[Congressional Record Volume 146, Number 47 (Thursday, April 13, 2000)]
[Senate]
[Pages S2700-S2706]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
SOUTHEASTERN EUROPE: OBSERVATIONS AND OUTLOOK
Mr. VOINOVICH. Mr. President, when the bombing ceased, and Serbian
military forces withdrew from the Kosovo province, most Americans
believed that the end of the air war meant the end of the United
States' involvement in the Balkans. Such a misconception is due
primarily to the fact that the political and military situation in the
Balkans, as well as U.S. foreign policy towards the region, remains
largely unknown to the vast majority of Americans.
Because of my belief that the Balkan region is key to our strategic
interests in Europe, earlier this year, I traveled to the Republic of
Croatia, the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Kosovo and
Brussels, Belgium in order to examine the humanitarian, economic,
political and security situation in Southeastern Europe. Today, I would
like to take this opportunity to share some of my observations with my
colleagues and the American people.
Before I proceed further, I would like to publicly thank U.S.
Ambassador to Croatia, William Montgomery, U.S. Ambassador to
Macedonia, Michael Einik, Chief of the U.S. Mission to
[[Page S2701]]
Kosovo, Larry Rossin, U.S. Ambassador to NATO, Sandy Vershbow and U.S.
Ambassador to the EU, Richard Morningstar. They are fine
representatives of our nation, and they are doing an outstanding job to
help bring peace and stability to this sensitive part of the world.
I would also like to thank our U.S. embassy staff in Croatia,
Macedonia, the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) and the
European Union (EU). In addition, I would like to thank the personnel
who comprise the U.S. Mission in Kosovo, the Department of State, the
Department of Defense, and the U.S. Army--especially Colonel Timothy
Peterson, who accompanied me on this trip and also provided his
valuable insight and expertise on the region.
I would further like to thank Senator Fred Thompson, my chairman on
the Governmental Affairs Committee, for giving me the opportunity and
the Committee authorization to take this trip.
Finally, I would like to thank our men and women in uniform who
provided such invaluable assistance during my travels in the region.
They have my gratitude, and I believe the gratitude of our nation
should go out to our peacekeeping force in Kosovo. We have a tremendous
team working on our behalf in the region, and all Americans should be
proud of their tireless efforts to help promote peace and protect the
interests of the United States in southeastern Europe.
Mr. President, one of the more encouraging developments I observed in
my trip to the Balkans was a new positive spirit that seems to be
emerging in a number of nations in the region.
In my visit to Croatia, I had the opportunity to meet with the newly-
elected president of Croatia, Stipe Mesic.
President Mesic is a bright, engaging, well-spoken gentleman with a
tremendous understanding of the varied and complex issues facing his
country. More importantly, he has a clear concept--supported by his
electorate--of the direction his country should take for the future.
President Mesic is pleased that the region finally seems to have
abandoned the two terrible ideas that have caused so much bloodshed
over the last decade--the dream of a ``Greater Serbia'' and the dream
of a ``Greater Croatia.'' In an indication of his commitment to ending
these disastrous notions, he expressed to me his support for sending
individuals responsible for war crimes that have taken place over the
last decade to the International Criminal Tribunal for prosecution.
He is also committed to fully returning to Croatia those refugees who
were displaced after conflict swept the nation in the 1990's. He
understands that a functional economy, the establishment of private
property rights and the rule of law are key to the return of these
refugees.
President Mesic appeared to understand that the future of
southeastern Europe is linked to minority rights and that redrawing
international boundaries along ethnic lines is fundamentally
unworkable--we need only witness the ongoing debacle in Bosnia for such
an example. With this realization on the need to consider minority
rights, he plans on appealing to the best instincts in his people to
put aside ethnic hatred, so that they and their nation may move ahead.
He has stated that he looks forward to serving as the President of all
of the Croatian people, regardless of their ethnicity. If lines are not
going to be redrawn, then a major hurdle to domestic peace in Croatia
will have been removed.
It is my understanding that Prime Minister Racan, who I did not have
the opportunity to meet since he was out of the country during my
visit, seems committed to these principles as well. I'm also encouraged
that Parliamentary President Zlatko Tomcic, Deputy Parliamentary
President Zdravko Tomac, Serbian Member of Parliament Milan Djukic and
Serbian Democratic Forum President Veljko Dzakula--all of whom I met in
Croatia--appear to be supportive.
I was also pleased to meet with Macedonia's President Boris
Trajkovski, the Macedonian Prime Minister, Ljubco Georgievski, and
Arben Xhaferi, the leader of Macedonia's ethnic Albanian community.
They seem to have been able to successfully bridge the domestic ethnic
problems that have been at the heart of the various conflicts that have
decimated southeastern Europe over the last ten years.
As many of my colleagues may recall, Macedonia was seen as another
potential flashpoint during the course of the Kosovo bombing campaign
as the Macedonian people became polarized either in favor, or against,
NATO's actions. This possibility seems to have been successfully
averted because Macedonians do not generally possess the same kind of
ethnic hatreds towards their minority community that have plagued other
nations in the region.
Domestic peace and stability has been achieved in Macedonia by
appealing to the best instincts in people, rather than the worst. The
elected leadership has made it clear that the ethnic Albanian
community, which makes up roughly 25% to 30% of the population, is an
integral and respected component of society. Because of this, minority
rights are, by and large, protected, and the rule of law is, for the
most part, very well respected. The importance of these trends cannot
be understated.
I was particularly interested to hear President Trajkovski discuss
the amazing recovery of Macedonia's economy. When the nation separated
from the FRY in 1991, Macedonia's per capita income immediately started
sliding downward, dropping 40 percent. This decline was clearly
exacerbated by the Kosovo bombing campaign.
Nevertheless, in recent months, the economy has staged a dramatic
turnaround because of stable and progressive leadership, market reforms
and economic activity as a result of Macedonia's serving as a staging
point for KFOR. Macedonia is beginning the slow process of returning to
its pre-independence level of economic activity. More importantly, the
EU, as a part of its new focus on the Balkans region, has established a
relationship with Macedonia intended to lead to its eventual membership
in the European Union, a commitment that had never been made before the
Kosovo war. Given my belief that integration of the nations of the
region into the broader European community is essential to long-term
peace and stability, this is a dramatic development.
At the headquarters of the United Nations Mission in Kosovo (UNMIK)
in Pristina, Kosovo, I had the opportunity to sit down and meet with
several key leaders of the Kosovo Albanian community and
representatives on the Interim Administrative Council--Dr. Ibrahim
Rugova, Mr. Hashim Thaci and Dr. Rexhep Qosja. This was an
extraordinary meeting given the historical animosity between these
leaders.
All three leaders made a very clear promise to me that they were
committed to a multi-ethnic, democratic Kosovo, one that would respect
the rights of all ethnic minorities. I was heartened to hear these
comments. This commitment could serve as the basis for long-term peace
and stability in Kosovo.
In response, I said that they could go down in history as truly great
men were they to make this commitment a reality. I explained that the
historic cycle of revenge in Kosovo must end and minority rights must
be respected--including the sanctity of churches and monasteries. This
would be the key to the future of Kosovo.
I traveled to Brussels to make my feelings known to the leadership of
the European Union (EU) regarding their lack of leadership and
commitment to the problems facing southeastern Europe. I met with U.S.
Ambassador to the EU, Richard Morningstar and U.S. Ambassador to NATO,
Alexander Vershbow and with other leaders of NATO and the EU. I was
pleasantly surprised to learn that the Europeans basically ``get it.''
That is, they understand that unless the Balkan region is fully
integrated into the broader European community, the region will
``Balkanize Europe.'' This is the same message I have been saying for
months. I was pleased to see the Europeans taking the necessary steps
that will eventually include the nations of the region in the EU and
NATO.
I think it is important to highlight the level of support the
Europeans are providing the region. They have budgeted six billion
euros (basically $6 billion) over the next six years to help bring
Romania and Bulgaria into the EU. They have also prepared to provide
[[Page S2702]]
5.5 billion euros (again, roughly $5.5 billion) over the same time
period to implement the three initiatives of the Stability Pact--
democratization, security, and regional infrastructure development.
Of the total financial support committed to Kosovo by the
international community, including humanitarian, development, economic
recovery and reconstruction assistance, the EU has pledged 35.5
percent. The U.S. has pledged 15.4 percent.
Of the total amount pledged for the operations of UNMIK, the EU has
pledged 41.4 percent, the U.S. 13.2 percent.
I ask unanimous consent that a document detailing these burden-
sharing numbers be printed in the Record.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
(See Exhibit 1.)
Mr. VOINOVICH. We need to understand that while the Europeans are
handling the bulk of the spending in the region, we must also be
willing to come to the table to provide leadership. The importance of
the United States to provide leadership was underscored by members of
NATO and the EU, particularly those countries benefitting from the
Stability Pact.
One of the highlights of my trip was the opportunity I had to spend
time with our troops in Macedonia and Kosovo. There are few things that
make me more proud of being an American than seeing the pride,
professionalism, sense of duty and commitment in the faces of our young
people in uniform.
I was especially happy to spend time with the 321st Psychological
Operations Company, Task Force Falcon, which was deployed from Ohio and
stationed at Camp Bondsteel in Kosovo. It gave me the chance to
interact with these fine men and women from Ohio and hear their views
on their mission in Kosovo. It also gave me the opportunity to visit
with my friend, Major Wendell Bugg, whom I've known since my days as
Governor. He is with the 321st and is doing a wonderful job. It was
great to see him and get reacquainted.
And, Mr. President, I can't forget the unsung heroes of Kosovo--the
men and women of the various humanitarian missions. I had the
opportunity to meet with representatives from all of the major
humanitarian aid organizations involved in Kosovo and Macedonia. I
truly admire the service these people provide their fellow man. They
are on the front lines daily, helping people, making a difference. To
all of them I say, keep up the good work. Their efforts are key to
stability in southeastern Europe and in responding to basic human
needs.
While I encountered many encouraging prospects for regional peace and
prosperity during my trip, I also identified a number of challenges the
region and the international community are facing.
While there is ample reason to be optimistic about the future of
Croatia under the leadership of President Mesic and Prime Minister
Racan, there are also reasons to be concerned. The Croatian economy has
been struggling for years. Unemployment and inflation rates are high.
The country is deep in debt internationally. Many skilled, well-
educated young people have left the country for better job prospects
elsewhere. This has effectively created a ``brain drain,'' which,
unless it is stemmed, will have a negative impact for decades. For
Croatia to continue on its new path, away from its nationalist past,
the economy must improve. If a solid market economy cannot take hold,
there is a very real possibility that the Croatian people will grow
impatient with President Mesic and Prime Minister Racan and seek to
replace them; possibly with individuals who would rule the country
under nationalist communist ideology.
The other problem facing the Croatian economy is in the area of
refugee returns. As my colleagues may know, the majority of the
civilians forced out of their homes during the conflicts of the early
1990's still have not returned to their homes. Even as President Mesic
works to implement his campaign commitment to create a legal
environment where minority rights are protected, people will not return
to their homes--if their home still exists--if there is no work for
them when they return. Thus, Croatia's struggling economy does impact
and will continue to impact the entire region.
Current trends in Macedonia suggest the existence of an extremist
element within the ethnic Albanian community. These individuals are
willing to resort to violence in order to destabilize the sitting
democratically-elected government of Macedonia, and put in its place a
government run by Albanians, for Albanians. These extremists are
beginning to make their presence felt with the government in Macedonia.
It will take a tremendous commitment on the part of the current
government to maintain a democratic, multi-ethnic form of government in
Macedonia in the face of this threat.
A major impediment to peace and prosperity in southeastern Europe is
the rise in organized crime. There have been a number of recent reports
indicating that the Balkans region is being used more and more
frequently as a transshipment point for illegal narcotics and arms.
These reports were echoed by nearly everyone I spoke with on the trip.
With this illicit trade comes violence, corruption, a lack of foreign
investment and general societal havoc. As the nations of the region
work to establish the rule of law, a functional judicial system and
prosperous economies, I believe America and European nations must offer
their crime-fighting expertise in order to help the Balkan nations
shape their own future and steer clear from the menace of organized
crime.
A tremendous concern that Dr. Bernard Kouchner, civilian head of the
UNMIK operation, brought to the forefront was that the international
community must be more active in their dispersal of aid-money pledged
to the region, and in particular, the EU needed to be a more active
participant in this area. Indeed, the EU has only dispersed 13.3
percent of the money they have pledged to UNMIK thus far. The EU has a
number of strong arguments to explain their delay, including the nature
of their fiscal cycle, the various mechanisms in place to prevent fraud
and abuse, the unwieldy nature of the body, etc. Regardless, the fact
is that the money has to be put on the table. As I mentioned before,
the U.S. is doing its fair share given the role we played during the
course of the bombing campaign. Now is the time for the Europeans to do
theirs.
Throughout my trip to the Balkans, all signs pointed to the fact that
the Stability Pact was not being implemented to the benefit of the
region.
I believe that the Stability Pact represents one of the few good
things that resulted from the Kosovo bombing campaign. Under the
Stability Pact, the Europeans, with the leadership of the Germans and
the French, agreed to work towards the gradual integration of the
nations of southeastern Europe into the broader European community. In
practice, this means EU and NATO membership. In exchange, the nations
of the Balkan region must agree to put aside the ethnic divisions and
nationalism that has caused so much death and destruction in recent
years. This compact, if implemented, would be a gigantic leap forward.
Unfortunately, so far, not much has happened with the Pact. Meetings
and conferences between government bureaucrats have been held. There
have been a lot of speeches, studies, conversations, debates, and the
like, but nothing has really happened ``on the ground'' in the region.
I believe the Pact must move ahead with infrastructure projects that
benefit the economies of the region. Start building bridges. Start
cleaning the Danube River. Start building ``Corridor Eight,'' which
will create an East-West railway/roadway travel corridor to stimulate
commerce. Just start doing something!
I am somewhat heartened by the results of the Stability Pact
conference in Brussels 2 weeks ago. There, 4 dozen countries and 3
dozen organizations pledged 2.4 billion Euros to fully-finance a 1.8
billion Euro ``Quick Start'' package of regional economic development
and infrastructure projects and initiatives in southeast Europe over
the next twelve months. I believe this commitment represents one of the
first positive steps that has been taken since the end of the air war
towards restoring peace and stability to the region.
Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to insert into the Record at
the
[[Page S2703]]
end of my remarks a statement that was made by the Honorable Nadezhda
Mihailova, Foreign Minister of the Republic of Bulgaria, regarding
Bulgaria's perspective on southeastern Europe prior to the Stability
Pact Conference.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
(See Exhibit 2.)
Mr. VOINOVICH. The deeds of the Kosovar Albanians are not matching
the rhetoric of the Albanian leadership. As recent press reports have
made clear, NATO is facing another potential crisis in Kosovo.
Extremist members of the ethnic Albanian community--some have argued
under the direction of Hashim Thaci--have refused to put down their
arms, put aside their desire for revenge against the Serbs, and work
towards peace. Rather, they are intent on pushing the Serbs, with
bombings, assassinations, threats, etc. to force a response from
Slobodan Milosevic in Belgrade. Today, Kosovo Serbs are being killed,
their monasteries are being burned, and they are afraid to leave their
homes. This is not KFOR's fault. This is not UNMIK's fault. Radical
elements within the Kosovo Albanian community are responsible for
continued attacks against the dwindling Serb community in Kosovo. I am
concerned that many in the Kosovo Albanian community want to force
another confrontation between NATO and Milosevic so Kosovo can finally
be rid of the Serb community and establish itself as an independent
nation.
Let me be clear. The same group our State Department once called a
terrorist organization--the KLA--whom we embraced as our friends and
allies when NATO was bombing, are again becoming terrorists. They are
working against the healing of Kosovo. Our message must be clear to
Thaci, Rugova, Qosja and their Kosovo Albanian followers--stop this
violence against the Serb community or the U.S. will pull out our
troops. I said this directly to Thaci, Rugova and Qosja when I met
them. As much as I want southeast Europe, including Kosovo and Serbia,
to be integrated into the European community, I will work against it if
the cycle of violence continues. The Kosovo Albanians have a historic
opportunity to choose between two very different paths for the future--
integration or continued isolation. The choice is theirs to make and
the world will be watching.
Let me now turn to the Kosovo Serbs. They have suffered a great deal
since the end of the Kosovo bombing campaign at the hands of certain
elements within the Albanian community seeking revenge. However, the
Kosovo Serbs' continued refusal to participate in UNMIK's Interim
Administrative Council is unacceptable. I took the same message I made
to the Albanians to the Serbs--stop the cycle of violence and move
ahead towards reconciliation.
Decisions are going to be made regarding the future of Kosovo with or
without Serbian participation. It is in their best interest to become
involved. I am somewhat heartened that Bishop Artemjie's visit to the
U.S. has prompted some progress towards getting the Kosovo Serbs to
participate in the Interim Administrative Council. I understand that as
a result of his visit, discussions are taking place that would allow
the development of several media outlets within Kosovo. I am hopeful
that this will serve as the impetus to get the Serb community in Kosovo
involved in the Interim Administrative Council. It will require
diligence and co-operation on a multi-ethnic approach, but I believe it
will ultimately serve to draw the whole of Kosovo society together and
stop the killing and violence and fear for life, limb and property that
permeates the minority community in Kosovo.
Meanwhile, NATO continues to struggle with Milosevic's meddling hands
in Kosovo. He has a group of extremist Kosovo Serbs, mainly situated
around Mitrovica, agitating the situation in Kosovo whenever possible
in an effort to encourage NATO to pack up and go home. He must not
succeed. NATO must stand strong and refuse to accept any more
provocations. They should seize illegal weapons and jail law-breakers
and agitators. NATO forces should take the enemies of peace off the
streets and shut-down the extremists of both sides. De-fusing the
situation will lower tensions and allow the mainstream people of Kosovo
to move forward with their future.
Last month, I introduced S. Res. 272 which I believe effectively
addresses this issue, and many more. On Milosevic, the Resolution makes
it clear that he continues to be the heart of the problem in the
region. In order to encourage democratic change, the Resolution:
Expresses the readiness of the Senate, once there is a democratic
government in Serbia, to review conditions for Serbia's full
reintegration into the international community;
Expresses its readiness to assist a future democratic government in
Serbia to build a democratic, peaceful, and prosperous society, based
on the same principle of respect for international obligations, as set
out by the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE)
and the United Nations, which guide the relations of the United States
with other countries in southeastern Europe; and
Calls upon the United States and other Western democracies to
publicly announce and demonstrate to the Serbian people the magnitude
of assistance they could expect after democratization.
I ask unanimous consent that the full text of S. Res. 272 be printed
in the Record at the conclusion of my remarks.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
(See Exhibit 3.)
Mr. VOINOVICH. Mr. President, the NATO KFOR troops are in Kosovo to
provide a secure environment for all citizens while civic institutions
develop. The UNMIK structure, which I will address momentarily, has
been charged with this civic development--this nation building. One of
the key elements in this process is the establishment of a functional
judicial system, including a functional police force. It is hoped that
once properly trained, this police force will eventually take the
responsibility for domestic law enforcement from the KFOR troops.
The international community has promised to supply 4,433 police for
this UN force in Kosovo. Our European friends have committed the bulk
of this total. However, only 2,359 police are in place in Kosovo. This
is appalling.
As a rule, our European allies have national police systems rather
than state or provincial police forces like we do in the U.S. This
matters because it gives the national governments--governments that
have promised to put their police in Kosovo to serve in the UN body--
the ability to simply direct redeployments to meet their commitments.
This lack of will and action is truly appalling. To provide context, I
think it is important to note that we have had to recruit the American
men and women serving with the UN in Kosovo from our state and local
police departments. The best information I have shows that we have put
481 people, out of our total commitment of 550, in place in Kosovo. If
we can meet our promises through recruitment, surely our European
friends can meet theirs through directives.
This all matters because the sooner the UN police force and a
judicial system is operational in Kosovo, the sooner our troops can
come home.
One of the issues hardly considered when NATO became involved in
Kosovo was the development of an end game. Well, now we know why. We
are, in fact, building a nation. I understand no one is willing to say
this publicly but we need to be truthful: the international community--
using UNMIK as its tool on the ground--is building a new nation in
Kosovo. It's all-encompassing. From schools, to roads, to power grids,
to taxation, to local elections, to municipal councils, to the judicial
system--it is all now our responsibility because we won the war.
In conclusion, I would like to address those cynics who believe we
should immediately pull out of Kosovo and the Balkans because they
believe we will never successfully bring about peace in the region.
These cynics often point to the historical hatred between the ethnic
groups in the region as an indication that NATO and the UN are doomed
to fail. I disagree. We can make a difference and history supports my
view.
Consider the centuries of animosity and hatred between the nations of
western Europe. Few would have thought that the bitter adversaries at
the heart of two world wars last century could be looking to a new
century
[[Page S2704]]
where borders are crossed without passports, where there is freedom of
labor movement, and where there is no military presence on the borders.
It happened because the nations of western Europe were willing to put
aside centuries of hatred, revenge and ethnic prejudice and break the
cycle of violence. If it could happen there, it can happen in southeast
Europe.
One of the Beatitudes states that ``blessed are the peacemakers, for
they shall be called the children of God'' (Matthew 5:9). With these
words in mind, our efforts must be redoubled so that we may help bring
peace, stability and prosperity to southeastern Europe.
Exhibit 1
Southeastern Europe Funding
Southeastern Europe (includes humanitarian, development,
economic recovery and reconstruction assistance--
military, security and assessed expenditures are not
included)
The international community, led by the United States, the
European Union and international financial institutions, has
pledged $4.033 billion in support for southeastern Europe for
the year 2000. A complete list of the nations involved in
this effort appears below:
[In billions of dollars]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
EU U.S. EU + \1\
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Amount pledged............................ $1.398 $0.3764 $1.853.2
Amount pledged as a percentage of the 34.7% 9.3% 45.9%
total....................................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ EU + Individual European Nations (EU and Non-EU Members).
Kosovo Total (includes humanitarian, development, economic
recovery and reconstruction assistance--military,
security and assessed expenditures are not included)
The international community, led by the United States, the
European Union and international financial institutions, has
pledged $1.013 billion in support for Kosovo for the year
2000. Again, a complete list of the nations involved in this
effort appears below:
[In millions of dollars]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
EU US EU + \1\
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Amount pledged............................ $360 $156.6 651.1
Amount pledged as a percentage of the 35.5% 15.4% 64.2%
total....................................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\EU + Individual European Nations (EU and Non-EU Members).
UNITED NATIONS MISSION IN KOSOVO (UNMIK) OPERATING EXPENSES
[In millions of dollars]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
EU US Total
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pledged................................... $75 $24 $181.3
Dispersed................................. 10 14 71.8
Amount pledged as a percentage of the 41.4% 13.2% ........
total:...................................
Percentage of pledge dispersed:........... 13.3% 58.3% ........
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Assessed Contributions for United Nations Staff
The U.S. is assessed 25 percent of the United Nations
regular budget. This budget is used to fund the staff
involved with the United Nations Mission in Kosovo (UNMIK).
UN POLICE
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total US
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pledged............................................. 4433 550
Fielded............................................. 2359 481
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Expense: $93 million (for both FY99 and FY00). The FY00
supplemental includes a request for an additional $12.4
million to increase the number of Americans serving in the UN
police force to 685 (from 550).
KFOR Troops
Peacekeepers
Total............................................................38,000
U.S.........................................................5,800-6,200
The U.S. also has an additional 1,000 troops deployed in
countries surrounding Kosovo to provide support for the
operation.
Using 6,000 American troops (the average of the estimates),
the U.S. has deployed 15.8 percent of the total forces
involved in the KFOR operation.
Costs
In billions
Initial Deployment (FY99)..........................................$1.2
$1.9g Operations (FY00)..............................................
____
Exhibit 2
Statement of Hon. Nadezhda Mihailova, Foreign Minister of the Republic
of Bulgaria
As the United States discusses assistance to Southeastern
Europe prior to the Stability Pact financing conference in
Brussels on March 29-30, 2000, I believe it is important to
provide you with the Bulgarian perspective.
Before I speak to the contributions Bulgaria will make to
peace and security in Southeast Europe, let me tell you a
little about the distance Bulgaria has traveled since 1989.
In 1989, Bulgaria shared the plight of all the former
Warsaw Pact countries. My generation inherited a country
without democratic institutions, without the basic mechanisms
of a market economy, and without a balance of political power
based on trust between the citizens of Bulgaria and their
government. Indeed, we had only two assets that proved to be
of value: Bulgaria's 1300-year history as a state deeply
involved in the history of Europe and a highly self-confident
and self-reliant population.
Many of those who were committed to rebuilding a Bulgarian
democracy, myself included, spent the early years of the
1990's in Europe and the United States refining our political
thinking. I myself benefited from the National Endowment for
Democracy (NED) established by Congress to fan the flames of
freedom and in 1991-92, I specialized in foreign policy and
public relations in the US Congress and Harvard University.
By 1996 Peter Stoyanov was elected President. Bulgaria had
begun to turn the corner in its transition to a market
economy and the election of Prime Minister Kostov and his
Government gave a strong impetus to this process. A new
generation of Bulgarians was ready to begin our drive for
full integration (actually re-integration) into the
institutions of the Euro-Atlantic community.
In the few short years in which I have been fortunate to
serve as Foreign Minister, Bulgaria has been identified as
one of the most qualified candidates under consideration for
NATO membership. We have been invited by the European Union
to begin accession negotiations on full membership and we
allied ourselves with other democracies in resisting the
depredations of Milosevic during the Kosovo War. Today, the
values of freedom and democracy and the commitment to Euro-
Atlantic cooperation form the foundation of our foreign
policy. Our country is firmly dedicated to progressive but
prompt integration into the European community.
I can state with considerable pride that Bulgaria has made
great progress in the establishment of a robust and permanent
pluralistic democracy and in building the structures to
support a modern market economy. On the political side, we
have reestablished institutions that guarantee democracy, the
rule of law, human rights, and ensure respect for and
protection of minorities. On the economic side, Bulgaria has
concentrated its efforts on the consolidation of market
reforms, the acceleration of privatization, and the juridical
measures a functioning market economy requires to operate
openly and transparently.
These reforms have already produced significant improvement
in the macroeconomic situation in Bulgaria. In 1998, we had a
remarkably low annual inflation rate of 1%, after a horrible
578.6% in 1997. In 1999, the inflation rate increased to 6.2%
mainly due to the obstruction of the Danube River, which
damaged our trade relations with Europe. In 1998-99 our
budget deficit was almost zero and we achieved a 3% growth in
GDP. Additionally, the government maintains a high-level of
hard currency reserves accounting for more than 30% of GDP.
We have completed the difficult task of liquidating state
enterprises and banks undergoing losses. Privatization of
Bulgaria's largest companies is nearly complete. My country
has also begun to apply the rules of the European Monetary
Union and the use of the Euro-currency. The European Union
accession process will provide the Bulgarian economy a
further impetus for development. The full introduction of
European rules and practices in this rapidly growing emerging
market should make Bulgaria very attractive for foreign
investment. At the same time, by expanding its borders to
include Bulgaria, the EU will come closer to regions, rich in
natural resources and of great economic potential, with which
Bulgaria has traditional economic ties.
In the foreign policy arena, Bulgaria has clearly and
consistently defined its strategic goals. NATO membership,
accession to the European Union, and dedication to lasting
political stabilization for Southeastern Europe. After years
of political legal, social and economic reform, our country
began official negotiations with the EU last month. Full
membership into the European Union is a strategic goal that
enjoys wide support throughout Bulgarian society. The long
cherished aspirations of the Bulgarian people for sharing
the identity and the political future of a united Europe
will be substantially advanced by our accession in the EU.
But this step alone is insufficient.
Bulgaria's aspiration to join the European Union and NATO
are motivated not only by its own economic interests and
security reasons, but also by the desire to help strengthen
the Euro-Atlantic community by promoting democracy throughout
all the nations of Southeast Europe. Thus, Bulgaria's long-
term foreign policy interests can only be served by joining
with its neighbors in the effort to consolidate regional
stability and security.
We believe that a safe and prosperous home can be built
only in a safe and prosperous neighborhood.
Thus, only primary foreign policy goals in Southeast Europe
are to:
Develop bilateral relations with all countries of the
region based on a shared commitment to democratic values and
human rights;
Mobilize and accelerate regional economic development
through joint infrastructure projects, trade and investment
encouragement, etc.;
Expand the scope of arms control, and support other
measures for strengthening confidence and security;
Implement bilateral and multilateral measures for
restricting new security risks, including regional programs
aimed at combating transborder crime;
[[Page S2705]]
Play an active role in implementing the goals of the
Stability Pact for Southeastern Europe.
A defining principle of Bulgaria's foreign policy with its
neighbors has been to address and resolve contentious issues
in pursuit of balanced bilateral relations. This bold
approach has recently led to the resolution of some of the
region's diplomatic divisions. Successes include re-opening
relations between Bulgaria and the Republic of Macedonia
(Bulgaria strongly supports Macedonia and as you know, was
the first country in the world to recognize Macedonia) and
the resolution of all disputed issues and development of
equally friendly relations with Greece and Turkey. In
addition, just last month, Bulgaria and Romania reached
agreement on building a second bridge on the Danube River
between Vidin and Kalafat. This agreement, I would argue,
highlights the important strategic role Bulgaria can play in
the context of regional political and economic stabilization
as well as promoting the integration of Southeast Europe into
the Euro-Atlantic community.
As an illustration of our efforts to enhance regional
cooperation, Prime Minister Ivan Kostov organized a meeting
in January with the Prime Ministers of the countries
bordering the Former Republic of Yugoslavia. The basic goal
of this meeting was to encourage broad discussion on how to
pursue joint stabilization efforts. We also sought to send a
clear message to the international community reflecting the
view of these Southeastern European leaders.
Only a few weeks ago the first trilateral meeting of the
foreign ministers of Bulgaria, Turkey and Greece took place
that was generally estimated as a new step in building new
patterns of relations in the region.
In addition, last month, Bulgaria joined six other nations
in signing a 21-point charter to further democratic and
economic development in the region. We pledged to support
good neighborly relations, stability, security, and
cooperation in Southeast Europe.
The United States does not need to be reminded that without
Hungary, Romania, Greece, Turkey and Bulgaria working
together, the containment of Serbian aggression and the
eventual democratization of all of the Balkans will be
impossible.
President Clinton's visit to Sofia last year and numerous
conversations I have had with Lord Robertson and General
Clark, serve to reinforce the role Bulgaria has played in
developing and promoting multilateral cooperation in
Southeast Europe and in standing firm with NATO during the
Kosovo crisis. It is because of our past contributions and
the pivotal role we can play in the region that the Bulgarian
city of Plovdiv was chosen as the headquarters of the newly
established Multinational Peace-keeping Forces in Southeast
Europe.
Events in Serbia and Kosovo last year, however, adversely
affected the economics of the region. We suffered direct
losses in trade as a result of transportation difficulties
and foreign investment in Bulgaria declined because the
neighborhood was, and still is to some degree, perceived
as unsafe and unreliable for foreign investors.
Bulgaria's view for the future of Southeast Europe is for
the region to transform into a source of economic growth and
an active link between Western Europe and the adjacent area
to the northeast and southeast, whose strategic importance
will continue to increase in this century. This vision is
based, among other things, on the understanding that the
region has an important place in the overall geopolitical
architecture of Europe.
The present level of interdependence among countries and
the status of Southeast Europe's political and economic
development directly impacts the entire European continent.
In addition, security and stability in the region represents
an important element of the European security architecture,
and therefore is of strategic importance to the US.
That is precisely the reason why we are strongly encouraged
by the growing involvement of the Euro-Atlantic community
with the issues expressed in the Stability Pact promotion of
security, democracy and economic development in the Balkans.
This engagement marks the beginning of an approach that is
fundamentally different from the past. It does not mean
temporary crisis-management measures, but rather a move
beyond this to a comprehensive effort to find a common
concept for development of the region and its full
integration into the Euro-Atlantic community.
Now is the time--nearly one year after the crisis in
Kosovo--to turn the financial commitments made by the
European Union into reality. We seek the support and
leadership of the international community, and particularly
the United States to transform the Stability Pact's long-term
vision for ``integrating the Balkans into Europe'' into a
concrete policy, with structured benchmarks backed by
financial resources. The goal should not only be to
neutralize the immediate consequences of the Kosovo crisis,
but also to find solutions to the problems of economic
development in the region as a whole. Cooperation and full
integration of the region with a prospering and democratic
Europe can be achieved only through integration on all
fronts--political, economic, and financial. However, it is
impossible to expect quick developments if no money comes to
the region. We believe that funds should be devoted to long-
term regional goals like transportation routes,
infrastructure development, and improving specific
institutions that can facilitate the links between the
countries, such as customs operations, drug control and
combating corruption.
Our key priorities for Stability Pact assistance include:
1. Construction of the Trans-European Transport Corridor
#4. This project will connect Central Europe with Bulgaria
and Macedonia and includes construction of a second bridge
over the Danube at Vidin-Calafat. The bridge will replace the
ferry, decreasing travel time and eliminating the need to
load and unload cargo. The project also includes construction
of road and railway approaches, as well as border and customs
infrastructure. The budget for the bridge is estimated to be
US $177 million. Included in this cost are road connections
to the bridge from Romania and Bulgaria. The project is
expected to take 3\1/2\ years.
2. Construction of a regional section of Trans-European
Transport Corridor #8. This project, estimated at US$10
million, involves construction of a 2.5-km railway connecting
Gyueshevo, Bulgaria with the Macedonian border. This project
will greatly improve the capacity of Trans-European Corridor
#8. Project coordinators can make use of the partially
installed track, and will need to construct a ballast prism,
lay additional rails, complete and install electrification of
a 500-meter tunnel, and improve border railway station and
facilities. US $1.1 million has already been invested to
modernize Gyueshevo station, which started in the second
quarter of 1998.
Completion of a new railroad between Beliakovitsa,
Macedonia and the Bulgarian border is critical for effective
functioning of the transportation corridor and requires an
additional investment of US $220 million.
Reconstruction of the railway track between Radomir and
Gyueshevo in Bulgaria is also necessary. This project
includes laying electrical lines on 88 km of railway to
increase maximum train speed from 65-75 to 160 km/h. It will
cost US $93 million and is expected to take three years.
3. Pipeline for light fuels. US $40 million is needed to
construct a 110-km pipeline from Thtiman, Bulgaria to
Koumanova, Macedonia. This project also includes construction
of petrol depot in Kriva Palanka or Koumanova.
4. Increased electrification of the railway between
Karnobat and Sindel, Bulgaria. This project includes
reconstruction and expansion of electrification along an
existing 123-km railway line in order to increase
transmission capacity and allow a maximum speed of 130 km/hr.
Estimated cost of this project is US $125 million, of which
US $38 million has already been spent. Additional funds would
allow the project, part of Transport Corridor #8, to continue
immediately.
5. Construction of an Information Center for Democratic
Development for Southeastern Europe. The Center will
contribute to the development and strengthening of democracy
in the region by deepening the process of reform and building
an atmosphere of confidence and understanding. It will also
help prevent new crises and conflicts in the region. The
center will be directly involved in the process of
Yugoslavia's democratization, as well as the search for
solutions to the lasting political and economic effects of
the Kosovo crisis. Active NGO participation from the region
will be key to realization of the Center's potential.
I cannot state strongly enough how critical U.S. leadership
is at this time to ensure that the Stability Pact goals turn
into action. U.S. Congressional commitment, along with a
renewed commitment by the Administration, to support and
encourage Europe to honor her financial commitments is vital
to the success of the Stability Pact. Continued U.S.
assistance through OPIC, EXIM and TDA is also crucial for
stimulating foreign investment increased trade and
implementation of infrastructure projects.
Finally, I would like to express my personal gratitude and
that of the Republic of Bulgaria to the United States and
particularly the U.S. Congress, for providing essential
economic, political, and military assistance to Bulgaria and
the other Balkan nations throughout the Kosovo conflict and
beyond. The active support of the United states continues to
be the indispensable condition for economic recovery of
Southeast Europe and the completion of its long journey
towards democracy. I cannot tell you how important it is for
the United States to remain committed to your allies in this
critical and dynamic region of the Euro-Atlantic community.
Thank you.
Exhibit 3
S. Res. 272
Whereas the North Atlantic Treaty Organization's (NATO's)
March 24, 1999 through June 10, 1999 bombing of the Federal
Republic of Yugoslavia focused the attention of the
international community on southeastern Europe;
Whereas the international community, in particular the
United States and the European Union, made a commitment at
the conclusion of the bombing campaign to integrate
southeastern Europe into the broader European community;
Whereas there is an historic opportunity for the
international community to help the people of southeastern
Europe break the cycle of violence, retribution, and revenge
and move towards respect for minority rights, establishment
of the rule of law, and the further development of democratic
governments;
[[Page S2706]]
Whereas the Stability Pact was established in July 1999
with the goal of promoting cooperation among the countries of
southeastern Europe, with a focus on long-term political
stability and peace, security, democratization, and economic
reconstruction and development;
Whereas the effective implementation of the Stability Pact
is important to the long-term peace and stability in the
region;
Whereas the people and Government of the Former Yugoslav
Republic of Macedonia have a positive record of respect for
minority rights, the rule of law, and democratic traditions
since independence;
Whereas the people of Croatia have recently elected leaders
that respect minority rights, the rule of law, and democratic
traditions;
Whereas positive developments in the Former Yugoslav
Republic of Macedonia and the Republic of Croatia will
clearly indicate to the people of Serbia that economic
progress and integration into the international community is
only possible if Milosevic is removed from power; and
Whereas the Republic of Slovenia continues to serve as a
model for the region as it moves closer to European Union and
NATO membership: Now, therefore, be it
Resolved, That the Senate--
(1) welcomes the tide of democratic change in southeastern
Europe, particularly the free and fair elections in Croatia,
and the regional cooperation taking place under the umbrella
of the Stability Pact;
(2) recognizes that in this trend, the regime of Slobodan
Milosevic is ever more an anomaly, the only government in the
region not democratically elected, and an obstacle to peace
and neighborly relations in the region;
(3) expresses its sense that the United States cannot have
normal relations with Belgrade as long as the Milosevic
regime is in power;
(4) views Slobodan Milosevic as a brutal indicted war
criminal, responsible for immeasurable bloodshed, ethnic
hatred, and human rights abuses in southeastern Europe in
recent years;
(5) considers international sanctions an essential tool to
isolate the Milosevic regime and promote democracy, and urges
the Administration to intensify, focus, and expand those
sanctions that most effectively target the regime and its key
supporters;
(6) supports strongly the efforts of the Serbian people to
establish a democratic government and endorses their call for
early, free, and fair elections;
(7) looks forward to establishing a normal relationship
with a new democratic government in Serbia, which will permit
an end to Belgrade's isolation and the opportunity to restore
the historically friendly relations between the Serbian and
American people;
(8) expresses the readiness of the Senate, once there is a
democratic government in Serbia, to review conditions for
Serbia's full reintegration into the international community;
(9) expresses its readiness to assist a future democratic
government in Serbia to build a democratic, peaceful, and
prosperous society, based on the same principle of respect
for international obligations, as set out by the Organization
for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) and the United
Nations, which guide the relations of the United States with
other countries in southeastern Europe;
(10) calls upon the United States and other Western
democracies to publicly announce and demonstrate to the
Serbian people the magnitude of assistance they could expect
after democratization; and
(11) recognizes the progress in democratic and market
reform made by Montenegro, which can serve as a model for
Serbia, and urges a peaceful resolution of political
differences over the abrogation of Montenegro's rights under
the federal constitution.
____________________