SFOR Transcript 4 Aug. 1997

Transcript: Joint Press Conference 4 August 1997, 1100 Hours Coalition Press Information Centre Holiday Inn, Sarajevo

Simon Haselock, OHR: There were a number of important meetings concerning the Sintra deadlines over the weekend. These meetings involved Sarajevo representatives of the Steering Board, the Peace Implementation Council, and the Presidency. The Sintra deadlines expired on 1 August and despite the considerable efforts of the Office of the High Representative and the other principal international organizations involved over the past weeks to assist the authorities in achieving the objectives laid down in Sintra, results have not been satisfactory. The Presidency and the Council of Ministers have failed to agree on the appointment of ambassadors to represent the country as a whole. They've also failed to agree on the draft laws on citizenship and passports and on the reconstitution of the Civil Aviation Authority. However, on Saturday, the ambassador's issue was very close to resolution and we expect an agreement in the next few days. Nonetheless, as the deadline was not met, the High Representative, Carlos Westendorp, has made recommendations to the Steering Board of the Peace Implementation Council that their capitals immediately suspend relations with current BiH ambassadors until the agreement has been reached. This is in line with the Sintra Declaration, which says, "If the matter is not resolved by the 1st of August, the Steering Board would take further steps upon the recommendation of the High Representative, including to deal only with those ambassadors who represent the new authorities of a united country." The citizen and passport law is a more complex problem, and although an agreement was not reached by the deadline, we believe the issue to be well in hand. The High Representative believes it is appropriate that a window of opportunity for the Council of Ministers should be given, and they are due to meet today. If they fail to make further substantive progress, it may be necessary to recommend further action be taken, in accordance with the Sintra Declaration. The Sintra Declaration specifically says, "If the laws are not in place by the 1st of August, the High Representative should recommend action to the Steering Board." This recommendation has been made and there a number of options being considered by capitals now. Although we have given them a window of opportunity to meet and discuss it today, we have made a recommendation to the Steering Board about what action should be taken if we're not satisfied by the close of today that further progress is being made. On the Civil Aviation Authority, the OHR has been sharing negotiations between representatives of the Federation and the Republika Srpska for a number of weeks. There's been no agreement, but we believe substantive progress has been achieved. For instance, a Joint Commission has been formed and is functioning to produce an agreement and a common position. However, if this common position or agreement is not reached rapidly, we will proceed with the solution that we have proposed, allowing the opportunity for any dissenters from that agreement to sign on at a later date. So we're talking about an imposition of a solution unless they address it very rapidly. There have been other areas where there has been significant progress and where decisions and deadlines have been achieved. The first is that the Quick Start Package of laws has been adopted. The second is that the presidency has agreed the provision of 200,000 deutschmarks to each of the Annex 6 and 7 Commissions. The authorities and the European Union have signed up to a Memorandum of Understanding on the telecommunications network, and the first cross-entity link is scheduled for 22 August. Also, the BiH Constitutional Court has agreed its rules of procedure. They've appointed an interim president and vice president and have accepted Sarajevo as the permanent location for the court. About the activities in Jajce over the weekend: We're extremely disturbed and concerned about the demonstrations and intimidation that took place against Bosniac returnees. These events are unacceptable and are in direct contravention of the Peace Agreement, specifically Annex 7. They also clearly threaten stability and the political climate within the Federation of a whole. We are particularly disappointed with the situation in Jajce since up until now, it had been encouraging. A letter was issued from our office over the weekend insisting that the authorities in the central Bosnia canton immediately reestablish law and order and prevent people from carrying out unlawful actions such as we saw over the weekend. We also insisted that conditions be established within 48 hours to enable expelled families to return to their homes in Jajce with full guarantees for their safety. We are also insisting that a full investigation be carried out. Additionally, the UNIPTF will carry out their own investigation and submit a report within seven days. On the basis of these investigations, we will insist that the perpetrators be punished and that those who are found to be politically responsible are removed from office. We intend to hold a meeting tomorrow with the cantonal authorities in our offices in Sarajevo to discuss these issues. We are also gravely concerned about events in Vogosca on Friday and Saturday; Serb displaced people were meeting with the local authorities to discuss an assessment visit to their homes. The violent demonstration against them and the beating up of some people is completely contrary to the spirit of the police agreement and we utterly condemn it. The High Representative has written to the Prime Minister of the Federation and to the governor of the Sarajevo canton expressing his concerns, and that letter is available for you to read.

Chris Janowski, UNHCR: UNHCR would like to express its outrage over what happened in Jajce over the weekend, where several hundred returnees had been expelled from their homes or intimidated into leaving by angry mobs--With obvious consent and quiet agreement by the authorities. It is quite appalling that after having been able to gather enough courage to go back to their partially destroyed houses, these people were re-cleansed from their homes--One year and nine months after Dayton. UNHCR is demanding that these people be allowed to return home. It is a mistake made by some in this country to think Annex seven of Dayton is meaningless piece of paper to be ignored. Annex seven is the absolute key to Dayton's success; without the return of minorities to their homes, the entire peace process is threatened and the whole peace process could collapse. There can be no lasting peace or stability in this country unless minorities are allowed to return to their homes. In Vogosca Saturday, several UNHCR staff members and 14 displaced Serbs visiting from Visegrad were holed up in the Municipality building by an angry crowd of women, teens and children throwing stones. It was a fairly dangerous situation with a lot of glass splinters flying around and several cars were stoned as well. According to our staff members, when the cantonal police finally arrived they acted very professionally and created a corridor through the crowd which allowed the Serb DP's and the UNHCR staff members to leave the scene, albeit in a hail of stones. What was encouraging was that after the incident, the Serb DP's told us that they were still determined to come back and make an assessment visit. They even expressed understanding towards the reaction of the crowd, saying that it probably wouldn't be much better in Visegrad. Alex Ivanko, UNIPTF: Over the weekend, Bosnian Croats protested the return of Bosniacs to Jajce and used intimidation to force the evacuation of about 500 Bosniacs from the municipality. On the afternoon of 1 August, 200 Croats erected a road block on the main road from Jajce to Sarajevo. On 2 August, the protest resumed with two roadblocks built: one on the main Jajce-Sarajevo route and the second near the junction to one of the villages to which the Bosniacs had been returning. IPTF estimated that over 100 Croats manned each of the roadblocks, with at least two vehicles parked across the highway. Although IPTF advised local police and the Deputy Minister of Interior to remove the obstacles, Croat police refused to comply. Overnight, there was another threat from Croat mobs: More than 370 Bosniacs evacuated seven villages in the Jajce municipality. Marauding gangs of Croats, sometimes numbering in the 100's, protested throughout the 3rd of August. We have reports that most of them were heavily intoxicated. Under threat, more Bosniacs evacuated their homes. Overall, around 500 Bosniacs left Jajce and the seven surrounding villages. As of this morning, the situation is reported quiet-No surprise there, since virtually no Bosniacs are living in the area now. Friday night, we had reports of four houses burning in the village of Psenik, and two in the village of Kottowa. On Sunday, one Bosniac house on fire in Jajce near the city's village. Last night, three more houses on fire in villages near Jajce. The UN Mission is appalled and dismayed by this campaign of intimidation. Numerous appeals were made to the authorities in the region to allow the return of refugees, but the authorities failed to prevent the latest campaign of intimidation. The UNIPTF has commenced an investigation into the role of the local police on the events in Jajce since there are indications that police may have been involved in some of the incidents. In contrast, the newly set up cantonal police acted extremely professionally in Vogosca by not only preventing the mob from entering the municipality building, but also securing the safe passage of the Serbs in the building; entirely different from the local police in Jajce, who acted in a passive way and did absolutely nothing to prevent this campaign of intimidation against hundreds of Bosniacs. There were reports in the press yesterday that a dead body was found by civilians in Kruscica. This morning, we were informed that, yes, the local police have found one dead body in a burned house in the village of Kruscica. Maj. Blakeley, SFOR: Over the weekend, SFOR conducted 36 Weapons Storage site inspections: 13 ABiH, 14 HVO and 9 VRS. Two AK 47's were confiscated from the HVO weapons site in Drvar on 1 August. SFOR monitored 50 Training and Movement Activities: 31 ABiH, 12 HVO, and 7 VRS. SFOR also monitored 18 demining activities over the weekend, 9 ABiH, 8 HVO and one VRS. As most of you are aware, SFOR was called upon to provide an increased presence in the area of Jajce over the weekend. Over Saturday and Sunday, SFOR troops and vehicles were positioned in the villages to closely monitor the situation, remove a roadblock and set up checkpoints to facilitate freedom of movement. SFOR continues to maintain an increased presence in the area. SFOR will help to protect freedom of movement, provide for general security and back up the IPTF in monitoring law and order. SFOR will also respond, within the rules of engagement, to mitigate violence which clearly jeopardizes human life. However, SFOR by itself cannot guarantee the safety of refugees and displaced persons. Ultimately, this is the responsibility of the Parties who must promote law and order as well as foster a climate of security and reconciliation. The Parties must do more to live up to their responsibilities. I would like to remind you that SFOR is not a police force! David Foley, OSCE: We can now add the term "ethnic re-cleansing" to the lexicon of horror in Bosnia and Herzegovina. The municipal authorities and the leadership of the entities must be held responsible for these outrageous actions over the weekend in Jajce. I've heard complaints that some media organizations are planning on charging political parties to cover their press conferences and to report on the views and policies of political parties and independent candidates. This is utter nonsense and serves only to draw the immediate attention of the OSCE through the Media Experts Commission and the Election Appeals Sub-Commission. I would draw your attention to the following articles from the PEC rules and regulations: Article 131, under the rules governing media organizations, entitled Equal Access states, "All media must give fair coverage and equal access to all political parties and candidates in the elections. Article 127.3, regarding the obligations of governments and authorities in relation to the media in Bosnia and Herzegovina, entitled Equal Access to Public Broadcast in the Print Media, states in Paragraph B, "Governments and competent authorities at all levels will ensure that the public media provide one fair coverage of political party, coalition and candidate activities, including comparable coverage of events of comparable news-worthiness and fair exposure through interviews, analytical articles and broadcast documentaries." Part two: "Equal access to allotment of free prints space and broadcast time for direct address by political parties and candidates." Lastly, Article 127.4, entitled Media Information, states, "Governments and competent authorities at all levels will ensure that the public broadcast and print media are particularly scrupulous in providing accurate, balanced and impartial information in the reporting of news, current affairs and campaign issues and that they informed the public in a comprehensive and balanced fashion about the political parties' candidates' campaign issues, voting processes and other matters relevant to the election. The amount of broadcast time and print space allocated to the parties or candidates must be sufficient for them to communicate their messages and for the voters to inform themselves about the issues, political party or coalition positions qualifications in character of the candidates." We will enforce this rigorously. I'd also like to announce that there will be a special voter registration period for the Zepce municipality this Thursday, Friday and Saturday from 9 a.m. to 6 p.m. at the elementary school there. From the EASC decisions issued on 25 June and 17 July with regard to Zepce, we have addressed the problems that happened during the original registration process when the OSCE detected a massive attempt at manipulation from 7 to 21 June. Registration was halted and all those who attempted to register during that period as DP's were forced to reregister during the re-registration. It was interrupted because of the threats and intimidation of a small group. A number of potentially eligible voters were not able to register because of the improper action of others. During the three-day period, the registration center will also function as a claims center. All those wishing to register should bring their identification and a valid displaced person's card or residency receipt. To all potential registrants who have lived in Maglaj, Zavidovici, Doboj or any other municipality at any time since 31 July 1996: You are not eligible to vote in Zepce and your application will be denied. There will be a great deal of supervision by OSCE supervisors at this center, and if anyone presents bogus documents in attempt to manipulate the registration process, the municipal authorities responsible can expect the most severe penalties to be imposed by the OSCE through the EASC. All sides are hereby on notice that there can be no complaints afterwards if the OSCE supervisors discover attempts at manipulation. On Sunday, the claims period closed around the country with the exception of Brcko, where claims period begins today and lasts for the next two weeks. All we have left for voter registration is Zepce Thursday, Friday and Saturday and the ongoing claims period in Brcko. I'd like to mention that 19,548 candidates have now been approved for the municipal elections. Lastly, there will be a Political Parties Consultative Council meeting held in Banja Luka this Wednesday at the OSCE Regional Center at 1:00. The main item will be information about procedures for distribution of funds to the political parties for the election campaign. Journalists interested in attending should speak to my office today. Simon Haselock: Karen. Q: Chris, what's the next step for the Muslims who were thrown out of the villages? They're saying that they want to go back on Tuesday. Chris Janowski: I don't think there's a procedure for them to go back. They can attempt to go back. We'll be in touch with the authorities everywhere in those villages and in Jajce to try to persuade them to take the DP's back; we will put as much pressure on the authorities as possible. I don't know whether they will be able to go back or how safe they will be. Considering what happened over the weekend, they probably won't be very safe. Q: I remember that with some of the villages around the ZOS, a procedure was put in place where documents were made and then brought to the local authorities; there seemed to be more of an effort made then. Chris Janowski: We had a similar procedure in Drvar where the authorities were registering people who were willing to return. Unfortunately, they used that procedure and the concession that we made to block all return. They have been stalling and stalling and stalling in these commissions, refusing to register people who have been obvious pre-war residents of the area. So I don't think that establishing a commission or procedure is a guarantee that the people return home. However, these people have the right to return home; it is not the Zone of Separation. This is not between the entities, it is in one entity. They aren't even displacing anyone by going back-they're just going back to the remains of their destroyed homes. There's no reason whatsoever why they should not be able to do that. Annex 7 of the Dayton Agreement does not say that refugees and displaced people will be allowed to go home if the mayor agrees. It says that refugees and displaced people will be allowed to go home, period. Simon Haselock: Colin. Q: Chris, most of what we've heard from SFOR is that they're not a police force. From the perspective of UNHCR, did SFOR do as much as you would have liked in terms of protecting the people who tried to return? Chris Janowski: We agree with SFOR in that protection has to come from the local authorities. If the international military assumes a police role, they become a quasi-occupation force. They cannot protect every returnee or replace the local authorities. The tragedy of this country is that in many cases, the local authorities pursue the same organized demonstrations against returns and still pursue the same line that they had pursued during the war. That's why it is so fantastically difficult to organize any minority returns. I don't really see how foreign troops can remedy that situation. Simon Haselock: I'd like to endorse that position. This is where we expect the local police authorities to take action. When we say that we expect them to create the conditions for these people to return within 48 hours, it is not just words. This is specifically what conditionality is all about. In the past we've talked about the use of economic task forces to target economic aid to specific areas and to ally that to whether they are fulfilling their obligations under the peace agreement; this is the sort of area where that conditionality can be applied. It is the local police who are the first line of authority for ensuring safe refugee return, and if they don't, we'll consider the means we can use to see that they do so. The ETF is definitely a possible lever. David Foley: When we talk about possible levers, we are all reminded, perhaps, of the original EASC decision with regard to Drvar. Q: If these people are not returned within 48 hours, what credibility will anybody on this stage or in the international community have with the people in Bosnia Herzegovina? You've been made complete monkeys of over the past weekend-Why should any one in Bosnia Herzegovina take you seriously after this? You've now set a deadline by saying that you expect these people to be back in 48 hours, but we all know that they're not going to be back in that time. What are you going to do about it? Simon Haselock: We're not the people being made monkeys of; the people who are being made monkeys of are the authorities within the Federation, and specifically the cantonal authorities in Jajce who are not fulfilling their obligations under Dayton. We're not here to run this country for them. This is their Peace Agreement and it is their responsibility to ensure that it works. If they want to live together in peace and to establish the Croat conditions to continue in peace, they have to accept responsibility themselves. It's like the drunken brother-in-law syndrome: You can take the alcohol away from him, you can lock it up, you can instruct the bars not to sell him alcohol, you can make sure he doesn't go to supermarkets, but eventually he'll end up drunk on your doorstep unless he admits to himself that he's an alcoholic. This is the same situation here: They have to take responsibility for their own actions. Chris. Q: Chris, it has been said that 1997 was going to be the "year of returns". You've only got about two or three more months before the winter really starts to bite, and as you said last week, only 700 out of half a million Muslims and Croats have managed to get back to Srpska. Presumably, a lot of Serbs also haven't come back here. Is there acknowledgment by the UNHCR at high echelon level that 1997 appears not destined to be the so-called "year of returns" after all? Chris Janowski: This is a year of some returns, since 50,000 people have returned to Bosnia and Herzegovina this year. There have also been some returns within the Federation. The Jajce incidents are a big set back. The problem is, as it has always been since Dayton, that some see belief in Dayton as a selective religion, particularly in the Republika Srpska and Croat-controlled areas. Annex 7 of Dayton is seen as some sort of a little concession, a piece paper that can be ignored. The commitment written in Dayton to refugee minority return is treated as a phony one. It's as if we claim to believe in Dayton, but we only believe in a few commandments. The other commandments we don't like and so we don't abide by them. If this philosophy prevails, the whole Peace Agreement and possibly even peace itself will be threatened. Q: The difference between Jajce and Srpska seems to be that this is in Federation territory. If certain other Federation or Federal police units want to come in and protect those refugees, presumably they can do it. I mean, of course, Muslim police. Would you have objections if armed Muslim police were stationed in these areas even though they are nominally under the Croat Jajce police? Alex Ivanko: Policing is conducted at the canton level and it is the police force of the canton which is in charge of upholding law and order in the canton, so I suspect we may have problems with police units being brought from a different canton, for example, to Jajce. Q: But there's no objection from IPTF, SFOR or the High Representative if police units from another canton-hypothetically-come into the Jajce canton and starting operations? Alex Ivanko: No such request was made. If such a request is made, we will have to look at it's merits and make a decision to allow or not allow this to happen. Q: But would they need UN permission to do this? Alex Ivanko: Well, it is a little outside standard policing when you have police from one canton to move into a different canton, especially since it probably would be without the agreement of the cantonal authorities of the other canton. So yes, it might be an issue in which IPTF would be involved. Simon Haselock: Caroline. Q: Do you have anything in your power that you can actually use to punish the authorities in Jajce for what happened over the weekend and to assure that it doesn't happen again, or is it just words? Simon Haselock: No, there's a precedent for this in terms of what happened in Mostar: We expect the investigations to be carried out by the local police, and those investigations will be monitored and subject to report by the UNIPTF. Then the people identified in that report should be prosecuted and punished according to that prosecution. Secondly, any politicians or people with political influence found to have been involved in this should be removed from office; we will insist that that actually takes place. Q: Are you capable of actually removing them from office, or can you only monitor, write a report, make a recommendation and then expect them to actually remove their own people from office? Simon Haselock: When we have demanded that people be removed from office, it has occurred. Whether they are re-employed in some other capacity is a matter from debate, but we believe we can achieve their removal from office and we will insist upon their removal if they are identified as having been involved in the incidents this weekend. If they aren't removed, we won't do business with them, and that means that they are impotent. Laura. Q: Chris, what provoked this incident in Jajce? Chris Janowski: What provoked it is obviously the return of several hundred people over a few days. We were very pleased that these people were returning, it initially happened without any incidents--I guess it took the Croats a few days to get organized. Simon Haselock: Karen. Q: Simon, do you think that the precedent set in Mostar will be enough to convince the Jajce authorities that they will indeed cooperate with the international community and Carlos Westendorp's- Simon Haselock: That's the position we've taken and we expect them to respond to the demands that we've made. We shouldn't need to make threats like that-they should fulfill their obligations, and we expect them to do that within 48 hours. Q: But in the Mostar incident, you also wanted a proper trial of the people who were photographed shooting at the crowds, and that didn't happen. They were removed from office, but they didn't get the trial that the international community called for. Simon Haselock: No, I agree, and I think that issue is still being pursued. The fact is that they were prosecuted, even though we were not happy with the court case or with the punishments meted out. Q: Alex, you said there were indications that the local police were involved in the standoff-What were those indications? Alex Ivanko: I think I would be prejudging the results of the IPTF investigation if I gave you concrete examples of what we have before the investigation is finished. I can tell you there were indications and there are allegations from individuals that they may have seen people they believe are members of the police force involved in intimidating the refugees. Simon Haselock: Colin. Q: Since you're using Mostar as a precedent, maybe Alex could shed a little light on how successful the incident in Mostar was. Simon Haselock: Let's not push the Mostar - Q: But you've raised it as a precedent- Simon Haselock: No, I haven't used it as a precedent in the sense that you mean. What I am saying is that there is precedence for international pressure having an affect. Nobody would as nave as to assume that the final results of what happened in Mostar were satisfactory. Since this incident is more severe than the one in Mostar, we believe that we will have the desired effect. We expect the people who are found responsible to be punished and we expect anyone in the local authority who has been involved in orchestrating this to be removed from office. Further, we expect that to be more meaningful than that in Mostar. Alex Ivanko: The people that were involved in that incident are no longer in a position of authority. We were unhappy with the trial, but that's being pursued. After that incident and after political pressure was exerted on the authorities in Mostar, we now have at least a joint police force in Mostar. We are on track with setting up the joint police force throughout the canton; the deadline is 15 August. We actually have Bosniacs and Croats patrolling together in East and West Mostar. Q: So you're suggesting this is the result of- Alex Ivanko: It's the result of a number of things, including political pressure exerted on the authorities in that area. Q: David, the OSCE has some power through the EASC; clearly you set a precedent in Drvar connecting the return of refugees and burning of houses to the political leadership there. Now that you've approved the candidate lists, does the EASC or the PEC still have the power to remove candidates from the lists in Jajce if necessary? David Foley: The Election Appeals Sub-Commission will maintain the ability to remove candidates from the municipal elections until final certification of election results. Under the post-election implementation strategy document approved at Sintra, election results will not be certified as final by the PEC until municipal councils have met and carried out certain actions. Therefore, candidates can be removed from party lists even after the elections. Q: The Federal Minister of Refugees, Rasim Kadic, said yesterday that this incident in Jajce might have something to with the visit of a high official of HDZ to Jajce recently. What is your opinion? Simon Haselock: That is what the investigation is going to discover. We believe there may have been influence from the local authorities, as well as political influence. The inference that there was orchestration and collusion is clearly there. Caroline. Q: About the ambassadorial discussions that are going on at the moment-I believe Westendorp said that the clock had stopped on Monday, so the deadline is now tonight. Is the ambassadorial issue agreed? If nothing has happened, then will the capitals take action? Simon Haselock: The capitals have already begun to take action; Mr. Kinkel announced over the weekend that the German government was suspending diplomatic relations with their embassy. Today is Monday; given that it was the weekend when this was announced, we're waiting for other capitals to make their responses. We said that the deadline was Saturday, was midnight on Friday. They hadn't responded by that time, but there was no moving of the deadline-We expect them to agree within the next few days. But we also expect the other capitals who we've exhorted to take up sanctions against them to support us here shortly and to demonstrate that they are doing that. Q: You expect them to agree in the next few days, so they now have a few more days? Simon Haselock: No. The Germans have already suspended relations with them and we expect another capitals to announce the same. That suspension will continue until they actually agree. We believe that they will agree within the next few days, which would allow that suspension to be lifted. Q: You said that 1 August was the deadline for the Presidency of Bosnia Herzegovina to find the ambassadors. They didn't find them, so will you now find the ambassadors? Because it's obvious that each of the three parties want to have their own ambassador in Washington, D.C., and I've heard reports that OHR has found an ambassador from the Serbian side to send to Washington. Is that true? Simon Haselock: We have said that this is an exercise that can be carried out relatively simply by all three of them sitting down and going through the lists and allocating them according to the 1991 census--Or any other formula they are prepared to agree over. They're already close to an agreement, but there are some key ambassadorial posts which have yet to be agreed upon. We expect them to do that within the next couple of days. It is up to them to agree where the ambassadors should go-We're not going to tell them where they should put people. Q: So until they find out who will be the ambassador in Washington or wherever, those embassies will be closed? Simon Haselock: That's up to the authorities here. As far as we're concerned, the governments of those countries where those embassies are should not deal with those embassies. Q: Can you force them to find a solution or not? Simon Haselock: Well, I think that's what we're trying to do now. We're saying that until they agree, we will not deal with any of their ambassadors. Q: David, which media organizations were charging fees? David Foley: I just have general complaints from one political party in particular as to that; it was a general warning, and we're looking into it. Q: And you can't tell me which political party filed the complaint? David Foley: You might check ONASA.