U.S. Department of State 96/02/14 Daily Press Briefing

From: DOSFAN <gopher://dosfan.lib.uic.edu/>

U.S. State Department Directory

U.S. Department of State

96/02/14 Daily Press Briefing

Office of the Spokesman

FORMER YUGOSLAVIA
Congressional Concern re Alleged Karadzic Travel ........4-5
US, NATO Policy re IFOR Detention of War Criminals ......4-9
- Use of Force  .........................................8
Call for Release of All Non-Suspect Detainees  ..........9-12
Lack of High Level IFOR Contact with Bosnian Serbs ......10,13-14
Croatia, Serbia Cooperation with Policy on Detentions ...11-13
Investigation of Missing Men and Boys from Srebrenica ...12
Role of Karadzic and Mladic; Karadzic Travels ...........14-15
Determination of War Criminal Status ....................15
JAPAN/SOUTH KOREA
Territorial Dispute of Islets in Sea of Japan ...........16-17
- U.S. Mediation, Advice ................................16-17
GREECE/TURKEY
Possible ICJ Consideration of Aegean Dispute ............17-19
- US Policy re Sovereignty ..............................18

[...]

Q Nick, Senator Dole and three other Senators have written President Clinton, saying they're outraged by reports that Radovan Karadzic was able to go through checkpoints manned by Americans and other NATO troops.

First, to check the facts. This supposedly happened last weekend. That's several days ago. Has the State Department determined yet whether indeed Karadzic went through checkpoints manned by American or other NATO troops?

MR. BURNS: First, Barry, as you know, we just saw a copy of this letter just in the last hour, so I really can't comment on the specifics of the letter. Obviously, we here in the Department and in the White House will look at this and get back to Senator Dole and Senator Helms and the others who wrote this letter.

Second, Barry, on the question, we've spoken to this before. We were disturbed to see reports that Karadzic may have gone through a checkpoint over the weekend. As the military, as IFOR has looked into these reports, however, they've been unable to confirm this.

I think as Ken Bacon and Secretary Perry have explained publicly as of yesterday, our troops and other IFOR troops have a commitment to freedom of movement. So they are not stopping civilian cars at checkpoints. We don't want to stop civilian cars at checkpoints as a matter of course, because we want people to be free to move about the country. People could not move about the country for the last four years because of the war, and that's one of the central features of the Dayton accords.

However, we have taken steps just over the last 48 hours to try to improve the ability of IFOR to locate indicted war criminals who may be encountered by IFOR troops. Secretary Perry said yesterday that the United States will make sure that IFOR has a good collection of very clear photographs of the 52 indicted war criminals and most prominently war criminals number one and two -- Karadzic and Mladic; that IFOR troops that man checkpoints will understand that if they encounter these war criminals, they have an obligation, a duty to detain these people so that they can be transported to The Hague for prosecution, because they've already been indicted, and their next stop will be prosecution at the War Crimes Tribunal.

I want to be very clear about that. Secretary Perry said very clearly yesterday it is the responsibility of our troops if they encounter suspected indicted war criminals, to detain them.

It won't be the central mission, and he explained that, and Admiral Smith has also spoken to this. We will not launch search parties into the hills in Bosnia, but these people, if they are encountered, will be detained, and they ought to know this.

Q I guess I'm puzzled by two things. You began by saying you're disturbed. I don't know how you can be disturbed by the reports if the troops are not stopping passenger cars. I mean, if they're not stopping civilians, you're sort of disturbed at your own policy. I mean, what are you disturbed about? I don't quite get it.

And, secondly, what good do the photographs do. I don't imagine a suspected war criminal, as they pass the sentry post, you know, would kind of point at his head and stay there for a long time to try to match up with a photograph. He might be in the back. You know, if you've seen the movies, he might have his hat a little bit over his eyes. If you don't stop civilian passengers, how do you expect to encounter them?

MR. BURNS: Full stop.

Q Yes. Would you expect them to come out of the car and say, "Check me out"?

MR. BURNS: Okay, now we're back to the question.

Q Okay. There's something illogical, slightly illogical about this policy. I don't quite get it.

MR. BURNS: Barry, let me try to clarify this for you. I think it's very clear. It's clear to me. I think it's clear to everybody else in the government. We have a responsibility to detain indicted war criminals if they are encountered by our troops. That could happen in a variety of ways.

Sometimes there are checkpoints, because of security in certain areas, where cars are slowed down. Sometimes they're not. It's not the custom, however, to stop civilian cars. But sometimes people get out of their cars, and they walk around cities, such as Banja Luka, where Karadzic was sighted, if you believe press reports, just a couple of days ago.

If our troops sight someone in a car, walking around, in a room -- if they happen to stumble into an indicted war criminal, and if our troops recognize Mladic or Karadzic or any of the 50 other indicted war criminals, they will be detained. There's nothing illogical about that. In fact, that's very logical.

We were disturbed by the press reports, because it is highly disturbing to read that Karadzic may feel that he has the freedom to ride around the Bosnian Serb controlled areas and to hold meetings and to be a normal citizen. He's not a normal person. He has been indicted for war crimes that are reprehensible, that are the worst that Europe has seen in 50 years. He ought to know that we are going to be looking for him, and that sooner or later he will be detained, and he'll be brought to justice.

Q Okay, who will have these photos --

MR. BURNS: I just want to respond to your question. It's not illogical; it is logical. It's the right policy, and it's the right thing to do.

Q Logically enough, you'd figure a checkpoint would be the place to look out for people. If you're not stopping cars, you're not really looking out for them. You want them to fall into your lap at a cocktail party or something, in a lecture -- I don't know what.

But, in any event --

MR. BURNS: I disagree with that. I disagree with it.

Q Wouldn't the checkpoint be the place to check for -- if you're looking for somebody, wouldn't a checkpoint be -- I don't want to say "logical" again -- be the customary place to see if that person is coming or going in an area?

MR. BURNS: The primary purpose of the checkpoint set up by IFOR is to make sure that the military forces in the area are respecting the zone of separation that has been created so ably and so well by the IFOR troops and that they are not carrying into the zone of separation or anywhere near it weaponry that is not permitted under the rules of the Dayton Accords.

Sometimes there are checkpoints for other reasons. If there have been security incidents in the area, the troops may be stopping all cars, not just military cars. In that case, it's certainly pertinent for people manning checkpoints to know and to have inside their heads a sense of who these indicted war criminals are, but there are other ways to encounter them.

I think, Barry, the important thing here is for Karadzic and Mladic and their compatriots to understand that this isn't life as usual for them and it never will be again for them; that they cannot, and they will not be able to just wheel around Bosnia-Herzegovina at will and have meetings with whomever they please. They have to always think about the fact that they may run into people who will detain them. That's good. We hope to create some concern in their own minds.

Q Who will have the photographs?

MR. BURNS: Secretary Perry said yesterday that we would make the photographs available to NATO, to the IFOR troops, and specifically those who will be manning -- who will be out in public.

I believe that the War Crimes Tribunal Spokeswoman in The Hague said the same thing yesterday, that the Tribunal will also make every effort to make sure that NATO and IFOR have the necessary documentation, the necessary photographs so that our soldiers understand who these people are.

Q Nick, are the allies on board with this? Is there consensus with the allies about the procedures for detaining these guys?

MR. BURNS: I'm sure that there is, because these procedures are not new procedures. These procedures were developed as we negotiated the Dayton Accords. They are written into the Dayton Accords. It talks about full cooperation with the War Crimes Tribunal and the new rules of the road which are supplementary to Dayton -- they're not an amendment to it, but supplementary -- are certainly accepted by our allies. They've been fully briefed.

Q This procedure of giving out information and troops being more vigilant about looking for them, Perry announced yesterday is a tactical change. That was a change on our part, on the United States part. Are the allies also instructing their troops to do the same?

MR. BURNS: I would refer you to the comments of the NATO Spokespersons on this issue, who consistently over the last 24 to 48 hours have said essentially the same thing that Secretary Perry did, and that is that NATO will be vigilant; that NATO does understand that while it's not the mission of the troops to search in the hills for war criminals, it's certainly the obligation of troops to detain them when they do see them. NATO speaks for all the contributing nations of IFOR.

Q What happens when a troop -- a soldier or a group of soldiers -- encounters Radovan Karadzic? You know Karadzic presumably will not just surrender gracefully. Maybe he will resist. Maybe he'll try to run away. What do the troops do then?

MR. BURNS: They are to detain a war criminal when they encounter a war criminal, whatever it takes to detain a war criminal.

Q So if they have to use force, they can use force?

MR. BURNS: The IFOR troops have the ability to use force to accomplish their mission. This is, of course, part of the mission.

Q Nick, it's been stated at DoD, it's been stated by Leighten Smith, that under the circumstances it would depend upon the capability of, say, those at a checkpoint or those NATO people to successfully detain whomever they might suspect as being war criminals. They would have to receive orders from, I believe, Leighten Smith before they would take such action.

Mr. Karadzic, when he travels with quite a number of gunmen who would probably overpower most checkpoints. So it would be a matter of practicality, wouldn't it, and common sense?

MR. BURNS: What would be a matter of practicality and common sense?

Q Whether those NATO troops would act to detain anybody they suspect as a war criminal, as to whether they could do so successfully.

MR. BURNS: Well, Bill, now you're getting into the specific orders that our people would have and that's a question for the Pentagon and it's a question for IFOR.

I think Secretary Perry spoke for all of us yesterday when he very clearly delineated the responsibilities of IFOR troops. I think you should understand that his comments are certainly agreed to by everybody here at the State Department and throughout Washington.

Q The Pentagon has said it depends on the viability to detain and arrest without taking risks by the particular troops to --

MR. BURNS: Bill, you can create all the hypothetical situations you want. The plain fact is that if these people are encountered, they will be detained. They ought to know that, and they ought to be wary of that and they ought to have some cause for concern. It's good that they're going to feel a little sweat on this.

Q Secretary Perry also said yesterday that the Bosnians had released the six additional prisoners that they were supposed to release. It turned out that they had not done so. Can you update us on that?

MR. BURNS: I'd be glad to. We all arrived at work yesterday morning understanding that the remaining four detainees had been released by the Bosnian Government. These are Bosnian Serb detainees. That is what we read in the newspapers and that's what we understood.

I think the comment made was -- it must have been a comment, Sid, 30 hours ago. So this is old news.

The new news is that Secretary Christopher, as I told you yesterday, called President Izetbegovic and said that we had a commitment from the Bosnian Government that these four would be released. I understand that the Bosnian Government is claiming that the reason they continue to hold these four Bosnian Serb detainees is because the War Crimes Tribunal is interested in investigating these individuals. That is not true.

The War Crimes Tribunal informed the United States this morning from The Hague that they have no interest in these four individuals.

Therefore, these four individuals should be released immediately. That was the request that Secretary Christopher made directly to President Izetbegovic yesterday. We would like to reaffirm that request today. We are reaffirming it in person in Sarajevo, and we fully expect that these four people will be released.

Let's remember the rules of the road that Dick Holbrooke negotiated. If the War Crimes Tribunal does not have an interest in people detained by one of the parties on suspicion of war crimes, they cannot be held. We cannot have a situation where people are being picked up as hostages for a variety of reasons without respect to the interests and to the orders of the War Crimes Tribunal.

The Tribunal has clearly said, these people ought to be freed, so they must be freed.

Q So you're saying -- you now consider these people hostages --

MR. BURNS: No. I'm saying these people are detainees. There are other examples of people who have been taken, detained, taken prisoner just in the last 24 hours and there is cause for concern. We call upon all the parties -- all the parties, not just the Bosnian Government -- to honor the new rules of the road.

Q Who are these other people? Are you confirming that the Bosnian Serbs have detained some Muslims?

MR. BURNS: I understand the Bosnian Serbs have taken an AP photographer who is a Bosnian Muslim. They've detained him. They are holding him.

Obviously, the Bosnian Government, to give it its due, is concerned about this individual, and we would call upon the Bosnian Serbs to release all the people who are being detained and in whom the War Crimes Tribunal has not expressed an interest.

Q Have the Bosnian Serbs resumed their contacts with the IFOR people?

MR. BURNS: I'd just referred you to the IFOR spokesman this morning who said that for the most part, they have not. At the senior levels, and even at the mid-levels, the Bosnian Serbs are not engaging in the routine military contacts that are necessary to implement the Dayton Accords; that there is still some communication but at a very low level.

Again, here, we call upon the Bosnian Serbs to adhere fully to their Dayton commitments and to resume military contacts at all levels. This is a point that we will be making very forcefully and very clearly in the next few days directly to the Serb leadership and to all the other parties.

Q The Serbs have not told you that this AP photographer is a possible war criminal, have they?

MR. BURNS: All sorts of claims are made about people that are being held. But the pertinent point here is that Justice Goldstone has to have an interest if, in fact, the reason for detention is suspicion of war crimes.

Q Do you know if that's the reason for detention or not --

MR. BURNS: I've seen that expressed as the reason for detention. I don't believe there has been any interest expressed publicly by the War Crimes Tribunal.

Q In media reports?

MR. BURNS: In media reports, yes. Betsy.

Q You said yesterday that Croatia and Serbia had not signed on to these new rules of the road. Have you heard anything more from them on whether they are going to?

MR. BURNS: I don't believe that they have signed on yet, and we're going to continue our attempts to request that they do sign on, that they become a party to these rules of the road because we do want to see a greater measure of stability in implementing these accords.

Q Has there been any attempts to try to get them to engage more openly with the War Crimes Tribunal? They had been balking at giving information as well as turning over people.

MR. BURNS: Yes, there has been an attempt. In Belgrade, Secretary Christopher convinced President Milosevic that he should open an office -- he should allow the War Crimes Tribunal to open an office in Belgrade. President Milosevic agreed. That is a good step forward -- a good first step forward.

The next step would be for the Serbian Government to cooperate with the War Crimes Tribunal. When the War Crimes Tribunal wants to question individuals in Serbia about certain suspected war crimes, the Serbian Government should make those people available.

If the War Crimes Tribunal asks, as it has asked Serbia to, in effect, allow people who have been indicated to be transported to The Hague, that should happen. That hasn't happened, so that's cause for concern.

We've made the same request of the Croatian Government in both respects.

Q Nick, was it (inaudible) who delivered the demarche in Sarajevo?

MR. BURNS: Yes. Ambassador Menzies has been talking to the Bosnian Government about these four detainees? Yes.

Still on Bosnia. Let's go to Lee. Lee has not asked a question. Lee is just back from the Arctic Circle.

Q Where they're interested in --

MR. BURNS: The mind is clear, Judd said.

Q It's what?

MR. BURNS: Judd said your mind is clear.

Q As clear as possible. On the war crimes topic, which is the big talk in the Arctic Circle, do you have any final report on the fate of the thousands of Muslim men believed missing in Srebrenica?

MR. BURNS: Assistant Secretary Shattuck will speak to that later today. We presume, unfortunately and tragically, that the great majority of the men and boys there were murdered by the Bosnian Serbs. That is one of the reasons why Mladic and Karadzic have been indicted for war crimes, because they directed that operation.

Q How many people do you think the Bosnian Serbs are holding? I don't mean (inaudible) question. I mean the AP photographer. How many others, do you know?

MR. BURNS: We've seen reports of several others being taken -- being detained or taken prisoner in the town of Foce.

Q Could you spell it?

MR. BURNS: F-O-C-E.

Q The State Department -- we've seen reports, too. You're saying the Bosnians -- you have your own information, do you, that the Bosnians --

MR. BURNS: We believe those reports to be true. Yes.

Q Not to split a hair, it gets to be part of the situation. It's a terribly complicated situation. You have two countries that don't observe the rules of the road. You have Bosnian Serbs which aren't even a country. You communicate to the Bosnian Serbs through Serbia but Serbia doesn't buy on?

MR. BURNS: No, we have regular contacts --

Q So this is very strange --

MR. BURNS: We have regular contacts with the Bosnian Serbs through our Embassy in Sarajevo. Ambassador Menzies sees Bosnian Serbs leaders -- not Karadzic and Mladic; not indicted war criminals -- but Koljevic and Buha and the others regularly.

Q This doesn't cause you any concern about recognition or perhaps they will foment incidents to increase contacts with American officials? You don't see this as a potential problem giving them some status you may not want to give them --

MR. BURNS: No, the Bosnian Serbs were at Dayton --

(Multiple questions.)

Q I know they were part of the Serbian delegation --

MR. BURNS: (Inaudible) were at Dayton.

Q They were part of the Serbian delegation.

MR. BURNS: We spoke to them there. We had regular contacts with them.

Q They were part of the Serbian delegation. My understanding was that you tried to influence the Bosnian Serbs through Milosevic.

Certainly, when Christopher went out there he didn't go visit the Bosnian Serb quote "Government" end quote because you don't recognize any such rebel government? You see what I'm driving at?

MR. BURNS: I understand the question. At Dayton, and throughout the Fall, the Bosnian Serbs were part of the larger Serbian delegation, headed by Mr. Milosevic. So we normally spoke to Mr. Milosevic.

However, throughout the autumn, and to the present day and continuing into the future, we will have our own contacts direct with the Bosnian Serbs; not with indicted war criminals, but with the others in Pale. John Menzies travels there and sees them. They come to Sarajevo and see him, and that will continue.

The Bosnian Serbs are one of the major entities in the new state that is being created, and we certainly want to have continuous contacts with them.

Q Nick, are these people in charge? Do you view them as running the show there? Or with the re-emergence of Mladic and Karadzic's new-found visibility, are they in charge?

MR. BURNS: Unfortunately, it seems that Karadzic and Mladic still retain political and military power and influence among the Bosnian Serbs. That's most unfortunate and it should not continue in our view and will not continue at some point in the future.

Q Lt. Colonel Mark Rayner, NATO Spokesman in Sarajevo, this morning according to the AP wire, said that all emergency communications had been cut off. He's referring to communications between NATO and the Bosnian Serbs. He said "this unilateral boycott constitutes a serious violation of the Dayton peace agreement."

Ambassador Robert Gallucci said yesterday that the problem had not been completely remedied, this problem of contacts, Nick. He said that there had been some left that needed to be done. Could you comment on that?

MR. BURNS: I agree with both Lt. Colonel Rayner and Ambassador Gallucci. I agree with both statements.

Q There were press reports earlier today that Karadzic was actually in Belgrade meeting with President Milosevic. Are you aware of those reports? Do you have any information to that effect?

MR. BURNS: I have seen those reports. I'm unable to confirm them. But if Karadzic does travel to Belgrade, the Serbian Government should arrest him and turn him over to the War Crimes Tribunal. That's our position on Karadzic travelling to Belgrade or to any other part of Serbia.

Q What if the reports turn out to be true that he has met with Milosevic and he has not been turned over. What would the United States do?

MR. BURNS: If the reports turn out to be true, if we believe them to be true, we'll certainly raise that directly in a very serious way with the Serbian Government. It's a violation of the Dayton Accords. Because the Dayton Accords talk about full cooperation with the War Crimes Tribunal.

The War Crimes Tribunal has told Serbia there are 52 people, and the ones who enter your territory must be detained so that they can be prosecuted. That's a very serious violation of the Dayton Accords.

Q (Inaudible) Milosevic. I can think of one good reason why he would not be enthusiastic about having a War Crimes Tribunal office in Belgrade since he has been, by many people, targeted as the number one war criminal since he was the architect of ethnic cleansing.

Have you ever broached that subject? Has the United States ever broached that subject with him, about his complicity in possible war crimes by ethnic cleansing and such?

MR. BURNS: That is a job for Justice Goldstone. We recognize the purview of the War Crimes Tribunal to determine who is a war criminal and who is not. We fully support Justice Goldstone.

We've said often in the past, and I'll be glad to say it again, wherever Justice Goldstone's trail of evidence leads, we'll support him.

We're off Bosnia? Good.

[...]

Q South Korea is holding military exercises in a group of islands in the Sea of Japan that are disputed between South Korea and Japan. Is the United States talking to its allies and giving them any sorts of messages, warnings, threats? Is the U.S. actively involved --

MR. BURNS: This is the dispute between the Republic of Korea and Japan over the islet in the Sea of Japan -- islets.

Q Islets.

MR. BURNS: Islets. Excuse me. The United States position is quite clear and simple and short. It is that Japan and Korea should resolve this peacefully. We are giving that advice to both governments.

Q Do you have a position on whose territory it is? Or now that it's a dispute, should it be settled? Or you have no position on it?

MR. BURNS: You almost had it right. I thought you were --

Q Anything under dispute, you --

MR. BURNS: You could write the press guidance on it.

Q You ask for a peaceful resolution and you withdraw any recognition you may have over the territories. Maybe I'm exaggerating. Do you have a view on whose territory this is?

MR. BURNS: Yes, our view is that this matter should be resolved peacefully. (Laughter) We said that yesterday.

We could make a direct transition, Mr. Lambros, or do you want to stay on Korea. (Laughter)

Let's make a direct to the other islet dispute, just further West. Are you still on Korea? Okay, we can't make a direct transition. I'm sorry. That would have been nice.

Q Did you send that kind of message --

MR. BURNS: Excuse me, I'm sorry.

Q Did you send that kind of message to the South Korean Government or to the Japanese Government?

MR. BURNS: I think in our contacts, which are close and regular with both governments, we've said we're not going to side with either one of them on any aspect, Barry, of this dispute; that we're going to simply hope and advise them and counsel them to resolve it peacefully and amicably.

Now we can make our direct segue to the Imia/Kardak problem.

Q According to today's dispatch from Athens right here, the Greek Foreign Minister, Mr. Theodore Pangalos, stated that the Greek Government had never sought to take this issue of Imia's sovereignty to the International Court of Justice, turning down your proposal to both governments of Greece and Turkey. Do you have any comment on that?

MR. BURNS: I've seen the statement by the Greek Foreign Minister. We obviously fully respect that statement.

Our interest here, as allies of Greece and Turkey, is to advise both of them and to help both of them, if they wish us to help, to resolve this peacefully and amicably.

If the Greek Government prefers not to take this to the International Court of Justice, there are many other ways by which this problem could be resolved. It could be resolved directly between Greece and Turkey peacefully and amicably. It could be resolved by other types of international mediation.

The United States could play a role. We don't need to play a role if the parties do not wish us to play a role. Our objective here is just to make sure that there is not a confrontation; certainly, no threat of military action or intimidation between two NATO allies. So that's the position of the Greek Government. We fully respect it, and we'll continue to be available to help if the two countries should wish us to help.

Q Can you comment on why your legal experts here in the Department of State separates the sovereignty from the ownership over the Imia Island when (inaudible) in any transition by any type of deed or treaty, possession, ownership, and the rest, of legal or property rights are transferred simultaneously at the same time.

MR. BURNS: We don't want to be part of the problem. We don't want to exacerbate the problem. We want to be part of the solution.

One way to be part of the solution is to be objective as we look at this question, and to urge both of them to reach some kind of settlement.

Q Already, you are part of the problem because you stated here -- right here from this podium on February 1 -- that automatically you do not recognize Greek sovereignty over this island.

MR. BURNS: I don't think that constitutes being part of the problem. I still think the United States has been helpful, objective, and interested in a peaceful resolution.

I think this is a very wise course that the State Department is on here, and we're going to maintain this course.

Q You believe the wisdom of State Department. What is the wisdom? Taking the sovereignty from an --

MR. BURNS: Sometimes wisdom is just implicit in the policy itself. I think this is probably one of those areas.

Q Nick, on another subject.

Q Same subject. Yesterday, you said the situation seems to go to the International Court of Justice. Today, the Greek Government said that it rejects the proposal. Yesterday, you had indications or information from the Greek Government that it wants to go to the International Court of Justice and today the Greek Government changed its position? Do you have any information?

MR. BURNS: We had understood that there was interest in resolving this dispute at the International Court of Justice. If that is not the case -- and there is a very clear statement today from the Greek Foreign Minister -- then, we will be available to the parties in whatever way they deem appropriate to help.

Ultimately, it's up to Greece and Turkey to resolve this problem peacefully.

Mr. Arshad.

[...]

(The briefing concluded at 2:13 p.m.)

(###)