|
|
 |
|
 |
 |
| MILOSEVIC INDICTED | |
 May 27, 1999 
|
||
|
|
The International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia has indicted Yugoslav President Slobodan Milosevic and four others for crimes against humanity. Following a sample of international reaction, Margaret Warner and guests discuss the indictment and how it will affect the Kosovo peace process.
|
|
TOM BEARDEN: The Yugoslavian government's reaction was swift and uncompromising. Yugoslavia's chief envoy to the United Nations, Branko Brankovic, categorically rejected the legitimacy of the war crimes tribunal.
TOM BEARDEN: In Brussels, NATO Spokesman Jamie Shea welcomed the indictment, but said it would have no impact on NATO's conduct of the war or its conditions for ending it.
TOM BEARDEN: In London, British Foreign Secretary Robin Cook said NATO was determined to bring Milosevic to justice, but that lines of communication had to be kept open while he was in power.
TOM BEARDEN: The Russian government called the indictment a politically motivated obstacle to peace.
TOM BEARDEN: Russia's Balkan Envoy, Viktor Chernomyrdin, plans to continue his diplomatic efforts despite the indictment. He will fly to Belgrade Friday to meet with Milosevic. |
 |
|||||||||||||||||
| Assessing the indictment. | |||||||||||||||||||
|
JIM LEHRER: Margaret Warner takes it from there.
MARGARET WARNER: And when you say it will make him less likely to put himself out of business, why? LAWRENCE EAGLEBURGER: Because he now sees that if he goes out of business and leaves Serbia -- MARGARET WARNER: By out of business we, we mean -- LAWRENCE EAGLEBURGER: He no longer runs Serbia and then he tries to leave the country at any point, he's going to end up in the poky. We all understand that, and he certainly understands it. So, I think it probably makes it more difficult to arrive at an agreement, also because some of those around Milosevic have been indicted as well. So there's a vested interest now in finding some way to keep themselves in power, which I think they all intended to do anyway. So the consequences in the short term probably don't help the process. In the long term, it's the right thing to do. MARGARET WARNER: Ambassador Zimmermann, what do you see as the impact on ending this Kosovo conflict?
MARGARET WARNER: Nina Bang-Jensen, address the question that Jim asked Sandy Berger, which is how do you negotiate or make peace with an indicted war criminal? That is, as a matter of international law, is Milosevic a valid person to make an agreement with? |
 |
||||||||||||||||||
| Negotiating with a war criminal. | |||||||||||||||||||
|
MARGARET WARNER: But, I mean, when you say he's not the person to deal with, somebody has to be dealt with. What's the alternative? NINA BANG-JENSEN: Somebody has to be at the table, and I would like Slobodan Milosevic not to be at that table. We should be sending signals to people in the government that we're prepared to negotiate with other people. We certainly should accept that he's prepared to offer the NATO objectives up or if he's prepared to surrender, but beyond that, we should not compromise at anything lower than those objectives. We've negotiated with him for many years to no result.
LAWRENCE EAGLEBURGER: No. Not as long as he's in power. And what the discussion here tonight shows is how this whole mess, which is called our bombing of Serbia, has become so complicated that there are no easy answers to anything. Do we negotiate with him, don't we negotiate with him? Ambassador Zimmermann says we have to win the war first. I agree with that, but I don't see any evidence that we intend to win it any way other than to continue to bomb, and as that goes on, make ourselves look to the rest of the world as the big bully on the block. This is an unholy mess in every regard -- and now having indicted Milosevic, which as I say should be done, largely as a warming to the next Milosevic, as much as it is to this fellow. But now that we've indicted him, I think it is probably clear that it's more difficult if we're going to follow the line here that we shouldn't negotiate with a war criminal. As long as he's running Serbia, we're going to have to negotiate with him. But we're doing so in very odd and awkward circumstances. This whole war has turned out to be an odd and awkward circumstance. And there are no easy answers to any of the problems. MARGARET WARNER: Ambassador Zimmermann, follow up on something Sandy Berger said, which is well, there are other authorities in Belgrade that we can deal with. Are there?
MARGARET WARNER: But, I mean, at some point still someone has to give the army and the paramilitaries the order to leave Kosovo if NATO is going to get what it wants, correct? LAWRENCE EAGLEBURGER: It has to be as of now Milosevic, unless he's replaced. He's the one who has to do it.
|
 |
||||||||||||||||||
| Inside Yugoslavia. | |||||||||||||||||||
|
MARGARET WARNER: Secretary Eagleburger, you spent a lot of time in Yugoslavia and dealt with the Serbs even since then. You heard Mr. Berger again, and we've heard this from other administration people and some of the Europeans saying, "Well, there were signs of rising opposition in Yugoslavia. There are demonstrations. There are some politicians speaking out." What's your take on what this indictment, one, whether those are significant, and there have been some news accounts, and two, what this indictment will do to Milosevic's basis of support internally? LAWRENCE EAGLEBURGER: First of all, Margaret, I can't say no to the arguments that there are beginning to be cracks in Milosevic's armor in Serbia. I have serious doubts about that myself, but maybe it's there. I must say, my own judgment of Serbs and of their position with regard to Milosevic is that the bombing and everything that's gone on has largely solidified his support. I would suspect that this indictment will also solidify their support of Milosevic, at least for a time. Now, having said that, maybe the bombing over a long period of time will, in fact, accomplish what we hope, which is that they will rise up and throw him out. I have very serious questions about that, and particularly in terms of if it's a race between how long we can sustain the bombing before publicly and internationally it becomes a real albatross around our next. And his ability to last things out in Serbia, I'm afraid I think he has a better chance than we do. But maybe it will work. Maybe they will overthrow him. I think there's very little likelihood of that myself.
WARREN ZIMMERMANN: I think in the short term Milosevic will make the argument that this indictment is an indictment of all Serbs. He will wrap himself in the Serbian flag. He'll argue that all Serbs are being victimized by NATO and now by the U.N. That's inconvenient for him, because he likes the U.N., but he'll swallow that one. And I think, in the short run, that may work. In the long run, I don't think it will. And it particularly won't work to the degree that the Serbian citizens and people get more opportunity to express a free choice. Then I think he will become a serious embarrassment to them. MARGARET WARNER: And Ms. Bang-Jensen, what do you think are the chances that Milosevic will ever be actually apprehended and brought to trial? NINA BANG-JENSEN: Right now it seems like it will -- it's far away, but I'm convinced that it eventually will happen. I hope and maybe this is wishful thinking, that ultimately people will rise up and they will turn him over, hand him over, over time. He can't go anywhere. MARGARET WARNER: But it is true, or is it true, does the War Crimes Tribunal have any way itself to apprehend him? NINA BANG-JENSEN: It really doesn't. The only thing that it has is the commitment of member states to execute their arrest warrants. And there are some states that might not execute those warrants. And that's the greatest fear, that there will be sort of a de facto immunity given to him. He'll be allowed to go to a third country, and they will simply not honor the warrants.
NINA BANG-JENSEN: Right. MARGARET WARNER: What do you think are the chances of that happening? LAWRENCE EAGLEBURGER: Well, I think, for instance, if he went to Russia, it's fairly clear they wouldn't honor it. It may well be. Since I don't believe we're going to get to the point where we win this war militarily, which I think requires ground troops, I'm inclined to believe in the end there has to be sort of a diplomatic deal. I don't like it, but I'm afraid that's where we go. And when it gets to that kind of a negotiation, I have to believe that Milosevic is going to look for some way to get himself out of this if, in fact, he's reached the point where he feels that he has to give in. And then I think Russia or some other or China or some other country that certainly doesn't approve of what's been happening here, then this indictment could well offer him a place to go. So I think there's at least a chance that he won't be ever dealt with. But again, Margaret, let me make my point, which is I care of course whether he gets his just deserts, but the fundamental question here is that what's important about what's been done is it tells the next Milosevic, there's something else he's got to think about before he engages in the kinds of activities that Milosevic has done. MARGARET WARNER: All right. LAWRENCE EAGLEBURGER: And I think that's important. MARGARET WARNER: Thanks. Secretary Eagleburger, Ambassador Zimmermann, Ms. Bang-Jensen, thanks very much. |
 |
||||||||||||||||||
 |
        |
|
| Support the kind of journalism done by the NewsHour...Become a member of your local PBS station. | ||
| ||
| PBS Online Privacy Policy Copyright ©1996- MacNeil/Lehrer Productions. All Rights Reserved. | ||
| ||
BRANKO
BRANKOVIC, U.N. Ambassador, Yugoslavia: First and foremost, this is
an indictment of a nonexistent court by nonexistent Madame Arbour. She
exists, but whatever she has as a duty to do -- this court for us does
not exist, so the indictment as well. Second point I would like to mention
as far as this is concerned, this so-called indictment is, I think,
the last attempt by the NATO countries to avoid what is obviously inevitable,
and that is a total collapse of the policy of aggression by NATO against
the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia. 
JAMIE
SHEA, NATO spokesman: Our position is crystal-clear. We continue to
insist that the authorities in Belgrade accept NATO's five conditions.
And as I've said, we are going to keep up our military action until
those five conditions are met. 
ROBIN
COOK, British Foreign Secretary: So long as Milosevic retains that power
in Belgrade, it would be irresponsible of us not to talk to him about
the implementation of our objectives in Kosovo. There will, though,
be no question of any deal that spares Milosevic from standing trial
on these charges. There can be no amnesty for war crimes. 
SERGEI
LAVROV, U.N. Ambassador, Russia: I don't think it's merely coincidental,
and it clearly undermines the peace efforts, and I don't know what will
be the consequences. 
MARGARET
WARNER: We get three further assessments of the Milosevic war crimes
indictment. Lawrence Eagleburger was Secretary of State in the Bush
administration. In December 1992, he called for Milosevic to be tried
for war crimes. He also served as ambassador to Yugoslavia in the 1970's.
Warren Zimmermann was U.S. Ambassador to Yugoslavia from 1989 to 1992;
he wrote a book about the country's breakup entitled "The Origins
of a Catastrophe." And Nina Bang-Jensen is special counsel for
the Coalition for International Justice, a private group with offices
in Washington and the Hague that assists the War Crimes tribunal's work.
Welcome all. Secretary Eagleburger, do you see the impact of this as
Sandy Berger does, which is that it leave, as he put it, Slobodan Milosevic
considerably weaker and under substantially more pressure? 
LAWRENCE
EAGLEBURGER, Former Secretary of State: No, I don't see it that way.
Mind you, I think it was the proper thing to do, to indict, but I think
probably the short-term consequences of this will make it more difficult
to arrive at a settlement with regard to the Serbs. Milosevic is clearly
not going to be anxious to put himself out of business. So I think it
probably slows the process, but it was the right thing to do nevertheless.
WARREN
ZIMMERMANN, Former U.S. Ambassador, Yugoslavia: Well, I have a different
perspective from Secretary Eagleburger. I think even in the short run
we are not hurt by this indictment, which by the way was very important
and very positive. Yesterday if we had negotiated with Milosevic over
Kosovo, we would have gotten nothing from him. That was when he was
unindicted. Today, now that he's indicted, if we negotiated with him,
we would still get nothing from him. And the reason is because NATO
still has to rebalance its position, its military position to the point
where it is clearly winning before anything will come out of the Serbs
from the point of view of a position that will meet even the minimum
NATO conditions. Further on down the road if NATO can do that, then,
as Sandy Berger said, a lot will be accomplished that won't need negotiation,
and for the rest of it, either Milosevic will have to make the right
concessions, or somebody will have to take his place who can make them.
But it will be the military situation and changing that in NATO's favor
that I think is determining.
NINA
BANG-JENSEN, Coalition for National Justice: Regrettably, there's nothing
in international law that says you cannot negotiate with an indicted
war criminal. What should prevent us from negotiating with this indicted
war criminal is exactly the reason that Louise Arbour said in her statement,
which is this essentially affirms the conclusion that many other people
have reached, that he is not the appropriate guarantor for peace in
the Balkans. He's not kept past agreements. He's unlikely to keep any
agreement he might reach here. So I see -- I have some concerns with
what Mr. Berger was saying, because I absolutely agree with him -- there's
nothing to negotiate now. We have to achieve the objectives that NATO
has set forth. Yet, at the same time, we have signs that we are, in
fact, negotiating. He knows what he has to do in order to bring peace
to Kosovo and Serbia.
MARGARET
WARNER: Do you see, Secretary Eagleburger, any alternative to dealing
with Milosevic to make this deal, if there is a deal to be made? 
WARREN
ZIMMERMANN: I'm with Secretary Eagleburger on that one. I think Milosevic
is in power. He's in charge. He's going to be the one to make the decisions.
So I don't really see anybody else to deal with. But it doesn't have
to be us -- NATO -- to deal with Milosevic. We can do it through third
parties, so we don't have to deal directly with a war criminal, which
I think we should not do. There's the U.N., Kofi Annan. His very first
statement on the NATO bombing condemned the ethnic cleansing in Kosovo.
He's an objective person. Maktia Tsari, the President of Finland has
played an enormously positive role in the Bosnian war, and he's doing
the same in Kosovo. There are plenty of authorities out there that can
be used as mediators. The Russians, if they want to, can do it. They've
hardly shown very much objectivity about that. They've criticized us.
They've criticized NATO. They've criticized the Kosovo Liberation Army.
They have not shown any concern for the Albanians.
NINA
BANG-JENSEN: I agree. If he -- all I'm saying is that we can't negotiate.
We have set forth our principles. And by not negotiating, I don't mean
we can't accept his acceptance of those principles. What I mean is we
should not be engaged in a sustained extension of these prolonged negotiations
that are going to give him, essentially reward him for what he's done.
MARGARET
WARNER: Ambassador Zimmermann, how do you see the impact of these indictments
on, you know, the political elite, the military elite, the public in
Serbia? 
MARGARET
WARNER: You mean, as sort of an unspoken part of a deal?