[Public Papers of the Presidents of the United States: William J. Clinton (1999, Book I)]
[February 24, 1999]
[Pages 246-255]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office www.gpo.gov]



The President's News Conference With President Jerry John 
Rawlings of Ghana
February 24, 1999

    President Clinton. Mr. President, distinguished members of the 
Ghanaian delegation, it's been a real pleasure for me to welcome 
President Rawlings back to Washington to advance the partnership between 
the United States and Ghana.
    On my visit to Africa last spring, I said the United States wanted 
and very much needed a new partnership with Africa. We face stiff 
challenges: a border war between Ethiopia and Eritrea; civil wars in the 
Congo, Angola, Sierra Leone; famine and disease causing heartbreaking 
human loss. But it is important not to forget how far Africa has come 
since the days of apartheid and authoritarianism.
    In a few days, we'll have an election in Nigeria to elect a 
President and to give the largest, most populous country in Africa a 
chance to chart a new course. Over half the countries of sub-Saharan 
Africa already have democratically elected governments. It is clearly in 
our interest to have a broad and constructive partnership.
    Since Kwame Nkrumah led Ghana to independence in 1957, Ghana's 
example has inspired other nations to take control of their destinies. 
Over the past decade, Ghana has continued to lead the way, with a 
growing economy, with peacekeeping forces in west Africa and around the 
world, with its efforts to strengthen democracy at home.
    Today President Rawlings and I are broadening our partnership. We're 
encouraging multilateral African forces to respond quickly to outbreaks 
of violence. We're providing more training for Ghana's battalion in the 
new African peacekeeping enterprise, the African Crisis Response 
Initiative. We're supporting Ghana's active role in stemming violence in 
west Africa through ECOMOG's regional peacekeeping force, as it seeks to 
stop the carnage that has racked Sierra Leone.
    For our part, we have contributed logistical and medical support for 
peacekeeping troops there, and we will continue to do so. In fact, I 
want to increase our support for ECOMOG, and I hope Congress will 
support my proposal to do so. In the last 18 months, we have also 
provided over $75 million in humanitarian assistance to refugees and 
victims of violence.
    President Rawlings and I also agreed on a number of steps to 
increase trade and investment between our nations. Tomorrow our U.S.

[[Page 247]]

Trade Representative will sign a trade 
and investment framework agreement with her Ghanaian counterpart. It 
will be only our second such agreement in Africa. Next month, here in 
Washington, 9 members of my Cabinet will meet with ministers 
representing more than 40 African nations to discuss ways that we can 
work together to expand development. I also hope Congress will soon take 
the next step by passing the ``African Growth and Opportunity Act.''
    Finally, the President and I will continue to work together to 
fulfill the promise of democracy in Africa. Ghana already invests a 
phenomenal 40 percent of its budget in education. Today we announced 
that we will be sending new Peace Corps volunteers to help link Ghana's 
classrooms to the Internet. We're also working with Ghana to crack down 
on child labor, to train judges and lawyers mediating disputes, to fight 
HIV and AIDS while infection rates are still low there, to build a 
reliable power supply for the future, to study and preserve Ghana's 
elephant population and their environment, and to prepare for fair 
elections in the year 2000.
    This partnership, indeed, covers a lot of ground. Our investment in 
Ghana and Africa is one of the most important we can make for the new 
century. This year we will offer over $800 million in economic support 
to Africa. We will augment this with a healthy program of bilateral debt 
forgiveness for Africa's strongest performing economies. Over a 2-year 
period, counting what we did last year, that bilateral debt forgiveness 
will be almost $500 million.
    Africa cannot overcome all its challenges overnight. But make no 
mistake about it, there is a new Africa, growing proudly alongside its 
ancient traditions. Ghana is not the largest country in Africa, but it 
continues to lead toward tomorrow by the force of its example, by its 
commitment to democracy, by its steady economic progress, by its 
cooperation with its neighbors, by its willingness to take risks and 
make contributions for peace. Ghana is lighting the way forward, and we 
are proud to be here working to strengthen our partnership.
    Mr. President.
    President Rawlings. Thank you very much. Thanks for some parts of 
the good news. I wish you had told me about it earlier on. [Laughter]
    Mr. President, ladies and gentlemen of the press, this morning, at 
the ceremony on the White House lawn, I set out a rather modest agenda 
for my visit to the U.S. I'm happy to note that the discussions that 
we've had so far have been instructive from both sides. President 
Clinton has shown to us his sincerity and determination to forge ahead 
with a new era of cooperation with Africa.
    We all agree that his trip to Africa last year represented the high 
point of official U.S. attention to and recognition of our continent. 
And I hope that Africa will continue to feature prominently on the 
foreign policy agenda of the U.S.
    It is rather unfortunate that the stereotype image of Africa as a 
continent full of conflict, lack of democracy, et cetera, et cetera, 
continues to dominate the international media. And yet, there are many 
positive developments taking place on our continent. For example, in the 
past 5 years, some 21 African countries have achieved positive GDP 
growth rates, with 12 of them--including Ghana--reaching 45 percent a 
year. Democracy has taken root in many African countries, with emphasis 
on good governance.
    And many of our countries have done the right things to create a 
favorable climate for foreign investment. In fact, Africa has 
demonstrated real promise as a destination for investment. Ladies and 
gentlemen, listen. The statistics show that between 1990 and '94, the 
average annual return on U.S. direct investment to Africa was 28--28--
percent. This, compared with 11 percent in Europe, 12 percent in Latin 
America, and 14 percent in Asia--the Pacific areas.
    Ladies and gentlemen, let me conclude my very brief and introductory 
remarks by saying that Africa is a continent in transition. It is a 
continent facing challenges, and some of these have their roots in the 
bipolar politics of the cold war. But Africa could very well be the 
continent of the future. As you know, the Secretary-General of the U.N., 
Mr. Kofi Annan, put it succinctly the other day when he said that the 
conflicts and problems of Africa were caused by human action and can, 
therefore, be ended by human action.
    We're here, ladies and gentlemen, as I said earlier on, to invite 
the United States of America to be part and parcel of that human action, 
to address the problem of hunger, poverty, debt, and conflict. Thank 
you.
    President Clinton. Thank you. Ladies and gentlemen, what we will do 
is, we'll take alternating

[[Page 248]]

questions, one from the American press, one from the African press, and 
we'll begin with Helen [Helen Thomas, United Press International].

Independent Counsel Statute/Allegations of Misconduct

    Q. Mr. President, would you like to see the independent counsel 
statute expire in June? And what is your reaction to recent allegations 
by an Arkansas woman, apparently of something she claims happened many 
years ago?
    President Clinton. Well, my counsel has 
made a statement about the first issue, and I have nothing to add to it.
    On the independent counsel law, I think that, as you know, we've 
been--I think you know, I think it's been public that we've been asked 
to testify, the White House Counsel has 
been invited to testify next week. And I presume sometime between now 
and then I'll have a chance to talk to them about what they intend to 
say.
    I think for right now what I would like to say, because I have been, 
to put it mildly, closely involved with the operation of the statute, 
that I think I would like to leave the maximum amount of time for others 
to make their opinions known and to feel free, without any reference to 
anything we might say, to do that. I would encourage people who have 
views to make them known. And I was particularly struck by the change in 
position of the American Bar Association and by the size of the vote in 
favor of that different position. And I think it's just something that 
Congress should look at.
    Q. Excuse me, but you do have some ideas about----
    President Clinton. I do; I do have some----
    Q. ----the loss of confidentiality.
    President Clinton. I do. I have some ideas about it. But I think it 
would be better for me at this time to say less so that others can say 
more. The Counsel will be testifying at some point next week. But now I 
think the important thing is that everyone feel free to express their 
opinion, and I don't think mine should, in effect, cast a shadow or 
illuminate what others might wish to say between now and the time we 
make our statement.

Peacekeeping Force in the Democratic Republic of the Congo

    Q. My question is for both Presidents. There is a conflict in the 
Democratic Republic of Congo--[inaudible]--is trying to negotiate a 
peaceful settlement. In the case that it reaches the point where it 
needed the contribution of troops for a peacekeeping force in the Congo, 
is, first, Ghana going to contribute troops to bring peace to the Congo? 
And also, is the United States going to contribute money and logistics 
for the peacekeeping in the Congo?
    President Rawlings. If I may--do you mind, sir? You are no doubt 
aware that we have more than enough problems on our hands on the West 
Coast of Africa, and for the past--what--10 to 15 years or so, we've 
been involved in the conflict issues in west Africa, mainly between 
Nigeria, Guinea, and Ghana. We've managed to find the appropriate 
solution to the problem in Liberia, and today we find ourselves also in 
Sierra Leone.
    I must admit, though, that much as we've enjoyed some form of 
assistance from some of our Western allies, I don't think the assistance 
that has been provided has been adequate, and it's something we've 
always brought to their notice. But in our recent discussions with the 
Cabinet, under his leadership, they've made it quite clear that they'll 
do everything possible to assist us to be able to deal with some of the 
problems in west Africa.
    As far as the issues to do with the Congo is concerned, I believe 
the U.S. is doing what you can by way of providing the necessary 
assistance to South Africa and a few other countries to find a solution 
to the problem in that part of Africa.
    Should they be asking for troops from Ghana to serve in, what do you 
call it--Congo-Brazzaville----
    Q. The Democratic Republic of Congo.
    President Rawlings. Thank you very much. I have to say that our 
resources are stretched to the very limit. We have problems back at 
home. And if the U.N. or the international organizations and countries 
would want to assist us, we have a number of troops who would be 
prepared to assist, to provide a peacemaking as well as the peace--what 
do you call it--peacekeeping effort in that part of the country. Okay?

[[Page 249]]

    President Clinton. My answer to you sir is, first of all, I think we 
all have a stake in a resolution of the problems of the Congo. And if 
there were an appropriate peace signed that we felt to be consistent 
with the rules of the international community and the long-term 
stability and welfare of the people of the Congo, as well as its 
neighbors, I would certainly do my best to support any necessary force 
to maintain the peace for a period of transition, including logistical 
and other support.
    I'm sure you know this, I mentioned it in my remarks, but for some 
years now, we've been trying to help establish an Africa Crisis Response 
Initiative, and help to support it financially, that would, in effect, 
go beyond the efforts of ECOMOG in west Africa, to deal with the whole 
continent. And when I was in Senegal last year, I actually went out to a 
training operation of the Africa Crisis Response Initiative, and I met 
with some of the soldiers, and I talked with our people about what we 
were doing together.
    So I would be pleased. I also went to Rwanda last year and met with 
the leaders of the surrounding countries, the Great Lake countries, 
including Mr. Kabila. At that time, we 
were trying to--I was hoping we could avoid the bad year we've had in 
the Congo.
    So if there could be an internationally recognized agreement, 
consistent with international law, that required a peacekeeping force, 
and we were asked to provide some sort of support, logistical and 
otherwise, I would be inclined to do so.
    Terry [Terence Hunt, Associated Press].

Kosovo Peace Negotiations/U.S. Foreign Policy Interests

    Q. Mr. President, two questions. Last Friday you said it would be a 
mistake to extend the negotiating deadline for Kosovo. What made you 
change your mind in less than 24 hours? And how do you respond to former 
Secretary of State Kissinger, who says that Kosovo should be protected 
by European troops and not American troops? He wrote this week, ``Kosovo 
is no more a threat to America than Haiti was to Europe, and we never 
asked for NATO support there.''
    President Clinton. Well, this is a good way to have a six-question, 
instead of a three-question press conference. [Laughter] Let me try to 
disaggregate those things.
    First of all, what they did in the peace talks was to reach an 
agreement that they had gone as far as they could, but they did not want 
to give up and disintegrate into violence. So when we agreed to extend, 
we were basically agreeing to what both parties wished to do. It seems 
to me that if your objective is to get people to get together to make 
peace and they say, ``We think this is what we need,'' I think that's 
the right thing to do.
    Now, the Kosovars have agreed in principle to the agreement. They 
want to go home and have time to sell it between now and the middle of 
March. The Serbs have agreed, except they don't agree to having a 
multinational, NATO-led peacekeeping force because they say there's a 
big difference between Kosovo and Bosnia. Bosnia was an independent 
country in which the Serbs had interests; Kosovo, they say, is a part of 
their country, so this erodes their sovereignty. The problem is that we 
believe, and all others, including the Europeans, who have been involved 
in this process, believe that unless there is some sort of multinational 
force, we cannot keep the peace.
    So they've agreed to work on this between now and March 15th, and 
they're giving us some time to work on it to try to make it work, and 
I'm committed to do that.
    Now, second point: I would say there is a difference between the 
interests of Europe in Haiti and the interest of the United States in 
Kosovo. And I don't mean--this does not diminish the importance of 
Haiti. We've worked very hard to save democracy in Haiti, and to support 
that country. But our country, for 50 years, has recognized that what we 
wanted in Europe was a Europe that was democratic, peaceful, and 
undivided. At the end of the cold war, we finally had a chance to 
achieve all three. But with the disappearance of repressive regimes and 
the threat of the cold war conflict, a lot of old ethnic, religious 
conflicts reasserted themselves.
    Does the United States have an immediate, selfish interest in what 
happens on some lonely road in Kosovo to some poor farm family driving a 
wagon, with horses that are underfed because they haven't been able to 
get food? No. We have--I would argue we have a humanitarian interest. 
One of our major papers yesterday ran a gripping picture on the front 
page of a whole line of refugees moving out.

[[Page 250]]

    But the United States does have a direct interest in whether there 
is instability in the Balkans. And I would say to Dr. 
Kissinger, I think we're moving in the 
right direction. We want Europe to assume more of its own defense. And 
if you compare where we were in Bosnia--how long it took to get there, 
what our role was, our contribution in the beginning of the Bosnia 
operation--to where we are in Kosovo on this military proposal--how much 
more quickly it materialized, and our contribution, only about 14 
percent, I think, of the total--I think we're moving toward more of an 
independent European force, but supported by the United States, because 
we have a very large stake in anything that upsets the stability of 
central Europe.

Support for the President's Africa Initiative

    Q. It's obvious that Africa does not play a major role in terms of 
the minds of the people of the United States, as we can gather now that 
no questions have been asked about Africa.
    President Clinton. You shouldn't take it--it often happens with 
Asians and Latin Americans and--[laughter]--and it's really my fault 
because I don't let them ask me enough questions on other occasions, so 
I'm forcing them to use this opportunity to pepper me. I apologize. 
[Laughter] So go ahead.
    Q. It's obvious that you and your Government have very good 
intentions towards Africa. But how are you going to ``conscientize'' 
Congress and the American people to be able to support your efforts in 
Africa?
    President Clinton. Well, first of all, that's a very good question. 
We talked about that at great length in our meeting today. We spent as 
much time on that as anything.
    Let me say, I see this as a multiyear effort, long-term effort. It 
started when we had the first-ever White House conference on Africa 
here. And we're about to have this ministerial, as I said, next month, 
with at least 40 African nations represented--very high levels. I was 
the first President ever to take a really long trip to sub-Saharan 
Africa and to go to six countries.
    We're trying to increase both--not both, all three--aid, trade, and 
investment and bilateral debt relief. We are working on demining 
activities, which is very sensitive and important in many parts of 
Africa. We're working especially hard on health-related issues and 
particularly HIV and AIDS, where that's a big problem.
    And meanwhile, we're trying to lift the profile of Africa in the 
United States. There is actually quite a lot of interest among ordinary 
citizens here. The Africa trip I took last year, particularly since it 
got off to such a good start, when a half million people showed up in 
Accra--[laughter]--and most of our people--Presidents are not used to 
having half a million people. [Laughter] If I get 10,000 or 20,000 here, 
it's a big show. [Laughter].
    But the point is, it captured the imagination of the American 
people. And we also had a good delegation from Congress there. And 
tonight, at the state dinner, we will have a delegation from Congress, a 
sizable delegation, which will include both African-Americans and non-
African-Americans. It will include both Democrats and Republicans.
    This is not going to be--we were isolated from Africa for a long 
time, except for cold war concerns, as you know. And we are trying to 
have a broad, deep, full relationship now. And it is simply not going to 
happen overnight; we're going to have to work at building it.
    But I want you to be encouraged. I think we're moving in the right 
direction. And I have been very heartened by the genuine interest I have 
gotten from Members of Congress, from both parties and all kinds of 
backgrounds. I have been trying to tell them that this is a phenomenal 
opportunity, as well as obligation, for the United States; we've been 
missing it, and we don't need to miss it anymore. And I think that we're 
moving in that direction.
    President Rawlings. It is true that when this issue came up I did a 
lot of talking about, engaging about this issue, almost sounding like a 
priest. [Laughter] And at the end of it, the response I got was that 
there are other ones that you should be talking to this way. I mean, 
those who you should be talking to this way were outside of this room, 
outside of this Cabinet. And in other words, they are very much in 
agreement with our perceptions about Africa's problems, what the 
problems are and what the solutions ought to be. So in effect, it's hard 
to take this message outside of that Cabinet, to the broader American 
public, to Members of Congress, et cetera, on both sides of the aisle.
    President Clinton. To be fair, what the President said here in his 
opening statement in some ways is the most important thing you can say 
to Americans who are not involved in Africa.

[[Page 251]]

This is not simply a continent with problems; it's a continent with 
promise. Our investments in Africa, American investments in Africa, have 
earned a rate of return more than twice the rate of return earned by 
American investments the last 5 years in Europe, Asia, or Latin America. 
That is quite a stunning statistic.
    And you can say, ``Oh, well, it's because it's just the beginning of 
investment;'' or, ``Oh, well, the best opportunities are there.'' You 
can make all the excuses you want; 30 percent is 30 percent. [Laughter] 
And that's real money, you know? Even by the standards of the last 5 
years, that's a hefty rate of return.
    I did tell--after the President was pounding on me to do better by 
Africa, I did say, I said, ``Reverend Rawlings, you're preaching to the 
saved.'' [Laughter] ``You should just pass the plate, you know.'' He was 
preaching to the saved. [Laughter] But it's a very important point. I 
don't blame him, or you, for asking this question.
    But you have to understand, too--I know the cold war has been over 
10 years now; I know that. But I also would call your--I would like to 
say one other thing, briefly, I said to the delegation earlier. The end 
of the cold war presented the United States with a new circumstance that 
required us to take an approach different from the approach we had taken 
for 200 years. For 200 years, our principal involvement with other 
countries was commercial or cultural, unless attacked. Then in the 20th 
century, we got into World War I because our ideals were offended and 
because our allies were in trouble in Europe. We immediately withdrew 
from the world, with disastrous consequences. One of the reasons that we 
had the Great Depression and we had World War II is that the United 
States in its idealism walked away from the world.
    So then we had World War II, and then we had the cold war, a reason 
for America to stay in the world. For the last 10 years, it is the first 
time in the history of the United States that we have had a sustained, 
comprehensive commitment, bipartisan, to have a larger role in the 
world--in peacetime, without our existence being threatened--which means 
we learned something from what happened between World War I and World 
War II, and we understand that America is a country where people here 
come from everywhere, and we know we have unique responsibilities 
because of the blessings we enjoy at this moment in history. But it is a 
new moment for us, and we are still learning how to do it.
    That is not an excuse. I know when you see a child die of AIDS, or 
you see a child step on a mine in Angola, or you see an economic 
opportunity going unfulfilled, or you think that we could help you to 
end a war more quickly, I know it's frustrating. But our friends in 
Africa have to understand what we have been doing for the last 10 years 
is unique in more than 200 years of history for us. And I think we'll 
get it right and do the right thing, but it requires a certain departure 
that I think most people who don't know the history of our country have 
difficulty accepting.
    Go ahead, Larry [Larry McQuillan, Reuters].

President Rawlings' Budget/Iraq

    Q. President Rawlings, your domestic critics say that your budget 
proposal for the coming year has been unrealistically optimistic, and 
I'm just wondering if you might like to take this opportunity to respond 
to that.
    And President Clinton, on Iraq--[laughter].
    President Clinton. I thought you were going to ask me the first 
question. [Laughter] Go ahead.
    Q. There's been another incident again today. And this certainly 
seems to be an ongoing recurrence. And I'm just wondering if, perhaps, 
you can clarify for us what the U.S. policy objective is on Iraq? And 
have we given up all hope of any kind of arms inspections again?
    President Rawlings. Please. I don't think there's anything 
unrealistic about what the Minister of Finance--and it's not just the 
Minister of Finance, but it's the whole Cabinet, under the chairmanship 
of the Presidency, myself, as well as the Vice President, do a very 
thorough examination of the pros and cons of what's coming in and what's 
going out, et cetera, and on the basis of which, we do a very thorough 
examination of what will come and what will not. And it's on the basis 
of this that we come out with the budget statement for the country.
    And please accept it when I say that we've gone through an 
experience where, unlike governments of the past, we did not make the 
mistake of--what do you call it--taking politically expedient moves just 
to deal with some economic problem. Because ultimately it's going to 
catch up with us, and this is what has happened

[[Page 252]]

in the past. And this is a lesson we learned more than 10, 15 years ago.
    I mean, it's been very difficult for us in the past, every time 
we've had to read the budget, but then we take the trouble to educate 
our people about what it entails, what it means, what the difficulties 
are going to be, et cetera.
    But you've got to keep in mind that the minute our people under--
very often--I think I understand where you're coming from--very often, 
whenever people do not understand or appreciate what is being churned 
out in a broadcast, then of course, I mean, they wonder what you're 
talking about. But if you can reduce it to the lowest denominator and 
then they understand what it all entails, they are all for you. That's 
half the problem; that's half the solution that's solved. And that's 
what we do, not just with our civilian counterparts, the workers in the 
factories, but soldiers, officers, et cetera, in the barracks, et 
cetera. The minute they understand it, that's half the problem.
    Now, if you're telling me this on account of what you are reading on 
the Internet, it's unfortunate that we're not as quick, as efficient to 
correct misimpressions--is that the word?--or distortions on the 
Internet, as others do ahead of us. I wish we were just as efficient as 
they are on the Internet--[laughter]--then you wouldn't be asking me 
this question. [Laughter]
    We have a Finance Minister--wait a minute--who started off as the 
Energy--he made a success of it--no, before the Energy--Transport and 
Communication; he made a success of it. From there we moved him to Lands 
and Forestry; he made a success of it; from there to Energy--no, Energy 
and to do with the gold mine--Mines and Energy; he made a fantastic 
success of that one. And that's how he ended up as the Minister of 
Finance. A man of integrity, earnestness, he sits with a cross-section 
of the people, from the top right down to the bottom--workers, union 
leaders, et cetera--and lays everything on the table.
    And that is what we need in Africa. That's what we've been doing in 
Ghana. That's how come we've survived this long, because we don't hide 
anything from anybody. We lay everything on the table.
    So if you're putting this question across to me, please, attribute 
it to those who just cannot accept the earnestness, the sincerity of 
this government. Is that okay? [Laughter] No, if I haven't finished, 
please feel free, you can come back.
    President Clinton. On Iraq, you asked two questions. Let me take the 
second question first.
    No, we have not given up on the prospect of restoring inspections. 
But since Saddam Hussein terminated his 
cooperation with UNSCOM and then the military action was taken by the 
United States, Great Britain, with the support of our allies, they have 
continued to defy the U.N., and that's where we are now. That brings us 
back to your first question.
    What's going on with these incidents is that under the United 
Nations resolutions, which are still in place, the no-fly zone still 
exists. The no-fly zone has to be patrolled. When it is patrolled by 
American and British pilots, from time to time, as you pointed out, 
there have now been several instances when Israeli air defense--excuse 
me, Iraqi air defense weapons have been fired at our airplanes. And 
they're trying, obviously, for the symbolic victory of shooting one of 
these planes down, and perhaps trying to intimidate us from enforcing 
the no-fly zone, which we're still bound to do under the United Nations 
resolution.
    Now, in response to that, we have certain rules of engagement which 
permit us to take out the air defense. And we have done quite a lot of 
it. I noticed there was one column in the press in the last week--I 
think it was Mr. Seib's [Jerry Seib, Wall Street Journal] column--but 
anyway, it was a column which pointed out that a significant amount of 
damage, perhaps as much damage or more, has been done to the air defense 
network since the end of the last military action than was done during 
the military action, where we had a lot broader range of targets we were 
going after.
    And I regret this, you know. I regret this. I wish he would stop 
doing that. I wish he would make an agreement 
with the United Nations to let the inspections go back. We have shown 
that we are not interested in hurting the Iraqi people. We have been for 
broader rules for meeting the nonmilitary needs of the people of Iraq, 
and we will continue to work at that.
    But these little encounters--each of them so far has been relatively 
small--are as a result of the fact that we are still, notwithstanding 
the fact that the inspectors aren't there, bound to enforce a no-fly 
zone which still exists under the U.N. resolutions.

[[Page 253]]

Debt Relief for African Nations

    Q. This question is to President Clinton. In recent years, there's 
been much talk about the need for debt cancellation, and the general 
feeling among African countries is that this is one surest escape route 
towards economic development. I would like to hear your comments on it.
    President Clinton. I'm sorry. I'm hard of hearing. Could you 
repeat--the debt cancellation issue?
    Q.  Yes.
    President Clinton. Well, I believe that debt relief is appropriate, 
in Africa and in certain other places, particularly in view of the 
countries in--some of the countries in Asia that have been so hard hit 
by the financial crisis. I think that debt relief, frankly, though, only 
works if it is accompanied by a longer term commitment to a sound 
economic policy.
    If you look at the astonishing results that Ghana has produced over 
a period of years--steady growth, good years and bad years; some years 
are better than others--but you've enjoyed steady growth. You've had a 
steady political environment that has also become steadily more 
democratic, not steadily more repressive, moving in the right direction.
    I think that it is unlikely that a lot of these countries can really 
resume significant growth without debt relief. But I do not believe debt 
relief alone will bring them their growth. That's my position. I'm for 
more debt relief. The United States is sponsoring--as I said, we will 
have, in Africa alone, almost $500 million in debt relief this year and 
last year, if Congress approves my proposal. We also have contributed 
another $50 million in this budget as our contribution to a larger 
international debt relief effort.
    And I think we can do more. But it is essential for some countries, 
but it is not enough. So we need debt relief plus trade and investment, 
plus aid, plus good economic policies within the country. You have to 
have all of them, I think, to maximize African growth.
    Let's take one more. John [John King, Cable News Network].

Cooperation With Congress

    Q. Sir, both the Speaker of the House and the Senate Majority Leader 
left their meeting with you yesterday and refused to answer directly 
when we asked them outside if they could trust you after the events of 
the past few months. Was that your sense in the meeting? And if that is 
the case, how do you hope to accomplish anything in your final 22 
months?
    President Clinton. Well, the answer is, that was not my sense. I 
thought it was a good meeting. Because of what they went through with their own 
Members, that's a difficult question for you to ask them. And no matter 
what answer they give, it causes them more problems than it solves. You 
guys are great at asking me those questions, too.
    But I mean, keep in mind, they're the leader of--they have 
to lead their caucuses in the House and the Senate. So that sort of 
question, at the time when some of the nerves are still raw, any answer 
they give makes it more difficult for them, potentially, at least, 
within their caucus or within the country, depending on what answer they 
give.
    So I think the answer ought to be, the answer they ought to give and the 
answer they ought to have deeply imbedded in their minds and hearts is 
that their feelings are not important here--just like my feelings are 
not important. We have an oath to fulfill, a responsibility to fulfill. 
We were hired to do the public's business, and they expect us to do it.
    You know, it would be hard to imagine a year that was more strained 
than last year, and we got a lot done. It was a good year, 
legislatively. We continued--we passed our second balanced budget; we 
passed the legislation to provide for 100,000 teachers, with almost a 
third of them paid for in the downpayment, and lots of other things.
    So I think we're now in a period--this is early in the legislative 
calendar; they have a new leader in the House; they have a lot of work 
to do; they have to get a budget resolution through. And then we have 
probably, oh, I don't know, 8 or 10 bills that I can conceive of us 
getting agreement on--I mean, really significant bills, a lot of them--
between the two parties.
    And then we've got these big questions of what to do about Social 
Security, Medicare; whether I'm right, they're right, something else is 
right on the tax cut issue. There are big questions out here. And I 
believe that we will all do our duty in the end; that's what I think. 
And I just think we need to--if we focus on the American people and 
doing our duty, and not on whether we're mad or happy, disappointed or 
elated about the events of the last

[[Page 254]]

year, then all this in the course of time will work itself out. And the 
American system will be validated.
    We--if you take a position like the ones we've taken, it is simply 
wrong for you to think about what your feelings are. Your responsibility 
is to fulfill your oath and do what the public needs. And if we focus on 
that, we'll be just fine.

Dual Citizenship

    Q. President Rawlings, I think I'm on the wrong side of the room. I 
apologize, but I have a question for you.
    President Rawlings. I understand. Actually, I was actually briefed 
that most of the questions would be directed at the President. 
[Laughter] I was made to understand that, don't be surprised if most of 
the questions are related to American domestic situations and not the 
fact that I'm here from Africa. Thank you. Carry on, please. [Laughter]
    Q. Well, I've heard that Ghana is offering some sort of dual 
citizenship to African-Americans. Is that true? What does it mean, and 
what's the reasoning behind it?
    President Rawlings. It's very true. Sorry, do you mind if I--is it 
something connected to the question?
    President Clinton. Answer this one, and then if you want to call on 
him, it's fine.
    President Rawlings. Very soon, our Parliament will be passing the 
bill to grant black Americans their dual citizenship, as far as Ghana is 
concerned, and you'll have the right of dual abode.
    Q. What does it mean?
    President Rawlings. What does it mean?
    Q. Yes.
    President Rawlings. You wouldn't need a visa; you wouldn't need 
whatever it is to enter my country. You will have the freedom to move 
around as any fellow Ghanaian, and that will not deny you your American 
citizenship, either.
    Q. What's the reasoning behind it?
    President Rawlings. What's the reason behind it?
    Q. Yes.
    President Rawlings. Do German-Americans, do Israeli-Americans--are 
they denied the right of their citizenship back at home? No, no, please, 
if I'm wrong, can you correct me?
    Q. I don't know. [Laughter]
    President Rawlings. Quite frankly, I mean, I could go on and on. But 
the point is that, I mean, you're our kith and kin. If others can refer 
to themselves as Jewish Americans or German-Americans or Irish-
Americans, whatever it is, Italian-Americans, and you're calling 
yourself African----
    Q. Americans.
    President Rawlings. ----whatever it is. [Laughter] I mean, where do 
you come from? After all, I mean, my continent is the mother of--what do 
you call it?--not all continents but humanity and civilization as we've 
come to know today. I mean, is there any reason why you should not have 
the right to enjoy the citizenship of where you come from?
    President Clinton. I'm just sorry I can't do it. [Laughter] I don't 
qualify. [Laughter]
    President Rawlings. No, no, wait a minute, sir. Hold on, Mr. 
President. [Laughter] No, no. You're not going to explain this for me. 
[Laughter]
    Let's put it this way. I'm rather surprised that you're asking me 
this question. I should be asking you, I mean, how on God's possible--
whatever it is--could you be asking me a question like this? [Laughter] 
Because, I mean----
    Q. Would it be dual loyalty?
    President Rawlings. Well, I guess that's what we have a bit of--we 
don't have any problem with that. I think--when I look into that issue, 
I have a problem with you, because you're demanding loyalty to the 
American Constitution, and yet I cannot demand the same kind of loyalty 
to my country. And this is where I'm beginning to have a problem. But 
nonetheless, there's no reason why I will deny my fellow black African 
the right to enjoy the citizenship as I enjoy as an African.
    President Clinton. Let me just try to--the general rule is that dual 
citizenship laws are, by definition, controlled by the citizenship 
conditions of both countries. And it's not unheard of for Americans to 
have dual citizenship.
    Interestingly enough, after the fall of the Iron Curtain and the 
breakup of the Soviet Union and the Warsaw Pact, we've had American 
citizens who had roots, for example, in the Baltic States. One went home 
to his country and became the Ambassador. I don't know if he had to give 
up his American citizenship, or not. It would be a function of the law. 
But there are--and the laws operate differently in different countries. 
But almost all countries allow some form of dual citizenship.
    Now, second thing is, the President didn't mention this, but if 
Ghana does this, it certainly

[[Page 255]]

won't hurt in trying to get more Americans interested in Ghana, going to 
Ghana, and contributing to Ghana's future. I thought it was quite a 
clever idea myself. [Laughter]
    Thank you very much.
    President Rawlings. No, no, no. Hold on, Mr. President. [Laughter] 
On one condition--that if you fall foul of the laws and regulations of 
my country, the--what do you call it?--the judiciary, the police, and 
the laws of my country will take their course without the American 
Government attempting to intervene, to say, this is a citizen of my 
country.
    President Clinton. I think that's what the rule is.
    President Rawlings. Thank you, sir.
    President Clinton. There's a whole lot of law on that. I think 
that's the rule.
    Thank you.
    Q. I want to say to you something.
    President Rawlings. Yes, sir.
    Q. You know, we the people----
    President Rawlings. Yes sir.
    Q. ----of African descent that are Latino, are ready, willing, and 
able to cooperate with Africa--[inaudible]--and our experience, the 
President of the Dominican Republic, and I, as a Cuban-American, reside 
here for--[inaudible]--are ready and willing to help you in the African 
initiative. And I guarantee you with my friend of the Republican Party 
is going to give me 100 percent support for the initiatives of the 
President of Africa--[inaudible]. So you have the cooperation of the 
Latinos, like the Jewish have for their people in Israel.
    President Clinton. Thank you.

Note: The President's 169th news conference began at 2:35 p.m. in the 
Presidential Hall (formerly Room 450) of the Old Executive Office 
Building. In his remarks, he referred to David E. Kendall, the 
President's personal attorney; President Laurent Desire Kabila of the 
Democratic Republic of the Congo; former Secretary of State Henry A. 
Kissinger; and President Saddam Hussein of Iraq. President Rawlings 
referred to Minister of Finance and Economic Planning Richard Kwame 
Peprah of Ghana.