clear that it is wise to conduct that business there. I might have encouraged everyone to come here, but it seemed to be better to go down there, as we did last week. It's a mixture. But have I enjoyed this vacation? A lot of things about it I have, yes.

U.S. Policy in the Persian Gulf Crisis

Q. Mr. President, how would you describe your policy for ousting Saddam Hussein right now, as of this moment? Would it be fair to describe it as wait and see?

The President. No. My policy is to do everything we can, working with other nations, to enforce the sanctions. We have moved forces, considerable forces, and I hope that that has safeguarded Saudi Arabia, which in my view was clearly threatened when Saddam Hussein moved his forces south from Kuwait City. So, I think it is now get plenty of force in place-we're still doing that. Enforce the United Nations sanctions rigorously. And for the U.S., we will do that and encourage others to do it. And that's about where we are right now.

Q. You were very effective, sir, in getting the U.N. to join in on this sea blockade. Are you now considering doing the same thing on an air interdiction policy?

The President. Well, I don't think there have been many examples of this net being penetrated, broken through, by air. But we have been talking to countries about not permitting overflight and tightening up in every way all aspects of the economic sanctions that were called for by the United Nations.

Canada's Military Presence in the Persian Gulf

Q. Prime Minister, have you discussed, the two of you, under what circumstances Canada could play a larger role in this? And, Mr. President, would you welcome a larger Canadian role?

The Prime Minister. We haven't discussed it, but I've indicated earlier that Canada hasn't added anything in or added it out. We will play it as circumstances develop. We think that our contribution is appropriate. As I said when I announced it, Canada is not a superpower. But we believe that we-along with countries, for example, all the way to Australia-have an obligation

to stand with our friends and allies and resist aggression. And if more is required, the Government of Canada will consider that and make an appropriate decision. But for the moment, we're pleased with the leadership of the United Nations, very pleased with the skill of the President of the United States and the manner in which he has brought about quite a remarkable display of solidarity, both from our European partners and around the world.

I think that the achievement of the President, if I may say, in respect to the Arab world is certainly unprecedented in my memory. That this kind of action would be contemplated with the results of approval coming as strongly as they have from so many Arab nations is in itself a remarkable achievement of political leadership, and I think it's important to note that.

The President. Charles and Norm [Charles Bierbauer, Cable News Network, and Norman Sandler, United Press International], I've recognized both. So, if we can do, with your permission, those two; and then you take as many as you want. But I should do those. Marlin [Marlin Fitzwater, Press Secretary to the President] is getting a little restless.

The Prime Minister. And I'm going for a swim.

Agreement Among Multinational Forces

Q. This is really a question for both of you, sir. For all this talk of unanimity, there seems to be divergences on tactics. You are content to use force. The Soviets say they won't use force to stop the blockade. You have hostages; Prime Minister Mulroney does not have hostages. Mrs. Thatcher doesn't think talking is such a good idea. Is there a divergence, and is it potentially undermining?

The President. I think any nuances of difference are SO overwhelmed by the common ground that they are almost meaningless, is the way I view it. I mean, I think the thing of note is how together everybody is, not that there might be nuances of difference.

I don't know whether you want to

The Prime Minister. Well, I've noticed the points that you make. If somebody had told you 2 years ago that this kind of crisis

would emerge and the Soviet Union would repudiate Iraq and that the United Nations Security Council would stand in unanimous support of five resolutions and that you would see this kind of support emerge, as I say, from Canada to Australia, you would have bought him a ticket to the funny farm right away.

This is an historic achievement by the United Nations, by members of the alliance, and by the President of the United States. This is a remarkable achievement. There are few parallels for it, certainly, in modern history. But there are differences of opinion. Sure there are. You better believe it; they happen all the time. The story is not that. It's that there are so few of them and so modest in nature, given the profound dimensions of the challenge. There will be others ahead of us, and it's going to require this kind of cooperation and consultation to make sure that they all mesh together and that we try and bring about the end that is sought.

The President. Norm?

Diplomatic Solutions

Q. Mr. President, if Saddam Hussein is in a box, as General Scowcroft [Assistant to the President for National Security Affairs] said yesterday, are you willing to give him any way out short of unconditional surrender? Which is to say, if there are going to be negotiations, what's negotiable here?

The President. Well, certainly not the U.N. position. The position of the international law is not negotiable. I think that's what Prime Minister Thatcher was addressing herself to. I would agree with that. The United Nations has spoken-country after country supporting the action taken by the Security Council. So, there's no room for compromise or negotiation on that point. But I don't think you should ever say you'll never talk about anything. But I'm not saying that there's any flexibility, is what your question is. And there is no flexibility on Iraq getting out of Kuwait and the rulers being permitted to come back to Kuwait.

Q. But is there any flexibility on the future composition of the Kuwait Government, which is to say

The President. No.

Q. -Is the United States firmly committed now to restoring the Al Sabah family, to keeping that family in power?

The President. That's a matter for the Kuwaitis to decide. Of course, they should be restored. I suppose that you might say that's true of any country-leadership, whether it's the United States or Iraq or Kuwait or anyplace else. But there's no compromise on the question of getting legitimate government back and getting the illegitimate invaders out. And so, that's where we stand. And I haven't heard one single country that has been supportive at the outset suggest that we should back off from the principle so clearly stated, certainly, by the United Nations and, hopefully, by the United States and Canada and many others.

White House Briefing on the Persian Gulf Crisis

Q. Mr. President, you've been pretty fortunate in that Congress has been on vacation all this time. Tomorrow aren't you opening a Pandora's box by meeting with 150 of them?

The President. Is that all that will be there, only 150 out of 450, 465, is it? No, what is it, 450? Look, the Congress, I think, has stayed in close touch. I'm very grateful to the leadership for the almost Vandenbergian support for the actions that we have taken. Indeed, in this case, differences have seemed to end at the water's edge. And so, if this briefing is helpful to them, and I hope it will be, so much the better. And I, again, might just take this opportunity to thank the leaders on both sides of the aisle for the support they've given us.

But I don't think there's any Pandora's box involved in briefing the Congress. They'll have an extensive briefing period, because not only will I brief them and tell them what's on my mind but I believe the Secretary of Defense [Richard B. Cheney], Secretary of State-and, Brent, I don't know if you're scheduled to brief or notbut they'll have adequate briefing. And it is most understandable that they want to know what is going on and get up to speed on things. Some, indeed, will be going there. So, I welcome this, and I don't worry about any Pandora's box aspect of it at all.

You can always dig around and find somebody that will want to fine-tune it or have some little criticism. But look, the support have been overwhelming, and I think the American people see that. They know that this isn't a Republican or a Democrat policy, but it's the policy of their country. And to the credit of the Members of Congress, I think they have helped convey that. Meeting of the Canadian Parliament

Q. Prime Minister Mulroney, why do you not see any need to recall Parliament, facing the situation in Oka and also in the Persian Gulf?

The Prime Minister. Well, I'd indicated that I'd be happy to recall Parliament if the government were of the view that it would be helpful and appropriate. We haven't arrived at that view yet, but should that change, I'll be happy to call the House back. Wouldn't hesitate at all.

Conflict Between the Mohawks and the
Canadian Governments

Q. Prime Minister, is military intervention now the sole option of resolving the Oka situation?

The Prime Minister. Pardon me?

Q. Do you consider further military intervention as the sole option now to resolve the Oka situation?

The Prime Minister. All I've said is that we have negotiated now for some 46 or 47 days, demonstrated, I think, quite remarkable patience. And we've sought a negotiated settlement of this. And if the settlement is elusive and we are getting these demands at the table which can only be construed as bizarre, then obviously the law of Canada must be applied to all of us and will be applied to all of us in exactly the same way. Thank you very much.

The President's Dogs

The President. I'd like to just clear up one thing. And this is just if the Canadian press would drop all notebooks and not write this down and consider this off the record. This is just for the American press.

The other day our dog Ranger appeared at the press conference, and he was called "Millie." He's a strong male dog here, as you can see, and his feelings were slightly hurt. And some decreed that because

Ranger looked so frisky that Millie was well-calling Ranger "Millie." So, I'd like to clear it up as best I can. Knowing my way with the English language, I hope that's got it all clear for you guys. [Laughter]

Note: The President spoke at 3:33 p.m. outside his home. In his remarks, the Prime Minister referred to the conflict between Mohawk Indians and the Quebec and Canadian Governments that began when police tried to remove barricades erected by the Indians to prevent commercial development of land they considered to be sacred. Prime Minister Mulroney and his family arrived in Kennebunkport, ME, at noon and returned to Canada the following day.

Proclamation 6173-Citizenship Day and Constitution Week, 1990 August 28, 1990

By the President of the United States of America

A Proclamation

Well over a century ago, while reflecting upon the course of our national journey, Daniel Webster observed: "We may be tossed upon an ocean where we can see no land-nor, perhaps, the sun or stars. But there is a chart and a compass for us to study, to consult, and to obey. That chart is the Constitution." If we are to remain a free, strong, and prosperous nation as we navigate ever new and uncharted territory in domestic and foreign affairs, every American must have a thorough understanding of our Constitution, its history, and the timeless principles it enshrines.

During the long, hot summer of 1787, the 55 delegates to the Federal Convention engaged in fervent study, debate, compromise, and prayer as they shaped a system of government for our fledgling Nation. Recognizing the God-given rights and dignity of the individual and determined to secure the freedom He has envisioned for each of us, they carefully crafted our Constitution, dedicating this Nation to the ideals of liberty, justice, and equality and providing for the separation of powers that has served us

so well. Today, more than 200 years after it was written, our Constitution-and the Bill of Rights later added to it-is not only a shining testament to the wisdom and foresight of its Framers but also a light of hope and inspiration to the world.

In this 4th year of the Constitution's bicentennial, we commemorate the establishment of the Nation's judicial system. Article III of the Constitution defines the powers of the judiciary; however, it was the First Congress under the Constitution that gave it form and substance. The Judiciary Act of 1789 provided for a Supreme Court and created the office of the Attorney General. It also established a Federal judicial structure of 13 district courts and three circuit courts and defined their jurisdiction. When the Supreme Court met for the first time in February 1790, the dual judicial system of State and Federal courts was firmly established. Then, as now, State courts conducted most of the Nation's judicial business. The Federal courts have the authority to decide only those cases that involve the violation of Federal law or as otherwise specified by the Constitution.

This Nation's independent judiciary, dedicated to upholding the rule of law and the rights of individuals, has reaffirmed time and again the inestimable value of our Constitution. Asserting that no person shall be "deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law" and guaranteeing every American "equal protection of the laws," the Constitution has remained a powerful governing tool and an effective instrument of justice to this day. The great American jurist, John Marshall Harlan, underscored the significance of its guarantees of equal justice under the law when he wrote: "Our Constitution is color-blind, and neither knows nor tolerates classes among citizens. In respect of civil rights, all citizens are equal before the law. The humblest is the peer of the most powerful."

This week, we celebrate our Constitution and its promise of liberty, equality, and justice for all. In times of doubt and decision, generations of American leaders have looked to this great document for guidance; generations of patriots have labored and sacrificed to defend the principles it sets forth. If we are to keep faith with them, if we are to continue to enjoy the blessings of

freedom and self-government, each of us must understand our rights and responsibilities as citizens.

Each of us has not only the right but also the obligation to become educated and informed; to vote; and to participate at all levels of government. However, as President Theodore Roosevelt well knew, there is more to responsible citizenship. "The good citizen," he once observed, “is the man who, whatever his wealth or poverty, strives manfully to do his duty to himself, to his family, to his neighbor, [and] to the State; who is incapable of the baseness which manifests itself either in arrogance or in envy, but who while demanding justice for himself is no less scrupulous to do justice to others." Responsible citizenship begins with being a loving and responsible parent, an eager and attentive student, and a just and caring neighbor.

As citizens of the United States, we are not just the beneficiaries of our Founding Fathers' great experiment in self-government-we are also its custodians. Thus, as we observe Citizenship Day and Constitution Week, we do well to reflect upon our Constitution and its history, as well as our role in upholding the vision of freedom and justice it enshrines.

The Congress, by joint resolution of February 29, 1952 (36 U.S.C. 153), designated September 17 as "Citizenship Day" in commemoration of the signing of the Constitution and in recognition of all who, by birth or by naturalization, have attained the status of citizenship, and authorized the President to issue annually a proclamation calling upon officials of the government to display the flag on all government buildings on that day. Also, by joint resolution of August 2, 1956 (36 U.S.C. 159), the Congress designated the week beginning September 17 and ending September 23 of each year as "Constitution Week" in recognition of the historic importance of the Constitution and the significant role it plays in our lives today.

Now, Therefore, I, George Bush, President of the United States of America, do hereby proclaim September 17, 1990, as Citizenship Day, and call upon appropriate government officials to display the flag of the United States on all government build

ings. I urge Federal, State, and local officials, as well as leaders of civic, social, and educational organizations, to conduct ceremonies and programs to commemorate the occasion.

Furthermore, I proclaim the week beginning September 17 and ending September 23, 1990, as Constitution Week, and I urge all Americans to observe that week with appropriate ceremonies and activities.

In Witness Whereof, I have hereunto set my hand this twenty-eighth day of August, in the year of our Lord nineteen hundred and ninety, and of the Independence of the United States of America the two hundred and fifteenth.

George Bush

[Filed with the Office of the Federal Register, 4:39 p.m., August 28, 1990]

Remarks at a White House Briefing for Members of Congress on the Persian Gulf Crisis

August 28, 1990

Let me just start off by thanking all of the Members of Congress who were able to get back here to discuss this situation of deep

concern to every American. What we will do is, I'll make a few remarks here and then we'll go into executive session. And I will be glad to respond to your questions as best I can, backed up ably by the team that's here with me.

But meeting the challenge in the Persian Gulf is not something that I or this administration can do by ourselves. We can only succeed if all of us-executive and legislative, Republican and Democrats-work together. And that was one of the reasons I wanted you to come here today. Let no one at home doubt my commitment to work with the Congress, and let no one abroad doubt our national unity or our staying

power.

Let me begin by providing some background to the unfolding drama in the Gulf; and then later, I want to hear from you and, as I say, respond to questions.

First, the background. When this administration began, we sought to strengthen the

cease-fire between Iran and Iraq and to improve relations with Iraq. We held no illusions about that. We hoped, along with many in the Congress, that Iraqi behavior might be moderated. But even before the current crisis, though, Iraq was moving at odds to our interests and to the interests of many around the world. So, we suspended the provisions of the CCC [Commodity Credit Corporation] agricultural credits, stopped the export of furnaces that had the potential to contribute to Iraq's nuclear capabilities.

You all know the events of the last several weeks. Iraq threatened Kuwait, lied about its intentions, and finally invaded. In 3 days, Iraq had 120,000 troops and 850 tanks in Kuwait, moving south toward the Saudi border. And it was this clear and rapidly escalating threat that led King Fahd of Saudi Arabia to ask for our assistance. We knew that an Iraq that had the most powerful military machine in the Gulf and controlled 20 percent of the world's proven reserves of oil would pose a threat to the Persian Gulf, to the Middle East, and to the entire world. We responded to this quickly, without hesitation. Our objectives were obvious from the start: the immediate, com

plete, and unconditional withdrawal of all Iraqi forces from Kuwait; the restoration of Kuwait's legitimate government; security and stability of Saudi Arabia and the Persian Gulf; and the protection of American citizens abroad.

Our actions to achieve these objectives have been equally clear. Within hours of the assault, the United States moved to freeze Iraq's assets in this country and to protect those of Kuwait. I asked Dick Cheney, Secretary [of Defense] Cheney, to go to Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and Morocco to arrange for military cooperation between us and key Arab States. And I asked Jim Baker, Secretary [of State] Baker, to go to Turkey and to Brussels to rally the support of our NATO allies. Both of these missions were extraordinarily successful. The world response to Iraq was a near unanimous chorus of condemnation.

With great speed, the United Nations Security Council passed five resolutions. These resolutions condemned Iraq's invasion of Kuwait, demanded Iraq's immediate and