[Congressional Record Volume 146, Number 54 (Thursday, May 4, 2000)]
[Senate]
[Pages S3497-S3499]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[[Page S3497]]
FOR CONTINUED U.S. ENGAGEMENT IN THE BALKANS
Mr. BIDEN. Mr. President, next week the Appropriations Committee is
expected to mark up several bills that will incorporate the
Administration's supplemental request for this fiscal year. Included in
this request is two point six billion dollars for peacekeeping and
reconstruction in Kosovo and the surrounding region.
In that context, I rise to examine the rapidly changing conditions in
the Balkans and to argue for continued vigorous American involvement in
the region, including meeting the Administration's supplemental
request.
Mr. President, since the end of the Cold War few, if any other parts
of the world have commanded as much of our attention as the Balkans,
particularly the area of the former Yugoslavia. This is no accident.
The Balkans were the crucible for the First World War, played a pivotal
role in the outcome of the Second World War, and persist as the only
remaining major area of instability in Europe.
As every thoughtful political leader in London, Paris, Berlin, Rome,
Madrid or other capitals will attest, if the movements in the countries
of the Balkans toward political democracy, ethnic and religious
coexistence, and free market capitalism do not succeed, the resulting
turmoil will endanger the remarkable peace and prosperity laboriously
created over the past half-century in the countries of the European
Union and in other Western democracies.
Moreover, Mr. President, for Americans warning of this possibility is
not merely an academic exercise. In political, security, and economic
terms, the United States is a European power. We are tied to the
continent through a web of trade, investment, human contacts, and
culture to a degree unequaled by relations with any other part of the
world. Instability that spread to Western Europe would directly and
adversely affect the United States of America in a major way.
In other words, Mr. President, we do not have the luxury of being
able to distance ourselves from the Balkans, no matter how emotionally
appealing such a policy may appear at times.
As someone who visits Southeastern Europe on a regular basis, I fully
understand how frustrating dealing with Balkan issues can be. Much of
this stunningly beautiful area, with its jumble of ancient peoples, has
seemingly intractable problems. Americans accustomed to quick solutions
naturally become frustrated, especially since we have built up a large
presence on the ground in several Balkan countries in the last few
years and, therefore, know first-hand the complexities involved.
But the very diversity of the Balkans means that even if human
history moved in a linear fashion--which it certainly does not--
progress toward democracy, human rights, and free markets in
Southeastern Europe would necessarily be uneven, moving forward in some
countries, stagnating in some, and even regressing in a few.
Mr. President, this is precisely what has been happening; the region
is experiencing ``ups and downs.'' Contrary to popular belief,
undoubtedly influenced by the proclivity of the mass media to emphasize
the negative, there have been several positive developments in the
Balkans.
Slovenia, the northernmost country of the Balkans, is the region's
success story. It has already established a solid democracy, and its
transition to a free-market economy has been so successful that its per
capita gross domestic product now exceeds that of a few members of the
European Union. Slovenia seems certain to be in the next round of NATO
enlargement, and it is one of the strongest candidates for EU
membership.
Croatia, which suffered for a decade under the authoritarian rule of
Franjo Tudjman, elected a new parliament this past January with a
moderate, democratic coalition gaining a solid majority. The winner of
the February presidential election, Mr. Mesic, is also a democratic
reformer.
Already there has been signs of positive movement from the new regime
in Zagreb, both domestically and in foreign policy. For example, the
government has begun investigating corruption from the Tudjman era in
the banking and communications sectors. In the international realm, the
Croatian government has signed an agreement on cooperation with the
International War Crimes Tribunal in the Hague. Moreover, the new
government has closed down illegal television transmission towers in
Bosnia and Herzegovina, which had spread ultra-nationalist programming
from Croatia.
In fact, the hard-line obstructionist nationalist Croat leadership in
Bosnia and Herzegovina is running scared, knowing that it has lost its
patron, the former HDZ regime, in Croatia. It appears that the new
government in Zagreb has pledged itself to full Dayton implementation,
including a commitment to the integrity of Bosnia and Herzegovina as a
state.
It is debatable whether the ``good example'' set by Zagreb will soon
influence the situation in Serbia; but it is already clear that the
change of government in Zagreb is causing Bosnian Croat leaders to re-
think their strategy.
The local elections in Bosnia last month provided mixed results. In
the Republika Srpska, Prime Minister Dodik's coalition lost ground, but
there is still hope that the new government being formed will
accelerate the pace of implementation of the Dayton Accords.
In the Federation, reformist Bosnian Croats did not have sufficient
time to organize strong opposition to the entrenched HDZ nationalists.
As the withdrawal of subsidies from Zagreb to the Bosnian Croat HDZ
takes effect, however, the moderate Bosnian Croats may be able to
increase their strength in the upcoming national elections.
The most heartening developments concern the Bosnian Muslims, the
largest of the three major communities in the country. The Muslims have
demonstrated an accelerating move away from the nationalist SDA party
to non-nationalist alternatives, as demonstrated by their electoral
victories in several of Bosnia's largest cities.
Mr. President, the southern Balkans also show several positive
trends, some of them quite remarkable. At the Helsinki Summit of the
European Union in December 1999, Turkey for the first time was granted
the status of candidate for membership. To be sure, any realistic
analysis of Turkey's chances would make them long-term, but the
development in Helsinki is nonetheless a real breakthrough and is being
received as such by the majority of Turkey's population.
Moreover, the devastating earthquakes that rocked both Turkey and
Greece last summer elicited mutual expressions of popular sympathy from
both peoples and have led to a significant warming of relations between
these two long-time rivals.
Both Bulgaria and Romania are governed by Western-looking, democratic
free-marketeers. The closing of the Danube by the NATO bombing in the
air war last year has had an extremely damaging effect on their already
shaky economies. Both countries, though, have embarked upon painful,
but necessary reforms. The reformers will be sorely tested in upcoming
national elections.
Macedonia, perhaps the most fragile country in the region, has
survived the trauma of the Kosovo war, with its massive influx of
hundreds of thousands of refugees, without the violent destabilization
expected by many observers, and certainly intended by Milosevic. A
newly elected conservative government includes an ethnic Albanian
party, but the raw material for an ethnic conflagration persists.
The ``downs'' in the Balkan picture, which have been getting the
lion's share of the publicity, are Serbia proper, Montenegro, and
Kosovo.
Certainly the principal negative fact of life in the region is the
continuing presence in power in Serbia of Slobodan Milosevic. My
colleagues know well my feelings about this man. In 1993, six years
before the Hague Tribunal made public its indictment, I called
Milosevic a war criminal to his face at a meeting in his office in
Belgrade.
Milosevic, quite simply, has been a disaster for the Serbian people.
He has destroyed Serbia's economy, eviscerated its body politic, and
debased its reputation internationally. It is not easy to start--and
lose--four wars in eight years, but Milosevic has managed to do it. He
is a man of only one ideological conviction: that he must hold
[[Page S3498]]
onto power in Serbia. To retain power he is ready to use any means,
including ruining the lives of the people he theoretically represents.
Unfortunately, Milosevic clings to power through a combination of
ruthlessness, tactical cunning, and the inability until now of the
Serbian opposition to forge a permanent anti-Milosevic coalition that
could be compelling for the Serbian electorate. There is some basis for
cautious optimism that the political opposition in Serbia may be
unifying in its opposition to Milosevic. Last month the opposition was
able to bring out to the streets of Belgrade a massive crowd of more
than two hundred thousand demonstrators against Milosevic.
The gangland quality of life in contemporary Serbia is demonstrated
by the recent public machine-gun slayings of ``Arkan,'' the Yugoslav
defense minister, and other ultra-nationalist figures. Most recently
independent journalists in Serbia have been given implicit death
threats--from no less a personage than Mr. Seselj, the deputy prime
minister! These moves, however, bespeak the increasing weakness and
fear of the Milosevic regime, not any strength.
I should add that another reason that Milosevic has been able to
survive this cold winter is assistance from like-minded dictators. Over
the past few months, China made a gift of three hundred million
dollars, and Iraq contributed much needed oil. It is also extremely
likely that Russia and Belarus have funneled assistance to Milosevic.
The United States Government is actively supporting the creation of a
civil society in Serbia through targeted grants to a variety of
independent media, citizens' groups, independent trade unions, and
towns controlled by the democratic opposition.
Despite Milosevic's malevolent and unscrupulous behavior, I remain
convinced that ultimately the pressure from below--and from within his
government, party, and armed forces--will result in his fall from
power. What is key is that we not lose our patience or our nerve. I
will not put a date on Milosevic's fall, but fall he will, and the
long-suffering Serbian people will begin to regain their dignity.
Montenegro, the junior partner in the Yugoslav Federation, is
governed by a multi-ethnic, democratic coalition led by President Milo
Djukanovic. The reformist government of this little republic of less
than seven hundred thousand citizens is struggling to avoid being
overthrown by Yugoslav President Slobodan Milosevic, who is currently
scheming about how to undermine Montenegro's democratically elected
government. His tools are the Yugoslav army and shadowy paramilitary
forces loyal to him, plus economic pressures applied to its vastly
smaller neighbor.
We have seen Milosevic starring in this movie before--- in Slovenia,
in Croatia, in Bosnia and Herzegovina, and in Kosovo. Milosevic lost
each time, in the process sacrificing hundreds of thousands of lives
and causing untold material damage. I can only hope that he has learned
his lesson.
Kosovo is another ongoing challenge for American policy and
fortitude. Eleven months after the withdrawal of Yugoslav troops,
Serbian police, and paramilitaries, the province is still struggling to
regain a semblance of normalcy. The task is enormous: by the estimate
of the U.N., some eight hundred ten thousand residents who fled during
last year's war have returned to a province in which approximately two-
thirds of the housing stock was destroyed or damaged beyond repair. Not
an appealing base on which to rebuild a traumatized society.
In that context, the herculean efforts of the international civilian
and military authorities have had a good measure of success. Despite
the understandable headlines detailing revenge killings of Serbs and
Roma by ethnic Albanians, and of Kosovar Albanians by other Kosovar
Albanians, the fact is that the incidence of homicide has dropped
dramatically over the last several months.
The serious upsurge in ethnic violence in the town of Mitrovica
earlier this year shows that universal security in the province has yet
to be achieved. The response of KFOR to Mitrovica was to send in
additional troops, from different sectors. Also a special prosecutor
was appointed by the United Nations to handle Mitrovica. Things boiled
over there; now the flame has been doused and the lid is back on. We
will have to keep an eye on Mitrovica and northern Kosovo.
Similarly, the Presevo Valley in southeastern corner of Serbia
proper, which has a strong ethnic Albanian majority population, is a
potential flashpoint. Radical elements have been training in the
demilitarized zone between Kosovo and Serbia proper, occasionally
staging hit-and-run raids on Serbian police. Their motive is clearly to
provoke a larger conflict, and then to appeal to KFOR to bail them out.
We should not fall for this trap. I am pleased that the Administration
has made clear to the radicals that they are on their own, and has
enlisted the help of responsible Kosovar Albanians to rein them in.
With respect to security in Kosovo, however, the overall trend is in
the right direction. The drop in the murder rate is due largely to the
excellent work of the forty-two thousand, five hundred KFOR troops in
Kosovo, and increasingly to the more than three thousand, one hundred
international police deployed by the U.N. Interim Administration
Mission in Kosovo--known as UNMIK. Eventually four thousand, four
hundred UNMIK police are to be deployed.
Our government must be sure to make its pledged payments to UNMIK on
time and to pressure other donor countries to do the same. Cooperation
between UNMIK's chief, Dr. Bernard Kouchner, and KFOR's commander has
been superb. If Dr. Kouchner is given all the tools the way KFOR has
been, then I believe he will be able to do his job successfully.
Incidentally, Mr. President, KFOR's commanders have been, in order,
an Englishman, a German, and now a Spaniard--all under NATO's Supreme
Commander in Europe, an American.
While profound mistrust of KFOR and UNMIK exists among much of the
Serbian community in Kosovo, a hopeful sign is that observers from the
Serb community recently joined the power-sharing system UNMIK has set
up with a broad spectrum of Kosovar Albanian leaders.
Much of the Serbs' mistrust--and of widespread unease among the
Kosovar Albanians--stems from the fact that although the homicide rate
in the province has dropped, other forms of criminality are increasing.
Particularly worrisome is the influx of organized crime elements from
Albania across the porous, mountainous border into Kosovo.
We must not allow Kosovo to descend into gang-infested semi-anarchy.
This is the principal reason that the promised international funding
for UNMIK simply must be delivered promptly. I cannot stress this
requirement enough. Our government must pressure the Europeans--who
have assumed the primary responsibility for KFOR, UNMIK, and the
Stability Pact for Southeast Europe--immediately to live up to their
pledges.
Because of excellent work by the U.S. Agency for International
Development and other national and international organizations, there
are high expectations all over Kosovo that this spring and summer there
will be reconstruction on a mass scale all over the province. We must
be certain that the international funding is delivered in time, so as
not to deflate the Kosovars' and the Kosovo Serbs' hopes and damage our
credibility and that of our allies and other cooperating nations.
Mr. President, the more I delve into the details of the American and
other international efforts to rebuild the Balkans--in Kosovo, in
Bosnia and Herzegovina, in Albania, and elsewhere--the more respect I
have for our outstanding men and women serving in often difficult and
dangerous circumstances in our diplomatic service, our armed forces,
and our aid missions. They are bright, they are dedicated, and they are
getting tangible results. This is a side of the story that the American
public should hear more about.
It is also important that the American public understands that the
overwhelming majority of KFOR troops, the overwhelming majority of
UNMIK personnel, and the overwhelming majority of development
assistance are all being provided by our European allies and other
friendly governments. Mr. President, one bright spot of the Kosovo
story is that it shows that
[[Page S3499]]
burdensharing not only can work, but is working.
In Kosovo, perhaps more than anywhere else in the Balkans, however,
even as we analyze serious current problems, we must never lose sight
of what the situation would be if we had not acted militarily last
year. Milosevic would have gotten away with vile ethnic cleansing on a
scale unprecedented in Europe for decades, causing untold human misery,
destabilizing Macedonia and Albania, irreparably harming the
credibility of NATO, and possibly even fracturing the alliance.
No, the situation in Kosovo is far from good, but it is incalculably
better than it would have been, had NATO, under President Clinton's
leadership, not intervened.
In early February, at the Munich Conference on Security Policy, the
U.S. Congressional delegation had breakfast with Lord Robertson, the
Secretary General of NATO. As he so aptly put it, ``no one should
expect a Balkan Switzerland to be created in a few short years.'' But
that should not blind us, either to the significant progress already
achieved, or to the continuing importance to the United States and to
the rest of Europe of the struggle for lasting security in the Balkans.
We must keep our eye on the prize and redouble our efforts to rebuild
and stabilize Southeastern Europe. So, once again, I urge my colleagues
on the Appropriations Committee to fully fund, without conditions, the
Administration's supplemental request for peacekeeping and
reconstruction in Kosovo. The stakes are simply too high to do
otherwise.
I thank the Chair and yield the floor.
____________________