[Weekly Compilation of Presidential Documents Volume 30, Number 22 (Monday, June 6, 1994)]
[Pages 1194-1201]
[Online from the Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]

<R04>
The President's News Conference With Prime Minister Berlusconi of Italy 
in Rome

June 2, 1994

    Prime Minister Berlusconi. I wish to begin by first and foremost 
thanking the

[[Page 1195]]

American President for having chosen to begin his stay in Europe or his 
tour of Europe with our country, to commemorate the liberation that the 
Allies brought to us, the liberation from Nazi totalitarianism and 
fascism.
    We had a very interesting meeting during which I was able to explain 
directly to the President the current scenario in Italy, the reason 
having determined the change in government, as of the majority voting 
law or electoral law, to the political situation that had come into 
being and the program of the new government and the willingness on 
behalf of the government to continue the alliance policy, following a 
tradition that Italy has always wanted to pursue in a climate of good 
neighborhood relations vis-a-vis international organizations and 
especially the United States of America.
    After that point, we went on to analyze international policy issues. 
We would be very honored to have President Clinton as our guest in 
Naples for the G-7 summit coming up. The main issues during that time 
that are going to be debated in that forum are going to be of an 
economic nature, especially the employment issue. It's a very difficult 
problem I think to be conjugated with economic development, and it's a 
problem that's afflicting our Western countries, I should say.
    We then went on to discuss the international scenario and the need 
for international organizations to intervene more promptly and more 
effectively to manage the various regional crises that bring about so 
much suffering and pain to civil populations. On our behalf, we also 
confirmed to President Clinton and to his staff our gratitude for what 
the United States of America, together with the Allies, did 50 years 
back, 50 years which to us have meant freedom. And I don't think that--I 
did underscore this explicitly--we wouldn't have had this Italy that 
President Clinton has met with today. This free Italy wouldn't have been 
here without the help of the Allies. The reconstructed Italy wouldn't 
have existed without the sacrifice of many young lives in America.
    This is something that we always remember, we bear it in mind, and 
it has been this spirit of friendship and gratitude that we welcome 
President Clinton and his staff.
    Please, Bill.
    The President. Thank you very much, Mr. Prime Minister.
    Ladies and gentlemen, I was delighted with the meeting that I had 
with the Prime Minister and other high officials of his government. I 
welcome this opportunity to get to know him better and to make the ties 
between our two nations even stronger.
    I also think I should say, since this is my first public opportunity 
to do so, I was pleased to have the opportunity to meet with His 
Holiness Pope John Paul II earlier today and to see him looking so well 
and being so vigorous. We had a very, very fine conversation, and I was 
able to give him the best wishes of all the American people for a full 
recovery.
    I am here overwhelmingly for the purpose of commemorating the 50th 
anniversary of the restoration of freedom to Western Europe. We will do 
that here in Italy and then in France and in England.
    Italy has been a staunch ally of the United States throughout the 
cold war and throughout, now, this post-cold-war era. I was able to tell 
the Prime Minister personally how much I appreciated the support that 
Italy has given for NATO's efforts to resolve the conflict in Bosnia and 
for the support Italy has given particularly to the United States Armed 
Forces in all the efforts we undertake in this part of the world.
    We discussed a lot of our common economic and social challenges. We 
talked about the G-7 meeting coming up, and I think we have laid the 
foundation of a very, very good and strong relationship. I was deeply 
impressed by the strong commitment that the Prime Minister made to the 
democratic process which produced his election and to the progress, that 
he believes that he will make and that I was very impressed by his 
commitment to make, on the whole range of domestic issues as well as our 
international partnership.
    Thank you very much.

Italy

    Q. What is, Mr. President, your assessment of this new era in Italy 
after meeting with our Prime Minister--we have a new

[[Page 1196]]

Prime Minister--and will you bet on Italy's future, sir?
    The President. Would I bet on it? Is that what you said? Well, the 
answer to the second question is, yes, I would bet on it. I'm not much 
of a betting man, but I would bet on that.
    I told the Prime Minister that this whole election process has been 
very interesting for the American people. Because Italian-Americans are 
so important to the fabric of life in our country and because Italy has 
been such a good ally of ours and because in our relatively stable 
system, we have marveled at the continued economic progress and strength 
of Italy throughout a series of, I think, some 53 governments since the 
end of the Second World War. So this whole process of political reform 
and elections has been very interesting to me personally and, I think, 
to all the American people.
    I think I understand the question you asked me, and I would make 
only two points. First of all, the first thing the Prime Minister said 
to me was his government from top to bottom is unequivocally committed 
to democracy. Secondly, in the world in which we live, not just in Italy 
but in Poland, in Argentina, in any number of other countries, there are 
many political parties which have their roots in a less democratic past. 
And I have found it not only useful, but the only reasonable approach, 
to judge all people in governments today by what they do--what do they 
say and what do they do when they are in power.
    In that regard, I think the United States would support the judgment 
of the people of Italy and their democratic elections and looks forward 
to a very good relationship with this Prime Minister.
    Q. My question to the Prime Minister is: Why is it then, with what 
you have told the President, that so many people think your government 
is trending toward fascism? Also, in your statement you said there 
should be greater intervention in world crises. Would you send troops 
into Bosnia to fight?
    Prime Minister Berlusconi. What I can tell you is what the actual 
situation of Italy is. I can tell you how my government stands, truly. 
In Italy there is no such thing as nostalgia for a period that we 
consider to be completely buried in the past and having been condemned 
by history.
    All surveys, all investigations that have been carried out to assist 
this have led to the recognition that less than one percent of all 
Italians--the latest survey actually gives us the result of 0.4 percent 
of all Italians--feel some sentiment or have a memory, a nostalgic 
memory--might I define it as such, which is a rather excessive way of 
putting it--for fascism. So you see, this is a fake problem. It is 
completely far removed from all reality.
    I'd like to add the fact that in the government that I preside right 
now, with the ministers that I've chosen for the Cabinet, there is not 
and there could never be any minister or any official that were not 
democratic in nature, that truly and deeply believed in freedom and 
democracy, and that believed completely that totalitarianism needs to be 
fought always and at all costs.
    As regards to the second part of your question, we discussed about 
the possibility that international organizations might undertake more 
effective initiatives in the future. As far as certain crises in the 
world are concerned--the former Yugoslavia is one, but we also have the 
situation in Rwanda and other crises having broken out in Africa, take 
Somalia as an example--much has been done. But in looking at many scenes 
of suffering and pain on television, all of our people are starting to 
wonder whether or not sufficient amount of things have been done, 
whether everything that could be done has been done.
    Now, I know right away that it's not so easy to find a solution. And 
I don't think that one could think that simply by sending troops in it 
might be possible to solve certain situations. Nonetheless, I do believe 
that international organizations have to be very attentive to what's 
going on throughout the world in order to be able to prevent, with very 
specific diplomatic action, the possible crises that might break out and 
lead to disaster and much suffering and pain throughout the world. And 
especially, I believe that everything has been done in order to avoid 
that a wound may become an ulcer, a permanent and incurable ulcer, which 
could be the constant source of pain and suffering.

[[Page 1197]]

U.N. Security Council

    Q. To President Clinton: Do you support Italy as permanent member in 
the United Nations Security Council?
    The President. As you know, the United States has previously stated 
that we would support membership for Japan and for Germany on the 
Security Council. We have not foreclosed further expansion of the 
Security Council. That is a matter, I think, that the Security Council 
itself and that the United Nations would have to discuss. But I would 
not foreclose that possibility, and the suggestion that I made was not 
with a view toward having another frozen membership for another 45 
years.

Meeting With Pope John Paul II

    Q. [Inaudible]--spoke with the Pope on the population control 
conference and specifically on the question of abortion?
    The President. Yes. First of all, let me try to reiterate here what 
I said when I was at the Vatican meeting with the American seminarians, 
and some of you covered that. His Holiness raised a number of questions 
that we discussed at great length, including a long discussion of his 
concern about what is happening in the Islamic States and how we can 
work with them in a more cooperative way, and then a long discussion 
about what is going on in Asia, China, Japan, and North Korea. I would 
say those two subjects probably took up more time than any other part of 
our discussion.
    We talked about Bosnia. We talked about Eastern Europe. We talked 
about Russia. We talked about Haiti a bit, and he expressed general 
support for what we are trying to achieve in Haiti, for which I was 
quite grateful.
    His Holiness mentioned with regard to the Cairo conference his 
concern that the world community in general, and the United States in 
particular, not be insensitive to the value of life or appear to be 
advocating policies that would undermine the strength of the family.
    What I said about that was pretty straightforward, but let me try to 
recapture it here if I might. First, I said it seemed to me that there 
were two issues here, one of which I thought we could resolve in ways 
that would bring us closer together. The first issue is that there are 
some genuine disagreements between us on the question of the role of 
contraception and population policy and in attempting to slow the rate 
of population growth in the developing world.
    But secondly, there is no disagreement, in my judgment, on the 
larger issue, which is that we agree with the Vatican that the essential 
thing is to have a policy of sustainable development, which normally 
leads to improved roles for women and stabilization of population, if 
properly done; and that we should recognize at Cairo and everywhere else 
that the central role of the family as the basic institution of every 
society should not be undermined; and finally, that the United States 
does not and will not support abortion as a means of birth control or 
population control; that we do support active and aggressive family 
planning efforts, we do have differences over contraception, and we did 
move away from the Mexico City policy to a more neutral one in terms of 
the policies other countries have with regard to population planning, to 
contraception, and to abortion; but that I thought we had a great deal 
in common in terms of our overall objectives, and that we should focus 
on those things.

Neofascism

    Q. Mr. President Clinton, you said that you will judge the Italian 
Government by its record. I would like to know which criteria you will 
use, only economical? And secondly, do you think neofascism in Europe is 
a danger or is over, like Mr. Berlusconi said?
    The President. First of all, the answer to your question is we would 
evaluate people not by wholly economical criteria, but by whether they 
were faithful to democracy and human rights, the recognition of the 
rights of others to speak their piece, and the respect for the 
democratic process of elections and public judgment.
    Secondly, you have asked a different question in terms of what the 
role of neofascism will be. I think that depends upon, again, what 
happens not simply in Italy but in other countries as well.
    You see all across the world--and no country, I mean no country, is 
immune to people

[[Page 1198]]

who run making extremist statements trying to divide people, trying to, 
in effect, play on both the economic frustration and the social and 
moral frustration that people feel in all countries where there is both 
economic stagnation and social disintegration.
    People everywhere yearn for a certain sense of order and discipline 
and hopefulness about the daily conditions of life. And when those 
things are under stress, every political system will be vulnerable to 
people who try to play on fears and to divide people, and neofascism is 
but one label. You see that in the politics of elections in Islamic 
countries; you can see it in our country; you can see it in many other 
countries. And it is almost a constant in electoral life that then rises 
and falls depending on the objective conditions of any nation and the 
mood of the people.
    I would say the thing that would be most likely to defang or 
diminish the influence of destructive neofascism or other extremist 
views is a successful government here, a government that, (a) is 
successful economically; (b) is successful in uniting the people; and, 
(c) is successful in making people have a higher level of confidence 
that government can actually function in a limited but appropriate way. 
And if you ask me this question in the United States, I would give you 
the same answer.

North Korea

    Q. Mr. President, North Korea has now threatened to withdraw from 
the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. What is your response to that? 
Secondly, do you feel now that the United States can only move toward 
incremental sanctions because China has expressed its opposition to a 
broader U.N. embargo? And now that you've mentioned it, could you share 
with us what the Pope, what His Holiness said to you about the Korea 
issue?
    The President. Let me see if I can remember all of that. First of 
all, North Korea has said many things--that sanctions would be viewed as 
an act of aggression, that something bad might happen, that maybe 
they'll withdraw from the NPT--in an attempt somehow to shift the focus 
from their actions to the rest of the world. This is not about the rest 
of the world; this is about North Korea.
    North Korea is a mature country governed by mature people who freely 
undertook the obligations of participation in the NPT. They did that. No 
one made them do it. They did it. Now they cannot have it both ways. 
They can't say, ``Well, we'll stay in the NPT but only if we're not 
required to assume the obligations of membership and only if we can 
violate the obligations we freely undertook without anybody reacting to 
it.''
    Well, we're not, any of us, permitted to conduct ourselves that way. 
So this is about North Korea's conduct, not about the United States or 
Britain or France or Russia or China. It is about their conduct.
    The second question is, I think that if the IAEA certifies that it 
is no longer possible to determine whether any of the fuel from the 
defueling in 1989 was diverted, and that in their judgment that means 
they cannot in good conscience go forward with just looking 
prospectively at what might happen, what that would say is that--the 
United States and the world community has worked with North Korea on 
this issue for 5 years now--and I believe, therefore, the question of 
sanctions has to be at least taken up in the United Nations Security 
Council and discussed.
    And I must say, I was quite encouraged by what President Yeltsin 
said today with President Kim in Moscow. That is, he says he thinks we 
ought to--as you know, he's been calling for some time for a meeting, 
which also should be discussed in the context of the U.N. But he said--
this is the first time I believe Russia has said publicly--that if 
negotiations are clearly going to be unsuccessful, that Russia would 
support sanctions. The Chinese have continued to say, as the closest 
ally of North Korea, that they are trying to get North Korea to comply, 
that North Korea ought to comply, but that they hope there will be a 
diplomatic solution.
    They have not yet said that they would veto a sanctions resolution. 
So what I think the United States should be doing--and I believe Britain 
and France agree with this, although I will have a chance to discuss 
this with them in the next few days--I think we should just--if the IAEA 
certifies that the chain of proof is broken, that they cannot

[[Page 1199]]

establish what has happened, then the question of sanctions will have to 
be moved to the U.N. Security Council, and we will have to discuss all 
these issues.
    But this is because of North Korea's conduct, not because of Mr. 
Blix and the IAEA, not because of the U.S. or Russia or China or Britain 
or France. This is about North Korea's conduct. And I think we have to 
go forward. They have triggered these events, not the United States or 
anyone else. We have to go forward.
    Q. What about His Holiness? Does he share the view----
    The President. Oh, His Holiness basically was more concerned about--
he wanted to know what I thought about them. And he was concerned about 
the whole issue of religious freedom throughout Asia, in North Korea. He 
said, you know, North Korea's clearly the most closed society. But he 
was interested in religious freedom in China, in Vietnam and all other 
parts of Asia, and in whether Europe and the United States would be able 
to have the kind of partnerships in Asia, specifically with Japan and 
with China, that would enable us to go into the 21st century continuing 
to support the move of democracy there. That was his general concern. 
And he asked me what I thought was going to happen to the Asian 
economies--of whether they would continue their explosive growth for the 
next three decades. That's basically what he asked.

Italy

    Q. I'd like to ask Mr. Berlusconi, considering the fact that 
judgment on government has to be based on concrete facts, we'd like to 
know what are the first provisions and most urgent to be presented to 
Parliament, to be submitted to Parliament? And how do you intend to act 
within the Senate, in which the majority has a very narrow margin? Plus, 
a question to President Clinton: What is your opinion about the 
participation of Italian troops in the U.N. mission in former 
Yugoslavia? Do you agree with that, or not?
    Prime Minister Berlusconi. Fine. I don't think that we have to bore 
our guests in discussing topics that are strictly pertinent to domestic 
issues and domestic policy. And I do think that they've been illustrated 
repeatedly in presenting the government program within the Senate and 
even the Chamber of Deputies. We're all quite aware of the fact that 
what lies ahead of us is a revamping of the economy and, hopefully, new 
momentum which will be given to the economy and the solution of an 
important problem, which is a generation of new jobs, new employment 
possibilities. And we're going to proceed just in that direction.
    And please let me underscore that as far as this problem is 
concerned I have a very clear recollection of what President Clinton 
said in Detroit a few months ago when he stated that it was not state 
intervention that we could base our hopes on in order to solve the 
employment problem, but rather the state or government should urge 
private entrepreneurs to undertake a business, because that's the real 
engine that's capable of creating new employment, new jobs.
    And in those circumstances, he also made reference to the therapies, 
if you will, that he deemed to be most appropriate, in other words, a 
different relationship between individuals and their job, to be open in 
a different way to one's job in order to provide greater flexibility on 
the job market, and a great commitment on behalf of everybody in order 
to provide better vocational training.
    I think that we're exactly pursuing this avenue. We very much share 
this attitude. And we're already reaping the fruit of all this because 
here in Palazzo Chigi we have this new government. And that justifies, I 
think, or bears witness to this.
    We've been able to provide new elan to the economic situation and 
the various entrepreneurs and businesses, that I feel that they trust 
the government more. They would have lost all hope had there been a 
different government, I think. But now we've promised an intervention, 
we've promised especially to lower taxes, and we've promised especially 
to change the attitude of redtape here, vis-a-vis those who decide to 
undertake new job opportunities and new business opportunities. And so 
they're more optimistic, and they're looking with better eyes to the 
future of their businesses and enterprises. I think this is what we need 
to be concerned with; this is what we have to do; we're already doing 
it.

[[Page 1200]]

    Now, about the second part of your question. Frankly, I am not 
concerned or worried about the fact that in certain commissions there 
are chairmen that have been appointed that don't belong to the majority. 
I think that we have a long path lying ahead of us, and I continue to be 
optimistic, because I always--and I continue to think that the minority 
will simply take stock of what's been going on, and they will realize 
that Italians want to be governed. They demand that there be some type 
of government so the minority will not, I think, want to be destructive. 
They will not want to make it impossible for the government to govern; 
rather, I think that they're going to be ready to look at the various 
provisions for the welfare of this country.
    I think the minority is going to want to be more dialectically 
oriented and will decide to work not against but for our country in a 
constructive light.
    Press Secretary Myers. This will have to be the last question.

Bosnia

    The President. You asked a question. I'd like to dodge the question, 
but he asked it, so I should--you ask about Italian troops in Bosnia.
    Let me say, first of all, the objectives of the European Community, 
the United Nations, NATO, the United States in Bosnia include not only 
doing whatever we can to bring the slaughter of innocent people to an 
end and to restoring some harmony to life there under conditions that 
everyone can live with but also limiting the conflict and not permitting 
it to spread.
    With that in mind, there was a general consensus that in this period 
of the U.N. presence, that the countries which actually border the 
former Yugoslavia would not be asked to provide troops but instead to 
provide other kinds of support, just as the United States has also 
provided other kinds of support, air power to enforce the various NATO 
requirements and to supply the longest airlift in history now.
    If there is a settlement which then requires a multinational force 
under the authority of NATO, for example, to support, that would be a 
different question altogether, a question that your government would 
have to revisit, a question we all would.
    But I think in fairness, the Italian Government has been very 
forceful in supporting the NATO mission in Bosnia and trying to do 
whatever could be done to bring the conflict to an end. And I think the 
decision to not ask any of the countries bordering the former Yugoslavia 
to provide troops as a way of limiting the conflict and reinforcing the 
objective of limiting the conflict was a good decision.

North Korea

    Q. A follow-up on Korea. Do you really believe that there is 
worldwide resolve to say to the North Koreans, you cannot go forward 
with this? And also, do you feel that your own leadership skills are on 
the line here in dealing with this crisis with North Korea?
    The President. Well, on the second question, I think they're on the 
line every day, and they're always under challenge. This is a difficult 
time.
    Let me say a little something about the first question. There are 
two issues here. One is that a Communist country and an isolated one 
freely undertook to join the NPT in what I believe at the time was a 
decision they had made to move toward integrating themselves more 
closely with the world community and trying to reconcile their historic 
differences with South Korea.
    That is the direction that, frankly, has been very welcome, not just 
by me personally but by my predecessors and by the United States 
generally. And we have made it very clear that there is a future of 
genuine partnership with North Korea not simply with South Korea but 
with the United States and with the rest of the world in the context of 
a nuclear-free Korean Peninsula. That was the path. But when that path 
was taken, there were certain obligations assumed. And it seems to me 
that the world community cannot just simply look away from those 
obligations.
    The second issue is, what are the consequences of the North Korea 
policy, because they will say, ``Well, what about India? What about 
Pakistan? What about other nonmembers of the NPT?'' The difference is, 
of course, if this country is changing path

[[Page 1201]]

and going back to an isolationist and to a hostile path, what could they 
do, maybe not today or tomorrow but a few years from now with the 
material that they might produce along with their well-known capacity to 
produce missiles? Who else might wind up with it? So it's a very serious 
question.
    And all I can tell you is that I have been impressed by the gravity 
with which the other members of the United Nations Security Council, 
including Russia and China, have approached it. I recognize it is a more 
difficult question for China and for Russia than for the United States 
and for Britain and for France. It also matters a lot to Japan and to 
South Korea. I think we all have a common desire to see North Korea 
return to the former path. And I believe that in the end when we move to 
the Security Council discussions, we will come out with a policy that 
will show resolve and that will do that. I just don't think we can walk 
away from this. And so, I am hopeful, but I realize it is a difficult 
and a challenging issue.
    Prime Minister Berlusconi. We apologize, but time is running out, 
and we have a certain schedule we have to go by. And so, all we can do 
is thank you and say good-bye.
    The only think I do wish to add on my personal behalf is that in 
looking to the international scenario, I am very glad to be able to say 
that the opinion of our government is that we feel very close to the 
positions expressed by the United States of America.
    We spoke about Partnership For Peace. We spoke about the need to 
open the European Union to other countries of Central and Eastern 
Europe. And we have also wished for participation of Russia within the 
Partnership For Peace agreement. And we look to this country and its 
development with great interest, in full awareness of the important role 
that Russia will play in the future, for the maintenance of 
international relations. Of course, both of our countries are 
determined, insofar as possible, to provide support and help to 
undertake the economic and political reform of this great state and 
country.
    I think in that in this forum I can confirm to President Clinton and 
the rest of his staff the feeling that we are very close, we appreciate 
you, and we very deeply thank you for being here with us.
    The best of luck to you, Mr. President.
    The President. Thank you very much.

Note: The President's 59th news conference began at 4:46 p.m. at the 
Palazzo Chigi. In his remarks, the President referred to Hans Blix, 
Director-General, International Atomic Energy Agency. Prime Minister 
Berlusconi spoke in Italian, and his remarks were translated by an 
interpreter.