|
|
 |
|
 |
 |
| THE EUROPEAN ANGLE | |
 April 21, 1999 
|
||
|
|
European journalists discuss the war in Kosovo and what may lie ahead for the upcoming NATO summit.
|
|
MARGARET WARNER: On the eve of the NATO summit here in Washington, we're joined by four leading journalists from allied countries in Europe. Hugo Young is a columnist for the Guardian newspaper in Britain. His newest book on Britain's relationship with Europe, "This Blessed Plot," will be issued soon in the United States. Christine Ockrent is a veteran TV anchor and editor and is now a commentator with France 3 Television. Josef Joffe is a columnist and editorial page editor for the German newspaper Suddeutsche Zeitung. His work often appears in American publications. And Lucio Caracciolo is editor in chief of Limes, an Italian bimonthly political review. Welcome all. |
|||||||||||||||||||
| Does the commitment remain? | ||||||||||||||||||||
|
MARGARET WARNER: Josef Joffe, does the commitment of the German government and of German public opinion remain as strongly behind this NATO bombing campaign as it was when we spoke with you a couple of weeks ago?
MARGARET WARNER: Do you see the same thing, Miss Ockrent, in France?
MARGARET WARNER: Hugo Young, what about in Britain, are you beginning to see the growing doubts expressed that we're even seeing in this country, at least in editorial pages and so on? Are you seeing the same thing? HUGO YOUNG: No, I don't think so. I think our situation is very like the French situation. Today there has been a development, though, which is that Tony Blair has said in stronger terms and clearer terms than ever before that ground troops -- I mean, he's put himself behind the ground troops position by saying that we cannot go in unless Serb troops are degraded. Now, this is quite different from saying "We aren't going to go in." And I see the British leader, therefore, trying to push things forward in anticipation of his meeting President Clinton. And so far, British opinion with a brief flutter last week after the tragedy of the killing of Kosovo refugees, British opinion is still pretty strongly behind him. But, you know, you can't be sure how long it's going to last.
HUGO YOUNG: One of the consequences of the way this has worked out,
ironically, is that really, because the humanitarian disaster is so
acute and the picture so appalling and the air war apparently so ineffective
in doing anything MARGARET WARNER: Mr. Caracciolo, are you seeing the same thing in Italy, growing doubts about the effectiveness of the air campaign alone? LUCIO CARACCIOLO: You know, here in Italy, most of the Italian people
are in favor of air strikes, even if we don't see clearly what sort
of strategy the alliance has. And this is a particular, important problem
from our perspective since we are on the front line. We have already
thousands of |
|
|||||||||||||||||||
| Is another step needed? | ||||||||||||||||||||
|
MARGARET WARNER: Josef Joffe, go back to this point about where your government is on the effectiveness of the air campaign alone and whether that alone can do the job, can realize NATO's goals as they set them forth. JOSEF JOFFE: Well, you know, there's an old American adage, "Where you stand depends on where you sit." Since this government wants to avoid like the plague a ground engagement, they're not, unlike these other countries we've heard from, they're not publicly questioning the effectiveness of the ground campaign -- I'm sorry, of the air campaign -- but insist that we must break his back, we must break his will. His will must be broken, and every -- all of this in order to avoid having to take the next step, which this government will try to avoid as long as it can. MARGARET WARNER: But is the same thing happening JOSEF JOFFE: No, I think -- I think this may be the most interesting contrast between -- between this country, Germany, and the others we've heard from. There is -- the doubts that we have, that are being stressed here do not lead logically, compellingly to a ground campaign. The doubts are more about strategic aims; is this working; should, in fact, NATO destroy a country in order to save other souls. The difference between the Germans and the French and the Brits and maybe the Italians is no ground troops. But in the end, if others go in, I don't think the Germans will stay behind. |
 |
|||||||||||||||||||
| Assessing NATO's credibility. | ||||||||||||||||||||
| MARGARET WARNER: Miss Ockrent, tell me, French opinion on another point
that keeps being raised here in the states, which is that NATO credibility
is at stake in this operation. Is that of -- is that considered of paramount
or great significance in France?
CHRISTINE OCKRENT: It certainly is. But what is NATO? NATO is an alliance
of democracies. And I think the consensus in this country is that we
just cannot afford to lose. And this is very much as President Chirac
repeated again tonight on television -- it's very much the battle of
democracy against tyranny and barbarian rule. And I think there is a
dimension which I find very much underplayed in MARGARET WARNER: Mr. Caracciolo, do you see it that way? LUCIO CARACCIOLO: I think that the problem is that we don't have any
sort of European pillar in NATO. And this is a major problem. And this
can trouble transatlantic relations in the near future, because I think
that if we don't take seriously our defense responsibilities, particularly
as far as, for example, our so-called "near abroad" is concerned,
we will have, I think, a major crisis in the alliance. In any case,
my opinion is that after this crisis -- I hope this crisis won't last
a month -- we will have a completely different MARGARET WARNER: Mr. Young, go back to the issue of the relation -- what this war is doing and saying about the relationship between Europe and the US and NATO, in NATO. HUGO YOUNG: Well, I think it's taking a large leap forward, a debate, an argument, which was beginning in earnest in the autumn, which was moved forward when the British prime minister Tony Blair, along with the French, got together to try and really build a proper European defense entity. It's been put to the test much more quickly than they wanted. It's a proposition which Washington's always been rather ambivalent about. I think that among other things that are being tested by all that is going on is whether the -- is whether the European defense identity really can be made into something. I think that the Washington sort of commitment to this -- Washington's anxiety about it is partly going to resolve itself according to how the Kosovo crisis evolves and how the Europeans in particular deal with it. I should just make one point about what Lucio was saying. In a sense, it's in none of our interests to fight this war. I mean, one of the oddities -- one of the uniquenesses perhaps about it is that people - is that Tony Blair and others have couched it in a sort of moral context, humanitarian context. The actual specific national interest of the individual countries isn't there. But the national interests or the international interests of the regions of Europe is totally there. MARGARET WARNER: Mr. Joffe, we're almost out of time, but I'd like to get your comment, too, on this relationship between Europe and NATO. And specifically, do you think after this, the Europeans are going to be willing, say, to spend more for defense, as the United States does? JOSEF JOFFE: Two quick points. On the national interest, MARGARET WARNER: All right. Well, thank you all four very much. |
 |
|||||||||||||||||||
| |||||
 | |||||
| |||||
|
|
| |||
| |||||
| |||||
| Support the kind of journalism done by the NewsHour...Become a member of your local PBS station. | |||||
JOSEF
JOFFE: The answer is yes, which is really quite amazing considering
we are talking about a left-wing plus green government, parties in other
words which used to spend -- which spent the last 40 years fighting
NATO, fighting everything they're now doing themselves. And the second
miraculous thing is that the support seems to be holding. Public opinion
says that a solid majority is behind the action of the government, while
of course just as solid majority is against ground troops. 
CHRISTINE
OCKRENT: Yes, indeed, Margaret. There is a vast majority of the French
who support intervention. But it's shrinking, as indeed there is growing
doubt as to the efficiency of the strategy of NATO. And paradoxically,
the more doubt there is about this strategy, the more support is actually
expressed for ground intervention. 
about
that, that I think that the public opinion is ready for ground troops
to go in, although, of course, the preparations for that need to be
much greater that they have yet been, including the preparation of public
opinion for casualties. But I think as things stand, the televised effects
of what is going on in Kosovo have bitten pretty deep into British public
opinion. 
soldiers
in the Balkans. We have Italian volunteers who are trying to rescue
the Kosovar people. But we don't know what are the final aims of this
operation, what are the strategic goals. And this, I think, that in
a couple of weeks will be a major problem, even in terms of consensus,
because people want to know what for we are fighting. 
in
Germany that Christine Ockrent said was happening in France, which is
that as the public or perhaps the political elites look at the air campaign,
there's a concern, maybe the government isn't expressing it yet, but
that another step may be needed?
your
American media, if you allow me to say so overtly. This is very much
a European war, and not only an American one. And it's the first time
that the European Union, as such, has shown indeed a very strong political
consensus-- Britain, France, Germany, Italy, and all the other countries,
except perhaps for Greece. But still, Greece is still with us. And indeed
there's a strong European political will that indeed this has to be
done. And there's growing discussion, at least in this part on the continent,
as to whether or not the European Union, as such, which now has for
most of us common currency, should have more of a political will and
should indeed have its own military means within NATO, of course. But
I think this war could paradoxically be very much a step forward for
the strength of the European Union as such.
NATO
because, for example, as far as Italy is regarded, we are going -- we
are actually fighting a war which is not in line with our national interests.
We are not interested in waging war in the Balkans. We are waging this
war because of the alliance, just for the sake of it, not because we
have specific interest in the area. And we can fight a war, such a war,
once but not twice, not use our soldiers against our national interests.
it's
a very important idea. I think we are fighting this war precisely because
it's not in the national interest. The left and the greens and peace
camp is only going along because we are not fighting for oil or strategic
advantage, but for a moral purpose. So that's a very important thing
to understand about this. About the European component, I mean, I'm
a bit more skeptical than my colleagues, because I'm looking at the
numbers and the numbers tell me most of the planes that are flying are
American, most of the bombs that are being thrown are American, all
the Cruise missiles, all the intelligence, the naval power behind it.
So if the Europeans ever get their wills together, they will still have
to go a long way in finding the means to fight that kind of war. The
Europeans are not equipped to fight even that small war by themselves.
