U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE 95/09/29 DAILY PRESS BRIEFING

From: [email protected] (Dimitrios Hristu)

U.S. State Department Directory

Subject: U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE 95/09/29 DAILY PRESS BRIEFING

OFFICE OF THE SPOKESMAN

[...]

FORMER YUGOSLAVIA

Assistant Secretary Holbrooke's Mtg. w/Izetbegovic,

  Travel to Zagreb, Belgrade, Sofia, Sarajevo ............13-17

--Continuance of Peace Process; Ceasefire Issue; Peace

Contact Mtgs. in Rome, Moscow Expected ...................14

Progress on Cessation of Hostilities .....................19

[...]

[...]

Q Dick Holbrooke had a six-hour meeting today with President Izetbegovic and his advisers. Dick said that the meeting was most productive -- in fact, one of the most productive meetings that he has had with the Bosnian Government in some time.

They discussed specifically the very great hope that the United States has that there might be a cease-fire throughout Bosnia- Herzegovina. They discussed the question of the Map and other territorial issues that will be at the center of a peace conference.

They discussed constitutional principles and specifically some of the issues that flow out of the agreement that was reached on Tuesday in New York. They discussed United Nations implementation of the Sarajevo agreement of earlier in September and specifically on that the very strong hope that the United States has that more roads may be opened tomorrow to civilian traffic into Sarajevo.

I understand that some members of Dick's delegation are now meeting with United Nations officials to try to ensure that in fact that will happen.

Dick is going to be going to Zagreb and Belgrade over the weekend, Saturday and Sunday, for talks with President Tudjman and President Milosevic. On Sunday evening he will travel to Sofia, to Bulgaria, for discussions with the Bulgarian Government. That will extend it to Monday morning.

On Monday, he will return to Sarajevo for further discussions with the Bosnian Government. He has not made any specific travel plans beyond Monday, but he is on a shuttle mission, so I wouldn't be surprised to see him stay in the region.

He is there, and he has set out on this trip to pursue the following issues and the following objectives. We want to continue the U.S.-led initiative for peace. We had a very positive development this week, I think thanks in part to the intervention of the United States at several points on Sunday, Monday and Tuesday morning, led by Secretary Christopher and Dick Holbrooke.

There is a momentum for peace. There is in sight at some point in the future the convening of an international peace conference on Bosnia. Specifically in order to drive towards that peace conference, Dick Holbrooke will be pursuing the issue of cease-fire -- the issue that Secretary Christopher believes very strongly should be entertained seriously by all the parties.

Second, the territorial questions that will lie at the heart of the peace conference, specifically 51/49, and what impact the recent territorial changes have had on the thinking of the parties to the conflict.

Third, the situation around Gorazde, whether or not it will be possible -- we hope it will -- to open a secure road into Gorazde. I understand that just a couple of days ago a U.N. convoy made it into Gorazde with 100 metric tons of food. That was the first convoy into Gorazde since August 23. So the supply of Gorazde for the winter is a very important question.

Last and perhaps most importantly, in all of these discussions Dick Holbrooke will be focusing on the central question: What will be the dimensions and parameters of a peace conference. What will be the agenda of a peace conference, and how can we work in the next couple of weeks and perhaps beyond that to establish a firm foundation for a conference so that it will have a prospect of success once it is convened. These are all very important issues.

As he finishes, the next couple of days, of shuttling among these capitals, he will keep the Contact Group closely informed of what he is hearing and what he is thinking. I would expect that there will be a Contact Group meeting in Rome before too long; and, as you know, we would hope very much that some session might be arranged as well in Moscow. Those are both firmly in our view as part of our attempt to keep the Contact Group together and focused on this imperative of a peace conference.

We've gone through a lot of different permutations on this issue over the last month. This is a very important stage. We now have an agreement on constitutional principles. In fact, we have an expanded agreement on that. We have an agreement on the territorial basis of a peace conference, but we don't have an agenda. We don't have any definite parameters. We don't have a commitment to a cease-fire, which is desirable but not necessary, before a peace conference unfolds. So we've got to make more progress.

Rather than let the situation sit for a week or two, the Secretary thought that Dick ought to go out and take advantage of the progress we made this week to try to make more.

Q Diplomats are saying that you're trying to pull together a peace conference in the next few weeks. Is that the kind of urgency that you're feeling?

MR. BURNS: There's a real sense of urgency in our government -- I think from the President and Secretary Christopher on down -- to move fast to give this peace process and infusion of American energy and creativity, which is being supplied, I think, in spades by our leadership.

There is not a good sense right now tactically as to when we're going to be in a position to suggest to the parties that a peace conference should be set and should convene. We'd rather do it sooner than later, but in the Balkans it's always very difficult to predict progress.

I would just remind you of the difficulty that we had on Sunday, Monday and Tuesday when both Secretary Christopher and Dick Holbrooke were on the phone at unusual hours with Sarajevo and Belgrade and Zagreb to try to put back together what we thought we had established.

Frankly, it was harder than we thought to get the agreement on the expanded constitutional principles, and so that leads us to believe that there's hard sledding ahead, and Dick, I think, in his initial public comments this morning in effect said that.

Q Why did he think it was one of the most productive meetings he's had in some time with Izetbegovic?

MR. BURNS: Because he felt that the quality of the discussion on these specific issues that I mentioned -- on the constitutional principles, on the Map, on cease-fire, and on U.N. implementation -- was very good. The spirit of cooperation was good. I think he sensed a willingness to move forward on the part of the Bosnian Government.

But now, of course, he's got to go onto Belgrade and Zagreb, and then back to Sarajevo. We don't want to declare a victory on the basis of this. I just wanted to note that he felt it was a most positive and productive meeting.

Q On what subjects did he sense new flexibility on the part of the Muslims that caused him to think it was more productive than previous meetings?

MR. BURNS: Let me just, David, rest on the fact that he says "productive" and specifically on the issues that I mentioned. What I cannot do, obviously, is go into a level of detail that would impair his ability to negotiate privately.

Q You want all of us to go out there and write about the most productive meeting since whenever. I had the same question as David did, and you're not answering them, but you did mention three issues. You got a little closer to explaining what was so productive.

What was productive about the 51/49 split? Did they agree to take less?

MR. BURNS: We have an agreement here that we're not going to get into the specifics of any of these issues as we have not over the past month.

Q I understand. But when you were able to use -- a very recent and big example -- when you were able to get the Bosnian Serbs or to get Milosevic to say the siege would be lifted, the guns would be pulled back, you were delighted -- the State Department was delighted -- to announce it and for good reason, because it's impetus to the other parties.

If you had gotten something out of Izetbegovic, I think State would want to publicize it as a means of moving the other parties. It isn't like we're intruding. State does make announcements when one of the parties or another makes a major concession.

Did the Bosnian Government make a major concession that you could tell us about?

MR. BURNS: They did not make a major concession that I can tell you about.

Q The part about the discussion is a nice thing, but --

MR. BURNS: If we had made the type of progress today that have been made in the past, if a fundamentally important step were taken, then we would announce it today. We're talking about the quality of the discussion.

The quality of the discussion last weekend was at times difficult and very challenging. It took us many, many more hours to get to Tuesday afternoon than we had suspected it would -- as recently as Sunday morning.

The quality of discussion today was quite good. We wanted to note that publicly. It's a good start to his mission but there was no significant step taken today that can be announced as tangible, concrete progress.

Q There's no specific step taken that you can announce, or there was no specific step taken? (Laughter) I hate to keep harping on it. You're moving awfully -- As Margaret Tutweiler used to say, "cute by half."

Q Go ahead, Sid, harp on it.

MR. BURNS: Margaret used to say that?

Q That's what she used to say.

MR. BURNS: I meant to say exactly what I said. I really can't interpret it any better. Our position is so well known on this one. I can't really help you out on this one.

Q The Senate is now debating the State, Commerce, Justice appropriations bill. We've heard at length from Department officials about how these budget numbers would impair, in the Administration's belief, its ability to conduct foreign policy.

Why should ordinary Americans care about this? If an American travels abroad, will their services be affected in some way? Could you give us some specific examples as to why a gentleman in Iowa should give a damn?

MR. BURNS: I'd be glad to. This is the kind of question where I can give concrete examples. (Laughter) You have to go? You don't want to hear the answer?

Q This is going to be along answer.

MR. BURNS: This is a very important issue, Barry. I'm glad that David has asked this question. The fact is that one of the fundamental responsibilities of American embassies and consulates is to serve the American public and in countless ways.

Last year, our embassies and consulates performed 1.7 million services for American citizens. By that I mean, everything from birth to death: Issuing birth certificates; issuing death certificates; rescuing Americans who are in trouble, as the four Americans were who survived the balloon incidents in Belarus a couple of days ago; helping American mothers who have child custody problems; helping Americans who are incarcerated; advising them of their legal rights when they're incarcerated, when their imprisoned in foreign countries; helping to get them legal assistance.

A lot of American citizens who are tourists, in places like Bordeaux, in Florence, find themselves in trouble, find themselves ill or in prison because they didn't understand the legal system or they came crosswise with the system, and the only people they can turn to for help are American diplomats. So it's critically important to the average American -- and millions of Americans travel overseas every year -- that they have Americans who can help them when they get into trouble. It happens all the time. I can even go on if you'd like.

Q I'm sure you could. But this is general discussion. The whole government's budget is being cut. Why is this more important than something else?

MR. BURNS: First of all, the whole government's budget is not being cut. Some Cabinet agencies are receiving significant increases in their budget beyond what they asked for -- most notably the Pentagon.

The State Department budget is different. We don't have tanks and planes. We don't have hardware that can be cut. We have people; the people who help American citizens overseas. If 23 percent of our budget is going to be cut, as is threatened by Senator Gramm, then we have to cut into people. We have to cut into our ability to put people in places like Bordeaux and Florence and other major cities where Americans travel. That will limit the ability of the United States Government to help people overseas, and we don't want to do that. Because since the beginning of the country, since the time we first had diplomatic missions overseas, the fundamental purpose of embassies is to serve American citizens when they're in trouble as well as relating to foreign governments. That's a service and a responsibility that the State Department takes very, very seriously.

Q Nick, both you and the Secretary have emphasized the State Department part of this overseas spending. Could the arms control agency or the aid agency survive? By our reckoning, it's a 21 percent cut. Not to quibble -- 21, 23. Should the Senate, which has taken it up already today, but may not finish today, do this, would those two agencies be able to survive?

MR. BURNS: State Department, AID, ACDA, and USIA would all suffer from budget cuts. All of them have very important responsibilities that they carry out, and we think that all of them should be able to continue those operations.

Bill.

Q Nick, Secretary of Defense Perry, on Monday, stated that continued hostilities in Bosnia would erode -- it was a danger to the peace process there. Can you report progress on putting the pressure by all sides -- Russia, U.S., NATO, the U.N. -- to bring about this cessation of hostilities?

MR. BURNS: There's been very little progress towards the cessation of hostilities. In fact, I think, after a lull last week, the fighting seems to have picked up over the last couple of days, specifically, in Western and Central Bosnia. I can't report any progress on that, but I think you know our position, and that is that the fighting should stop and that the parties should turn towards peace.

Q Does the State Department agree with Secretary Perry's assessment that hostilities erode the process or the prospects?

MR. BURNS: They certainly have a direct effect on the political process -- a directly negative effect in most cases. That's one of the reasons why we think that the fighting should stop. It should also stop because none of these countries is going to be able to achieve a military solution to this conflict. They've been unable to do that for four years. They will not succeed now. Sooner or later they've got to turn towards negotiations.

[...]

(Press briefing concluded at 1:46 p.m.)

END