[Public Papers of the Presidents of the United States: William J. Clinton (1995, Book I)]
[June 14, 1995]
[Pages 881-888]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office www.gpo.gov]



The President's News Conference With European Union Leaders
June 14, 1995

    President Clinton. It's a great pleasure to welcome President Chirac 
and President Santer to the White House, the first visit for both 
leaders in their present positions to the Oval Office.
    I begin with congratulations to President Chirac on his outstanding 
victory last month. From our many contacts with him throughout his long 
public service, the United States knows that he is a true and reliable 
friend, and he will be a strong and effective leader for France and for 
Europe. In his short time as President, he has already demonstrated this 
leadership. We applaud his determination to create jobs and economic 
growth for his own country, and with Jacques Chirac as President, we are 
sure that the French commitment to peace, stability, and progress is in 
excellent hands. France, as all of you know, was America's first ally. 
We know

[[Page 882]]

that our relationships will grow even stronger in the coming years.
    It was a pleasure as well to meet President Santer, whose leadership 
in the cause of Europe follows in the great tradition that began with 
Jean Monnet. More than 30 years ago, President Kennedy spoke of a strong 
and united Europe as an equal partner with whom we face, and I quote, 
``the great and burdensome tasks of building and defending a community 
of free nations.'' This is more true than ever. And our summit today 
shows the United States partnership with Europe is a powerful, positive 
force.
    The three of us reviewed a lot of economic and security issues: our 
efforts to help the countries of Central Europe and the former Soviet 
Union; we reaffirmed our commitment to strengthening NATO and proceeding 
with the steady process of enlarging the alliance; we agreed to continue 
liberalizing trade. We agreed that senior representatives of the U.S. 
and the EU will work together to develop a common agenda for the 21st 
century. Secretary Christopher has already provided a road map for this 
dialog in his recent speech in Madrid.
    We discussed our efforts to strengthen the U.N. peacekeeping forces 
and to reduce the suffering in Bosnia. In the midst of the tragedy, we 
must not forget that the common efforts have already saved thousands of 
lives, and we must continue to work together.
    We also explored a number of issues that the leaders of the G-7 will 
deal with in Halifax, and I'd like to mention a couple of them if I 
might. The Halifax conference marks another step in our effort to build 
the structures of the global economy for the 21st century. In the face 
of astonishing change, the growing economic ties between nations, the 
rapid movement of people and information, the miracles of technology, 
our prosperity depends upon preparing our people for the future and 
forging an international system that is strong enough and flexible 
enough to make the most of these opportunities.
    At home we have been working hard to establish a steady record of 
growth, investment in our people, in bringing down our budget deficit. I 
am proud that our deficit today is now the lowest of all the G-7 
countries. Our new budget proposal to balance the budget in 10 years 
will permit us to do this and continue to invest in the education and 
development of our people.
    Abroad we have set out clear goals: to open world markets, to help 
the former Communist countries transform themselves into free market 
democracies, to promote economic reform in the developing world, to 
speed reforms in the international financial institutions. These efforts 
have yielded tremendous successes: NAFTA, GATT, agreements with the 
Asia-Pacific region and in our own hemisphere. We have supported the 
nations in Central Europe, the New Independent States, and the 
developing world in their historic turn toward free markets. Now we have 
a chance to reap enormous benefits in better jobs, greater 
opportunities, and growing prosperity.
    We will build on our agreements last year in Naples when we meet in 
Halifax to focus on reforming the institutions of the international 
economy. The IMF, the World Bank, the regional banks have served us very 
well over the last half-century. And they have grown, taken on new 
missions as the times demand. But to deal with a new economy, we have to 
give them new guidance and new momentum.
    First, we must work to identify and prevent financial problems like 
Mexico's before they become disasters and rock the global economy. And 
when crises occur, we must have efficient ways to mobilize the 
international community.
    Second, we have to examine how best to adapt for a new era the 
multilateral development banks and the social and economic agencies of 
the U.N. These organizations have helped dozens of countries to build 
their economies and improve the lives of their people. We must not walk 
away from those banks and our obligations to the developing world. This 
is a point that President Chirac made to me in our meeting and one with 
which I strongly agree.
    Finally, together with Russia, we will discuss a range of political 
issues that include Bosnia, Iran's nuclear ambitions, European security, 
and reform in Russia. We will consider new forms of cooperation to 
combat international crime, terrorism, and nuclear smuggling, because 
prosperity without security means little.
    Also, I will be having some bilateral meetings, as all of you know, 
including a meeting with the Prime Minister of Japan, at which time we 
will review the position the United States has taken on our trade 
disputes with Japan regarding autos and auto parts. As you know, we are 
going to be meeting about that again shortly after the Halifax summit. 
My determination there remains

[[Page 883]]

as firm as ever. I believe we can reach a successful conclusion, and I 
intend to do everything I can to see that it is done.
    Let me again thank President Chirac and President Santer and offer 
them the opportunity to make a couple of opening remarks.
    Mr. President.
    President Chirac. Mr. President, ladies and gentlemen. Mr. 
President, 40 years ago, when I was working as a soda jerk in the Howard 
Johnson restaurant--[laughter]--I didn't think that one day I would be 
in the White House beside the President of the United States for a press 
conference. And I appreciate it very much. It's rather moving for me. 
Since that time, I unfortunately forgot most of my English. [Laughter] 
That's why I'm going to speak French, if you don't mind--[laughter]--
just to say a few words to start with.
    Firstly, I would like to thank you very much for the welcome you 
have extended to me. I'd also like to tell you how pleased I am to see 
that on the main issues we are facing in the world today, and namely 
relations with France and with Europe, we have total convergence of 
views.
    We're living in a world that is becoming increasingly disintegrated. 
We see a rising trend of selfishness and isolationism in many, many 
countries. And so, it is very reassuring indeed to see that the world's 
greatest nations realize how important it is to have solidarity amongst 
one another. This is true in politics. This is true in the social and 
economic areas. It's also true when we face challenges together 
throughout the world and crises together throughout the world. And this 
is why I said that we are in agreement on most of the points, even if on 
some issues we do have divergent views.
    Mr. President, as the President of the European Union for a few more 
weeks, I would like to express my gratitude for the stance that you have 
taken on Bosnia, which is of great concern to me personally. I would 
like to say to you that we would like the entire Western world to be 
more attentive to the problems of the developing issues. And this is 
something that I will take up in Halifax. This is something that we must 
do something about. It's an ethical problem, a moral problem. It's also 
in our own interest, given the population growth that we see in many of 
these countries.
    I think that we must also work more closely together when it comes 
to addressing regional crises. We've seen the eruption of regional 
crises in many different parts of the world, in Africa, in Europe, 
elsewhere. I think that we must, again, think more carefully about the 
main issues, the main challenges we are facing today, mainly employment. 
And this is why I am very pleased to make--that my request that a second 
G-7 meeting be held on employment and that you welcomed that. The first 
meeting was indeed a success.
    I also think that we ought to undertake great efforts to fight 
against organized crime. In the United States some recent successes have 
been achieved in the fight against drugs. And I think that everything 
that deals with money laundering, fighting against drug trafficking, 
fighting against the spread of AIDS, again we must pool our efforts, 
enhance our efforts, and make sure that we work together in a 
complementary fashion. Now, in Halifax I will be touching on those 
points as well.
    Now, we have an additional issue, monetary insecurity, currency 
fluctuations. This is something that is a worldwide problem and a 
European problem, in particular. So these are the issues that I, as 
President of the European Union, have raised in my conversations with 
the President of the United States and will also be discussed during our 
meeting in Halifax.
    President Santer. Thank you, Mr. President. The wide range of issues 
we covered in our stimulating discussions today is testimony to the 
importance of our mutual relationship. Ours is undoubtedly the world's 
most important bilateral partnership. The regular six-monthly meetings 
between the United States and the European Union as such are catalysts 
for announcing our cooperation. The continued strengthening of the Union 
allows this cooperation to be balanced and effective.
    Despite the excellence of our relations, there is no place for 
complacency. In a world searching for new equilibrium, every opportunity 
must be taken to broaden and deepen the relationship. This will provide 
the foundation for global stability and prosperity.
    That is why I called at the beginning of this year for a review of 
the transatlantic partnership and launched the year with a transatlantic 
treaty. I am happy that since then, on both sides of the Atlantic, vivid 
debate is starting on the future of American and European relations. 
Today's meeting shows that there is a clear political

[[Page 884]]

will to explore the various means of structuring our relationship in 
view of the 21st century.
    It is too early to commit ourselves to precise concepts. This will 
need more time. But what we must achieve is a formula which would 
integrate the political, economic, and security components of that 
relationship. A lot will obviously depend on the outcome of the 1996 
intergovernmental conference which will define the future shape and role 
of the European Union itself. But it is not too early to immediately 
improve our consultation mechanism and to concentrate on concrete 
action, delivering tangible results in the short term. And that is what 
we have done today.
    We have also discussed the idea of launching a new transatlantic 
initiative at our next meeting in Madrid in December. I very much 
welcome that, as I welcome the decision to charge a small group of 
senior-level representatives to examine ways of strengthening the 
European Union and the United States relationship and prepare the Madrid 
meeting.
    Today's meeting has confirmed my belief that we are on the right 
track and that the transatlantic partnership will further prosper, to 
the benefit of our peoples and indeed of the whole world.
    Thank you so much.
    President Clinton. Helen [Helen Thomas, United Press International].

French Nuclear Tests

    Q. President Chirac, your decision to resume nuclear testing has 
provoked worldwide consternation. Are you willing to reconsider? And 
also, President Clinton, has his decision handicapped the drive for a 
comprehensive test ban?
    President Chirac. Well, obviously, the question that you've put to 
President Clinton is a question that he shall answer. But for me, I 
would say that no, I am not at all willing to go back on the decision 
that I've taken. But I would like to recall that we are talking about a 
very limited number of tests for a preestablished time frame, that is, 
from September to May 1996, and that France has made a commitment to 
sign without reservations once it is ready to do so, that is, in the 
autumn of 1996, we will then be in a position to sign the comprehensive 
test ban treaty.
    Q. So the protests don't bother you? I mean, the fact that the rest 
of the world really is disarmed by your decision?
    President Chirac. Well, unfortunately, I haven't really seen that 
the rest of the world is unarmed in this. [Laughter]
    President Clinton. As you know, we regret the decision, and we have 
worked hard to try to stop the test as a way of setting up greater 
willingness to have a comprehensive test ban treaty. And we have forgone 
testing ourselves. But I do want to point out that the French have 
pledged before President Chirac came here--and he has reaffirmed that 
pledge, which you just heard--to achieve a comprehensive test ban treaty 
by next year. Also, France was very helpful in supporting the indefinite 
extension of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty.
    So I believe on the larger goals that we still are united, and I 
believe we will achieve the success that we seek.
    Mr. President, would you like to call on a French journalist?
    President Chirac. A French journalist, is there a French journalist 
who would like to ask a question?

Iran

    Q. A question to both Presidents: Concerning the way of dealing with 
Iran as a terrorist state, are both of the governments on the same 
wavelength, or is it still a bone of contention?
    President Clinton. You think I should go first? [Laughter]
    President Chirac. Yes, you are the host. [Laughter]
    President Clinton. It's the least I can do as the host.
    I don't know that we're on the same wavelength. As you know, many 
countries disagree with the position the United States has taken, but we 
believe the evidence is clear that Iran is a major sponsor of terrorism. 
And we believe the evidence is clear that they are attempting to develop 
the capacity for nuclear weapons. And we think that neither of those 
things should be supported and, in fact, should be opposed.
    We also believe, regrettably, that the evidence is that a 
constructive engagement with the Iranians has at least so far failed to 
produce any positive results, failed to change the course of conduct of 
the country. And that is why we decided to take even stronger action 
recently and stop our direct and indirect trade with Iran. And I believe 
it is a proper course. I will attempt to persuade others that it is a 
proper course, at least insofar--certainly insofar as it

[[Page 885]]

affects sensitive things like technologies which can be used for 
military benefit and certainly to develop nuclear capacity.

Bosnia

    Q. I'd like to ask President Clinton, thousands of government troops 
are converging on Sarajevo vowing to break the 3-year-old Serb 
stranglehold on the capital. Do you think that a military solution is 
possible there? And do you think that the U.N. peacekeepers should get 
out of the way and open the way for any attack?
    President Clinton. Well, you really asked two different questions 
there. In the first--whether the road can be opened to Sarajevo 
militarily is not the same question as whether a military solution is 
possible in a larger sense. And my judgment is, and I think President 
Chirac agrees, that in the end a military solution is not available to 
the Bosnian Government. And I'm quite concerned about it.
    And therefore, I believe that what we are trying to do in 
strengthening UNPROFOR--you know that President Chirac has taken the 
lead, and the United States certainly supports him in principle, in 
developing a rapid reaction force to try to strengthen the UNPROFOR 
troops there and to protect his own troops more. And we believe that 
that and a vigorous continued pursuit of diplomacy offers the best hope 
of saving the Bosnian state and minimizing casualties.
    In terms of whether in this narrow moment such an action would 
succeed, I think our military leaders' judgment would be better than 
mine. But I think the larger point is that we have discouraged all the 
parties from continued violence. That's one of the reasons that we 
agreed with the U.N.'s request for a bombing support when Sarajevo was 
shelled by the Serbs recently. We think that the position of the United 
States should be to support our allies who are there on the ground, to 
support strengthening the U.N. mission, and to discourage all increases 
in violence, to try to keep the lid on the violence and put the pressure 
on all parties, including Serbia proper, to support those actions which 
would lead to a negotiated settlement.
    Would you like to comment on that?
    President Chirac. On Bosnia, we share the same view. Firstly, the 
UNPROFOR soldiers have been scattered throughout the country as part of 
a humanitarian and peacekeeping policy. They have been spread out across 
a vast territory, which is, furthermore, occupied by terrorists and, in 
particular, Serbian terrorists.
    Now, the inevitable happened, that is to say, availing themselves of 
the first pretext that came along, the Serbians took hostages, and the 
UNPROFOR soldiers on the ground were incapable of defending themselves. 
Now, a soldier ought to be able to defend himself at all times, 
especially if he is running a risk of physical danger or death. And in 
that kind of case, it is impossible to allow for him to be humiliated. 
But the soldiers of UNPROFOR have become increasingly humiliated. So 
it's a question of honor, and that called for a reaction.
    And so, France and the United Kingdom, along with some Dutch 
reinforcements, we have decided to create a rapid reaction force. The 
objective of this is not to attack anyone. It is going to be part of the 
existing U.N. mission and will cooperate with NATO, of course. The 
mission here is to react, to react anytime U.N. soldiers are attacked, 
humiliated, or deprived of their freedom. In order to achieve this, we 
had to develop a force that has the means to react, namely artillery, 
helicopters, and tanks.
    Now I have heard, in some quarters, from some political leaders who 
are wondering whether or not this Franco-British initiative is just a 
first step towards a withdrawal of UNPROFOR in Bosnia. Well, this is 
obviously absurd. If such a withdrawal were ever to take place--and I 
certainly hope that it does not--this is something that has already been 
planned for. We've already come up with contingency plans for a 
withdrawal.
    So what I would--what we were trying to do with the creation--what 
we are trying to do with the creation of the rapid reaction force is to 
enhance the capability of the soldiers to carry out their mission. And 
the quicker we can do this, the quicker the Serbs themselves will 
realize that they can't get away with murder.
    And this is why we require the general agreement of the Contact 
Group. And I can say that the Russians have agreed to this and almost 
all the countries we've consulted have agreed. Now, it is up to the 
United States Congress to give the green light to this initiative. And 
obviously, I hope that it will.
    It's important to bear in mind that any delay shall be seen by the 
Serbs as a glimmer of hope. And they shall be banking on internal 
dissension within the Contact Group--shall give them more time. And they 
have to understand

[[Page 886]]

that time is running against them. So that is the rationale behind this 
rapid reaction force which is being set up and which is, for the most 
part, composed of French and British troops.
    President Clinton. If I might just make one other response to the 
original question. You know that the sympathies of the United States and 
this administration are with the struggle of the Bosnian Government to 
preserve the territory, certainly the territory that has been agreed to 
in the Contact Group proposal, and to end the kind of behavior that we 
saw in the taking of the U.N. hostages.
    The question here is, therefore, would this action, even if it could 
succeed, ultimately strengthen or weaken the efforts of UNPROFOR to 
strengthen itself. President Chirac is taking bold actions here to try 
to strengthen UNPROFOR. Would it increase or decrease the chances that 
ultimately these objectives that we all share would prevail? What other 
consequences could occur in other parts of the country as a result of 
this? All these things need to be taken into consideration, which is why 
the United States has taken the position that, for the time being, all 
the parties should take as much care as possible to avoid further 
actions, because we believe that we have the best chance now of 
strengthening UNPROFOR and getting some new energy behind a lot of these 
diplomatic initiatives. This had nothing to do with where our sympathies 
are in terms of whether that road ought to be opened.
    Yes, it's time for a European journalist. Go ahead.

Algeria

    Q. Did you talk about Algeria?
    President Clinton. No, but we will tonight. Let me say I'm very 
interested in Algeria and the implications of what happens there for 
other countries. And President Chirac knows much more about it than I 
do. Your country has had a very long history there. And I look forward 
to a rather detailed discussion about it this evening.

Vietnam

    Q. Mr. President, you're being urged by Members of Congress and by, 
we're told, officials of your own State Department to proceed with the 
establishment of full diplomatic relations with Vietnam. Do you think 
the time is right for that? And in your view, does Vietnam now meet your 
criteria for the establishment of these relations?
    President Clinton. I have discussed this issue with some Members of 
Congress; you're correct about that. I specifically have talked with 
Senator McCain and Senator John Kerry in my office, and I had a--and 
Senator Robb. I also had a passing conversation with Senator Bob Kerrey 
about it. And of course, I've talked with Herschel Gober, the Deputy 
Director of the Department of Veterans Affairs, who just went to Vietnam 
on a mission.
    They brought back a number of documents, a significant number of 
documents which I am now having analyzed with a view toward trying to 
determine whether or not the standards that I have set forth have been 
met. When that analysis is complete, I will then reach a judgment and, 
of course, make it public. But I think I should await the analysis of 
the documents.
    I will say that the Vietnamese have been quite forthcoming. They 
have worked with us. If you look at the extraordinary efforts the United 
States has made to determine the fate of POW's and MIA's and the level 
of success that has been achieved, even though, to be sure, there are 
still outstanding cases, there's nothing quite like it in the history of 
warfare. And I think that the American people should be very proud of 
the efforts particularly made by our military, our active duty military 
and those supporting them, to determine the fate of every possible POW 
and MIA.
    But I cannot answer your question until the review of the documents 
has been completed.

Middle East Peace Process

    Q. Mr. President Clinton, what are your thoughts about the July 1st 
deadline which was set between the Palestinians and the Israelis for 
implementing the second phase in the Oslo accords? And what are the 
economic incentives that you are envisioning to guard and promote the 
peace process in the Middle East?
    And a question for President Chirac. What is the package, the 
economic package that the European Community is about to promote or to 
advance to strengthen the peace in the Middle East?
    Thank you.
    President Clinton. Well, we're working toward the deadline, and 
we're working closely with the Israelis and the Palestinians. As you 
know,

[[Page 887]]

we're in constant contact with both of them. And we're doing what we can 
to get other supporters involved in the process of rebuilding the Middle 
East. We support the establishment of a development bank, which we 
believe is the least costly and most effective way to leverage public 
capital with private investment to redevelop the region.
    And I can tell you that today I feel pretty hopeful about where we 
are and where we're going there, both in terms of the relationships 
between Israel and the Palestinians and in terms of the larger issues of 
Middle East peace. I have been pleased by the courage and the vision 
shown by all the leaders there in achieving the progress that's been 
achieved thus far.
    And of course, as you know, we still have two countries to go. We 
have to resolve the differences between Israel and Syria, which are 
difficult, but they are both working on them. And then, of course, we 
would then hopefully get an agreement with Lebanon and Israel.
    So I feel hopeful about it, and we're prepared to invest quite a lot 
of money in it. And we believe that the institution of a development 
bank is not only that favored by the people in the Middle East but also 
is the most cost-effective way to leverage a large amount of private 
capital with public investment. We do have to show the Palestinian 
people some benefits of the peace. And we are committed to doing that.
    President Chirac. Yes, I would just like to make a brief reply to 
that last question. Development in these countries is a categorical 
imperative. What do the Palestinians today need? They need a house, and 
they need a job. And for that, it takes money.
    Let me just remind you that France is the largest financial 
contributor to the Palestinian Authority's budget. And France has every 
intention of participating in the development efforts, which to us seem 
to be exemplary. Now, we fully agree with the idea of setting up a 
financial system that would be as efficient as it is quick in bringing 
forward results.
    Now obviously, none of this has been fully decided yet. Is it going 
to be a bank or is it going to be something that's easier to set up over 
the short run? I think that that is more a matter of technical detail. 
But France will be there, and we'll be participating.
    President Clinton. [Inaudible]--point, and then I owe this 
journalist a question because she thought I was calling on her.
    The other thing that I would emphasize in addition to investment 
is--to pick up on a point the President made in his opening remarks--is 
that we, all of us, have to be involved in a stronger effort to combat 
terrorism because insofar as the Israelis and others can succeed in 
combating terrorism, the relationships between Israel and the 
Palestinians can be more open. The biggest threat to the success of the 
peace has been closing up the borders as a necessity of dealing with the 
terror, so that it drives the income of the Palestinians down. So they 
will develop a lot of their own economic opportunities if we can permit 
them to do so in peace and openness. And we should work on it.

Bosnia

    Q. Mr. President, is the United States prepared to pay its share of 
the creation of a rapid deployment force for Bosnia under the U.N.? And 
President Chirac, you have suggested that the time may have come for the 
United States to get tough on Bosnia. What did you mean by that remark, 
and what specifically are you asking the United States to do to help 
your troops on the ground?
    President Clinton. The answer to your first question is that it 
depends upon whether the Congress is willing to participate as well. And 
so, I have received correspondence and contacts with Congress about 
this. I have begun opening discussions about it, and I am consulting 
with them. But that is up to the Congress as well as to the President. I 
support, in principle, this rapid reaction force, and I think it has a 
chance to really strengthen the U.N. mission there. To what extent we 
can contribute depends upon congressional consultations which have only 
just begun.
    President Chirac. Well, perhaps I must have misspoken, even in 
French, because I never said that the United States had to take a 
tougher stand on Bosnia. I never even mentioned the idea that they ought 
to send ground troops. We have a convergent strategy for the time being, 
and I fully support the American stance. I hope that this time my point 
has been made understood.

[[Page 888]]

Note: The President's 97th news conference began at 5:15 p.m. in the 
East Room at the White House, with President Jacques Chirac of France, 
in his capacity as President of the European Council, and Jacques 
Santer, President of the European Commission. President Chirac spoke in 
French, and his remarks were translated by an interpreter.