its own 
political positions. And that might mean that we don't move things 
forward as fast as I would like. But I'm going to keep on trying.
    Q. Does that mean that you subscribe to the premise of no compromise 
on taxes? And how long does that----
    The President. Well, I think they will, at some point in here, will 
give up on trying to raise taxes on people. But in terms of sitting and 
talking about what we can do to move investment incentives forward, 
which does have to do with taxation, I think we ought to try to get 
something moving on that front.
    So, it's in that area--I didn't hear the comments; I was busily 
engaged in a very fruitful and constructive discussion with the 
Chancellor, so I was spared the agony of listening to these talking 
shows that come on every Saturday and Sunday. [Laughter] So I didn't 
hear it, so I just can't comment on the byplay. I can tell you that I'm 
going to continue to take my case to the people for change, for change.
    Q. Will you not extend your no-taxes pledge, and how far----
    The President. I thought I expressed it pretty clearly here, just 
standing here in this room; it seems like ages ago, but it was

[[Page 490]]

only 48 hours ago.
    Now, the Chancellor has to take a plane. He's got to be at work in 
the morning. What time is it back there in Germany? Eleven o'clock or 
something like that. So, we better let him go.
    Thank you, Helmut.

                    Note: The President's 124th news conference began at 
                        4:15 p.m. in the East Room at the White House. 
                        The Chancellor spoke in German, and his remarks 
                        were translated by an interpreter. In his 
                        remarks, the Chancellor referred to NATO's Lance 
                        short-range nuclear missile.