[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 146 (2000), Part 4]
[Senate]
[Pages 5706-5712]
[From the U.S. 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 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,

[[Page 5707]]

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 
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

[[Page 5708]]

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 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

[[Page 5709]]

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. Defusing 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 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        US     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.

[[Page 5710]]

       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;
       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

[[Page 5711]]

     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;
       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

[[Page 5712]]

     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.

     

                          ____________________