U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE 95/09/13 DAILY PRESS BRIEFING

From: [email protected]

U.S. State Department Directory

Subject: U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE  95/09/13 DAILY PRESS BRIEFING

OFFICE OF THE SPOKESMAN

[...]

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

[...]

[...]

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