|
 
31 March 2004
Powell Cannot Certify Serbian Cooperation with War Crimes
Tribunal
Excerpt from March 31 State Department Noon Briefing
Secretary of State Colin Powell cannot certify to the U.S. Congress
that Serbia and Montenegro is cooperating with the International Criminal
Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia as required by U.S. law, and therefore
as of March 31st new assistance for Serbia will stop.
So said Deputy State Department Spokesman Adam Ereli at the beginning
of the March 31 State Department briefing.
"We call on the authorities in Belgrade to cooperate fully with the
Tribunal by arresting and transferring their fugitive indictees,
particularly Ratko Mladic, to face justice before the Tribunal," Ereli
said, adding that "if Serbia and Montenegro takes action in the future,
the Secretary is prepared to review such actions to determine whether they
meet the requirements of the law."
Humanitarian assistance, assistance to promote democracy in
municipalities, and assistance to Kosovo and Montenegro are exempted from
the freeze, Ereli noted, declining to specify the amounts frozen.
He also said the United States wants to see Serbia succeed, "and we
want to work together with Serbia to help it meet its international
obligations" so that it can "move forward in full integration with the
Euro-Atlantic community."
Following is an excerpt from the transcript of the March 31 State
Department briefing:
(begin excerpt)
U.S. Department of State
Wednesday, March 31, 2004
Adam Ereli,
Deputy Spokesman
MR. ERELI: Good afternoon, everyone. Let me begin, if I may, with a
brief statement, which we'll be putting out after the briefing today.
Secretary of State Colin Powell has determined, pursuant to Section 572
of the Foreign Operations Export Financing and Related Programs
Appropriations Act, that he cannot certify to Congress that Serbia and
Montenegro is cooperating with the International Criminal Tribunal for the
Former Yugoslavia and, as a result, as of March 31st, new assistance for
Serbia will stop.
We call on the authorities in Belgrade to cooperate fully with the
Tribunal by arresting and transferring their fugitive indictees,
particularly Ratko Mladic, to face justice before the Tribunal.
It's important to point out that if Serbia and Montenegro takes action
in the future, the Secretary is prepared to review such actions to
determine whether they meet the requirements of the law.
QUESTION: Can you confirm the amounts involved? Yesterday, Richard said
it was about a quarter of $100 million. Is that right? Do you have a more
precise figure?
MR. ERELI: Yeah, I'm not going to sort of get into specific amounts
here. What I would tell you is that $100 million has been appropriated in
assistance to Serbia, and the Support to Eastern European Democracies
Budget FY04 has been appropriated. Of that amount, 43 million has been
spent, so that the amount subject to withholding would be the -- would
come from the remainder.
But I would also note that if you look at the Act, humanitarian
assistance, assistance to promote democracy in municipalities and
assistance to Kosovo and Montenegro are exempted from the freeze.
QUESTION: So do you stick with Richard's line from yesterday that about
a quarter of the 100 million is what is affected? Do you have any reason
to doubt that?
MR. ERELI: I wouldn't get into a specific accounting of it because
things can move around within the parameters that I've described. I
wouldn't want to be more specific on how, of the 47 million, how much is
going to be frozen because I'm not aware that a specific determination,
based on what the requirements of the law are, has been made.
QUESTION: 57 million.
MR. ERELI: 43 and 57. Yes, 57.
QUESTION: But in that 57 million, you're saying that there is money
that is not affected; i.e., the money to Kosovo.
MR. ERELI: Yes, yes.
QUESTION: And what else was it?
MR. ERELI: There are three categories that are exempted: humanitarian
assistance and assistance to promote democracy in municipalities and
assistance to Kosovo or Montenegro.
QUESTION: The reason I'm asking is Richard said it on the record, it's
in the transcript, and I think we ought to be given some understanding of
whether we can still go with that.
MR. ERELI: Richard said about a quarter.
QUESTION: Of 100 million.
MR. ERELI: About a quarter.
QUESTION: Right. You okay with that?
MR. ERELI: With the emphasis on "about."
QUESTION: Do you have any idea where it's -- well, I guess you don't
because you can't tell us. But at the moment, how much of that, how much
of the 57 million outstanding, is supposed to go for those three protected
--
MR. ERELI: I don't have a breakdown for you on that.
QUESTION: Do you think you could get that?
MR. ERELI: Um --
QUESTION: Could you take that?
MR. ERELI: I could take it, but I don't know if the answer would be
available today. I mean, it might take a while because of the way the
money is moved around, frankly.
QUESTION: Well, is it possible that that money that is protected -- the
money that is not protected --
MR. ERELI: Exempted. I think the word is exempted.
QUESTION: Right. The money that is -- no, but the money that is
affected by the suspension --
MR. ERELI: Right, right.
QUESTION: -- is it possible that that money could be shifted into one
of these exempt categories?
MR. ERELI: No.
QUESTION: No? Well, then I don't understand how you say it can move
around.
MR. ERELI: Let me give you a considered opinion. Let me take the
question and give you a considered opinion on it.
QUESTION: How many at-large criminals are there besides Mladic, do you
know, in Serbia?
MR. ERELI: We believe that 16 indictees spend a preponderance of their
time in Serbia and Montenegro.
Teri.
QUESTION: Can you tell us what conditions were present this year that
led you to not issue the waiver as you have in other years?
MR. ERELI: Basically, the open presence of indictees in territory under
the control -- in Serbia and Montenegro.
QUESTION: But that's been true -- that's been true since you issued
this law.
MR. ERELI: I would say that if you look at what's happened this year,
Serbia has not acted to arrest or transfer well-known and very prominent
indictees to the Tribunal's jurisdiction, even though political leaders
have called for both the voluntary surrender -- and the government -- of
the indictees as well as the government to take action.
So these are, I think, very open and clear problems that not only us
but people in Serbia have said need to be taken care of.
QUESTION: So you think their behavior has deteriorated.
MR. ERELI: I think we haven't seen -- they have not done things that
have been asked of them.
QUESTION: As they have in previous years?
MR. ERELI: Yeah, they have done things in previous years that they
haven't done in terms -- they have rendered people in previous years.
QUESTION: Okay.
MR. ERELI: Yes.
QUESTION: Change of subject? No?
QUESTION: Just one more. Adam, you mentioned Mladic. Have they -- do we
know of specific instances where Mladic has surfaced and they haven't
captured him?
MR. ERELI: Not that I am aware of, no. I mean, I think what's -- what
we believe is that all indications are that Mladic -- that we believe that
Mladic is in a position to be apprehended and should be apprehended.
Yes.
QUESTION: Different subject?
MR. ERELI: No.
QUESTION: Different subject. No?
MR. ERELI: Same subject.
QUESTION: I have a question on this subject. First, is the U.S.
Administration taking into consideration the fact that the government in
Belgrade is actually new, that it was recently formed, and also, the
current events in Kosovo?
MR. ERELI: I would refer you to the remarks by Under Secretary Grossman
in Serbia yesterday where he noted that, in his meetings, that he came
away with the belief that the leadership there recognizes its
responsibilities, are eager to meet their responsibilities, that
cooperation with the United States is certainly possible, and that the
government there is prepared to work with us.
I would also make, you know, the important point here that we want to
see Serbia succeed, and we want to work together with Serbia to help it
meet its international obligations, and so that we can all, you know, move
forward in full integration with the Euro-Atlantic community.
QUESTION: Serbia, yesterday, adopted a law on providing assistance for
The Hague indictees. Will this have a negative effect on future
consideration of assistance?
MR. ERELI: I wouldn't want to get into that kind of speculation. We did
see the passage or did note the passage of that legislation, which
basically extended benefits that were being paid to family members of
indictees, extending those benefits to the indictees and the defendants
themselves.
I wouldn't want to speculate on what prompted the Serbian parliament to
pass this legislation. For our part, our focus is on -- is not on the
government -- on assistance that the government may extend to the families
of the indictees, but rather on seeing that the indictees that remain
fugitives in Serbia, such as Ratko Mladic, are brought to justice.
QUESTION: Do you see anything wrong with it? I mean, these people have
been indicted but they haven't actually been convicted, so why shouldn't
they continue to get paid?
MR. ERELI: Like I said, I'm not going to comment on domestic Serbian
jurisdiction. Our focus is on getting the fugitive indictees before the
court. That's what Serbia's international obligation is and that's what we
want to help them fulfill.
QUESTION: Do you have any reason to believe that they're acting any
more vigorously to try to fulfill those obligations?
MR. ERELI: I think, put simply, there's important things that haven't
been done and there's more that needs to be done. That assessment is
reflected in the decision not to certify.
[...]
(end excerpt)
(Distributed by the Bureau of International Information Programs, U.S.
Department of State. Web site: http://usinfo.state.gov)
|
