U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE 95/09/18 DAILY PRESS BRIEFING

From: Dimitrios Hristu <[email protected]>

U.S. State Department Directory

Subject: U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE 95/09/18 DAILY PRESS BRIEFING

[...]

FORMER YUGOSLAVIA

  Implementation of Sarajevo Agreement .....................  2-4

  --Withdrawal of Heavy Weapons from Sarajevo ..............  2-5,16-17

  --Ceasefire in and around Sarajevo .......................  5,16

  --Opening of Land Routes into Sarajevo ...................  16-17

  --Opening of Airport to Humanitarian Traffic .............  16

  Bosnian Serb Refugees ....................................  4,9

  Assistant Secretary Holbrooke's Itinerary:

  --w/Milosevic in Belgrade ................................  5,16

  --w/Tudjman, General Janvier, FM Granic in Zagreb ........  5,14

  --w/Izetbegovic in Sarajevo ..............................  5

  --Tripartite Mtg. ........................................  5,14

  --Return to U.S. .........................................  5,15

  Croatian/Bosnian Offensive ...............................  5-12

  Contact Group Map and Plan ...............................  8,10-14

  Protection of Safe Areas .................................  13

  Organization of Islamic Conference's Involvement .........  14

  Reports of Mladic's Hospitalization ......................  14-15

  Reports of Missile Firings around Gorazde ................  17

[...]

[...]

Q Well, could you bring us up-to-date on the situation concerning the heavy weapons outside Sarajevo?

MR. BURNS: Yes, I'll be glad to. I think, as you know, the United Nations and NATO determined yesterday that the terms of the agreement had been met for the first 72-hour period; and that is that a substantial number of heavy weapons had, in fact, been withdrawn from the Saravejo exclusion zone over the weekend.

We think the number is somewhere in the vicinity of l50 to l60 weapons. The U.N. and NATO are the best people to go to for an exact number.

In essence, the first part of this deal has been met. Now, this agreement that was worked out with the Bosnian Serbs and with the Serbian Government calls for a substantial number to have been withdrawn by last evening; all heavy weapons, equal to or greater than 82 millimeters to be withdrawn by Wednesday evening. That is at the 144th hour of the implementation of this agreement.

As we have said continuously, we will look very carefully to make sure that the Bosnian Serbs have, in fact, complied with this crucial provision of the agreement; and we fully expect that they will do so.

Q To or greater than the 82 millimeters -- that includes an 82- millimeter (inaudible)?

MR. BURNS: That's right. "Equal to" includes 82 millimeter mortars.

Q So you overcame the drafting error?

MR. BURNS: As I understand it -- and I was on the phone, again, just before coming out here, with Dick Holbrooke, who is now in Zagreb. As I understand it, it was a typographical error that was discussed with President Milosevic the day following the agreement and into Saturday. President Milosevic acknowledges the fact that 82-millimeter weapons must be withdrawn, and there is no longer a problem in that regard.

Let me just also state, since we're talking about this, of course, after the pullout of all heavy weapons at the 144th hour, there will be some smaller weapons left in the exclusion zone. Of course, there is no possibility for those weapons to be used. If they are used, and we've been very clear about this, that will constitute a violation of the agreement that the Serbs and Bosnian Serbs have offered to NATO and the U.N.

Q What's the point of allowing them to keep these weapons if they're not allowed to use them?

MR. BURNS: Some of the weapons we're talking about are pistols and rifles and so forth, and the unilateral agreement that was offered did not encompass those. I think the conclusion was, among the NATO and U.N. countries -- and certainly on the part of our Government -- that those weapons did not constitute a threat to Sarajevo because of their size but also because we have arranged a situation now where they're not going to be used or else there's going to be a response from NATO.

The Bosnian Serbs understand, and have specifically included in this agreement, that all offensive military activities will be stopped as a result of this agreement. So whether they have the small arms or not, they can't be used.

Q Which side made the typographical error?

MR. BURNS: I don't know because I know this document, when it was first discussed on Thursday, went through several permutations. So I can't say whose word processor it came out of. The fact is that this issue was addressed after the initial announcement on late Thursday evening and has been addressed satisfactorily, at least in our point of view.

Q And so you're saying that the Serb side produced this document, discussed it and made some changes, came back, discussed it. I mean, so it wasn't, just as you said on Friday, a Serb declaration that Holbrooke parried around the Balkans. It was something that went through several changes, based on discussions with Mr. Holbrooke.

MR. BURNS: These were unilaterally offered Serb ideas. Of course, in the round of 11 hours of discussions that Dick Holbrooke had on Wednesday and Thursday with Milosevic, the issues were discussed in private. The offer was discussed in private. I think he was able to give Milosevic and the others a sense of what was going to work and what was not going to work, and as a result there was a unilateral final offer made as a result of those discussions. That's what was conveyed to the Croatians and the Bosnians subsequently by Dick Holbrooke.

Q How concerned is this building by the military action going on potentially around Banja Luka later today, and does this building take seriously the threat by Milosevic to send in his army to help if this doesn't stop?

MR. BURNS: We have discussed this issue intensively over the weekend, in fact, late last week, over the weekend, and including today. It's a very important issue. It was overshadowed on Thursday and Friday by the offer of a cease-fire, and the withdrawal of heavy weapons by the Bosnian Serbs and the Serbs is a very important issue.

As I talked to Dick Holbrooke just before coming out here, he says there are a lot of conflicting reports from the battlefield about just how much territory has been conquered, about how many refugees have been created. A conservative estimate -- a conservative estimate -- of the refugees created over the last week is 85,000 refugees. These are Bosnian Serb refugees.

This is, indeed, a tragic situation for those people. The United States believes that after four years of warfare, after so much killing and fighting, it should stop. That is the message that Dick Holbrooke delivered yesterday to the parties, that he is delivering again today.

We think that now that there is momentum towards peace; there has been a successful meeting in Geneva; we have an agreement for a cease- fire in Sarajevo that is being honored; we have the withdrawal of Serb heavy weapons from Sarajevo; we have the prospect, we hope, of an extended cease-fire throughout Bosnia-Herzegovina -- now is not the time to escalate the war. It is time to turn towards peace and to the peace conference that we in the West hope to engineer.

Now, Dick Holbrooke was active over the weekend on this issue. On Saturday, he met with President Milosevic in Belgrade. On Sunday, he was in Zagreb and had a meeting with President Tudjman, which focused on this issue. He met with General Janvier in Zagreb on this and other issues. He then yesterday, Sunday, flew to Sarajevo -- in fact, flew into the airport -- which was a very important symbolic flight for those of us in the West. He met with President Izetbegovic in Sarajevo and then flew to Belgrade, had a late dinner until l:30 a.m. with President Milosevic.

Today, this morning, he continued those discussions with Milosevic for a couple of hours. He's now in Zagreb and, in fact, has begun a dinner with Foreign Minister Granic on this issue of the Bosnian and Croatian offensive in central Bosnia.

Tomorrow, he will meet in Zagreb with President Tudjman and President Izetbegovic together in a tripartite meeting to discuss the fighting in central Bosnia, to discuss our hope that the Federation, in many respects, can be strengthened as these parties approach a peace conference, and to discuss the specific constitutional issues about a future state and future issues concerning a Map.

I would then expect that after all of this travel over the last week or so that Dick would return home to the United States tomorrow evening. So it's an issue we're concerned about. We've been pushing it. And as I've just gone through Dick's schedule, you can see it's the focus of our efforts right now.

Q What has the response been from the Muslims and the Croats when we have put this concern to them?

MR. BURNS: I think, frankly, you've seen the response on the ground. The offensive has continued. Let us step back for just a moment. From one point of view, I think everybody understands that the Bosnians and Croatians after four years of war, four years of bloodshed -- brutality inflicted particularly upon the Bosnian Muslim population - - that they would try to make up on the battlefield what they lost over the last four years.

It is from a human point of view certainly understandable why they would engage in this type of offensive. That is just a way of acknowledging the obvious. Our very firmly held point of view is that despite the successes of the Croatian and Bosnian offensive over the last week, there is no military solution available to those two countries in this particularly tragic conflict.

There were times in the past -- in fact, just a couple of months ago -- when it looked like the Bosnian Serbs might win a military victory and they did not. That was reversed. We think that any attempt to achieve a comprehensive solution on the ground through military force will not succeed. In fact, it will fail. That's why the parties have to turn towards the peace table. We have a table. I think we even know what the shape of the table is right now. We know who is going to be in the room.

We're not ready to go to the room and sit down at the table because a lot of the issues have to be discussed and agreed on; certainly more so than they have been, to date.

But since we do have the prospect of a peace table, and a meeting, we think the parties should aim towards that and refrain from further military offensive.

Carol.

Q Nick, what is the United States telling these two combatants will happen if they continue their offensive?

MR. BURNS: Obviously, what I don't want to do, as usual in these cases, is to go into the details of our negotiating position. Dick Holbrooke is in a meeting right now on the subject with Foreign Minister Granic.

Needless to say, these are serious conversations. I think they are conversations whose message is being brought home clearly to both parties. The fact that we have arranged a three-way summit meeting tomorrow -- at least with two Presidents and with Dick Holbrooke in the room -- is a pretty good indication of how seriously we feel about the issue.

Q Is it safe to say that they'll be some consequent sanctions, something like that. That the United States and the international community, having come this far or what it believes to be this far on a peace process, is not going to let this kind of military action clear the deal?

MR. BURNS: I don't think there's been any talk of sanctions. We are friends with Croatia and with Bosnia; and in a lot of ways, Bosnia is the aggrieved party in this conflict. We've seen it like that for a number of years.

I think the ultimate impact of continued fighting, Carol, is going to be upon these two countries. We don't believe they are strong enough to win a military victory on the ground even at a time when it looks like the Bosnian Serbs are reeling and retreating, which they are; and even at a time when -- you know, 85 to a 100,000, perhaps, refugees have fled their homes towards Banja Luka and other cities.

There is an obvious temptation for parties on the ground, after so much misery, to feel emboldened by a success over a week. But countries shouldn't decide their ultimate objectives based on a week's work. They've got to elect to move towards the peace table. That's where they can achieve the ultimate justice that the Bosnian people deserve.

Q But the bottom line is that the United States' approach at this point is, even though your allies, your friends -- the Muslims -- are totally ignoring your entreaties, that talk is really all that you're planning?

MR. BURNS: I have to leave it to them to characterize how they look at our entreaties. I don't think they're being ignored. I think they're being intensively discussed.

They have drawn their own conclusions, obviously, through their actions on the battlefield. It's plain for all of us to see.

We are giving them now public as well as private advice: It's to your advantage to turn towards the peace table. They have accomplished a lot on the ground over the last week. If you look at the relative shares of territory right now, even by conservative estimates, the Bosnian Serbs have lost a great deal of turf over the last week. The Bosnian Government and Croatian Government are in a much better position now than they were even a week ago on the battlefield.

We just think that it's time now for them to conclude that the way to finish this process is through negotiations and not through war.

We shouldn't underestimate -- none of us should underestimate the military capability of the Bosnian Serbs. They are now on the defensive. It is still a highly effective fighting force. It's proven itself to be that.

We don't want to be a party to encouraging further bloodshed. Not after four years of war.

Steve.

Q Going back to Betsy's question -- the part of it, I don't think you answered. Is there concern with the possibility or threats that Serbia proper, if the Bosnian Serbs in the northwest are pressed hard enough and far enough would enter again on the side of their Serbian brother?

MR. BURNS: There has always been that concern throughout this war. At several junctures of the war, that concern has grown more acute. I can't point you towards any statements or evidence that would lead us to think that there is going to be an intervention. But Serbia, obviously, has its own interests.

I think that President Milosevic has indicated quite clearly over the last two to three weeks -- in his formation of a joint negotiating team with the Bosnian Serbs, in his stewardship of that team towards the Geneva meeting a week ago Friday, in their offer of a cease-fire in Sarajevo, and the possibility of a broader cease-fire throughout Bosnian-Herzegovina -- they have indicated that they would like to begin a genuine diplomatic process.

We know that the Bosnian and Croatian Governments have reciprocated in that sentiment. We know that they want to have peace negotiations. Our message to them is, let's do it now. Let's have the negotiations begin when they can begin but let's move away from the battlefield.

Q Have the Bosnians and the Croats gained anything, in the longer term, by taking over this territory? In other words, does the U.S. still plan, as the moving force behind the attempt to build these negotiations, that any settlement will be on a 51/49 basis no matter who holds what?

MR. BURNS: Yes. We would not be a credible interlocutor, a credible intermediary, among these parties if now, when the tables have been turned on the Bosnian Serbs, we suddenly came up with a new basis for the Contact Group Map and Plan.

We offered that more than a year ago -- we in the Contact group -- when the situation was decidedly against the Bosnian Government. That remains the basis for any potential peace conference -- 51/49 on the Contact Group Map and Plan. There's no reason for us to change that right now.

Q So you think they're wasting blood, trying to take territory by force when they could get it at the table?

MR. BURNS: We think it is a great pity and is a human tragedy that 85,000 refugees have had to flee their homes over the last week. This is not a comment on the last four years. This is not an excuse or a justification for over the last four years. This is not sympathy for the Bosnian Serb leadership. They deserve very little, if any, sympathy.

But the Bosnian Serb civilians, who have fled their homes, who have lost their homes, who are now refugees on the road, deserve sympathy and they deserve the help of the international community. The UNHCR and the International Committee of the Red Cross are responsible for coordinating the international effort to provide assistance to these refugees. We intend to cooperate with those two organizations -- we in the U.S. Government -- in whatever way we can.

Our fundamental, bottom line position is this: there's always going to be an excuse to fight. Someone is always going to be up and someone else is going to be down. It's time for maturity and a longer- term vision to take hold. It's time for these parties, now that they've got the first real prospect of a peace conference in more than four years, to grasp it and to understand that that's the way to resolve these issues in a comprehensive way, in a way that will be fair to everybody involved, and in a way that will best promote a lasting peace -- something that will survive a peace conference.

Jim.

Q On that point, specifically, have the Serbs -- either President Milosevic or anybody else in the leadership -- threatened to withdraw from the negotiations, or the forthcoming negotiations if the Bosnian Muslim advances continue?

MR. BURNS: I'm not aware that that threat has been made publicly. I do know that there have been very intense discussions on this issue, not only with Croatia and Bosnia but also with Serbia and with the Bosnian Serbs who have participated from time to time in some of the discussions that Dick Holbrooke has had.

It wouldn't surprise me, Jim, but I haven't seen anything that would amount to a public threat.

Mark.

Q Does the amber light that was given over the Croatian surge into the Krajina reduce your credibility in giving this message to the Muslims and the Croats now?

MR. BURNS: I don't think anybody can reasonably question the credibility of the United States or the West after what has happened over the last three weeks.

In fact, let's go back now, since you've opened this up, to London, again. I don't think a lot of people in Western governments had felt unduly proud of what had happened over the last four years. But at London, the West drew a line in the sand. The West followed up that commitment three weeks ago, on August 29, when the NATO air campaign started.

We have not only -- "we," in NATO and the United Nations -- stopped in its tracks the Bosnian Serb offensive in eastern Bosnia; we have not only negotiated now a cease-fire in Sarajevo and a withdrawal, we hope, of all heavy weapons in a certain category by Wednesday evening, we've also begun a peace process. We also have had a successful first meeting. We've laid down and have mutually agreed now the foundation principles for any peace process.

I think the credibility of the West is quite strong. I think it's intact. I think all Americans should be proud of what their government has done over the last couple of weeks. I know a lot of us are proud of it.

Q To follow up. Won't the advances made by the Muslims and Croats reduce the likelihood that when American troops are sent in there as peacekeepers, the Americans would actually have to forcibly push back the Serbs?

MR. BURNS: It's just hard to say. I know that's the conventional wisdom. But if you look very closely at some of the challenges -- and Dick Holbrooke has been doing that -- you have constitutional challenges. You also have territorial challenges.

If, indeed, one of the parties -- the Bosnian Government -- is going to end up with 51 percent of the land or some such figure that they will negotiate, what part of the land? Has that really been decided? Do we know exactly which towns will go to them and which regions will go them? What part of the 49, or some other figure, will the Bosnian Serbs get?

This is going to be the most difficult issue -- land -- at any future peace conference. I don't think we know what the colors are going to be as Bosnia-Herzegovina emerges with two distinct entities. I don't think we know what exact proportion they will end up with. Fifty- one/forty-nine is a starting point. It doesn't have to be the ending point. We certainly don't know who is going to get which part of the 51; who is going to get which part of the 49.

This is a long-term process here. For anyone to think that somehow all these facts being created are going to put things in neat categories, I think that's an illusion.

Q Are you saying that should the Federation offensive continue and mess up the percentages -- the 51/49 percent -- that as far as the United States is concerned, anything over 51 percent that the Bosnians have, our position will be that they should give it back to the Serbs?

MR. BURNS: No, I'm not saying that. I didn't mean to say that. I don't think I did say that in any previous answer in this briefing.

The fact is that 51/49 is a starting point. It's a basis for beginning discussions. If the parties emerge and want 90/10 or 50/50 or 52/48, that's up to them to negotiate. If it's a mutually agreed upon result that we think is also satisfactory, we'll back it. Fifty- one/forty-nine is a starting point, but we can't sit here and say what the end point of any negotiations is.

Q How is your position not that the Bosnians should give back land? I don't see how that jives.

MR. BURNS: Our position is that the parties should negotiate a comprehensive peace; that Bosnia-Herzegovina should remain a single state within its present borders. We assume that the two entities will emerge within that state. It will have a single U.N. seat, and so forth, but two distinct entities; that the tough issue at the negotiations will be what percentage of the land and what part of the land does Entity A get and what percentage and part of the land does Entity B get.

We cannot prescribe now or at the beginning of the negotiations answers to those two questions. But we can be involved in the search for a resolution to those two questions. We don't have any magic answers right now.

Secretary Christopher and Dick Holbrooke do not have, in their pocket, some kind of blueprint that answers those questions. The parties have to resolve those.

Q Nick, if you're not going to force them to stick to 51/49, I do not understand why it is not in the interest of the Bosnian Muslims to keep fighting if they're doing so well. What have they got to lose?

MR. BURNS: Just so there is clarity on this particular question, we never said ever, in the year and some months that this Contact Group Map and Plan has been in existence, that 51/49 was the absolute end point of a peace conference; that, in fact, we were going to dictate the percentages and the particular pieces of land that would go to each side.

We always did say that we think that's an equitable place to start and a fair place to start. Now the parties have agreed to that. They agreed to that in Geneva. That was a direct and concrete result of Geneva. So that's where we're going to start. It's up to them to figure out where they end.

Obviously, David, for me to be completely frank -- and I think everybody in the room understands this -- it's obviously the calculation of the Bosnians and Croats that they're going to strengthen their hand at a negotiating table if they conquer more land. It's not difficult to see that that's what they intend.

All we're saying is, after four years of war -- and I do want to repeat this; it's the most relevant thing I can say today -- it would really be not only unwise, irresponsible for us to encourage any party to continue warfare, continue creating refugees, continue to kill, in pursuit of peace.

We think the day has come now to turn towards the peace table and to turn away from war.

Q "Words are cheap," as you've said very often. And that's all you are offering on this.

MR. BURNS: I have said that, but I said that in a very different situation. I don't think these words are cheap. I don't think that if you encourage people to talk peace at a time when peace is possible, when there is really a peace to discuss; when it is within their sight, when the parameters of that peace have already been identified and agreed to by them -- I don't think those are cheap words. I think those are wise words. They are the words that any government like ours should be enunciating at this time.

Q Do you think that peace might slip from their grasp if they don't grab it?

MR. BURNS: There's always that possibility in the Balkans. What we've tried to do is avoid euphoria over the last couple of weeks. The situation has completely changed -- 180 degrees over the last three weeks.

Four weeks ago, a lot of us, including a lot of you, were despairing about the situation. Now, there's a temptation to think that peace is at hand, that we can declare victory. We are far from that. We haven't even arrived at the peace conference much less dealt with the issues of the peace conference. We think that we, in the United States Government, have to talk responsibly and have to be responsible in what we encourage the parties to do, and that is to seek peace, not war.

Q Nick, as far as the Administration is concerned, NATO will continue to honor its obligations -- no-fly, safe areas, etc -- regardless of what the Bosnians and the Croats do on the ground?

MR. BURNS: We have an ongoing -- "we," in the international community -- ongoing commitment to protect the safe areas. That is why the Bosnian Serbs ought to heed President Clinton's words on Friday morning, that we will be watching carefully. Any attempt to back away from the commitments they've made in this Sarajevo agreement will, in effect, lead to further NATO action against them.

There is a threat hanging over their heads. There is pressure on them to withdraw these heavy weapons.

This is a very good example of a situation where diplomacy could not do it alone. Diplomacy could not achieve our objectives alone. Force had to be coupled with it, and that remains part of American strategy.

Q Regardless of whether the Bosnians and Croats continue right to the Serb border or not?

MR. BURNS: Right now, we have a fundamental obligation to protect Gorazde, Sarajevo, Bihac, and Tuzla, and we will continue to do that.

Q And there's no re-thinking of it based on what's going on on the ground?

MR. BURNS: No, there isn't.

Judd.

Q In their discussions with Holbrooke or other officials, have the Bosnians and Croats indicated any sense of what their military goals are? Have they indicated this much land and --

MR. BURNS: Without betraying the substance and details of those discussions, which I don't want to do, I think it's clear they want to take land; they want to take cities and they want to gain as much ground as they can. That's what we've been speaking to today.

Q Right. But have they indicated any specific set of goals?

MR. BURNS: I'm sorry. Whether it's more specific than that? There's conflicting information about what their longer-term objectives are, conflicting information about where they may be headed. I think you've seen a lot of that conflicting information.

One of the reasons for Dick Holbrooke's meeting with Granic this morning -- tonight, excuse me -- in Zagreb, and the reason for the three-party meeting tomorrow with Izetbegovic and Tudjman is to get into that question a little bit.

Q The French Government today is welcoming the Islamic role in the peace process, considering there is very strong sentiment in the Islamic world about the Bosnian issue. There is a contact group also working on this Islamic Conference. What is the U.S. position on this?

MR. BURNS: We welcome the OIC -- the Organization of Islamic Conference involvement -- more than two weeks ago. Dick Holbrooke, two weeks ago yesterday, had a meeting with the OIC Contact Group in Geneva. We welcomed them to the meeting in Paris, the day before the meeting in Geneva, a week and a half ago.

We have had bilateral discussions with Malaysia, Turkey, and with Bangladesh and a number of other countries in this group, and we will continue that. The OIC's involvement -- Muslim countries involvements - - is a very important part of this because Muslim countries are doing some of the peacekeeping through the United Nations.

Q Does the U.S. Administration find credible reports that Mladic is suddenly incapacitated in a hospital in Belgrade?

MR. BURNS: It's hard to say. We've seen the same reports that he's suffering from an ailment and is in a hospital. Who knows? We don't have any independent way at this point, at least, to verify that.

Q Holbrooke said nothing about it when he was --

MR. BURNS: He didn't mention anything to me. I didn't actually ask him that question. He didn't mention it to me.

Q I'm curious. If, as you say, there are intensive negotiations going on and things are moving in the right direction, why is Holbrooke coming back tomorrow?

MR. BURNS: Anybody who was in three capitals yesterday, has probably logged tens of thousands of miles in the last three weeks, deserves a break. That's not the primary reason for coming back. He is completing the second round of our discussions.

The first round, of course, was late August/early September. The second began last week. I think with all of the conversations he's had, it's time to come back and to have some discussions here in Washington about how we now get to the next stage, which we hope ultimately will be a peace conference. What would the shape and structure of that be? Who would come? What will be the central issues that we need to work on before the peace conference can be convened? That kind of thing.

It doesn't mean the negotiations will stop. We'll continue to have people in the field. We'll continue to have our ambassadors in each of these capitals working actively. But I think it's time for him to come back and to assess where we are and where we have to go with Secretary Christopher and with President Clinton.

Dick had about an hour long discussion this morning on the phone with Secretary Christopher -- early this morning. They agreed that was the best course of action.

I would also say, he deserves a little bit of R&R -- maybe even 24 hours of R&R given the amazing pace that he has kept over the last three weeks. The physical task has been in many ways equally daunting as the intellectual one for his shuttle diplomacy.

Q Is he leaving anybody behind -- General Clark or anybody like that?

MR. BURNS: I just don't have anything for you on that right now. That may be an option for him, but I have nothing to announce.

Q (Inaudible) shape of the table that they're going to sit at in these peace negotiations. You must know the city in which that table sits?

MR. BURNS: No, the shape of the table was defined at Geneva when they met at a round table. We know who was around the table. We know what the principles were that they agreed to for any eventual peace conference.

Where a conference is held is up to the Contact Group, which I know will be the sponsor of any conference, and to the parties. That has not been settled yet.

Q Nick, were any of the key Bosnian Serb leaders in any of the meetings between Milosevic and Holbrooke in Belgrade Saturday or yesterday or this morning?

MR. BURNS: I'm not aware that they were. I'm pretty sure that the two people most interesting to you were not. One of them is reported to be in the hospital. I don't believe there are others in the room. It doesn't preclude the possibility that in the future they or others may be in the room. We've already said that's important to do from time to time.

Q In addition to the removal of the heavy weapons, there are several other requirements in the unilateral undertaking that the Bosnian Serbs made to the world. Have all those requirements been honored? Specifically, have there been any attacks or has there been an firing on U.N. positions or safe areas?

MR. BURNS: There were several other aspects of this agreement -- you're right -- were and are important. Number one, that a cease-fire be adhered to in and around Sarajevo. We believe that for the most part -- I can't say in all respects -- that has been adhered to.

Number two: That two land routes -- specific roads -- would be opened up into Sarajevo. Both have been opened.

Number three: The airport would be open to traffic and that has also occurred. There were test flights on Friday and Saturday into Sarajevo. Dick Holbrooke's plane went into Sarajevo yesterday. I think there will be another flight tomorrow.

Two land convoys reached Sarajevo with a total of 363 metric tons of civilian goods, and three more UNHCR convoys are en route to Sarajevo.

The Mt. Igman road has been opened up. It has not been shelled. It has not been sniped at by individual snipers which was the case over the last eight to ten months. There is a very, very rich flow of traffic -- private civilian traffic -- over the Mt. Igman road into Sarajevo.

Gas prices have fallen. Food prices have fallen as a result of this influx of imports of food and gas and other materials into Sarajevo -- all good.

In addition to that, the key provision is the one that deals with heavy weapons. I would just like to correct some of the newspaper accounts this morning which say that NATO, in effect, relaxed the agreement, or put aside the agreement and allowed the bombing pause to continue.

The agreement called for an assessment at 72 hours and an assessment of 144 hours. Yesterday's assessment indicated that they have met the test of substantial withdrawal. Wednesday's assessment is complete withdrawal of heavy weapons at or above 82 millimeters.

Q Is it true that in the last couple of days there were missiles fired, which missed, at NATO aircraft?

MR. BURNS: There were reports on Saturday that there were missiles fired around Gorazde. I think the appropriate complaints have been directed to the appropriate people. I don't have any details on those incidents.

Q Are those the only incidents of that sort?

MR. BURNS: Of that sort that I've heard of over the weekend, yes.

Q Nick, you said on Friday that you all were concerned about other kinds of things getting in besides humanitarian goods -- things like furniture -- and that that was being negotiated with the Bosnian Serbs so that they would not block the shipments coming in. Has that been accomplished?

MR. BURNS: Yes. There were two concerns with the agreement on Friday and Saturday. One was the heavy weapons, the type of heavy weapons that had to be withdrawn. That has been resolved.

The second was -- I believe the agreement calls for the transportation of humanitarian goods which at least some Bosnian Serbs were reading to be food and medicine. We had a much broader definition: household supplies, civilian goods, and so forth. We believe that that is what is actually getting in now and is not being stopped by the Bosnian Serbs nor should it be stopped by the Bosnian Serbs.

[...]

(Press briefing concluded at 2:16 p.m.)

END