U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE 95/09/13 DAILY PRESS BRIEFING
From: hristu@arcadia.harvard.edu
Subject: U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE 95/09/13 DAILY PRESS BRIEFING
OFFICE OF THE SPOKESMAN
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE
DAILY PRESS BRIEFING
I N D E X
Wednesday, September 13, 1995
Briefer: Nicholas Burns
[...]
FORMER YUGOSLAVIA
Offensives by Croatians and Bosnian Government ...........9-10
Assistant Secretary Holbrooke's Diplomatic Mission .......10-12
--Accomplishments of Peace Initiatives ...................11
Continued NATO Air Campaign ..............................12-13
--Role of Italian Government/Inclusion in Contact Group ..13-14
--Role of Canadian Government ............................14,15-16
--Report of Ceasefire Arrangement ........................14-15
Continued Attacks by Bosnian Serbs .......................16-18
--Safety of Bosnian Serb Civilians .......................18
Implementation of a Peace Treaty .........................19-20
[...]
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE
DAILY PRESS BRIEFING
DPB #137
WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 13, 1995, 1:32 P.M.
(ON THE RECORD UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED)
[...]
Q One of the reported objections of the Russian Duma and the
Russian Government Executive has been that of the gains -- alleged gains
-- being made by Bosnian Muslim troops and Croatian troops in Bosnia.
Despite the statements of Mr. Granic yesterday who told us that they
would be restrained, they would be quiet, they would await the results
of the peace process, and that they did not plan any military action,
there's a Reuters report, Nick, from Sarajevo where Mr. Akashi is
announcing that the town of Donji Vakuf has apparently fallen to Bosnian
Muslim troops and that the Croatian troops have taken, in the last day -
- Croatian troops -- have taken Sopovo. Another Bosnian Serb village.
I think the Russians are saying NATO and the U.N. are using
airpower against the Bosnian Serbs while these other forces, rather than
standing down, are moving and taking ground.
The British have come out, frankly, in another Reuters wire and
said that we could condemn what Croatia is doing in western Bosnia.
Now, does the United States Government condemn what Croatia is doing in
western Bosnia?
MR. BURNS: I got the question. (Laughter) The United States has
repeatedly urged all parties in the region at the highest level not to
take actions which could aggravate the situation in the Balkans.
We believe that a negotiated settlement is the only possible
outcome to this very tragic conflict, and this is our principal
objective -- a negotiated outcome. We believe that forbearance from
military action is the only way to enhance the opportunities for peace.
We welcome President Izetbegovic's assurances that the government in
Sarajevo would not take advantage of current U.N. and NATO military
operations.
This applies to all parts of Bosnia-Herzegovina, not just the safe
areas, and the calls for restraint that we have put forth as recently as
yesterday in this building with the Croatian Foreign Minister by
Secretary Christopher pertain most especially to the Bosnian Serbs --
not just to the Croatian Government and the Bosnian Government -- but
also to the Bosnian Serbs; and it pertains to all the territory of
Bosnia-Herzegovina, not just to the safe areas.
We didn't start these appeals yesterday or today. We started them
several weeks ago when the military campaign started, and that's our
policy.
Q Beyond urging restraint, is there anything you can do to
encourage restraint on the part of the Muslims or Croats?
MR. BURNS: We're urging it and we are encouraging it, and we're
using all of our diplomatic powers of persuasion to convince them that
there is not likely to be much advantage to be gained by piling on and
by filling in behind NATO and the U.N. It's a very serious development,
and we're taking it seriously, and those governments understand that.
Judd.
Q Doesn't this make it more difficult for Mladic to surrender
his weapons -- the fact that, apparently, the Muslims and Croats are on
the move?
MR. BURNS: It shouldn't, and our message to General Mladic remains
the same. The international community has pledged by the stationing of
UNPROFOR in the area to protect all civilians in all safe areas, and
that pertains to the Bosnian Serb communities in and around these safe
areas, in all parts of Bosnia-Herzegovina, not just to the Bosnian
Muslim or Bosnian Croat population.
This is, in fact, the central role of the United Nations' presence
in Bosnia-Herzegovina, and that is to protect civilians -- all
civilians. That is a message that General Mladic should understand.
If I could, with your forbearance, I'd like to just -- now that
we're on Bosnia -- tell you that Dick Holbrooke is in the middle of a
meeting now with President Milosevic in Belgrade. He went into that
meeting about four hours ago. I called just before coming out here,
which is one of the reasons I was late, to see if I could get Dick, but
he was ensconced with President Milosevic.
Dick has said very little in public today. The objective of his
current peace mission is quite clear. He began today on behalf of the
President and Secretary Christopher a new round of diplomacy, which is
designed to maintain momentum in the U.S.-led peace initiative.
It's designed to try to help the countries of the region that have
been at war for four years to turn away from war and to turn towards
peace. I think this is a good opportunity to review, as Dick undertakes
this mission, what we've been able to accomplish in the last two months.
We have been able, since the fall of Srebrenica and Zepa, to shore
up the international presence in Bosnia. There was a lot of talk, a lot
of questioning in July, in the wake of the fall of those two cities,
about the sustainability of UNPROFOR in the region. No one is talking
about that now. UNPROFOR is going to stay in Bosnia.
There was a Bosnian Serb military offensive under way this spring
and summer in eastern Bosnia that has been stopped in its tracks, and
certainly the mortal threat that the Bosnian Serb military offensive
posed to the safe areas, the remaining safe areas, has been ended. Very
unfortunately, it was not ended before Srebrenica and Zepa fell.
I think we have begun to turn the tide of this war. Not just "we"
the United States, but "we" the international community, and "we" the
parties on the ground, from war towards the imperative of peace.
The peace initiative is showing some promise. We have been able to
have a successful first meeting in Geneva. Dick Holbrooke's objective
right now is to get into very detailed discussions of the difficult
issues that are at the heart of this conflict -- the Map, the Contact
Group Plan to end this war, the possibility at some point of a cease-
fire, the necessity of organizing an international peace conference.
All of these questions -- Eastern Slavonia, mutual recognition,
cross-recognition among the three parties -- are at the heart of Dick
Holbrooke's current diplomatic offensive. Certainly, the time has come
for peace. The Bosnian Serbs bear the lion's share of the
responsibility for the atrocious situation that these people are in all
over the Balkans, and they bear responsibility now -- and this includes
the Bosnian Serb military leadership -- to take the appropriate and
logical conclusion. As Secretary Perry said last night, they have a
losing hand.
They have a losing hand. They cannot achieve on the battlefield
their historic dream of a greater Serbia. They have got to go to the
negotiating table. That's why the President and Secretary have sent
Dick Holbrooke to the region. He'll be there over the next couple of
days. After Belgrade today, he will go to Geneva for the Russian-
hosted, Russian-shared meeting of the Contact Group tomorrow in Geneva.
He will then go tomorrow night to Zagreb for a meeting Friday
morning with President Tudjman. I imagine then he will resume over the
weekend and into early next week the shuttle diplomacy among Bosnia,
Croatia and Serbia. We have high hopes for this peace process, but we
understand that it's going to be very, very difficult to achieve a
successful result -- very, very difficult indeed -- and we need to be
patient about making quick progress. Progress may indeed be very slow.
Tom.
Q General Mladic may have a losing hand, but he seems to be
refusing to fold. There's no sign of Serb compliance yet. Meanwhile,
Boutros-Ghali is calling Janvier and Akashi to New York, and there are
reports this morning that they are unhappy with the escalation, as they
see it, of the bombing campaign. We, of course, know what Russia is
doing.
You have been saying all along that you don't plan for failure, but
isn't it time to address the question of what to do if Mladic refuses to
move those weapons?
MR. BURNS: NATO is going to stay determined -- remain determined
to continue the air campaign until the objectives of that campaign are
met. There is no weakening of resolve in the NATO alliance. There is
no weakening of resolve in the U.N. Security Council.
The Russian Federation put to the U.N. Security Council yesterday a
resolution that would have in fact have interrupted the NATO air
campaign, and that resolution was turned down by the Security Council
because the Security Council reaffirmed, as late as last night, that
UNSC Resolution 836 provides authority for NATO and the U.N. to
undertake this kind of action.
We are not going to slow up. We're not going to relieve the
pressure. We're going to keep the pressure on. It is very likely that
Mladic and his compatriots will try to wait this one out. They'll try
to wait until the West cracks, and they'll try to wait until the bombs
stop falling.
We're going to continue our two initiatives on two parallel levels,
and that is -- parallel routes -- that is, a continuation of the
military campaign, a continuation of the search for peace, and the
search for peace, second round, began today in Belgrade.
Q Nick, how would the Administration --
Q Follow-up. Could I follow up on that?
MR. BURNS: Sure.
Q On the Alliance weakening or not weakening, is there any
change in the Italians and whether or not they've had a change of heart
and allowed the F-117s to come into Aviano?
MR. BURNS: Another reason I was late -- another excuse that I have
for getting out here late is that I had a long conversation with our
Ambassador in Rome, Reg Bartholomew, and he reports very good
cooperation between the United States and Italy.
Italy is a strong supporter of the NATO military action, as it
supports our diplomatic action, and on the question of deployments of
our military assets, that's really a question for the Pentagon. The
Pentagon has not announced anything yet. I don't believe the Italian
Government has announced anything either.
So we are discussing, of course, as everybody knows, many issues
concerning deployment, but it's not for the State Department to comment
upon that specifically.
Q Nick, could you clarify the U.S. position on whether Italy
should be included into the Contact Group or not? And you said
yesterday it's a European issue. Does that mean that if the Europeans
want the Italians in, you will propose it?
MR. BURNS: It is most definitely a European Union issue. It's
been an issue that has been debated very intensely and intensively in
the European Union. The United States has taken the initiative at
several points over the last couple of weeks to include Italy, Spain and
Canada in an expanded Contact Group format.
All three countries are important allies of ours. We are very
comfortable with that format. It is not our decision as to whether or
not Europe should be represented by two, three, four or five countries.
That's a decision for the European Union.
But because we have to operate within a certain framework, we have
taken the initiative through Ambassador Bartholomew on a daily basis and
through Dick Holbrooke who visited Rome -- had talks with Prime Minister
Dini last week -- to make sure that our coordination with the Italians
is very intensive and complete and full.
I think the Italians will tell you that they have no gripe with the
United States, and that they have very good cooperation with the United
States.
Q Who decides (inaudible)? Is that a North American issue?
MR. BURNS: Pardon?
Q Is Canada a North American issue?
MR. BURNS: No. I mean, this issue is for the Contact Group to
decide on the EU level, and the question here pertained to Italy.
Q Yes, but who would decide if Canada was to be a part?
MR. BURNS: It would be a group decision.
Q Nick, as far as the airstrikes, yesterday and again today you
say there will be no relenting. But is there in fact a compromise being
discussed that involves removal of most -- all tanks, most artillery
pieces, leaving some in place, U.N.-monitoring of the weapons in a
nation-wide cease-fire?
MR. BURNS: If that kind of arrangement is being discussed, it
would not be done by American diplomats. It would be done by the United
Nations' officials who have responsibility for this kind of thing on the
ground.
The United Nations is the main conduit to the Bosnian Serb military
leadership, and specifically General Janvier. So I'll have to refer you
to General Janvier and the U.N. on that particular issue.
Q So how would the Administration, the main pusher for these
airstrikes, backer -- excuse me -- feel about that sort of arrangement?
MR. BURNS: I'm not going to reveal publicly everything that we
think about the situation. We certainly want to see the guns silenced
and the guns removed. That's an American position. That's an
imperative if the siege of Sarajevo is to be lifted, if people can live
a peaceful winter. We do have points of view that we are communicating
to the United Nations, to other NATO members, to our allies, to the
Serbs.
Dick Holbrooke is doing that right now, but we're not the lead
negotiator, and it doesn't make any sense to reveal our positions on
very critical and sensitive issues in public.
Q But clearly you're not ruling it out.
MR. BURNS: It's not for us to rule things in or out. It's for the
U.N. and the Bosnian Serbs to have a conversation about what it's going
to take to get those guns down from around the hills surrounding
Sarajevo. That is the objective that the U.N. has enunciated, and it's
a good objective.
Q Is it your understanding that those conversations are taking
place between the U.N. and the Bosnian Serbs about a compromise for the
removal of the weapons?
MR. BURNS: Excuse me. Should there be a compromise?
Q No. Is it your understanding, the building's understanding,
the Government's understanding, that those conversations are taking
place; that there are negotiations between the U.N. and the Bosnian
Serbs?
MR. BURNS: I just have nothing to offer on that today.
Q Since Canada was raised in connection with the Italian
situation, and you say there are special efforts made on the part of the
United States to involve the Italians in the process, what are you doing
for Canada, if anything?
MR. BURNS: Canada is in many respects our closest ally, and we
have continual contact with the Canadian Government through our Embassy
in Ottawa and also through military channels in NATO about the NATO
operation; and Canada has also been included expressly in many of the
most important recent meetings of the Contact Group.
Q Is it your understanding that Canada is satisfied with that
situation?
MR. BURNS: I think I would direct that question to the Canadian
Government. We believe that Canada should be fully involved in the
range of activities in the Balkans, because Canada is a major
contributor to the efforts for peace, and we take that obligation very
seriously.
There is a question here, I know, that a lot of you are asking
about -- how big should the Contact Group be. That's a very sensitive
issue, and I'd prefer to leave that for private discussions. But I
think in general I can give you the very strong sense that the United
States has acted over the past couple of weeks in a way that would
include as many countries that are critical to this -- and Canada is
certainly critical -- as possible.
Q Is the United States prepared to accept General Janvier's
judgment as to what is necessary to render Sarajevo safe?
MR. BURNS: The United Nations has enunciated, articulated, the
conditions that have been given to the Bosnian Serbs that would warrant
a cessation of the military campaign. We have never disagreed with
those conditions, and in fact they make sense, and it's up to the United
Nations now to continue those discussions with the Bosnian Serbs.
Again, this is a question that we have come back to time and time
again, and I understand why you're coming back to it. This is not a
difficult proposition for us all to figure out. It's a fairly
simplistic proposition. If the Bosnian Serbs would simply stop aiming
their weapons, firing their weapons -- as they have countless times over
the last couple of days at safe areas -- if they would pull back the
weapons from the positions that they currently occupy, if they would act
in a way that is consistent with their publicly expressed desire for
peace, they would make it easy on themselves. There would be a
cessation of the NATO air action overnight, and U.S. officials have been
clear about that.
But they don't do that. You have to look at their actions. We've
heard a lot of words from these people for four years. We've heard
lies. We've certainly heard lies over the last couple of weeks. They
said they're pulling out when they're not pulling out; they're pulling
back when they're not pulling back.
So you can't trust the words. You have to trust the action. Let's
review the actions on September 9 and 10. In Sarajevo: reports of
sniping, machine-gun fire, shelling; four wounded, one killed by Bosnian
Serbs. Tuzla: 11 shells reported on the 10th of September; wounded.
Mt. Igman: 20 shells, seven rockets. Gorazde: machine-gunning. In
the southwest beyond the safe areas, Serb tanks fire into Croatia in the
Bihac pocket. The Bosnian Serbs continue military actions. Are these
the actions of a government, of a group of people that want peace?
Should NATO in the face of this type of action withdraw its use of air
power? Absolutely not.
NATO is going to press forward and the United Nations Security
Council approved that last night. So that's where the situation is
headed. Self-interest would dictate that these people, specifically
General Mladic, act in their own self-interest, and that is pull back
from a military option and turn towards peace.
That's the message that the bombs are carrying, and that's the
message that Dick Holbrooke is carrying.
Q How does that stiffen the U.N. spine?
MR. BURNS: The U.N. Security Council acted last night very clearly
to back the NATO military operation. I don't think any spines need
stiffening today.
Q (Inaudible) from those remarks; did you mean to suggest that
if the Serbs just stopped firing their weapons, that that would be
enough?
MR. BURNS: No, I did not mean to suggest that at all. I used
these very specific examples of actions by the Bosnian Serbs, which
indicate that they still have this compulsion to fight. Certainly,
beyond stopping all this type of action, they've got to comply with the
conditions put down by the United Nations. The judge of whether or not
they've done that will be General Janvier and his colleagues in the U.N.
military command.
Q Nick, will a cessation of the using of those weapons -- would
that bring about a possible cessation or suspension of air action --
MR. BURNS: No.
Q -- until something else --
MR. BURNS: No.
Q Well, then what about the --
MR. BURNS: No. Bill, I believe you've asked the same question
that Carol has asked. If they simply stop attacking safe areas and the
Bihac pocket, are they going to be let off the hook? No. They've got
to do something about the placement of their artillery that currently
poses a potential threat to the citizens of Sarajevo. It has threatened
them all throughout the past four years.
Q (Inaudible)
MR. BURNS: As General Janvier said a couple of weeks ago, the
conditions include a relief from attacks on Sarajevo and other safe
areas, U.N. access and freedom of movement to Sarajevo airport, to the
land route from the airport into town, and the removal of heavy weapons.
On the second one, on the airport, the blue route -- at least one
is open.
Q The airport's been opened. He specifically said they had to
guarantee the safety of the airport.
MR. BURNS: And we want the airport to open. But the land route is
open. I think there are about 200 vehicles a day that are now coming
into Sarajevo with food, with the united colors of Benetton -- you know,
all these things that have made life a little bit more palatable for
people than it had been previously.
As we look towards winter, what the United Nations wants to
accomplish is a relief from the stranglehold so that food and other
materials may continue to get into Sarajevo.
Q Nick, the Bosnian Serbs say they don't want to withdraw those
guns because they fear for the Serb sector of Sarajevo. Do they have
any reason to fear for that sector, and is there anything that the West
can do to allay those fears?
MR. BURNS: I think one way to allay those fears is to state very
clearly and unequivocally that one of the central -- as I did just a few
minutes ago -- one of the central missions of UNPROFOR has been and will
continue to be the protection of all civilians in all safe areas. And
"all civilians" means Bosnian Serb civilians as well as Bosnian Muslim
and Bosnian Croats and others in the region -- all civilians.
Should the weapons be withdrawn from around Sarajevo, the
international community would have the obligation and the responsibility
to try to protect all civilians, including the Bosnian Serb civilians
who would remain inside Sarajevo, inside other safe areas.
Steve.
Q Would Strobe Talbott have gone on to Moscow had he not
publicly committed to that trip ahead of the Russians' trotting out the
charge of genocide? In other words, had that charge been made a day
earlier, would he now be planning to go to Moscow?
MR. BURNS: The Russian charge of genocide was preposterous, and I
think it's been commented upon by this Administration from President
Clinton on down. Put that aside. It's not a rational charge, and
Karadzic has spoken to that this morning.
Deputy Secretary Talbott felt very strongly, as did Secretary
Christopher that the time had come for good and comprehensive
consultations with the Russians on this issue of the Balkans on the
military dimensions, on the diplomatic dimensions. I think, yes, he
would have gone ahead even if those statements had been made a day
earlier, Steve.
Betsy.
Q Nick, can you tell us who he's meeting with?
MR. BURNS: I can't. I know I spoke to him just a few hours ago.
He's leaving in a few minutes. He'll be in Moscow tomorrow morning.
He'll spend about 24 hours there. He has requested various appointments
in the Russian Government. I think they'll be principally with the
Russian Foreign Ministry. When I spoke to him, we had not yet received
confirmation on the specific appointments that had been requested. I'm
sure he will be seen at an appropriately high level.
The Russians are committed to this type of dialogue. There has
been a lot of back-and-forth communications between the two governments
over the last couple of days and weeks. The Russians want this dialogue
as well as us.
Q Nick, it was reported in the Financial Times yesterday that
this subject had come up in the talks with Mr. Churkin, that there might
be a role for the Russians in the military force that would need to be
assembled to enforce the peace and to put the peace into place in
Bosnia.
Was that an accurate report, and is this Administration beginning
to think about the composition of a military force for such a purpose?
MR. BURNS: We are beginning to think and consider inside the
Administration at a very preliminary level with allies the question of
how would the international community safeguard a peace treaty. How
would we implement a peace treaty. What kind of military contribution
could be made to benefit the parties if they agree to a peace
arrangement.
It's a question that we would be delighted to deal with, because it
would mean that we had achieved a lot of progress on the diplomatic
front. It's very difficult, as Secretary Perry said last evening, to
tell you how many troops would be involved and whose troops, because we
don't know the shape of the peace. The parties haven't agreed to it
yet. Once we know that, then we'll be able, we and NATO, to make the
appropriate plans. As for Russian involvement, I think it just remains
to be seen.
Q That's why I was surprised that there was a report that it
was already being discussed with them. Is that an inaccurate report?
MR. BURNS: I think it remains to be seen. I don't believe there
have been detailed discussions either inside NATO or between NATO and
Russia, or any other country outside of NATO, as to who might
participate in such a peace implementation plan.
Q New subject?
MR. BURNS: New subject?
Q One on Bosnia. Just coming back to the Bosnian Croat and
Muslim offensive. Isn't your call for restraint a little bit
unconvincing? Because you also issued a similar call for restraint to
the Croatians before they attacked Krajina. Now you're effectively
saying that that has unlocked the entire situation and enabled the peace
offensive to go ahead.
MR. BURNS: This call for restraint, which we are reaffirming
today, which we have made on several occasions publicly as well as
privately over the last couple of weeks, should be heeded very
seriously. It's a very important and seriously delivered call for
restraint. Restraint is what is required.
There is always going to be an opportunity -- and maybe even an
rational call -- for military action on the part of one party or
another. That's the problem with the Balkans. They've been heeding
those calls for four years. It's time to stop heeding them. It's time
to contribute the international community's sponsorship of a peace
process. That's where the situation should head.
Q New subject?
MR. BURNS: Anymore on Bosnia?
Q Just briefly. Nick, what specifically are the Russians
asking NATO-U.N. to do in Bosnia now? And what are they saying -- what
kind of influence can they effect with the Bosnian Serbs to help bring
about a cease-fire, cease-bombing situation?
MR. BURNS: Those conversations are taking place at a diplomatic
level between the United Nations and the Bosnian Serbs. I think it's
very clear what the conditions are. They have been enunciated publicly
time and again. They can't fail to be understood by the Bosnian Serbs.
Q Do we have any details of the Russia objection to what the
U.N. and NATO are doing?
MR. BURNS: Do we have any details on the Russian objection? We've
seen what they said publicly. We've had a lot of private conversations.
One of the objectives that Strobe Talbott has, as he heads off to
Moscow right now, is that we need to have a comprehensive set of
discussions with the Russians. They need to have a very close
appreciation of our point of view as we do of theirs. We are going into
these discussions with a very determined view that NATO military action
should continue and a diplomatic offensive should continue.
Charlie, and then we'll go to Turkey.
[...]
MR. BURNS: We have the deepest level of cooperation with the
Government of Turkey on this question. The Government of Turkey and the
Government of the United States have worked together since March and
April l99l in northern Iraq to help the population there that was so
severely attacked by Saddam Husayn. The Government of Turkey is an NATO
ally of the United States, an exceedingly important ally. We have the
closest possible cooperation in Operation Provide Comfort. That will
continue.
Q There seems to be some kind of a problem on the negotiations
between Greece -- the fight in New York. Do you have any comment on
that?
MR. BURNS: There is an ongoing negotiation sponsored by the United
Nations by former Secretary of State Cyrus Vance as lead negotiator, by
a U.S. Presidential Emissary -- Matthew Nimetz. They're up in New York.
They are shuttling back and forth between hotel rooms. They are trying
to achieve a resolution of the long-standing diplomatic disagreements
between the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia and Greece. The
United States fully supports the U.N. efforts. We hope there'll be a
breakthrough for peace. We hope that we'll be able to normalize our
relationship with the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia as a result.
As I understand it this morning, there is yet no conclusion of
those talks. We'll just have to wait with some hope that they'll
conclude successfully.
[...]
(The press briefing concluded at 2:33 p.m.)
END
|