U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE DAILY PRESS BRIEFING (July 10, 1995)

From: hristu@arcadia.harvard.edu (Dimitrios Hristu)

Subject: U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE DAILY PRESS BRIEFING (July 10, 1995)

OFFICE OF THE SPOKESMAN

[...]

FORMER YUGOSLAVIA

Status of the Enclave Srebrenica/Dutch Peacekeepers ....24

--Prospects for Airstrikes .............................24,25-26

EU Negotiator Bildt's Efforts/Mtg of Contact Group .....24,27

U.N. Efforts/Rapid Reaction Force Status/Mandate .......24-25-27,29

[...]

[...]

Q On Bosnia. Over the weekend and part of today, the safe zones of Srebrenica and Zepa were shelled continuously, which provoked calls or threats by the United Nations for airstrikes. Can you give us the Department's assessment of what is happening right now on the ground?

MR. BURNS: I think that the assessment of the events as reported in the major newspapers are essentially our assessment that there's been a very serious incident that's occurred over the weekend where Bosnian Serb forces have gone within the 12.5 mile zone. They forced, from their positions, a small number of Dutch peacekeepers, and up to 30 of them, unfortunately, have been taken prisoner by the Bosnian Serbs.

We do understand that the Dutch have formed a defensive line just outside the city; that the United Nations has threatened NATO air strikes if the Bosnian Serbs attempt to pierce that line. NATO, of course, could launch air strikes or provide close air support to U.N. forces if requested to do so by the U.N., but NATO has not yet received any such request by the United Nations.

On the diplomatic side, the EU negotiator, Carl Bildt, has finished a tour of the region. There will be a contact group meeting on Wednesday night in Paris; where Mr. Bildt will report on his conversations with the Bosnian Government, with the Serbian Government in Belgrade and with a number of others in the region. Assistant Secretary Dick Holbrooke will represent the United States at that meeting.

Q These most recent incidents and the taking of hostages again and the threat of air strikes -- how successful do you think the U.N.'s mission has been on the ground in terms of delivering humanitarian aid or carrying out its mandate?

MR. BURNS: The United Nations, especially in recent months, has not been able to meet the mandate that it must carry out. It has not been able to deliver nearly enough of the humanitarian supplies to the enclaves and to Sarajevo. I believe that in most cases about ten percent of the monthly allocation of humanitarian food and medical supplies to most of the affected area.

It has also not been able to protect these areas from bombardment and from shelling by the Bosnian Serb forces. I think this is well known. It's apparent for everyone to see. That is why we have believed over the last month that the Rapid Reaction Force, if constructed properly and if it is served with the appropriate mandate, could, we hope, make a positive difference in strengthening the ability of the United Nations to meet its obligations, whether they're humanitarian or security. We very much hope that will be the case, although that remains an open question.

Q On the Rapid Reaction Force, there's a report on the wires that France has offered to use attack helicopters to assist the beleaguered Dutch that you referred to. Is this a proper example of what you intend -- this government intended the Rapid Reaction Force to be?

MR. BURNS: First, Judd, I'm not aware that the Rapid Reaction Force has been deployed to be utilized in this particular incident in Srebrenica. If the French have in fact offered that, we think it would be fully consistent with the mandate of the United Nations to protect the enclaves and also to protect its own peacekeepers. I can't speak to that request specifically.

Q But you've once again got hostages, U.N. peacekeepers being held hostage in Bosnia, doesn't that foreclose air strikes?

MR. BURNS: The U.N. spokesman this morning, Colonel Coward, was very careful to say that he did not think that these were hostages, in the sense that the Bosnian Serbs had not made demands for their release, as they have done in the previous cases where there were clearly hostage-takings of the several hundred U.N. peacekeepers. So I think we'll have to stand by what Mr. Coward has said and see what develops.

All I can say, David, is that the United Nations has threatened the Bosnian Serbs with NATO air strikes should this defensive perimeter, set-up just outside Srebrenica, be pierced. Also NATO, of course, under the dual-key arrangement is available to consider requests that are made to it by the United Nations, and we're not in a position to foreclose the possibility of air strikes.

Q On the wider point, there was a piece over the weekend that suggested -- and I wonder whether you agree with it -- that the reaction force and in fact the U.N. peacekeeping force in Bosnia really only has a few weeks to turn the situation around in some way before there are going to have to be plans made to withdraw the entire U.N. peacekeeping force in Bosnia. Do you agree or disagree with that thesis?

MR. BURNS: I think we'll have to wait and see when the Rapid Reaction Force is fully deployed. It's clearly not yet fully deployed from Croatia into Bosnia. We'll have to wait and see how that force equips itself and what kind of mandate it and others in the U.N. command want to give to it. If it is a mandate to protect the major responsibilities and advance the major responsibilities that the U.N. has, then we think it has a chance of being successful.

If it is more of the same, if it is unduly passive in the face of obvious provocations by the Bosnian Serbs, then we would think that this Rapid Reaction Force probably wouldn't be of much help, but based on our conversations, we believe that there is a good chance that it will be in effect a force that strengthens the United Nations. It was on that basis that the Clinton Administration -- President Clinton, Secretary Christopher and others -- decided that we ought to support the Rapid Reaction Force through the provision of American financial assistance, of military lift, of military equipment, of logistics help and intelligence support.

We also made the decision based on a very important point pertaining to U.S. relations with Western Europe. These are our NATO allies. They're in a very tight position, and the Dutch, a NATO ally of the United States, are certainly in a tight position today. It would be foolish of the United States to forsake our allies and to leave them in the lurch and to forsake the fundamental commitment we have to help them when they are threatened and in a tight position.

It was also on that basis that the President made the decision to back the Rapid Reaction Force, and we still think that's a very important point that everybody in our country has to consider. There are some people in our political system and people around the country who believe the United Nations has failed, and therefore we should simply wash our hands of the whole affair and walk out. That would not be an honorable thing for the United States to do when we have NATO allies who are currently threatened by military force.

We have 30 NATO allies -- peacekeepers -- who are detained today by the Bosnian Serbs. You don't leave your allies in a situation like that, and the President is determined not to leave them.

Tom.

Q The time pictures comes in the fact that winter is approaching and, if there is to be a U.N. withdrawal, completed before winter, that it would have to begin in a matter of weeks. I think that's where the idea of a deadline comes. Do you share that scenario, that sense of a deadline?

MR. BURNS: I think it's commonly agreed that winter conditions in the Balkans would preclude a major military operation along the lines of, say, the contingency plan that NATO has drawn up -- Plan 4104. Yes, it's commonly agreed to be the case, although in extremis all sorts of things have been done in difficult circumstances, but that is an assumption I think most people bring to this question.

Q The Defense Minister said today that the current diplomatic initiative by Bildt is the last one before these big decisions have to be made.

MR. BURNS: We certainly think there's enough hope for the particular negotiations, in which he has been involved, to give him more than one chance. These are very complex diplomatic, political problems, and Mr. Bildt has just had one foray into the region. He certainly deserves an adequate amount of time to see if he is able to bring the parties together.

We have been in close touch with him. Secretary Christopher has, as has Dick Holbrooke, and we're going to continue to support him in this.

(The briefing concluded at 2:10 p.m.)

END