|
|
SEC. ALBRIGHT: I just wanted -- I know it's a little chaotic, but
I wanted to have a chance to talk with all of you, and especially those
who have been traveling with me.
Let me say that today's agreement by the G-8 foreign ministers on the
text of a U.N. resolution related to the crisis in Kosovo is a major
step towards bringing this confrontation to an end on acceptable terms.
I would like to thank all my colleague foreign ministers for the hard
work that went into this, and especially the Russian foreign minister
for the partnership that he made so clear in seeking this peaceful resolution.
And I think those of you that heard him in this press conference understand
how Russia has also worked in order to bring this crisis to an end.
The resolution is fully consistent with the terms of the Chernomyrdin-Ahtisaari
agreement and with the conditions established by NATO and the international
community. The major elements include a requirement that all Serb forces
leave; that an international security presence be deployed with substantial
NATO participation and a unified command. The establishment of an international
civilian authority is also called for to assist the Kosovars as they
prepare for democratic self-government.
It is our understanding that the resolution will be cosponsored by
all G-8 members who serve on the Security Council, and the others who
are not on the Security Council -- such as Japan has already indicated
that they would cosponsor -- we will move quickly to gain support from
other Council members and look for action in New York on the resolution
as soon as possible.
At the same time, it is essential that negotiations for a military
technical agreement resume. The regime in Belgrade should stop shilly-shallying
around. In case that's hard to translate, stalling. It should proceed
to implement the principles incorporated in this draft resolution and
approved by the Serb parliament last week. Each day of denial leads
only to another day's destruction and another day of delay in preparing
for the return of refugees and displaced to their homes.
NATO is interested in deeds, not words. We must see a demonstrable and
verifiable start towards the rapid withdrawal of all Serb forces. Until
that happens, we intend to keep both the military and diplomatic pressure
on and at the same time we are taking a longer view. Tomorrow, the G-8
will resume its meetings, including a discussion of a strategy for fully
integrating southeast Europe into the continent's democratic mainstream.
We want to make sure that this confrontation does not serve simply as
the prelude to another. We want to end this conflict and establish a
new foundation for a lasting peace.
The bottom line in assessing the last 24 hours here is that we got what
we came for and I congratulate all of my G-8 colleagues and join them
in the hope that our deliberations have, in fact, contributed to the
cause of peace and justice in Kosovo
I'd be glad to take your questions.
Barry?
REPORTER: Not to quibble, but the "NATO at its core," NATO in charge,
that isn't in the body of the resolution; it's an annex? And if that's
true, legally speaking, does an annex have as much force? Are you comfortable
with that as you would be if it were in the resolution itself?
SEC. ALBRIGHT: Yes. It was decided -- we went through a lot of different
discussions about how to include the G-8 principles as well as the Chernomyrdin-Ahtisaari
document in a way that fit in with UN -- U-N-ese -- and decided that
the best thing to do was to have appendices to the resolution, and they
have the same force as the resolution itself.
REPORTER: Yeah. Could you tell us what the other appendix is about?
SEC. ALBRIGHT: One appendix is the G-8 principles, and the other is
the Chernomyrdin-Ahtisaari document.
MR. RUBIN: -- in the back --
REPORTER: Madame Secretary, compared to what you said with what Mr.
Ivanov said, it seems like you are saying two different things. Ivanov
seems to be suggesting that things are still up in the air until they
get to the UN Can you explain that, what seems to me to be a discrepancy
between what you are both saying about what the security force will
be like on the ground?
SEC. ALBRIGHT: I think, as a statement of fact, we have already made
-- if you look at the numbers of the security force and the fact that
NATO will have the largest component of it, it -- obviously, there will
be a NATO commander. But what is still in discussion is who else will
be a part of it and how those forces will be related to the "NATO
at the core." But it does say -- (confers with staff) -- it makes
quite clear in the appendix, that it has a unified-command-and- control
part of it; and, therefore, whatever other forces come in will then
be integrated with that.
REPORTER: Madame Secretary, but in the final analysis, it is true then
that the resolution will not be adopted until after there is a bombing
pause?
SEC. ALBRIGHT: As it has worked out -- I think that we have worked very
hard on the sequencing of it, which is that the resolution is here presented
in what I would imagine as its final form. I have to say that, as a
former permanent representative at the UN, it doesn't happen very often
that you get a document that has been drafted by foreign ministers.
So chances are that it will be adopted as it stands.
And at the same time, the military-technical agreement has to go forward.
And then, as a part of that, there has to be the beginning of the withdrawal.
It has to be verifiable, there will be a pause, and then there will
be the final adoption. As you know, in New York it will go into "blue"
so that it will be in its permanent form, and then it will be voted
on. But all of this, we talked about at great length and tried to figure
out simultaneity in all its languages.
REPORTER: Madame Secretary, has anyone yet been in touch with the Chinese about
this? And if not, who will it be? Will it be President Ahtisaari who
is there now? Does he have a copy of this? And what is the timetable
for informing the Chinese and making sure they won't oppose this in
the Security Council?
SEC. ALBRIGHT: President Ahtisaari is in China, and he has obviously
been in touch. Chancellor Schroeder has been in touch with the Chinese
previously, and it is my understanding that others have been in touch
with the Chinese and we will have been, also, and meetings have begun
in an informal way in New York already.
REPORTER: Two questions, Madame Secretary; one on the sequencing. How much --
what's the minimum amount of time that you envision elapsing between
the first sign of Serb withdrawal and a bombing pause? The second question,
I know that the Russian foreign minister said that the participation
of Russian troops would be decided at a later time. Did he indicate
to you informally in any way of Russia's willingness to provide troops
and in what numbers?
SEC. ALBRIGHT: First of all, I don't want to give you a minimum time,
because this is something that will be based on a military assessment
when they see a verifiable number of the Serb forces departing. And
I think all of us would obviously like to have this happen as soon as
possible, but I'm not going to give you a minimum amount of time.
I think it is, on the second question, there have been a number of discussions
over the last weeks -- when Mr. Talbott has been in Moscow, in my discussions
on the phone with Foreign Minister Ivanov, including here, general discussions
about how -- whether and how Russian forces would be a part of this.
But these are, at this stage, general discussions.
REPORTER: Madame Secretary, one of the issues apparently with Russia was the
question of how to refer to the tribunal. Can you give us some sense
of what the discussion was that you had?
And how do you interpret the meaning of the language you've adopted?
Does it give the tribunal freedom to do everything that you know and
that it says it has to do?
SEC. ALBRIGHT: We feel very comfortable with the way that the War Crimes
Tribunal was mentioned and, in fact, have it in -- there was some discussion
-- one of the other parts, as you know, about UN resolutions is the
question is what is the first word? And there was some thought that
it would be less strong than what it ended up, and it ends up "demands".
So, as you know, that's as strong as it gets, and it demands full cooperation
by all concerned. And I think that -- and it allows the tribunal to
do its work.
REPORTER: Madame Secretary, I know you've been focusing on events here, but
do you know if Milosevic has given the order to his commanders in Kosovo
to withdraw?
SEC. ALBRIGHT: I do not know the answer to that. We would expect him
to do that as quickly as possible. And I would think that the message
from here, that you have the G-8 foreign ministers have agreed that
this should happen and a sequence has been worked out, unless he is
totally tone deaf, he should be getting the message that it is time
to withdraw.
MR. RUBIN: We have time for two more questions. Right in here, and then
here.
REPORTER: Madame Secretary, a philosophical as well as a diplomatic
question. The UN was bypassed when this conflict began, for obvious
reasons. How important is it now that the UN will be ensuring or will
be giving its imprimatur to the peace? And I know you don't like historical
questions and you've been very busy on the day to day, but have you
taken any lessons, early ones, from the way this conflict started, the
way it's been waged, and now in the way in which it appears to be ending?
SEC. ALBRIGHT: Well, first of all, let me say that the UN is going to
be very much a part of this phase, and a great deal of this resolution
is drafted in such a way that it makes clear that the UN is -- first
of all, this is going to be passed as a UN resolution, but then in terms
of their responsibility for the civilian implementation. Just for the
record, I did call the secretary-general whatever -- about an hour ago
-- to tell him that we had gotten this far on it, and he was very pleased,
and we look forward to cooperation.
I don't want to get overly professorial, because otherwise we'll be
here 50 minutes, on the lessons. But what I find very interesting in
this, and I, clearly, in my own way will be drawing this together, is
that here we are working, first of all, the 19 democracies of NATO,
and that in itself has been a very exciting way of watching democracies
operate, some of them that have divided governments, coalition governments,
and all of them very conscious of their responsibilities as elected
officials, especially the parliamentary democracies.
I have also been very intrigued -- as some of you know, I have studied
a lot about how various European organizations work together and how
international organizations work together, and you can see as a part
of this that practically everybody has been heard from; that various
organizations have fulfilled some of their responsibilities already,
and some of them are going to be called upon to cooperate with each
other as we go into the implementation phase.
I have also been very pleased in watching how countries have in fact
worked together. And in that, I would like to specifically note the
role that Russia has played. Despite the fact that clearly we have had
differences over a number of issues, I think that the partnership exhibited
here and the work done by Foreign Minister Ivanov and, clearly, the
work previously done by Mr. Chernomyrdin with President Ahtisaari is
very important. So it's a combination of organizations and country partnerships,
and then individuals doing their part.
MR. RUBIN: Last -- quick question. Yes?
REPORTER: Robert -- from NRC from the Netherlands. Madame Secretary,
could you explain what is the exact purpose of making the Ahtisaari
peace plan an annex to the resolution? Is it to accommodate the Russians?
SEC. ALBRIGHT: No, I think that it was to make clear -- first of all,
there were a great many details in that agreement that were germane
to what we were doing, and there was some thought about whether you
put all of this within the resolution. A lot of it is not written in
UN language. And it seemed like the simplest thing to do is to make
these two documents annexes. I misspoke before; they're not appendices,
they're annexes.
MR. RUBIN: Thank you very much.
|
|
