    [Weekly Compilation of Presidential Documents Volume 35, Number 17 (Monday, May 3, 1999)]
    [Pages 728-732]
    [Online from the Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]

    <R04>
    The President's News Conference

    April 24, 1999

        The President. Thank you. Ladies and gentlemen, I would like to read
    a brief statement after which we will entertain questions, alternating
    from the American press corps and the international press corps here.
        We have just about completed the first two days of our NATO
    meeting--welcoming new members, adopting very important changes to make
    NATO operations more relevant and more effective in meeting the new
    challenges of the 21st century.
        We have also reaffirmed our determination on Kosovo to get the Serb
    forces out, to get the refugees back home under the protection of an
    international security force moving toward self-government.
        Yesterday we sent a strong message of support to the frontline
    states who have risked and sacrificed so very much in this crisis. NATO
    will respond to any actions by Serbia against its neighbors as a result
    of NATO presence on their territory during this crisis or to any move to
    undermine the democratically elected government of Montenegro. We also
    expressed our support for a genuine democratic transition in Serbia.
        For 5 years now, we have been working to build a new NATO, prepared
    to deal with the security challenges of the new century. Today we have
    reaffirmed our readiness in appropriate circumstances to address
    regional and ethnic conflicts beyond the territory of NATO members. I am
    pleased that our strategic concept specifically endorses the actions
    such as those we are now undertaking in Kosovo.
        Now, this afternoon we will meet with President Kuchma to advance
    our cooperation with Ukraine. Tonight and tomorrow we will gather with
    23 of NATO's partner nations. The Partnership for Peace launched in
    1994, the Euro-Atlantic Partnership started in 1997, have clearly
    exceeded expectations. Sixteen partner nations are now serving with NATO
    in Bosnia. Our forces have conducted literally hundreds of exercises
    with forces from partner countries. These are the nations of central and
    eastern Europe, of the Caucasus, and central Asia, whose futures are
    clearly intertwined with ours.
        Our Alliance also recognizes the tremendous importance of Russia to
    Europe's future, and we are determined to support Russia's transition to
    stronger democracy and more effective free markets and to strengthen our
    partnership with Russia.
        We worked closely with Russia for a peaceful solution for Kosovo at
    Rambouillet. While our allied nations all agree that the offer Mr.
    Milosevic has apparently made to former Prime Minister Chernomyrdin on
    Thursday was inadequate, nevertheless, we welcome Russia's efforts and
    hope they will continue and ultimately result in Serb agreement to our
    conditions so that we can reverse the ethnic cleansing in Kosovo.
        That concludes my statement. Go ahead, Sandra [Sandra Sobieraj,
    Associated Press].

    Effectiveness of Policy in the Balkans

        Q. [Inaudible]--the Pentagon will be sending more tanks and more
    troops to the Balkans, American Reserves will be called up, NATO may
    well end up searching ships as part of an oil embargo, and still,
    Milosevic is not backing down. What specific assurances can you give the
    American people that we are not drifting into a long and endless
    conflict with no end in sight?
        The President. Well, we're not drifting. We are moving forward with
    a strategy that I believe strongly will succeed, one that we have
    reaffirmed here and intensified. I think the important thing for
    everyone to understand is that in order for this strategy to succeed, we
    need two things: one, vigorous execution, and two, patience.
        Keep in mind, we now know from the evidence that has come out that
    the campaign Mr. Milosevic and the Serb leaders have carried out against
    the people of Kosovo was planned in detail last year. It was not
    executed in October in no small measure because of the threat of action
    by NATO. It was executed when we began our air campaign.
        They had 40,000 troops in and around Kosovo, and almost 300 tanks.
    It takes time to reverse that. But we are working on it, and we will
    prevail if we execute well with real determination and if we have the
    patience.

    [[Page 729]]

        I would remind all of you that it may seem like a long time--I don't
    think this air campaign has been going on a particularly long time. In
    the Persian Gulf, there were 44 days of bombing before there was any
    kind of land action. And the land was flatter, the targets were clearer,
    the weather was better. We are doing what needs to be done here with
    great vigor, and I am convinced we will prevail if we have the patience.
    We have to be prepared not only to execute with determination but to pay
    the price of time.
        Yes?

    European Security

        Q. [Inaudible]--European pillar in NATO. Are you satisfied that the
    outcome in the statement will not allow a split to occur between the
    European forces and the American forces? And specifically, what role
    will the Western European Union play in the UK?
        The President. Well, first of all, I think the language speaks for
    itself. Europe will have to decide exactly how to constitute this force
    and also how to make it effective. One of the things that I think that
    will receive nearly no publicity during this meeting, obviously because
    of the dominance--appropriate dominance of Kosovo in the news--is the
    document we adopted today that deals with the European security
    initiative but also deals with what we can do to make all of our efforts
    more effective, including enhancing the defense capabilities of all of
    our allies.
        As long as this operation--however it's constituted by the
    Europeans--operates within and in cooperation with NATO, I think it will
    strengthen the capability of the Alliance, and I think it will actually
    help to maintain America's involvement with NATO.
        We have Members of the Congress here today--Senator Roth sitting
    here on the front row, has been one of the strongest supporters of our
    partnership with NATO and with our European allies. But I believe this
    is a very, very positive thing. The details are for the Europeans to
    decide, and you should ask them that. But as long as it's consistent
    with the Berlin principle--that is, separable but not separate from
    NATO--I think it will work very well.
        Helen [Helen Thomas, United Press International].

    NATO Ground Troops

        Q. Mr. President, the buildup of American troops and allied troops
    in Macedonia and Albania seem to smack of potential intervention,
    military intervention, despite ground troops, all your protestations.
        The President. Is that a question?
        Q. That's a question. I mean, is that true? [Laughter]
        The President. The short answer is, no. Let me remind you, we are in
    Macedonia and Albania to try to help them, two very brave countries with
    very strong-willed leaders, operating under extreme duress. We're trying
    to help them manage a massive refugee problem. And in Albania, we have
    troops there, also, to secure the helicopter operation we have put in
    there and to make sure that we can secure it not only as it's moved in,
    but as it becomes operational.
        Yes, ma'am?

    Future of Southeast Europe

        Q. How much of a guarantee can countries in the southeast Europe
    region get that they will actually be an important part of the
    reconstruction once the Kosovo conflict is over?
        The President. Well, that is what we will deal with tomorrow when we
    meet with the leaders of all those nations. Last week I went to San
    Francisco to speak to the American newspaper editors to outline what I
    believe is an essential part of the long-term solution to the problems
    of the Balkans and southeast Europe generally. They are not yet
    sufficiently a part of the future we all imagine for Europe in the 21st
    century, which is not only peace and stability but also prosperity and
    shared decisionmaking.
        So my view is that we should do more to draw those nations closer to
    one another, to give them a positive reason to work together and to
    properly treat the ethnic minorities within their borders and work out
    ways for them to participate in the life of their country, as well as to
    maintain their own religious and cultural traditions. And we should work

    [[Page 730]]

    out ways for the nations of that region to relate more closely to all
    the European institutions and to Canada and the United States in North
    America.
        So, to me, this will not work over the long run--if you don't want
    to see this repeated, what we're doing now, it is not enough to defeat
    this moment of aggression and to reverse it and to send the Kosovars
    back home. We are going to have to create an alternative positive
    future. We know what the history of ethnic animosity in the Balkans is.
    We know that there is not a single ethnic group, even the Serbs, who
    cannot cite some historic example of legitimate grievance that can be
    manipulated by an unscrupulous politician.
        So what we need, with all these magnets pulling the people apart, we
    need a powerful set of magnets pulling the people together. And those
    have to be economic, as well as political and security. So the NATO
    open-door policy, the European Union's open-door policy, the prospect of
    new cooperation with all the states of southeastern Europe among
    themselves and with Europe and the United States and Canada--I think
    this is a very, very important thing.
        Over the long run, we have to do this: We have to create a positive
    future for this part of Europe if we want to avoid being in the very
    position we're in today again in a few years, in another place.
        Yes, Larry [Larry McQuillan, Reuters].

    Oil Embargo

        Q. Mr. President, there seems to be a great deal of concern about
    the oil embargo that NATO has endorsed. The French are expressing
    concern that if military force is used to enforce it, that it would
    amount to an act of war. I'm wondering, do you agree with that
    assessment? And are you concerned that, on one hand, you're encouraging
    the Russians to negotiate a settlement, and on the other hand, they may
    be caught in the middle of an oil embargo clash?
        The President. Well, of course, I hope that won't happen. But let me
    tell you where we're coming from. We sent our pilots into the air to
    destroy the oil refinery and supply systems of Serbia, and they did so
    successfully. They risked their lives to do it. How can we justify
    risking the lives of the pilots to go up and destroy the refinery and
    the supply capacity of Serbia and then say, ``but it's okay with us if
    people want to continue to supply this nation and its outlaw actions in
    Kosovo in another way?''
        So what we have done is we've asked our ministers of defense to come
    up with a plan that will apply in an even-handed way. Obviously, we
    don't expect it to and we will not do anything to try to see that it
    leads to violence. But we have to be firm about it. And if we want this
    campaign to succeed with economic and political pressure and with the
    air action, then we have to take every reasonable means to give it the
    chance to succeed. And that's what we intend to do.
        Yes, sir?

    Proposed United Nations Peace Mission

        Q. Mr. President, the Austrian former Prime Minister, Franz
    Vranitzky, was proposed by Secretary-General Kofi Annan as a possible
    candidate for a peace mission to Kosovo. Would you kindly explain to us
    whether this has your approval and what you would expect from such a
    mission?
        The President. Well, I can't respond to your specific question for a
    very simple reason; I did not know which individuals were being
    considered by the Secretary-General until, oh, a couple of hours ago. So
    I've had no direct communication with the Secretary-General, nor have I
    even discussed it with the members of my staff.
        I have, as it happens, known Mr. Vranitzky for many years; I knew
    him before I was President, before I was a candidate for President. I
    have an enormously high regard for him, personally. But in order to make
    a judgment about that, I would have to have a clear idea about exactly
    what it is--what is the mission and what would be the parameters of it.
    So I can't really comment on the specifics. But I do have a very high
    regard for him, personally. I think he's an excellent man.
        Wolf [Wolf Blitzer, Cable News Network].

    Bombing of Serb Television

        Q. Thank you, Mr. President. Mr. President, a lot of people have a
    clear understanding when you authorize bombing missions against military
    targets, tanks, armor, military headquarters. But they have a little

    [[Page 731]]

    bit more difficulty understanding why you would authorize bombing Serb
    television in the middle of the night, knowing there are journalists
    working there, knowing there are cleaning crews there, knowing these
    people have no choice but to work there, and also know that within a
    matter of hours Serb TV would be back on the air from other locations.
        So the question is, what goes through your mind, knowing you're
    going to, in effect, authorize the killing of these people for
    questionable military gains?
        The President. Our military leaders at NATO believe, based on what
    they have seen and what others in the area have told them, that the Serb
    television is an essential instrument of Mr. Milosevic's command and
    control. He uses it to spew hatred and to basically spread
    disinformation. He does not use it to show all the Kosovar villages he's
    burned, to show the mass graves, to show the children that have been
    raped by the soldiers that he sent there.
        It is not, in a conventional sense, therefore, a media outlet. That
    was a decision they made, and I did not reverse it, and I believe that I
    did the right thing in not reversing that decision.
        Yes, sir?

    NATO New Strategic Concept

        Q. Mr. President, the new strategic concept practically legitimates
    NATO action beyond the borders. How far geographically will NATO go?
        The President. I don't think it's a geographical issue. I think that
    what we tried to do was to say that there are some things which can
    occur in Europe, in non-member nations, that can affect the security and
    stability of all of Europe, including NATO members. And I think the
    language should speak for itself.
        Sam [Sam Donaldson, ABC News].

    Effectiveness of Airstrikes

        Q. Mr. President, before the air campaign began, Pentagon planners
    advised you, according to reports that have not been denied, that the
    air campaign could degrade, it could damage, it could diminish, but it
    could not by itself stop the killing on the ground in Kosovo if
    Milosevic intended to persevere. You have said again today that you will
    continue the air campaign and that you believe it will prevail. Have the
    Pentagon planners given you new advice? Have they changed their mind?
    And if not, sir, on what do you base your optimism?
        The President. Well, first of all, I believe, first, the report that
    you have from the Pentagon planners is an accurate one and is what I
    believed to be the case at the time.
        Keep in mind--and I think I made this clear at the time--the reason
    we went forward with the air actions is because we thought there was
    some chance it would deter Mr. Milosevic based on two previous examples:
    number one, last October in Kosovo, when he was well poised to do the
    same thing; and number two, in Bosnia, where there were 12 days of NATO
    attacks over a 20-day period. However, I also well understood that the
    underlying facts were somewhat different. I still believe we did the
    right thing. And I believe, as one of the area's leaders said in the
    last couple of days, it would have been much worse had we not taken
    action.
        Now, there is a literal sense, Sam, in which, from the air, you
    cannot take every Serbian body in a uniform on the ground in Kosovo and
    extract them from Kosovo and put them back in Serbia. That, I think, is
    self-evident to everyone. So when I tell you that I think this will
    work, what I mean by that is I think if we execute well, if we are
    determined and if we spend enough time doing it, we will either break
    down his military capacity to retain control over Kosovo or the price of
    staying there will be far greater than the perceived benefits.
        That is the logic behind the campaign, not that it will physically
    extract every person and put them back across the border. Everyone knows
    that's not true. And I'm glad you asked the question because I think
    it's very important that everyone be clear on this.
        This is--my belief is that if we vigorously, comprehensively execute
    the air campaign and if we are prepared to take the time and do our very
    best to care for the refugees as best we can in the meanwhile and to
    provide stability and support to the frontline states, and especially to
    Albania and Macedonia,

    [[Page 732]]

    that we will prevail. That is what I believe. And I believe we will do
    it because we have the capacity to dramatically degrade his military
    operation which is the instrument of his control and because we have the
    capacity to make this policy very, very expensive for him militarily and
    economically and in other ways.
        Yes, sir, in the back.

    Effectiveness of Policy

        Q. Mr. President, under the scenario that you've just laid out
    doesn't mean that he would necessarily comply with the five conditions,
    which would also mean that it might be too high to keep his forces
    there, the cost, but then you would have to be willing to move some
    forces in to take the ground that they could no longer hold. And it
    seems at the moment there's no willingness to do that.
        The President. Our position on that I think is the correct one. The
    Secretary General has recommended a reassessment of what would be
    required. I think that everybody in the Alliance agrees with his
    decision; that is the correct decision. But we have not weakened our
    conditions, nor will we. If anything, I think this meeting has seen not
    only a reaffirmation but an intensification of our determination to see
    the refugees back in, the Serb forces out, an international force to
    protect them, and the movement toward self-government for the Kosovars.
        Thank you very much.

    Note: The President's 173d news conference began at 3:50 p.m. in the
    amphitheater at the Ronald Reagan International Trade Center. In his
    remarks, he referred to President Slobodan Milosevic of the Federal
    Republic of Yugoslavia (Serbia and Montenegro); former Prime Minister
    Viktor Chernomyrdin of Russia; former Chancellor Franz Vranitzky of
    Austria; U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan; and Secretary General Javier
    Solana of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization.