State Department Noon Briefing, October 3, 2000
STATE DEPARTMENT REGULAR BRIEFING
BRIEFER: PHILIP REEKER, DEPARTMENT SPOKESMAN
STATE DEPARTMENT BRIEFING ROOM,
WASHINGTON, D.C. 1:05 P.M. EDT
TUESDAY, OCTOBER 3, 2000
(ON THE RECORD UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED)
Q: Yugoslavia. What did you think of the Russian proposal inviting
Milosevic and Kostunica to come and sort it out in Moscow between
themselves? Do you think this is a positive proposal, a probably
productive proposal?
MR. REEKER: Well, I think as we have discussed all week, and last week
too, we are closely watching events unfold there. I think it is a
question for those individuals to make their determinations in terms
of any travel plans they want to take. We have noted the breadth of
the civil disobedience campaign, which has taken hold in nearly every
major city and town in Serbia. The miners are continuing to strike
despite a late-night visit from the army chief Pavkovic. There are
more reports of journalists breaking ranks with the official media and
exercising independent journalism.
So the civil disobedience campaign is continuing. There are plans, I
believe, for a large protest rally in Belgrade tomorrow. If I could
just echo what we have said repeatedly, we believe that Milosevic
should step aside and respect the will of the Serbian people, which
was clearly expressed in the September 24th vote and certainly has
been expressed on the streets of major cities yesterday.
Q: Okay. Is there a danger that these demonstrations are just going to
fizzle out and nothing - and they're not going to lead to anything, as
has happened in the past? Do you see any signs that the momentum is
waning?
MR. REEKER: Again, we're not there in Belgrade. We try to watch the
events unfold there. It's obviously premature to say whether the
campaign will induce Milosevic to step aside and respect the outcome
of the election and respect what the people of Serbia have said. We
consult daily with our European allies and the Russian Government as
well about current events there. So I think, as we've said many times
-- we don't really need to go over it again -- we don't think there is
a basis for a second round of voting. We think it is time for
Milosevic to end his regime, which has brought so much suffering to
the Serbian people and step aside.
Q: Phil, do you have any response to the comments that Kostunica has
made saying the United States ought to cool it with talking about
Milosevic going to The Hague? His point is that we have the will of
the Serbian people and their welfare; why is the US so concentrated on
this one small and, I guess in his view, beside-the-point issue?
MR. REEKER: I think I just basically stated our position on that. It
reflects very much what he said in terms of we believe that Milosevic
should step aside, that the will of the Serbian people has been
expressed very clearly. It's been documented quite transparently
through the results, the tally of the September 24th vote. We also
still believe that Milosevic should be held accountable for the
horrible crimes he perpetrated. So there is absolutely no change in
our position there. We have said the same thing day in and day out
from here. You've all heard it, you've all written it, and our
position remains exactly the same.
Q: I just wanted to follow up on that, and then I have another
question. But I think what Kostunica is getting at is that by the
United States insisting so heavily that he be tried at The Hague, this
makes him even more stubborn and more defiant to maintain his grip on
power because he knows that once he loses his grip on power that he
could be tried. So do you think that those comments that he should be
tried in The Hague are counter-productive?
MR. REEKER: Look, we really can't say exactly how Milosevic's
indictment by the Hague Tribunal affects his political calculations at
the moment, and I'm not going to speculate or try to get into the mind
of Milosevic. Our position is very clear, as it has been, and we think
it's time for him to step aside and respect the will of the Serbian
people, just as Mr. Kostunica said.
Q: Can I just - I have another question. Are you worried about a
potential split in the opposition between Kostunica, who has called
for civil disobedience and more following the rule of law, and people
like Djindjic, who are calling for a more confrontational approach?
MR. REEKER: Again, I think the opposition has been very united in
their approach to the election. In the campaign they have followed a
very structured and legalistic approach, transparently counting the
ballots, presently that openly together. Kostunica clearly won in the
first round of this election, and so now it's for the people of Serbia
to continue to express their will. And that's what we support. As you
know, we have said repeatedly that with a democratic transition we
look forward to welcoming Serbia, welcoming Yugoslavia, back into
Europe, back into the international community, and taking the steps
necessary to lift sanctions.
Q: Right. But, I mean, if there is a split in the opposition in terms
of which way to go, then that just means -- doesn't it? -- that
Milosevic could ride out this recent wave of protest.
MR. REEKER: Again, that's the kind of "if" question and analysis that
is not for me to do from here. There are lots of analysts out there.
We will continue to watch the situation carefully, to watch events as
they unfold there, and continue to stand by what we've said now since
September 24th.
Q: I realize this is a hypothetical question so I'll make it very
short, but the only reason I bring it up is because of the offer from
Putin is out there. But am I correct in assuming that should Milosevic
accept this invitation and travel to Russia, you would expect the
Russians to arrest Milosevic and turn him over the court pursuant to
their UN obligations; is that correct?
MR. REEKER: Our position on that has always been the same and always
been clear.
Q: So that if Milosevic did go - travel outside --
MR. REEKER: I think the ICTY indictment is very clear in that, and the
expectation under the UN and under that indictment is very clear.
Exactly.
Q: So you would expect the Russians to turn him over?
MR. REEKER: Our expectation is that Milosevic should be in The Hague
to face justice under the ICTY indictment. The facts are spelled out
very clearly.
Q: On the same --
Q: Well, I just want to try and get --
Q: It would be nice to get an answer -
Q: You would expect the Russians to turn Milosevic over to the proper
authorities?
MR. REEKER: Look, there is an indictment that calls for any country to
turn him over to The Hague. That is very clear.
Q: Including Russia?
MR. REEKER: Including Russia. That's right.
Q: But that is still not an answer to Matt's question. Would you
demand that Russia do so?
MR. REEKER: I don't know how much clearer one can be to say we expect
the indictment to be followed.
Q: Yes or no? Yes or no?
MR. REEKER: Okay? We expect the indictment to be followed. That's
simply --
Q: But expecting it and putting public pressure on Russia to do so are
two different things.
MR. REEKER: I don't see Milosevic in Russia, and I am not going to
prejudge anything. We think Milosevic should be out of power. Under
the indictment, he should be in the Hague where he can fact justice
for the war crimes. So to keep speculating down the road under - on a
travel arrangement that he said he is not going, I am not going to
waste a lot of time here talking about that. Clearly, we think he
should be turned over to The Hague.
Q: If Milosevic traveling to Russia as this offer to negotiate kind of
an end to this stand-off between Kostunica would kind of end this
particular dispute, and perhaps end his reign of power, perhaps Putin
would be able to mediate something. For this particular trip, would
the United States agree that --
MR. REEKER: Again, it is a huge "if" and hypothetical that I don't
need to get into. Our position on The Hague indictment is so clear and
so well-stated over and over again to you that I think you can just
continue to --
Q: Yeah, but how can Putin - how can this offer really take shape if
the minute Milosevic is going to --
MR. REEKER: That is a question for Putin and Milosevic to discuss. I
have seen statements in the press saying that Milosevic has said, no,
he is not going to do this. So it is not an issue for us. Our position
on Milosevic is incredibly clear. Our position on The Hague indictment
is incredibly clear. And beyond that, I am just not going to
speculate. We could sit here all day talking about various scenarios
that could play out.
Q: But what you are saying - if I'm correct, and correct me I'm wrong
- is that you would rather see Milosevic still in power in Belgrade
than perhaps go to Russia and mediate the dispute because you --
MR. REEKER: That is such a leap, Elise, that it is just remarkable.
Q: No, it's not. I don't think it's a leap.
MR. REEKER: That is not what I am saying at all, and you can go back
to the transcript and see that. What we are saying is that Milosevic
should listen to the will of his people, who have spoken very clearly,
and our position on where he should go after that is also very clear.
Q: But there is a precedent for not arresting indicted war criminals
when they travel to Russia, as you probably remember.
MR. REEKER: Again, our position is very clear. There is a precedent
for that because we have stated it over and over again every day for
weeks on end.
Who wants to go next?
Q: I want to take the same stab at that, which is that your position
has been made very clear in terms of the statements, but in terms of
actions, as we all know, there has been no effort to arrest Milosevic.
And so what the question becomes - and it is not speculative because
there is now a very real possibility, and it is something that is
being discussed --
MR. REEKER: Well, you have declared it a real possibility. I haven't
seen anything except Milosevic saying he absolutely won't do that. So
it is not --
Q: Okay. Well, several other Administration officials seem to be
spending a good deal of time discussing this behind closed doors. So
they seem to think that it is a real possibility as well. So given
that everyone seems to be spending - not everyone - but given that a
number of people working on this policy in the US are giving some time
and thought to this question, the question becomes - and Members of
Congress are paying attention to this as well - if he goes to Russia,
does the United States plan to publicly demand that Russia turn him
over the International Criminal Court?
MR. REEKER: Again, it is a huge "if" that I can't -
Q: It's not.
MR. REEKER: Our position is very clear. He is indicted for war crimes,
and any country is expected to follow through with that. And he
belongs in The Hague. All right? That's simply the facts as they
stand.
Q: Okay. This Russian proposal could easily put Moscow in the
position, essentially, of an arbitrator over the election results. Is
that something you would welcome, Russia being in that position,
especially since you are so confident that --
MR. REEKER: Again, I think you are going down these "ifs" and all
these hypotheticals. I realize you don't have a lot to work with here,
and it is a boring day for you all. I will simply stick with what the
facts are and what our positions are. We consult daily with the
European allies. We consult daily with the Russians. Secretary
Albright has had numerous phone calls with Foreign Minister Ivanov.
Q: Well, you must be discussing all these ideas. I mean --
MR. REEKER: I can't say exactly what ideas are being discussed where.
What I can say is that our position on what should happen in
Yugoslavia is very clear. That hasn't changed.
....
Q: To return to the question of accountability, for almost a year the
Center for Justice and Accountability in --
MR. REEKER: Accountability where?
Q: Oh, okay. Where - sorry, but I'm returning to the Milosevic issue.
The Center for Justice and Accountability and Amnesty International
and other human rights organizations urged the Department to support
efforts to bring former Chilean dictator Pinochet to trial when he was
under arrest in London. And there was very little enthusiasm or
support shown for that. Why is there so much determination to hold
Milosevic accountable, and very little determination to hold Pinochet
accountable?
MR. REEKER: Look again, on Milosevic, we're talking about an
indictment by the International Criminal Tribunal for Crimes in the
Former Yugoslavia, known as the ICTY, which was established by the
United Nations. Milosevic is indicted under that. All countries are
pledged to see that he goes to The Hague under that indictment, which
is something we very much support. We think he belongs out of power,
out of Serbia, and in The Hague to face justice. Period.
In terms of the other situation, I don't believe that was an issue of
an indictment by the International Criminal Tribunal. I think those
were issues pertaining to individual countries and their
determinations; and their justice systems, we said at the time, needed
to follow through with that. So I just don't have anything to equate
the two. It's very easy to try to do that, but we're very careful not
to mix situations here. So we can talk about Milosevic - our position
is very clear on that - and are separate situations that can be looked
at. I believe that situation is unfolding in Chile as their own system
deals with that.
(The briefing was concluded at 1:35 P.M.)
|
NEWSLETTER
|
|
Join the GlobalSecurity.org mailing list
|
|
|
