News Conferences & Interviews on the Middle
East/Israel
(1989)
FEBRUARY 21, 1989
U.S. Foreign Policy
Q. Well, what is your Middle East policy?
The President. Middle East policy is to encourage discussions
between King Hussein and the Israelis and to build on the progress that
has been made already. I've already said that I think it was very useful
-- the changes that the PLO [Palestine Liberation Organization] advocated.
Now we want to see that there's some follow-on there.
So, the policy is set. I campaigned on what the policy
is, and I think it's quite clear. The question is what specific steps
we take next. And I don't want to be rushing out because Mr. Shevardnadze
went to the Middle East. I'd like for the first step we take of that
nature, to be a prudent step. So, the principles are there, and I think
we're -- you know, we've got to now flesh that out and figure out what
we do specifically.
MARCH 7, 1989
Terrorist Raids in Israel
Q. Mr. President, on another regional question, Yasser
Arafat [Palestine Liberation Organization chairman] has refused to criticize
any of the raids within Israel that have been carried out. Is he backing
down on his promise against terrorism?
The President. I hope not, and I'd like to see him
forthrightly condemn any terror that might be perpetrated by the Palestinians.
I stop short of saying he's condoning it or that he is furthering it.
I'm not saying that. But I'd like to see him speak out. It would do
wonders. It would be very good for future dialog.
Q. Well, is he jeopardizing the dialog as it sits now?
The President. To the degree terroristic acts are condoned,
it doesn't help the dialog.
MARCH 28, 1989
Regional Conflicts
Q. You said, like, next week you're going to deal with
the Middle East. Is that, like, the main issue with that chemical plant
in the Middle East?
The President. No, it's a very important issue, but
it's a peripheral issue. You're thinking of the chemical plant in Libya.
And that Libyan leader, Qadhafi, does have a role, a very disruptive
role, as a matter of fact, in Middle Eastern affairs. But what we're
talking about next week is the -- Mubarak of Egypt and Shamir of Israel,
the two top -- President Mubarak and the Prime Minister of Israel coming
here. And we will be probing as best we can and making suggestions to
them as to what the U.S. can do in trying to bring about peace in the
Middle East.
As you know, and all of you know, I'm sure, that has
just been in turmoil for years and years, particularly since the '67
war -- war that took place in 1967, and the resolution of which has
escaped us all, escaped the world, even though things moved forward
with the Camp David accords. Remember the Camp David accords? That was
something that happened under President Carter. It was a step in the
right direction, but you still see a lot of killing. You see on the
television the Intifada [Palestinian uprising in the West Bank and Gaza]
fighting on the West Bank.
And so, we have a particularly important role there.
We are the only country that can be a substantial catalyst for peace
there, and it's difficult. And so, I sit and talk -- the way it works
on the thought process, the State Department will be coming with strong
ideas, and our national security adviser, the trade people, and the
Treasury fits into this in some ways, as we look at the economic problems
of the countries involved. And then the administration comes together,
and then the President is given some good thoughts as to what to present
to the leaders. And they'll come in; we'll have one-on-one meetings
with them. And then we'll meet with a group of our top Cabinet people
and the top leaders from Israel or from Egypt.
APRIL 7, 1989
Middle East Peace Process
Q. Do you believe the PLO [Palestine Liberation Organization]
should have a role in those independent elections in Israel -- or in
the West Bank?
The President. I think that the answer is to get on
with the elections. And I'd like to. We haven't fully resolved exactly
who's going to have a role, but I think that's a matter to be determined
between the parties. But I'd leave it right there. I'd leave it right
there. The PLO has people living on the West Bank, as you know, and
we want to see elections that are free and fair there.
Yes, David [David H. Hoffman, Washington Post]?
Q. Mr. President, was your statement this week about
Israel ending the occupation intended as sort of a diplomatic nudge
to Prime Minister Shamir? Should we read something into that?
The President. I wouldn't read anything into it. I
do not feel that the provisions of Security Council Resolution 242 and
338 have been fulfilled, and I wanted to be clear to all the parties
in the Middle East that that is my view. And I will hold the -- as best
the U.S. can -- hold the parties to a full implementation of those resolutions.
And so, what I was signaling is that the territory that has been ceded
for peace is not the end; it simply isn't.
APRIL 20, 1989
Middle East Peace Process
Q. Mr. President, you met now with [Egyptian President]
Mubarak, [Israeli Prime Minister] Shamir, and [Jordanian King] Hussein.
What is the next step in the Middle East peace process?
The President. Not sure now. On the table is the election
process, and one other thing would be how we flesh that out, taking
into consideration the concerns about it that have been expressed by
Mubarak and by King Hussein and also by Mr. Shamir. So, how we do that
-- what the modalities are of that -- a lot of thought will be going
into that: who's represented; making clear that this isn't a final step,
that that isn't going to solve the Middle East problem; making clear
that it's a step, but we want it to be a constructive step; and exploring
other options as well.
JULY 13, 1989
Israel-U.S. Relations
Q. Who are you going to send to Israel as an emissary?
The President. Well, there isn't any emissary going
from the President of the United States. There's no determination of
that at this point.
Q. -- -- a chance to talk at the Wallenberg Memorial.
Have you had any contact at all with the Soviets on that question?
The President. Well, we chose to stop there because
Wallenberg is a great international symbol of human rights. And I don't
know -- what do you mean about contact about -- --
Q. I mean, it's a constant issue that U.S. officials
are regularly asking of the Soviets -- --
The President. I have not personally asked of the Soviets
that.
Q. Are you saying that the Secretary of State might
send an emissary?
The President. Well, I'm saying that we have people
go to Israel all the time and to other countries in the area. But when
you say, ``Who am I sending as an emissary?'' -- I was putting that
in the context of past high-level shuttle diplomats or something of
that nature, and there are no plans for that. I reserve the right to
send people anytime I think it's in the interest of the United States,
but there are no plans for that kind of level -- diplomacy.
Q. Why is the U.S. making -- --
The President. But if somebody felt it was worthwhile,
somebody over there would welcome a special emissary from the President,
I'd be very openminded about that. But there are no plans. You asked
me whether there are plans.
Q. -- -- find out what's going in terms of -- --
The President. We've got a very able Ambassador over
there who knows a great deal about what's going on and has excellent
contacts with the Government.
Q. What do you think is going on over there? [Prime
Minister] Shamir has simply restated what his position has been all
along. Why is the U.S. so shook up over this?
The President. I don't know that the U.S. is so shook
up, but they know the United States policy. And the United States policy
on settlements, for example, has not changed, and it is not going to
change. And so, we might as well be frank with our friends, because
that's what friendship is about. And so, I want to see things go forward
in terms of the peace process over there, and we want to see the election
process go forward. And if anybody can make a case for me that the recent
deliberations in that party will enhance the election process, then
I'd say, Great! But I'm afraid other people are looking at it, saying,
``What's happened does not enhance the possibilities of election.''
So, the U.S. policy is set. And I'm the President of the United States,
and Israel is a friend and will remain a friend, but I have to say what
our policy is -- and so, I don't think there's great heartburn here,
but I want to just continue to articulate what we believe.
Q. -- -- Shamir said -- what should be important from
the very start -- so I'm trying to figure out why the United States
is so distressed.
The President. I'm not so distressed. I'm the President
of the United States.
Q. I mean State Department.
The President. Well, you go ahead and talk to the State
Department about that. You're talking to the President. I set the policy,
after a lot of input from the State Department, and I want the U.S.
policy to succeed. We've thought out very carefully what we think is
best, and our support is for our principles. And they've got great difficulties
inside of Israel. I understand that. I understand the political pressures.
But I can't be varying U.S. policy every day to accommodate political
change. I'm not going to do that.
Q. How about the Palestinian -- --
The President. Keep encouraging them to do what they
ought to do: to participate in this election process -- absolutely --
and deplore the kind of violence that we see when a bus is carried over
a cliff and carrying a lot of innocent people to their death, or innocent
people getting killed in other ways -- on both sides. I mean we have
to stand for something. And I'm going to continue to try to do that.
JULY 28, 1989
Israeli Kidnaping in Lebanon
Q. I wondered about your reaction to the Israeli kidnaping
this morning of Hizballah [radical Shi'ite Moslem group in Lebanon]
leader Obeid, and whether you think that improves chances now for getting
back Colonel Higgins or any of the other American hostages.
The President. Well, I don't know, because the freeing
of Colonel Higgins is very much on my mind, and the freeing of the other
hostages is. I can't tell you, Jackie [Jacqueline Adams, CBS News],
whether I think these two things can interact, the kidnaping and perhaps
the subsequent release of this man, whether that will benefit the Higgins
case or not. I just don't know.
Q. Have you been in touch with the Israelis about the
kidnaping, and do you approve of that?
The President. Well, I know that our people will be
in touch. This just happened. I haven't, personally.
Q. Mr. President, back on the Israeli kidnaping. Does
this help the cause of peace in the Middle East, particularly at a time
when there seems to be a lot of behind-the-scenes activity with the
PLO and the Israelis, passing messages in various ways?
The President. I don't think kidnaping and violence
helps the cause of peace.
AUGUST 15, 1989
Hostages in the Middle East
Q. Mr. President, your spokesman said yesterday that
significant progress had been made in pursuing the issue of the hostages.
We're told that you've been on the phone to foreign leaders, that there's
been a flurry of diplomatic contacts, but can you say today that we're
any closer to seeing the hostages released than we were, say, about
3 weeks ago when the Israeli seizure of Sheik Obeid [Moslem cleric and
Hezbollah leader] set into motion this chain of developments that seems
to have raised expectations or hopes of a breakthrough?
The President. Norm [Norm Sandler, United Press International],
I can't say that today, but we're going to keep on trying. But I cannot
give you a definitive assessment of that. I just don't know. There are
a lot of lines out there, a lot of initiatives have been taken. As I
said earlier, the cooperation that we've received -- some that we've
solicited and some unsolicited -- from leaders around the world has
just been magnificent. But I can't give you that positive assessment
at this point.
Q. Can I follow up on just one path that was pursued
on that? In the absence of an exchange of prisoners, have you considered
the extradition of Sheik Obeid to this country to face criminal charges?
The President. No, we have no criminal indictment against
Sheik 7Obeid.
SEPTEMBER 18, 1989
Emigration of Soviet Jews
Q. After pressing the Soviet Union for so many years
to allow unfettered Jewish emigration, do you think the United States
in good conscience can set a limit on the number of Soviet Jews that
are allowed to come here? And does the apparent decision to set some
limit have anything to do with Israel's view that not enough of the
Soviet Jews want to go there?
The President. Well, first, Israel does want as many
as possible to go there. There's no question about that. But I think
we can accommodate those certainly that have applied. And, yes, we do
have to control our overall immigration policy. I mean, we had that
at the time of the boat people. We have it in Brownsville, Texas. We
have it in people coming from other countries, from all across South
America wanting to come here. The British are facing this problem now
in Hong Kong in a very serious way. And any country must set certain
limits.
It speaks very well, I think, in terms of what's happening
in the Soviet Union and, hopefully, in the way we're handling the Soviet
account, that more and more people are being permitted to come here.
Q. But you don't feel any sort of moral imperative
after the United States has pressed the Soviet Union so long to have
an almost open immigration policy for Soviet Jews?
The President. Well, I'd like to have an open immigration
policy for Vietnamese refugees, for those fleeing the tyranny in Nicaragua,
but we can't do that. We have to have certain control of our own policy.
I remember feeling this way at the time of the Mariel Boat Lift, and
so, I know where my heart is. And I'm very proud that it's moved up
from what -- 3,000 emigres in one year to now 50 or 70, Bob [Gates],
somewhere in that range -- and that's good. And I want to do whatever
we can to encourage it. But P.S.: We have got to have an overall immigration
policy that keeps the control of our demographics in our hands.
OCTOBER 28, 1989
Israel-South Africa Nuclear Cooperation
Q. Mr. President, I'd like to ask you about another
foreign policy subject. There's very strong evidence that Israel is
involved in a joint project with South Africa to build a nuclear missile.
If that project should continue, what effect would it have on U.S. relations
with Israel?
The President. Well, I hope our position is clear in
transfer of any military technology that should not be transferred.
And if that's taken place, it would not enhance relations between us
or any country that does that. It would complicate things -- there's
no question about that.
Israeli-Occupied Territories
Q. Another question on that same general subject, sir.
Will the United States give Israel a veto over the identity of the Palestinians
in negotiations on elections in the occupied territories?
The President. We are not going with preconditions
on -- we're trying to be a catalyst, and whatever is worked out between
the parties will have our generous and enthusiastic support. But the
Israelis have made clear that that would be very difficult for them,
so we're not trying to throw down a precondition. We're just trying,
through the Baker 5 points and through giving support to [Egyptian]
President Mubarak's 10 points, to be helpful in getting the talks going.
And the main thing is to talk, and I hope that they'll get together.
Q. I'd like to take you back to Gene's [Gene Gibbons,
Reuters] question of a moment ago about reports of Israeli-South African
collaboration on missiles. Senior administration officials say it's
clear something is happening.
The President. What's that?
Q. On reports of Israeli-South African collaboration
on missiles, transshipment of technology. Administration officials say
it's clear something is happening. I want to know, sir, given this country's
historical reluctance to impose sanctions on Israel, what kind of leverage
we have to deal with the situation. What are you prepared to do?
The President. You're asking me to accept a hypothesis
that I'm not accepting. But I have said that, whoever it is, the transfer
of forbidden technology is a taboo. We're not going to have that, and
we will find ways to assert that with any country that abuses the system.
NOVEMBER 7, 1989
Israel-U.S. Relations
Q. Are you willing to meet with Prime Minister Shamir
when he comes to Washington?
The President. Whether he's coming or not, I'm not
sure -- certainly willing to consider it. And he is giving -- I think
there's a real effort now to work out support for the [Secretary of
State] Baker points, the Baker proposals. And I'd like to feel that
a meeting would be held and that it would be constructive, that we'd
have something positive to talk about.
DECEMBER 11, 1989
Middle East Peace Process
Q. Tom Dearmore, of the San Francisco Examiner. Do
you think the PLO is inspiring or orchestrating at least part of the
Intifada riot activity? And if so, do you think Israel should be pressured
or obliged to negotiate on any more than elections until this violence
subsides?
The President. I don't think Israel should be pressured
into negotiating with the PLO. Is that the question?
Q. Yes.
The President. No, they should not be. [Secretary of
State] Jim Baker is working out a very difficult formulation with the
Israelis, with the Egyptians, under which the representatives of the
Palestinian people would sit down and talk. And it has been very difficult.
Mubarak [President of Egypt], you remember, had his 10 points. Baker
came up with five points. There has been progress on that, incidentally,
but I don't think it is the role of the United States to force Israel
to negotiate with the PLO.
Sources: Public Papers of the President |