U.S. Department of State 95/11/29 Daily Press Briefing

From: Thanos Tsekouras <thanost@MIT.EDU>

U.S. State Department Directory

DEPARTMENT--Announcements

[...]

Secretary Christopher's Mtg. w/Bosnian PM Silajdzic ...14

FORMER YUGOSLAVIA

Paris Peace Conference ................................2-3

Proximity Peace Talks Agreement

--Signing .............................................3

--Reports of Renegotiation ............................3

--Agreement on Eastern Slavonia .......................4-5

--Arms Control Regime/Disequalibrium in Force Levels ..14-16

NATO Military Forces--Location, Numbers ...............5

Editorial Comment on Deployment of U.S. Forces ........17

NATO

Selection Process for Secretary General Position ......5-8

[...]

[...]

Q That's a pretty complete schedule. But can you push it a little further? Do you have Paris penciled in yet?

MR. BURNS: We fully expect that the Paris peace conference would take place probably sometime the following week. We're not yet in a position to announce a date with the French Government. I believe the French Government would be the first to announce that.

Q Confirming that date up, because diplomats out of Paris are saying it's the 14th.

MR. BURNS: We've had a number of discussions with the French Government. We've just tried to match up our schedule with the French, and the French have to match up with a lot of other people's schedules as well.

As you know, we believe, and the French agree, that that meeting should take place after there has been a conclusion of the Congressional debate here in the United States. So it's just been an exercise in trying to match up schedules. As soon as we have a full agreement on a date, I think the French and the White House will be in a position to announce that.

Q Is there any disagreement or difference of view about the scope of what happens in Paris? Is it just a ceremonial signing, or is it an opportunity to discuss Europe in broader terms, to use Bosnia perhaps as a pattern for resolving any other conflict?

MR. BURNS: The French are right now discussing with us and with others the program for the Paris peace conference. There will be some meetings as well as a formal signing. I think there will also be some ceremonial lunches or dinners. I'm not quite sure.

When that discussion is completed, the French will announce it. It will be more than just a signing. There will be some meetings attached to it, and it will be an importance conference. We congratulate the French for offering to hold it. We think it's appropriate that this signing take place in France, considering the sacrifice that the French and other European countries have made over the last couple of years in Bosnia.

However, the other day I did get a question on this. I want to repeat that part of the answer, Barry. The Bosnian Serbs should understand, and all parties at the Dayton Agreement should understand, that what was initialed at Dayton on November 21 will be what is signed in Paris the week after next -- meaning there is no possibility to renegotiate any aspect of the Dayton Agreement because of any unhappiness with it.

The Dayton Agreement was worked out over three and a half months, the last 21 days of which were an intensive series of meetings. It represents some fundamental compromises that all the parties had to make. None of us who were there are in a position to renegotiate it. There is no way we'll renegotiate it. We will not contemplate any renegotiation.

So what will be signed in Paris will be, to the letter, what was initialed in Dayton.

Q Nick, who is pushing -- is this a live debate now, the effort to try to push for some sort of renegotiation on some aspect?

MR. BURNS: It's not a live debate in Washington or Bonn or Paris or London or Ankara, or anyplace else. It is certainly a debate, that I've seen in the press, in some of the suburbs of Sarajevo and in Pale and Mr. Karadzic's remarks yesterday to CNN. They have to understand that this agreement was signed on their behalf, initialed on their behalf by President Milosevic. It was then initialed the next day by Mr. Karadzic. He is not in a position to renegotiate this with us, and we are not going to engage in any discussions with him to renegotiate.

Q The Russians, the French, none of them are taking up the cause of the Bosnian Serbs?

MR. BURNS: I have heard no talk whatsoever in any European capital, much less in Washington, D.C., about any inclination to renegotiate. We're hearing it from elements of the Bosnian Serb community.

Q Nick, what's happened to the agreement on Eastern Slavonia? Has there been some correspondence between the Secretary and the Croatian President on that?

MR. BURNS: I'm not aware of any correspondence on it, Sid. I'm not aware of any letters in the last couple of days or since we last saw President Tudjman in Dayton. I'm not aware of any phone calls on it.

The agreement stands. It's an agreement that was reached on December 12 -- very important agreement -- and we expect it to be carried out fully.

Q How long -- what's the implementation period of that agreement?

MR. BURNS: The implementation period or the transitional period?

Q Either.

MR. BURNS: The agreement will go into effect when the Paris agreements are signed. As you know, the United Nations has lead responsibility to look at how to put this agreement into practice. There needs to be a transitional authority arranged for the region and some kind of transitional military force that will come in in order to effect the demilitarization of the area. All of this is spelled out in the December 12 agreement.

As you know, the transitional period will last for 12 months. There is an option that any party has to extend that period for an additional 12 months.

The United Nations has been debating these questions of how to establish the transitional authority, how to carry it out, which forces would come in to stand between the opposing forces there. But I don't believe the United Nations has made any fundamental decisions, and certainly has not announced anything about the results of their discussions.

Q That's not part of the NATO peacekeeping mission?

MR. BURNS: No. It's separate. It's separate. The United Nations will be taking responsibility for looking at the question of the transitional authority, including its military complement.

The NATO debates right now and the operational plan concern Bosnia -- how to implement the military annex of the Dayton peace accords.

Q No American troops in Eastern Slavonia is what I'm getting at.

MR. BURNS: Right now, we have not made any commitments to do that, no.

Q What about the American troops in other places that we're reading about?

MR. BURNS: In Macedonia?

Q Well, even Hungary, maybe? By some accounts, at least one in the Los Angeles Times, that American troops will be -- we know there are some Americans in Macedonia -- but American troops will be in Croatia. This is apart from the 20,000. Another 5,000. And maybe even in Hungary.

Is this related to the agreement in some binding way? You talk about initialing and not being able to revise. Has the United States made some ironclad commitment to send troops to several other countries?

MR. BURNS: NATO will be staging some of its forces in some of the surrounding countries. Those countries, including Hungary, have given NATO permission to stage, in the preliminary parts of the deployment, forces there. But I have to refer you to the Pentagon for the numbers that we're talking about in that respect.

But the great bulk of the NATO force will be stationed in Bosnia itself. Of course, for support services, you're going to have to have some forces in the outlying areas and some of the surrounding countries.

Q But 5,000 is a kind of sizable number.

Q On the schedule, is lunch Saturday, in part, an interview for a Secretary General, the next Secretary General, with Solana?

MR. BURNS: Interview?

Q The Secretary was interviewing people here who were candidates for the job. Solana has been mentioned as a possible candidate for Secretary General. The position is still open.

MR. BURNS: The Secretary has a very good relationship with Foreign Minister Solana. They get along quite well. They've worked closely together on a lot of U.S.-European issues over the last year or so.

The process of selecting the next NATO Secretary General continues very intensively. It is taking place in Brussels, at NATO headquarters. It is a confidential and private process, and we're not in a position to talk about it in public.

Once the decision has been made by consensus, the smoke will go up and we'll be in a position to announce it. But I have nothing to announce today.

Q Is there a language --

MR. BURNS: A language test? I'm not aware of any language test.

Q A proficiency of French, is that --

MR. BURNS: I'm not aware of any language test.

Q From an American standpoint, at least two contenders, apparently, have come up short of their ability to speak French in a way satisfactory to Paris?

MR. BURNS: Not from our point of view.

Q I wonder if the Americans had a language test?

MR. BURNS: The United States does not have a language test. There are two official languages of NATO: English and French. But the United States doesn't have a language test.

Q Nick, is Solana a candidate? Can you go that far? I don't know. He's certainly been talked about.

MR. BURNS: I believe right now the only government that has officially declared a candidate is the Danish Government with former Minister Ellemann-Jensen. I don't believe that any other government has publicly put forward a candidate at this time.

There are a number of people being considered. There are a number of names being discussed. It's being done privately and confidentially. We certainly don't want to make this public in any way, shape, or form before a decision is made. We had an unpleasant experience a couple of weeks back and are not inclined to repeat that experience.

Q Does the United States consider Solana an appropriate candidate for NATO Secretary General?

MR. BURNS: We have great respect for Minister Solana -- the highest respect for him.

Q What about Spain's role in NATO -- its unique role in NATO -- and the fact that Solana has been critical of --

MR. BURNS: He has been critically important. He just was in Barcelona yesterday.

Q (Inaudible) (Laughter)

MR. BURNS: I'm just answering your question, Carol. I'll answer, and, if you're not satisfied, you can come back --

Q I will.

MR. BURNS: -- and you can even comment on my answer. I was going to say that Minister Solana has been a critically important figure in Western discussions on a number of issues. We have the highest respect for him.

Q But you're not troubled by the fact that Spain is not an integrated member of the NATO military, and that he has taken issue with some aspects of U.S. policy?

MR. BURNS: Spain is an important member of NATO, a valued ally, and I'll just keep it there. Are you satisfied with that response?

Q No. (Laughter)

MR. BURNS: I shouldn't have asked the question.

Q Some members of Congress today have written to the Secretary, also asking you to reconsider Solana as a candidate, because they oppose him, and I was just wondering if you had replied to that letter.

MR. BURNS: I have not seen the letter. I'm unaware of the letter.

Q Nick, are you ruling out the possibility of having a NATO Secretary General whose government is not a member of NATO's military wing?

MR. BURNS: All I'm going to say on this one -- since this is a private and confidential process -- is that a number of people are being considered. It's a very important choice, and I don't want to identify any of the people who are being considered beyond the person who's been publicly announced by his government.

Q Are there other candidates besides Solana? Are there other people being considered privately in this confidential channel besides Solana?

MR. BURNS: I haven't talked about Minister Solana as a candidate. You all have done that. Let me just note for the record, for all people who will read this transcript, that I haven't made that statement. That was made by one of the questioners.

There are a number of people being considered from a variety of NATO countries. We certainly would be comfortable with any of the people being considered -- they're all fine individuals -- from any of the countries, but I can't confirm who these people are.

Q And these are names beyond Ellemann-Jensen and Lubbers?

MR. BURNS: Yes.

Q Can you say what these names are?

MR. BURNS: No. Good try, however. I can't say it in French either. I could say it in French, but I won't say it in French.

[...]

Q Why is the Secretary meeting with Haris Silajdzic today?

MR. BURNS: Prime Minister Silajdzic is in town. He's having a number of discussions with people in the Administration, including the Secretary. He's also going to be talking to Senators and Representatives on Capitol Hill about the issue before the Congress, and that is whether or not the Congress should offer the Administration an expression of support for the deployment of troops.

The Bosnian Government has felt very strongly that the United States must be part of the effort to help implement the peace agreement. The Bosnian Government has requested the United States to participate in the NATO effort, and I think Prime Minister Silajdzic is here for both reasons -- to confer with the Administration and confer with the Congress.

So the Secretary wanted to take advantage of his presence here and have a short meeting this afternoon. I think he'll be meeting with Ambassador Albright as well and with others in our European Bureau.

Q Nick, when does the United States begin its processing of arming the Bosnian military?

MR. BURNS: That is a very important issue that we continue to discuss with the Bosnian Government, that we continue to consult with Congress on. As you know -- and the President spoke to this yesterday afternoon -- there is an important arms control regime that will be put in place, and we hope that there will be around a 25 percent reduction in the level of arms available to all the forces in Bosnia. We hope that that will be done on a voluntary basis.

That was part of the negotiations at Dayton. It's part of the Dayton peace agreement. If that does take place, I think all of us will be very pleased, and we'd be glad to help the parties achieve that figure.

If it cannot take place --- if there is not a voluntary reduction - - then we would like to try to achieve our goal of an equilibrium of military forces in another fashion, and that would be to help the Bosnian Government to increase its military capabilities, to build up its military equipment capacity, and we have had a lot of discussions with them and have to have a lot more to determine exactly what the outlines of that program would be.

I expect that certainly when the Secretary and Secretary Perry and General Shalikashvili testify on Thursday and Friday, this will be one of the questions that the Congress will want to talk to them about, and I'm sure they will be ready to discuss it.

Q You do believe that there is inequity in the force level now between the Muslims and the Serbs? When the Secretary testified on the Hill -- I guess it was last month -- he seemed to indicate that you weren't quite sure about that, and now there's been a lot of water under the bridge?

MR. BURNS: That testimony was -- what? -- six weeks ago, I think.

Q Yes.

MR. BURNS: What the Secretary said was that we wanted to be sure about the parameters -- we wanted to be sure about the numbers involved, and we wanted to get a comprehensive look at the situation to determine just what the disequilibrium was. We have been working at that since then. That effort began before that congressional testimony, its continued through the Dayton peace talks, and the Pentagon now thinks that it has a rough sense of the disequilibrium that does absolutely exist. The Bosnian Government does not have an equal -- certainly, by any stretch of the imagination -- equal military capacity in terms of equipment or firepower that the Bosnian Serbs and the Croatians and others do.

So there needs to be an effort to balance the situation, because we want this agreement to be self-sustaining. We don't want to be in a position, in our very carefully worked out exit strategy, our very highly tuned and carefully worked out exit strategy -- we don't want to be in a position when American and other NATO troops leave, sometime roughly a year after they're first deployed, where one of the countries -- in fact, the victim in this war -- is in a disadvantageous situation.

We'd like to achieve that balance by voluntary means. If we can't, we'll do it by a U.S. assistance program.

Q Can you quantify this disequilibrium?

MR. BURNS: I'm not in a position to do that now. That's really a question for the Pentagon. I think we also need to have some more discussions with the Bosnians and the others in the region before we throw out numbers.

Q Did you say 25 percent?

MR. BURNS: Yes. That's the figure that the President used yesterday.

Q That must come from somewhere, that number?

MR. BURNS: That comes from part of the study that we've made of the military balance in the region, yes.

Q And the disarmament would only be on the part of the Bosnian Serbs?

MR. BURNS: At this point, that is the preferred way to proceed, certainly; rather than injecting additional arms into a heavily armed area, we'd certainly like to see a process of disarmament take place. But if that doesn't happen, the Bosnian Serbs are on notice that we're not going to allow the Bosnian Government to be left in a situation where there is a profound disadvantage to the Bosnian Government -- say, a year or so down the road -- when the NATO forces will be departing.

Q When you look at this equation, you're talking about the Bosnian forces alone? Not the Bosnian Croat Federation?

MR. BURNS: That's right.

Q And the Croats won't be asked to disarm?

MR. BURNS: It's possible -- they will be in the equation. Anything is possible. But we just haven't gotten to the point where we've made specific requests yet. We need to get further into the discussion before we do that.

Q But has there been any thinking along the lines, if you only -- you have a Bosnian Croat Federation that seems to be roughly equal to the Bosnian Serbs -- those two together. If you arm the Bosnian Muslims so they're equal with the Bosnian Serbs, then the Bosnian Croat Federation has a distinct advantage over the Bosnian Serbs as far as weaponry goes.

MR. BURNS: That advantage is in population. That advantage is also built into some of the constitutional arrangements that were agreed to as part of the Dayton peace accords. That's life. The fact is the Bosnian Serbs are in a minority. That's life. It's the way it is.

Q One on Algeria?

MR. BURNS: Let me just note for the record that we were very pleased to see this morning -- before we leave Bosnia forever today -- some very good editorials from the Washington Times, Baltimore Sun, the Washington Post on the question of whether or not the United States should deploy troops. That's two times in two weeks that we've been pleasantly surprised by the Washington Times. I don't know if the Times has a reporter here, but I'd just like to congratulate the Times for its vision and foresight and wisdom on this question of Bosnia.

I've got copies I can pass out in the Press Room afterwards.

Q (Inaudible).

MR. BURNS: I sometimes comment on editorials. Only when they're good editorials. If they're negative, we usually don't comment on them.

[...]

Thank you very much.

(Press briefing concluded at 1:30 p.m.)

(###)