    [Public Papers of the Presidents of the United States: William J. Clinton (1997, Book II)]
    [October 14, 1997]
    [Pages 1354-1365]
    [From the U.S. Government Publishing Office www.gpo.gov]

    [[Page 1354]]

    The President's News Conference With President Fernando Cardoso of
    Brazil in Brasilia
    October 14, 1997

        President Cardoso. Mr. President of the United States of America,
    William Clinton; ladies and gentlemen. May I say to you first what a
    pleasure it is, Mr. President, for me and for Ruth, my wife, to welcome
    both you and Mrs. Clinton. And I'd like to take advantage of this
    opportunity to state our pleasure and, I'm quite sure, the pleasure of
    the Brazilian people as a whole. This is particularly due to the
    excellent relations between the two of us, which I think makes it
    obvious to everyone that there is a friendship that joins these two
    Presidents and that we share a great many interests--and by ``we,'' I
    mean our two peoples.
        On both sides, we are interested in ensuring that we will draw
    closer together and bring our societies closer together as well in very
    practical ways. We've had a number of opportunities in which to chat.
    We've covered, I think, just about every problem that was on our agenda
    before this meeting, including the most general problems, such as peace
    throughout the world, including the possibility of working together in a
    number of situations which might require more direct action on the part
    of the United States or Brazil, not just--in our region, of course, but
    also views were exchanged, opinions were exchanged about a number of
    international problems as well. And I can assure you that we both agree
    with regard to the overall objective which is to increase the prosperity
    of peoples on the Earth as a whole.
        It is also our conviction that prosperity is something that needs to
    be made a general phenomenon. The prosperity of one nation should not
    harm the prosperity of any other nation, and nothing leads us to believe
    this. On the contrary, we feel that what's good for Brazil is good for
    the United States, and what's good for the United States is good for
    Brazil as well.
        Just in terms of commercial relations, for example, the United
    States is our number one trading partner. But Brazil, as we like to say,
    is also a major global trader. We have excellent relations with the
    MERCOSUR countries, other countries in Latin America, with Europe and
    Asia, not to mention Africa. And it is with a full understanding of the
    comprehensive nature, the global nature of our relationships that we, in
    turn, have been able to reach a closer relationship.
        We have underscored our commitment to the sort of endeavor that we
    have embarked upon, for example, in MERCOSUR, which is a very important
    part of our foreign policy in Brazil, which we feel to be an example of
    the success of the work of these four countries: Paraguay, Uruguay,
    Brazil, Argentina--and now Chile as well.
        Much agreement has been reached with regard to trade, democracy,
    keeping peace. And we also believe that by working together we can move
    towards the integration of the Americas as a whole in such a way as to
    avoid harming our MERCOSUR interests and in such a way as to avoid
    harming the interests of the NAFTA countries. But we should integrate
    the hemisphere as a whole in line with the view that has already been
    expressed just a moment ago; in other words, prosperity for all is best
    for each and every one.
        On the other hand, it also became quite clear that we agree on a
    number of other issues, even at a personal level. For example, our take
    on problems is quite similar in our two countries. An example of that
    fact can be seen via the declaration that we are now signing in the area
    of education, one of the social area endeavors. I was extremely pleased
    when I heard President Clinton's State of the Union Address because he
    spoke about education, and what he said certainly made me feel quite
    enthusiastic. What he said moved us. As a former professor and as two
    human beings, I'm sure that we agree that education is an instrument
    which will allow us to equalize relations within a society and to do
    away with so many of the differences and asymmetries that can exist
    among countries as well.
        In this meeting, we would like to reaffirm our full commitment to
    all the programs in the educational field as a symbol of our concern
    vis-a-vis social issues. The integration that we are seeking to pursue
    at the regional, sub-regional, and even at a broader level, as soon

    [[Page 1355]]

    as that becomes timely, is going to be integration that will exclude no
    countries, no fragments within countries, either. Integration is
    designed to improve the standard of living of the peoples who integrate.
        Another thing that we can go over is a list of key issues that have
    to do with, for example, the climate change. President Clinton, for
    example, holds the view that I think is quite proper vis-a-vis climate
    change. He talks about shared responsibility. He talks about the fact
    that responsibility should exclude no segment of humanity because the
    climate is something that involves the preservation of the conditions of
    life for future generations throughout the planet. So, we must come up
    with mechanisms which will allow us to reduce the greenhouse gas effect.
    We should reduce the greenhouse gases, but in such a way as to ensure
    that we're not harming the interests or the development of any country--
    the United States, Brazil, or developing countries. These things should
    be done in a balanced way to ensure that we will solve the problems and
    do so in the best way for our countries, which is what we're going to
    try to do in Kyoto in December.
        Another thing that we're doing is broadening our cooperation in the
    field of space studies in a clear demonstration of the number of
    possibilities that exist for cooperation between Brazil and the United
    States, certainly in terms of advanced technology.
        I don't want to take up too much time, but may I reaffirm the fact
    that--very simply, because we did cover such a broad range of topics--
    the fact that we avoided no single topic is a clear sign that we can
    reach an understanding even upon those things that we have some slight
    misunderstanding on. And of course, misunderstandings usually just
    reflect the interests of our individual countries that we, of course,
    must defend properly, but at the same time in a way which shows that we
    have an old friendship, a long-term friendship, and this friendship
    allows us to deal with these issues in such a way.
        I'd like to repeat something I said in the Planalto Palace. Since
    the Second World War, never have we seen so many possibilities for
    cooperation in so many broad fields, certainly nothing compared to the
    many opportunities that are opening up for Brazil and the United States
    right now, which is why I'm particularly pleased to speak via the media
    to the peoples of our countries to reaffirm the tremendous satisfaction
    that I feel in being able to welcome this great President, Bill Clinton,
    in our country.
        Thank you so much.
        President Clinton. Thank you very much, Mr. President. Let me begin
    by thanking you and Mrs. Cardoso and the representatives of your
    Government for the warm welcome you have given to us, including our very
    large delegation, the senior members of our administration, a big
    percentage of our Cabinet, and the distinguished delegation from
    Congress. We are delighted to be here.
        I believe this visit marks a new phase in the long friendship
    between the United States and Brazil. This is clearly a unique moment of
    opportunity in the Americas. A quiet revolution is bringing our
    hemisphere together around common values of democracy, free markets,
    mutual respect, and cooperation. It gives us the opportunity to advance
    the welfare, the freedom, and the security of all of our people in a way
    that has not been possible before.
        Because we have the largest economies and the most diverse
    populations in the hemisphere, Brazil and the United States have both a
    special ability and a special responsibility to help lead the Americas
    into the 21st century. Under President Cardoso's leadership, Brazil
    clearly is meeting that challenge in fulfilling its destiny as a great
    nation. Through your own remarkable economic reforms, your strategic
    partnership with Argentina, your leadership in MERCOSUR and throughout
    the hemisphere and increasingly on the wider international stage, Brazil
    has helped to consolidate peace and democracy and to promote prosperity
    and stability.
        Brazil and the United States share a fundamental belief that opening
    the markets of our hemisphere to trade and investment is the best way to
    create good jobs and strengthen democracy and cooperation in all our
    countries. Three years ago, when we met at the Summit of the Americas in
    Miami, we pledged to pursue a free-trade area of the Americas by early
    in the next century. Today the President and I agreed that at the next
    Summit of the Americas in Santiago, we should launch comprehensive and
    balanced negotiations to achieve that goal, turning our common agenda
    into a common plan of action.
        If I might, I'd like to just speak a moment about what I think has
    been the cause of some misunderstanding between our two countries,

    [[Page 1356]]

    which is the question of what the American attitude toward MERCOSUR is
    and what its relationship to our support for a free trade area of the
    Americas is.
        I support MERCOSUR. I think it has been a good thing for Brazil, a
    good thing for all the member nations, a good thing for stability, for
    growth and cooperation in the region, and quite a good thing for the
    United States. Our exports to the MERCOSUR countries have grown
    substantially since 1991. And we believe that these sort of regional
    trade arrangements everywhere--if they serve to open borders, to
    increase economic activities, and to promote growth--promote stability
    and opportunity that benefit Americans.
        We believe that we can create a free-trade area of the Americas
    consistent with MERCOSUR and the leadership and role of Brazil and the
    other members in it. And so to me, this is a false choice that we don't
    intend to ask the Brazilians, the Argentineans, or the other members of
    MERCOSUR to make. We believe we can build on this and go forward to a
    free-trade area of the Americas.
        Trade has produced about a third of the economic growth the United
    States has enjoyed since I became President in January of 1993. And I'm
    working hard to continue to expand our capacity to trade and to create
    good high-wage jobs in our own country by securing the Presidential
    negotiating authority necessary to tear down more of the trade barriers
    of the past so that we can open wider the doors of the future to good
    jobs and higher incomes.
        Now, let me say that as we promote more free markets and more free
    trade, I believe that all of us must work harder to extend their
    benefits to all citizens. No great democracy has succeeded in doing that
    so far. We know we have to begin by ensuring that all of our citizens
    receive the education and training they need to succeed in this new
    economy. And I applaud the President's emphasis on education.
        The education declaration we have just signed focuses on what I
    believe the keys to making education work in both our countries are:
    first, high standards for what children must learn and testing to
    measure their progress; second, training our teachers so that those to
    whom we entrust our children's future are themselves well-prepared;
    third, intensive parent and community involvement; and fourthly,
    something the President has worked very hard on, access to technology to
    realize the possibilities of the information age for all of our
    children.
        In the United States, we're working hard to make sure that every
    classroom and library in our country is hooked up to Internet by the
    year 2000. We're giving discounted rates to our schools so that they can
    afford to be on the Internet. And we are finding something I am certain
    will be the experience in Brazil as well, and that is that very often
    the largest benefit of this technology revolution will flow to the
    children who are most in need, who tend to be in isolated rural or urban
    school districts where they have not had the chances and the
    opportunities many of our other children have. So I think that the
    Internet can be an instrument by which we democratize as well as
    increase the excellence of educational opportunity.
        We've also agreed that we can't have today's progress at tomorrow's
    expense. The President talked a little bit about our common commitment
    to the environment. The clean energy agreement we have signed will help
    Brazil to continue to grow, fueled by renewable and efficient energy
    technologies. Our park services will work together to protect wetlands
    like the Everglades and the Pantanal Park in Brazil. We share Brazil's
    determination to conserve the Amazon, one of the most wondrous and
    biologically diverse environmental habitats in the world. The United
    States will contribute another $10 million to the G-7's cooperative
    program with Brazil to sustain the rainforests. And we will help Brazil
    to put 21st-century technology into this effort, including research done
    by Brazilians in space. The fires throughout the Amazon have added
    urgency to these efforts, and the uncertainties about the climatic
    effects of this El Nino, both in South America and in the United States,
    have also added urgency to our efforts.
        We did, as the President said, discuss the challenge of climate
    change. Five years ago in Rio, the world community began to chart a
    common course to reduce the greenhouse gas emissions that lead to global
    warming. Developed countries have a special responsibility to lead. I
    told President Cardoso that the United States will meet that
    responsibility with a commitment to limit our emissions when we meet in
    Kyoto on December 6th. But as we do our part, I believe so, too, must
    the developing world. Climate change, after all, is a global problem
    that requires a global solution.

    [[Page 1357]]

        So here is the question, it seems to me--and I would like to talk a
    little about this because I think it's quite important--I think it's
    very important that the people of Brazil understand that just as with
    the trade issue and MERCOSUR, the United States would never knowingly
    make any suggestion that would undermine the growth of Brazil or any
    other country. It is not in our interest. We, after all, only have 4
    percent of world's people. We enjoy a very high standard living. We can
    only maintain our own standard of living if you grow. If there are more
    good jobs for Brazilians, higher incomes, more people are brought into
    the social compact in this country, then you can be a stronger partner,
    not only for us but for your neighbors in this continent and throughout
    the world.
        So our strategy is to aggressively support the growth of the
    emerging economies of the world, the strength of their democracies, and
    our capacity to cooperate together. I do not believe that any reasonable
    person can look at the world of today and imagine the world of tomorrow
    and believe that America can gain by someone else's economic loss. We
    have an interest in finding a way to grow together.
        By the same token, the world will not gain if some countries limit
    their greenhouse gas emissions and other countries grow in the same old
    way with the same old energy base so that the climate continues to warm
    more rapidly than it has at any time in the last 10,000 years. So what
    we want to do is to find a way for the developing countries to fulfill
    their responsibilities within the framework of Kyoto, recognizing that
    those of us in developed countries must do more but that we must all
    participate. And we want to be very explicit that any participation on
    your part would not come at the expense of economic growth.
        Developing nations have an opportunity to chart a different energy
    future than some of the developed countries. And if we share our
    technology and we share our knowledge, then we can achieve that. This is
    very important. Brazil has already gone a long way toward proving this
    point, because you have developed so many nontraditional fuels,
    biologically based fuels, for running your vehicles. So you have given
    evidence to the general point that I hope will be embraced by all the
    countries of the developing world. And I encourage that.
        Finally, let me say, we talked about expanding our cooperation in
    regional and global security. And I want to say a word of appreciation
    to Brazil as the guarantor of the Peru-Ecuador peace process, and
    appreciation for its historic decision to join the Nuclear Non-
    Proliferation Treaty and to sign the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty. In
    all these actions, Brazil has taken its place as a world leader for
    peace and security.
        Today the mutual legal assistance treaty we signed will help us to
    crack down on drug production and trafficking, and fight transnational
    crime in a way that benefits all of our people.
        President Cardoso said 2 years ago when he visited me at the White
    House--and I quote--``The vocation of Brazil and the United States is to
    stand together.'' I believe we stand together today as never before. The
    issues we face are central to the well-being of both our peoples. The
    fate of our hemisphere, with strong democracies, a commitment to fight
    crime and drugs, to work for lasting peace, the future of the new
    economy, preparing our people for the 21st century--that's what this
    trip is all about. These are all objectives we share, and they really
    matter to ordinary citizens in both our nations and throughout this
    hemisphere.
        Thank you.
        President Cardoso. President Clinton, I'd like to ask you to begin,
    if you don't mind.

    1996 Campaign Finance Inquiry

        Q. Mr. President, Attorney General Reno has made her decision and
    will extend her inquiry into your telephone fundraising to determine
    whether a special counsel should be named. How do you feel about that
    hanging over you for another 60 days at least?
        President Clinton. I feel nothing about it. There is a law, and
    there are facts. And I feel that it would be much better if she were
    permitted to do her job. I know I didn't do anything wrong. I did
    everything I could to comply with the law. I feel good about it. But I
    told you yesterday, the thing I don't feel good about is the overt,
    explicit, overbearing attempt to politicize this whole process and to
    put pressure on more than one actor in it. That's wrong. There's a law.
    There's a fact-finding process. And I'm going to cooperate with it in
    every way I possibly can.

    [[Page 1358]]

    Brazil-U.S. Trade Strategies

        Q. Mr. Clinton, will the recent--[inaudible]--between the European
    Union and MERCOSUR affect how you formulate your strategy for commerce
    in the Americas?
        And for President Fernando Henrique, the question is, what is the
    relative importance of Europe as far as Brazil's commercial strategy or
    trade strategy's concerned, especially vis-a-vis the United States?
        President Clinton. Well, first of all, if I were in Brazil, I would
    be trying to sell as much as I could to America and to Europe. I think
    that's the way this market works. Both the European Union and the United
    States have increased our exports to Brazil and to the MERCOSUR
    countries in the last few years markedly. So I don't feel threatened by
    it, I just want to make sure we're fully competing. And if we don't
    fully compete, it will be our fault, not yours and not Europe's.
        That's one of the reasons that I'm seeking the fast-track authority.
    It's up to the United States to decide whether it's going to be a fully
    competitive nation; but we have--in the last 2 years, for the first time
    in a long time, more than half our new jobs have come in the higher wage
    categories. And it's the direct result of our aggressive pursuit of
    trade opportunities.
        So I'm prepared to compete, and all I want is a fair chance to
    compete with the Europeans here or anywhere else. But I don't see that
    as a bad thing. If I were in your position, I'd be trying to sell more
    to everybody.
        President Cardoso. Well, I believe that what President Clinton said
    is most helpful to us. The more competition we have between the United
    States and Europe for trade, the better it is for us because it makes
    our products much cheaper. So I agree with President Clinton. It is true
    that Brazil's number one individual client is the United States today.
    But the European Union as a whole, or taken as a whole, imports and
    exports a bit more than the United States, actually. We are now, as I
    said before and I'm going to repeat this, global traders. We actually
    trade with a number of countries and areas throughout the world, and
    we're very interested in increasing these trade flows.
        With regard to the United States, we have increased such trade
    flows. Unfortunately, we have an increasing trade deficit as a result of
    the increased trade with the United States. So we have to review this
    situation and try to balance it better to the benefit of both. We want
    to increase imports and exports. We don't want a zero-sum game, and we
    don't want a game in which one loses and the other wins. We want a win-
    win situation in the trade arena.
        That is why we say that our trade policy with Europe is very active.
    It will continue to be very active. But I agree wholeheartedly with
    President Clinton; we cannot think about such economic blocs as isolated
    fortresses. They have been designed to increase trade, and we're going
    to take advantage of every opportunity that we can find to intensify our
    trade abroad, to sell things abroad. We will do so whenever we can.
    We're not going to close off our economy, because our competitiveness,
    our progress in the area of technology, and the cheapening of the
    products for our own people depend on such trade.
        Thank you.

    Alternative Energy Sources

        Q. Mr. President, in Venezuela your discussions included alternative
    energy sources. Here you've also discussed safe or clean energy sources.
    I wonder, given that in the United States there is opportunity for
    improvement in the area of both energy incentives and also reducing the
    amount of emissions, do you find it difficult to discuss this topic
    while abroad?
        President Clinton. No, because I don't think the two things are
    inconsistent. I think we are under a real responsibility in the United
    States to do energy conversion. We were on that path, ironically, 20
    years ago when our experts underestimated the amount of natural gas
    reserves that would be available to us in the United States and
    throughout the world. And we thought we could move to a clean coal
    technology and do the job. We now know that that decision was not
    accurate. But the people who made the decisions 20 years ago did it
    based on the best evidence they had at the time.
        So I think we're going to have more reliance on natural gas and
    other forms of energy that are even cleaner. And we have to do more
    conservation. If you were there at the climate change conference we had
    at Georgetown a couple of weeks ago, we learned, among other things,
    that two-thirds of all the heat generated in the production of
    electricity is wasted. If we can recover half of that waste heat, we
    will generate enormous new capacity for growth

    [[Page 1359]]

    without adding one single pollutant in the form of greenhouse gases to
    the atmosphere. So we've got a lot to do on our own account.
        But as I said--let me reiterate what I said. What I want to do is to
    try to help the developing countries grow their economy just as fast as
    would otherwise be the case, but chart a different energy future than
    the one we charted in the past when we were at the same stage of
    development. And the question is, can they do that? I think it's
    absolutely clear, crystal clear, that they can.
        And this is a big problem. In China today, bronchial disease is,
    among children, the number one health problem for kids in the country
    already. So I want the Chinese economy to grow and the Chinese people to
    prosper, but I think they should choose a different energy course for
    the same growth. And I think they can, and we should be trying to help
    them. If we don't do it, then no matter what we in the developed
    countries do, within 30 to 40 years we'll be right back in the same
    pickle we're in today, except worse.

    Brazil-U.S. Trade Strategies

        Q. I have two questions for both Presidents. For President Clinton,
    since 1995 both governments have worked on the bilateral trade with you,
    but so far they have no concrete results. And the perception is that
    Brazil is still complaining about trade barriers and better access to
    the U.S. market. So I'd like to know if both Presidents have now a new
    orientation toward a new phase in the trade bilateral relationship.
        For President Fernando Henrique, my question is, if there is no
    fast-track authority, if this is not granted, would Brazil be willing to
    negotiate--if there is no fast track, do you believe that there will be
    any continuity in the negotiations of FTAA? And if there isn't, would
    MERCOSUR take on this role, in other words, the role of the principal
    protagonist in terms of trade in the region?
        President Cardoso. I don't want to make any bets on American policy.
    If there is going to be this sort of a policy or not is the United
    States' problem. I think that President Clinton is going to be in a
    position to get the fast-track authority he wants.
        But integration, whether we're talking about integration throughout
    the hemisphere or MERCOSUR, are two processes that are very interesting
    to our economies, quite aside from any political issues, which will
    simply decide the speed at which such issues are decided. So what
    President Clinton said was crystal clear when he talked about his view
    of MERCOSUR and FTAA. He said there is no clash between the two, there
    is no opposition. There is simply a situation, and we have to give
    ourselves enough time so that we will be in a position to prepare for
    increased competition. It's just a matter of time, procedures, so that
    we will be in a position to participate fully in conversations and
    understandings.
        So with or without a fast-track authority, the question is, is it
    good or bad for us to increase international trade? And the answer is
    always the same: It's always good to increase international trade. So I
    would say that the other factors are just conditioning factors, but the
    key objectives are out there, and they're unchanging.
        We will continue to work to our utmost to consolidate MERCOSUR, but
    simultaneously to work on the FTAA. We signed an agreement in Miami--I
    didn't sign it myself personally, but I was just the President-elect,
    but President Clinton was kind enough to ask me to come and observe. And
    this is not just a commitment on paper. It's a real commitment; we
    really want to increase our trade foundation.
        Now, people are talking about the United States, Europe, and so
    forth; trade is trade. We have to look at things one question at a time,
    how we're going to deal with the interests that are being affected, how
    can we build bridges in such a way as to benefit the parties involved?
    All of this involves a long construction process.
        President Clinton. Let me say, first of all, I would only add to
    what the President said that I believe, and I think he believes, as
    well, that if we can proceed with this free trade area of the Americas,
    it's also a way of stabilizing the democratic governments of many
    smaller countries in our hemisphere and giving them some assurance that,
    if they stay with democracy and reform, their people will also be able
    to reap some economic benefit from it.
        So I think it is important that Brazil assume a leadership role in
    this fashioning of this whole agreement. And I hope they will, because I
    think what we're trying to do is to say, this is, first and foremost,
    about economics, but economics supports freedom and democracy and
    stability if we do it properly.
        Now, on the question you asked me, the trade question, let me just
    briefly say, we went over

    [[Page 1360]]

    the specific trade issues that Brazil has with the United States and the
    specific trade issues the United States has with Brazil. And we--
    obviously, neither one of us are trade negotiators and these are
    somewhat specific and, in some cases, almost arcane issues involved, but
    what we did is we resolved that we would give both sides instruction
    that we want these matters resolved if at all possible and as quickly as
    possible. They're dragging on; they're an irritant to our relationship.
    And they're, in the context of our larger objective, a negative rather
    than a positive force, and we'd like to have them resolved. And that's
    basically the decision we made.

    Attorney General Janet Reno

        Q. Mr. President, just to go back for a moment to Janet Reno and her
    investigation, I'm wondering if you can tell us, has this whole affair
    complicated your relationship with her and your ability to actually
    function with your highest ranking law enforcement official? For
    instance, do you find yourself not talking to her because you're
    hesitant to have too much contact with the Attorney General?
        President Clinton. Well, I don't really have anything to add to what
    I said yesterday about that. I think you all are perfectly capable of
    drawing your own conclusions and evaluating whether this puts our
    political system in balance or out of balance, and I don't think that we
    should discuss it here.
        The most important thing is we've got a law; we've got a fact-
    finding process. The fact-finding process should proceed with integrity.
    The law should be implemented without pressure either way. I am doing my
    part. I wish others were doing as well.

    Brazil-U.S. Relations

        Q. Mr. Fernando Henrique, I hope you don't mind if I ask Mr. Clinton
    the question. Mr. President, your visit was preceded by diplomatic
    turmoil. A document was disseminated that said that Brazilian corruption
    was endemic. This was commented on by the American Ambassador, and his
    comments made things worse. The head of the Supreme Tribunal, the
    superior court in Brazil, reacted badly, as did some other people in the
    Federal Government--even a Governor of the Federal District. And they
    also reacted not just to this issue but to a number of other issues in
    which excess security was demanded by some of your advisers. Brazilian
    authorities called these people's attitude rather aggressive. Not only
    authorities but people as a whole in Brazil felt that they had been
    badly mistreated. I would like to know your view, sir. Do you think
    there was any exaggeration? Do you think there were any diplomatic
    mishaps in this situation?
        President Clinton. Well, first of all, I became aware of this
    document and the characterization of Brazilian culture after it had been
    released. The document was wrong, and it represented an appalling error
    of judgment for anybody to write such a thing. It has been decisively
    rejected by every American authority, beginning with the Ambassador here
    now. And it has been excised from the document.
        So I regret very much that it happened, but once in a while such a
    thing may even happen in Brazil, where someone who works for some agency
    will put out something in printing which shouldn't happen. I can only
    ask the Brazilian people not to infer that that is the feeling of either
    the Government or, more importantly, the people of the United States
    toward Brazil. I assure you that no Brazilian could have been any more
    upset about it than I was. I thought it was terrible, and I did
    everything I could to correct it.
        Now, in terms of the trip here, I just don't have enough facts to
    know. I know that our people historically, because of the problems that
    have periodically affected our Presidents--always on our own home turf,
    I might add, always when we're at home--that the security for an
    American President often seems to others to be too rigid and too
    uncompromising. But as I said, we've never had problems with our
    President's security in a foreign country. But we've had enough problems
    at home, over the last 35 years and before, that I hope you will at
    least understand that. But I try to make sure that our people are as
    understanding and cooperative with the people in every country and
    community they visit as possible, and I hope they have been. That's all
    I can say; I don't know the facts.

    1996 Campaign Finance Inquiry

        Q. Sir, does it embarrass you when these questions about fundraising
    follow you on foreign trips, as they have on this one, or does it
    embarrass the country?

    [[Page 1361]]

        President Clinton. Well, I can't be embarrassed by other people's
    judgment. I have no control over what you decide to ask about. That's
    your decision, not mine. That's a question you should ask somebody
    besides me. I didn't have anything to do with what was asked. I think
    other people sometimes in other countries wonder what it's all about,
    especially when everyone concedes that there was no request or improper
    public action in any way, nor did any occur as a result of whatever
    communications are in dispute.
        But that's a decision for you. You have to decide what questions
    you're going to ask. I can't be embarrassed about how you decide to do
    your job.

    Brazil-U.S. Relations

        Q. I have a question that I want to ask both Presidents. People who
    monitor relations between Brazil and the United States feel that the
    problems that we have had most recently are often exacerbated by the
    bureaucracies of our two countries simply because there's not enough
    involvement of the Presidents and the leaders of the two countries. This
    is criticism that's been leveled against our countries. I wonder if you
    would agree?
        The United States has a difficulty, being a superpower, and the only
    superpower, to deal with an emerging power in the Americas that is
    asserting its leadership as a democracy, as a freer market. Former
    Secretary Kissinger told me recently that he believed that really you
    have to adapt, because you are not used to that; you have to adapt
    intellectually to that. I'd like you to talk about this issue. Does our
    emerging role bother Americans or the United States of America?
        President Cardoso. Well, at least as far as the Brazilian side is
    concerned, I was so very pleased because the touchiest issues are always
    being brought up for President Clinton. No one is asking me these touchy
    questions. I was so pleased up until now.
        However, my involvement and President Clinton's involvement can only
    be that of people who are involved at a very general level involving
    problems between our two countries. Of course, there are always going to
    be some sort of bureaucratic problems, but I'm quite sure that we can
    deal with them quite easily. I think bureaucratic problems and redtape
    dissolve as soon as people see the warmth of our warm and direct
    personal relations, which are much more important than any bureaucratic
    entanglement.
        Now, of course, we do understand fully that for security reasons,
    you do have some problems of your own. Luckily enough, we in Brazil
    don't have to face these major threats. It's not the case of every
    country. The United States particularly has had to face some very
    difficult situations. Of course, our security forces try to pay
    attention at all times in Brazil. But I'm always breaking the rules in
    Brazil, and so far nothing has ever happened. And things are very
    tranquil, and I'm sure they'll continue to be so in the future.
        But I'm quite sure that anything that comes up can be dealt with
    quite easily because of the warmth and the openness that President
    Clinton and Mrs. Clinton have shown to us in Brazil at all times. They
    have shown to all Brazilians that their trip is an open-hearted visit.
        President Clinton. I'd actually like to respond, if I might, to both
    your questions. Because the question you asked the President--I think
    the answer to your question is a lot of--people who work in government
    bureaucracies the world over are following established policies, and
    they tend to acquire an interest in maintaining the established
    policies, and most of them don't have the authority to change it, which
    is why these kind of personal relationships are so important. Because
    it's our responsibility, if we want to change the direction of the
    country, not to blame the people who work for us, and particularly the
    people who may not even be political appointees--they work through from
    one administration to another--but to try to give different
    instructions, to send different messages down there.
        And that's why--sometimes I think, with all respect, sometimes
    members of the press and even our own publics say, well, why did they
    spend all that money and do that foreign trip, all the money we spent to
    come here, all the money you spent to entertain us; why did they do all
    that? There didn't seem to be any great earth-shaking specific
    agreement. And the main reason is the very thing you said, that we have
    to increase understanding, we have to increase sensitivity. And even
    subtle shifts in our position can send a different message to those down
    in the governmental hierarchies that have to implement these decisions
    on a daily basis. So I think that's a very good question.

    [[Page 1362]]

        The second thing is, does the United States, at the end of the cold
    war, left as being the world's only superpower, feel threatened by the
    emergence of Brazil or any other country? The answer to that is, I
    actually support the emergence of countries to a greater role of
    influence and responsibilities, as long as they share our basic values--
    not agree with us on everything but share our basic values.
        If they're committed to freedom and democracy, if they're committed
    to open trading systems, if they're committed to giving all their people
    a chance to participate in the wealth that the global economy generates,
    if they're committed to a responsible global approach on the
    environment, if they're committed to working with us against threats
    that cross national borders--terrorism, weapons proliferation, criminal
    syndicates, and drug trafficking--if they're committed to those things,
    then I don't see this as competition. I see this as people emerging to
    take on more responsibility. And if we work together, more good will
    happen.
        I'll give you another example. When I became President, there was
    the question of whether the United States would object if, in addition
    to NATO in Europe, there were an independent European security force
    working with NATO. And I made it clear from the beginning, I support
    this. I don't see these things as competing.
        We have to change, because most of the threats to nations in the
    years ahead will come not from other nations but from threats that cross
    national borders--guerrillas, terrorists, weapons proliferation, drugs,
    crime, environmental and disease problems--number one. And because most
    of the benefits that nations can derive for their own people require
    them to cooperate with people beyond their borders, we will have to
    change our conception of how national power and influence is acquired.
    National power and influence is acquired, ironically, by becoming more
    interdependent and cooperative with others who are strong and self-
    sufficient and self-reliant but need to be allied with you. And I do
    believe, frankly, that this will require a big change in the way people
    look at politics, not just in the United States but elsewhere.

    1996 Campaign Finance Inquiry

        Q. Since you spoke yesterday on Air Force One, it's been reported
    that the White House and the Justice Department have been negotiating to
    figure out a way that you could speak to investigators about campaign
    finance. Have you reached such an agreement? And under what conditions
    would you speak to the Justice Department?
        President Clinton. I know nothing about that I didn't say yesterday.
    I literally--no one has talked to me about it, and I know nothing to add
    to what I said yesterday.

    Trade Policy and International Relations

        Q. President Clinton, Mr. President of Brazil, Fernando Henrique
    Cardoso, Brazil defends negotiations with the FTAA in complementation to
    tariff laws. Now, what complements are we talking about specifically as
    long as Brazil adheres to the calendar?
        And for President Bill Clinton, last night, Mr. Clinton, you said
    that you felt touched by Brazil and had felt touched by Brazil for over
    30 years. Have you been touched enough to say that you're going to give
    support to Brazil's candidacy on the Security Council so that Brazil
    will become a full member of the Group of Nine as well next year?
        President Cardoso. Okay, I'm going to break a couple of the rules
    here once again. Go ahead, one last additional question very, very
    quickly before we answer.
        Q. The United States Government wants that Brazil open the Brazilian
    market, but there are many restrictions against Brazilian products, like
    orange juice or steel. My question is, why not the U.S.A. don't change
    the situation, keep the situation, and allow the free commerce for many
    Brazilian companies?
        Fernando Cardoso, I would like to know what the Brazilian
    Government's view on these nontariff barriers against a number of
    Brazilian products that are trying to get into the U.S. market.
        President Cardoso. All right, I'm going to begin by answering the
    question on the additional agreements or side agreements to the FTAA. I
    think that President Clinton talked about his views very clearly when he
    talked about the meaning of the overall proposal for hemisphere-wide
    integration. And he made his comments in a way that I think was quite
    proper. He said it's not just a matter of tariffs--I'm going to talk
    about the tariffs in a minute--but it's not just a matter of tariffs.
    It's a much broader concept that we're fighting for here, because we're
    talking about the fact that there are some political considerations that
    come into

    [[Page 1363]]

    play. And of course, political considerations are based on values: a
    common desire, a shared desire to keep the peace, to control drug
    trafficking, to avoid criminal activities on the international level or
    in the international sphere.
        So we're not just talking about trade here, so much so that what we
    proposed in the meetings that we've had thus far and that we're going to
    continue to have over the next few days, is that the key topic be
    education. And in Santiago, we're going to keep insisting on education
    as the key issue, because people can say, all right, very generously,
    let's talk about something that will move people, but that means that we
    have to talk about something that goes beyond tariffs. Tariffs, of
    course, are very important to countries and their economies and
    especially interesting to specialists. But countries have much more that
    they talk about and disagree with in the area of international relations
    aside from tariffs. And we have to talk about things that will bring our
    people closer together.
        Education is ideal because the basic tenet of education is equality,
    and I think that what President Clinton said here pretty much follows
    along the same line of thought. And we do not want to limit our
    relationship to issues that don't even require a meeting between
    Presidents because technical-level meetings will be enough; what we are
    here to express and symbolize is something far greater than this. It's
    the desire for democracy and greater equality. A country such as Brazil,
    that has no reason to hide its problems, especially our social problems,
    which are so great in nature, is in a position to want very much to
    improve the standard of living of its people. Within MERCOSUR, outside
    of MERCOSUR, we're very interested in seeing that all agreements be
    broader in scope, just as President Clinton just said.
        So with regard to the specific issues that were brought up--you
    talked about steel and orange juice and footwear and--everywhere
    throughout Latin America where President Clinton goes, he's going to
    hear the same issues being brought up, and elsewhere as well, because
    the French, the Japanese, the British, they all have the same problems.
    To the degree that our countries move forward and progress, especially
    Brazil, where the industrial sector is growing rapidly, of course we're
    going to begin to compete and problems are going to crop up. And of
    course, some moment in time is going to require arbitration of some
    nature, which is not meant to be just political in nature. But the
    greater our understanding is, the better our possibilities will be of
    reaching an understanding as to these issues.
        Now, there are specific points on the agenda of demands of our two
    countries that neither one of us have really talked about them much.
    Some were brought up now, but we both know what they are. And when
    President Clinton goes back to the United States, people are going to
    ask him, ``Did they ask you about this, that, or the other?'' I'm not
    even going to mention what they are. He's going to say, ``Yes, I did
    talk to President Cardoso about it. What did he say? Well, President
    Cardoso said he's going to give utmost consideration to these issues.''
    And that's what I'm going to say to you. We're both going to work hard
    to try to solve these issues.
        President Clinton. Let me say again, on balance, the United States
    has a lower tariff structure than virtually any country in the world,
    and fewer restrictions on trade than the European Union, for example.
    And I hope we can work these last remaining areas out. If you think
    about how big and complicated our countries are and the fact that we
    have now two-way trade in the neighborhood of $23 billion a year, the
    number of disputes is actually relatively small, and I'm encouraged by
    that.
        I'm not going to ignore the gentleman's clever question on the
    United Nations. First of all, you should know that today Brazil has been
    elected to a 2-year term on the Security Council. Congratulations, Mr.
    President, that's a very good thing for the United Nations, as well as
    for Brazil.
        The United States position has been that the Security Council ought
    to be expanded, that a permanent seat ought to be given to Latin
    America, and that the Latin American nations themselves should resolve
    how that permanent seat should be filled. This really is one of those
    areas where I don't think it's our place to tell the people of Latin
    America how to proceed here. I hope we will proceed and give a permanent
    seat on the Security Council to Latin America, because I think that the
    actions of the last several years clearly warrant that. And again,
    that's another one of those questions like the gentleman who asked me
    about Brazil's emergence. The more there is a stable, constructive
    presence in global affairs presented by

    [[Page 1364]]

    Latin America, the better off the world's going to be.

    White House Communications Agency Videotapes

        Q. Thank you, Mr. President, and good afternoon. Based on your
    comments yesterday on Air Force One, sir, it would seem that you've been
    briefed on the videotapes that are soon to be released. What is your
    understanding of what's on them? And is there anything on them that
    causes you any concern?
        President Clinton. No, I think it's the same old stuff. As I said,
    those of you who have been going to the fundraisers with me, you've
    already seen it live, so the replay will probably be boring for you.
    That's what I understand, and I'm not worried about it.

    Greenhouse Gas Emissions

        Q. Mr. President, most of our allies are already saying that--
    [inaudible].
        President Clinton. I've not made a decision yet about what to do.
    But let me say this, I intend to take a strong position there, and I
    expect to probably be criticized by all sides. The United States, as our
    friends in Europe are well aware, is in a particularly difficult
    position when the benchmark is 1990, for three reasons.
        Number one, we've had economic growth since 1990 far greater than
    Europe, so our greenhouse gas emissions have gone up more, which means
    we have more to do to go down.
        Number two, the Europeans are--particularly if they're treated
    together--benefit from the incorporation of East Germany into Germany
    and the dramatic drop in production in East Germany, which had a high
    level of pollution. Therefore, they get a big reduction in pollution for
    something that--not because of any independent policy action taken but
    because of the incorporation of East Germany into Germany.
        And thirdly, the presence of the North Sea oil for Great Britain
    gave Britain the ability to sell the oil, which is relatively polluting,
    to other countries and keep the natural gas, which is quite clean, and
    substitute that for coal. So using the 1990 base mark, they have a lot
    of inherent advantages over the United States in terms of the degree of
    rigor required to meet any given target.
        Nonetheless, I think there's so much we can do through technology
    and different purchasing patterns and conservation patterns, that I
    think that we can do quite a great deal. And I intend to propose that we
    do a great deal. What I'm trying to do is to put together a
    comprehensive agreement in Kyoto that will actually do what everybody
    wants, which is to reduce greenhouse gas emissions into the atmosphere
    substantially in the next century.
        Right now we're at about double the volume of greenhouse gases in
    the atmosphere that existed before the dawn of the industrial age. If we
    don't do something, we'll triple the volume by the middle of the next
    century, and we know that something bad will happen. Even though the
    skeptics on the other side say we don't know exactly what and when, we
    know enough to know it's not going to be good, and we've seen enough
    evidence of that so far.
        So I'm going to have a credible plan. I'm going to do my best to get
    everybody involved in it. I hope I'll even have some success at selling
    it to the Congress. Right now, it may be a lot easier to sell it to the
    environmentalists and to the business community than to sell it to the
    Congress, but I'll do my best.

    Line Item Veto

        Q. Mr. President, have you decided against using your line item veto
    authority? And am I mistaken, or is this becoming habit forming?
        President Clinton. Well, it's not habit forming but, yes, I used it
    again today, as I told you yesterday I would, on I can't remember
    exactly how many projects, but more than a dozen worth more than $140
    million that were not either in my budget or recommended by the
    Department of Defense. I thought it was appropriate.
        I know that a lot of Members that voted for the line item veto in
    Congress now wonder whether they did the right thing, now that I'm
    exercising it. But I'd like to remind you that again I have deferred, in
    great measure, to Congress. Congress put in 750 projects not requested
    in our budget or in the Defense Department plan and reduced overall
    weapons procurement, reduced overall research and development to pay for
    virtually all of them.
        And I'm hoping that in the years ahead I won't be using it as much
    and future Presidents won't use it as much, because it will lead to a
    different kind of negotiation in the budgeting process. But I think what
    I did today was responsible and quite restrained. And I believe

    [[Page 1365]]

    that it's important to send a signal to the American people that we're
    going to stay on the budget track we started on and we're going to stay
    within these numbers and balance the budget. That's one of the things
    that's given us the big economy we've got.

    Alternative Energy Sources

        President Cardoso. I'd like to thank all the Brazilian and American
    journalists for having joined us and for being so good about answering
    all our questions.
        And may I say that the emphasis that President Clinton has put on
    the environmental issue is one that I would like to bring up for Brazil
    as well. We have an energy matrix that is very, very clean. We use hydro
    power and now gas, natural gas. And we are strengthening our links with
    regard to the energy matrix throughout the rest of Latin America. So I
    think that our dialog in terms of climate has been extremely positive.
        Thank you to everyone.

    Note: The President's 151st news conference began at 1:40 p.m. in the
    Garden of Alvorada Palace. President Cardoso spoke in Portuguese, and
    his remarks were translated by an interpreter. During the news
    conference, a reporter referred to former Secretary of State Henry
    Kissinger.