[Weekly Compilation of Presidential Documents Volume 35, Number 25 (Monday, June 28, 1999)]
[Pages 1157-1163]
[Online from the Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]

<R04>
Remarks Following Discussions With European Union Leaders and an 
Exchange With Reporters in Bonn

June 21, 1999

    Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder. [Inaudible]--I have introduced the 
President and Madam Secretary to Mr. Adenauer's study, and both of them 
thought that it was possibly lighter and brighter and possibly even 
nicer than what we've got over there. But as you might imagine, that 
wasn't the focus of our consultations.
    I'm rather pleased, indeed, that for the second time by now, I have 
the opportunity of welcoming President Clinton here in the Chancellory 
on behalf of the European Union. And I am very pleased also to note that 
Mr. Santer has come here again--the last time wearing the hat he's 
presently wearing. And I think soon he's going to join the European 
Parliament, and he's going to try to narrow it down to certain specific 
things that he would like to see happening. He's going to do that with 
the same sense of humor as he's done it so far.
    We have adopted some important documents regarding the transatlantic 
relationship. The Bonn Declaration that you have already got, or that 
will be handed out to you very soon, is very much going to deal with the 
spirit of the transatlantic partnership. And in the spirit of this, we 
also want to see to the individual trading problems that do exist but 
that we think can be overcome.
    Of course, as you might imagine, the situation in Kosovo and in the 
Balkans played an important role during our discussions. I am very much 
of the opinion that what we have triggered, being the Presidents of the 
European Council in Europe, was to trigger the Stability Pact for the 
Balkans, and the contours of that agreement have been drafted by the 
meeting of the Foreign Ministers very recently--but that will have to be 
promoted further with strong dynamism. And President Clinton and the 
European Union very much agree that this is worth promoting and 
developing further.
    So we think that--still in July and in close cooperation with the 
Finnish Presidency--we call for a meeting of the heads of state and 
governments--all governments involved in the Stability Pact. And that 
meeting is meant to happen in Sarajevo.
    Ladies and gentlemen, in having it there, we want to set a clear 
signal that the region can very much rely on the fact that we are not 
just talking about providing assistance but that we really want to help, 
and will help.
    During the discussions, we also said we want to show rigidity and 
decidedness on the military side but diplomatic skill on the political 
level. And arms have now gone silent since yesterday; it is definite. 
And after we've won the dispute, we will now win peace for us, and we 
will only succeed in doing so if we go in and economically develop that 
region and we get in closer to Europe--in individual steps, in phases, 
but expeditiously, rather. I think that is certainly an interesting part 
of joint cooperation between the European Union and the U.S.A.
    Dear Mr. President, I've very pleased to have you here yet again, 
and actually even more pleased about this wonderful spirit, sir,

[[Page 1158]]

of cooperation and friendship that has reigned over our talks here, and 
joint conviction. Thank you.
    President Clinton. Thank you very much. Chancellor and President 
Santer. Let me just make a few brief comments on the issues that 
Chancellor Schroeder has mentioned.
    First, on Kosovo. Yesterday the Serb security forces completed their 
withdrawal. Russia is now participating. The KLA is demilitarizing. I 
spoke late last evening to Mr. Thaci after the agreement had been 
signed. KFOR is moving in, and the refugees are on their way home.
    I congratulate Chancellor Schroeder on initiating this Stability 
Pact as a device for the long-term redevelopment of Kosovo and all of 
southeastern Europe. We will be full partners.
    We are interested in bringing this reconstruction to life. Our 
experts are now assessing the needs. We will have a donors' conference 
in July to finance the immediate reconstruction projects and one later 
in the fall to deal with long-term development of the region.
    We have also agreed, as the Chancellor said, to get the leaders 
together in Sarajevo--both the benefactors and the beneficiaries of the 
Stability Pact--to plan for the future of southeastern Europe, and after 
the pattern followed in the Marshall plan of World
War II, to get the people of the region to work together to define their 
own future. We think this is very important.
    I'd also like to thank the business leaders involved from Europe and 
the United States in our business dialog for their willingness to 
mobilize the private sector to help in the reconstruction of Kosovo.
    Let me say just a word about one other subject that I think is worth 
some discussion because of the interest to the public opinion in Europe 
and increasingly in the United States. We discussed the need to have 
unresolved trade disputes not define our relationship at a time when 
we're working together so well on so many fronts. With a relationship 
that covers such a large spectrum of economic activity, it is inevitable 
that there will be occasional friction--some small, some large. We must 
not let them cloud the fundamental soundness of our relationship.
    We've made a lot of progress in recent months on some irritants, but 
a lot of work remains. Let me just give you one example. I know there's 
deep concern in Europe on the question of food safety. It's also an 
important priority for me; I've done a lot of work on food safety as 
President in the United States. And it's important for our farmers 
because they have an enormous interest in providing safe and wholesome 
food to the world. We need to develop open and scientific regulatory 
processes in each country that actually command the full confidence of 
ordinary citizens.
    This is an issue of enormous consequence on both sides of the 
Atlantic. We must approach it constructively. We're already making 
progress under our Transatlantic Economic Partnership, establishing a 
pilot project for scientific review of new biotech projects. And I am 
pleased that the G-8, under Chancellor Schroeder's leadership, asked the 
OECD to undertake an analysis of international food safety.
    So I want you to know that I am committed to this. All of us should 
have one standard only: What is the right thing? What is the right 
thing? That's the only thing that should matter. What is the truth? What 
does the science tell us? And that will be my commitment.
    Finally, I think it is important that all of us honor the decisions 
of international tribunals when they are rendered on these trade 
matters.
    Let me say in closing, Chancellor, I'd like to bid farewell to 
President Santer as he leaves his present position and goes to work in 
the European Parliament. I thank him for the work that he has done. This 
has been a remarkable period of European integration with the European 
Monetary Union and common security and other policies. We welcome Romano 
Prodi as his successor.
    I also thank Sir Leon Brittan for his work and wish him well. And I 
would like to acknowledge and greet the newly-confirmed American 
Ambassador to the European Union, Dick Morningstar, who was recently 
very quickly confirmed by the United States Senate.
    So we are preserving this relationship as we change some of the 
personnel involved.

[[Page 1159]]

It is a long-term commitment by both the Europeans and the Americans, 
and I'm looking forward to it. I think what we are about to do in 
Kosovo, in the Balkans, and what we have done there, is something that 
our people will be proud of for many decades to come.
    Thank you.
    President Jacques Santer. Mr. President, Mr. Chancellor, this summit 
takes place at a crucial moment in Europe's development and in the 
development of the United States-
European Union relations. I'll make only four points about our 
discussions this morning.
    First, we have discussed Kosovo and the wider southeastern European 
region. The European Union nations shared equally with the U.S. in NATO 
action in the Kosovo crisis, and the EU has taken the lead in putting 
together the Stability Pact for the region, and the EU will play a 
leading role in financing the reconstruction. The European Commission 
will work with the World Bank to coordinate the donor effect for the 
region. And the Commission will be overseeing the negotiation of the 
proposed EU association and stability agreements with the countries in 
that region. This all shows that the EU is capable of sharing these 
burdens equally with the United States and that it is a full and equal 
partner with the United States in pursuing our common goals.
    We have discussed how the EU and U.S. interests can now jointly use 
their cooperation under the new transatlantic agenda to ensure that our 
partnership is at the heart of the rebuilding of a stable, democratic, 
and prosperous Balkan region.
    Second, we have agreed the Bonn Declaration, which builds on the new 
transatlantic agenda, can strengthen it in a number of areas and affirms 
our joint commitment to a full and equal partnership. We are committed 
in particular to work together to prevent and deal with regional crises, 
and Europe's emerging common security and defense policy makes this much 
easier.
    But too often in the past, President Clinton and I have had to spend 
time on damaging disputes, like Helms-Burton, bananas, and hormone-
treated beef, even if 98 percent of our trade relations are trouble-
free. By setting up an effective early warning system, we are seeking to 
resolve such problems before they become politically damaging.
    And we have agreed that it would be a good thing to have our 
scientists work together on health and consumer safety issues. The 
details still need to be worked out in order to prevent--[inaudible].
    To summarize, the transatlantic relationship, 4\1/2\ years after the 
signing of the new transatlantic agenda, is in fine shape. Kosovo has 
demonstrated, as clearly as anyone could wish, how important the 
relationship is, and it has put our occasional trade disputes into 
perspective. And we look forward as we go into the new millennium to 
continuing to deepen that relationship for the good of the whole 
transatlantic community.

Humanitarian Aid to Serbia

    Q. Chancellor Schroeder and President Clinton, I wonder if you could 
be precise on the definition of humanitarian aid to Yugoslavia, to 
Serbia proper. The G-8 was unable to reach an agreement on this point, 
but would you consider providing as part of your humanitarian assistance 
to the Serbs, rebuilding their electrical power plants and rebuilding 
their bridges to enable people to go to work as part of humanitarian 
assistance to the Serbs?
    Chancellor Schroeder. Well, I think--I'm not as certain as what 
you're doing with your question--you have to differentiate between 
humanitarian assistance on one hand, side, and reconstruction on the 
other. You cannot let people starve just because they follow the wrong 
President, or they have the wrong President. If they are in need of 
medical assistance to survive, we have to grant this medical assistance 
to them, even if they feel they want to support Mr. Milosevic as their 
President. And that applies for as long as they have him as a President. 
So humanitarian assistance, yes, but making a tangible contribution to 
reconstruction, that can only ever happen with a democratic Yugoslavia.
    That is very much my conviction. And you cannot look at it in 
abstract terms, what is humanitarian, and what is kind of more than 
humanitarian. So we have to know what is

[[Page 1160]]

needed here to be able to take a proper decision. That is the line that 
I consider the right one.
    President Clinton. First, I agree with everything he just said. But 
to take your specifics--I saw the interview that President Chirac did 
with you, and what he said about the electrical power I thought was 
pretty good, that it would depend. That is, for me, it is important that 
if the Serbs want to keep Mr. Milosevic and don't want to be part of 
southeastern Europe's future, that at least they not freeze to death 
this winter and that their hospitals not be forced to close. So they 
need some power.
    In terms of rebuilding the bridges so people can go to work, I don't 
buy that. That's part of their economic reconstruction, and I don't 
think we should help--not a bit, not a penny. So that's--but on the 
other hand, I think their hospitals ought to be able to function. I 
think--babies will be born; people will get sick; I think though--that 
people shouldn't be cold in the winter if we can help that. That's 
basically where I draw the line.
    But we will--the reason the G-8--we didn't have a disagreement about 
it. We recognized that--the Chancellor read us through this--we 
recognized that we would have to have people in place in whom we had 
confidence, who could make most of these decisions on a day-to-day 
basis, and if they had a question, they could then kick it back to us. 
But I'll give you--I'm just giving you my kind of feeling about it.
    Lori [Lori Santos, United Press International].

Reconstruction of the Balkans

    Q. In your discussions over the past few days, did you win specific 
commitments--in your talks over the past few days, did you win specific 
commitments from the European leaders for the billions that you'll need 
for the reconstruction effort? And are you confident that they will 
carry the lion's share, as you said you wanted?
    President Clinton. I think that their commitments and mine are in 
good faith. Let me restate what I said in my opening remarks. There will 
be--let me back up. I expect, in the next several days, all of you will 
hear various things about how much the immediate reconstruction of 
Kosovo will cost, what we're looking at in terms of long-term 
development. Then you'll see both Europeans and Americans say we will or 
won't pay this or that amount of money.
    I think that that--almost all of that is going to be rather 
fruitless in the end. What we have to do is have our people go in there 
and figure out, ballpark, what it's going to cost to get Kosovo up and 
going and whole again. And then we have to convene the leaders' meeting 
as well as have people look at what it would take to have a long-term 
development strategy for southeastern Europe. And obviously, that will 
be greater flexibility there; in other words, the more money you have, 
the more you can do; but there will be some flexibility there. And then 
we will--I will try to allocate our responsibilities.
    But I am absolutely convinced--you heard what President Santer 
said--I think that all of us are committed to doing this. And let me 
just say to the American people and to--who would be listening to this 
and to our friends in Europe, it will probably cost more than most 
people think, but I promise you, it will be a lot cheaper than a 
continuation of war would have been. It will be phenomenally less 
expensive than a land invasion of Kosovo and a protected conflict would 
have been.
    So I want to say what I said again is, the most expensive peaceful 
reconstruction is still cheaper than the cheapest war. This is a 
responsibility we should assume, and it will pay for itself many times 
over in future conflicts avoided, in future trading partners, in future 
cooperation.

Bombing of Chinese Embassy in Belgrade

    Q. Mr. President, China last week bluntly rejected Under Secretary 
Pickering's explanation of the bombing of its Embassy in Belgrade. What 
is your reaction to that? Does it have any merit, their position, and 
have you given up--do you think you've lost any chance of reaching a WTO 
agreement with China before the end of this year?
    President Clinton. Well, the answer to the second question is, no. I 
have not given up. The answer to the first question is, I think--as they 
have time to review the information we gave them, and reflect on it, I

[[Page 1161]]

think they will conclude that it was a truly tragic accident, that a 
series of very bad mistakes were made, and a tragic accident occurred.
    I also, frankly--after Mr. Pickering made his important but 
difficult journey there, I noted that the reports, the contents of the 
report, were highlighted in Chinese news for 2 or 3 days thereafter, 
which I took to be quite a positive sign, actually.
    So this is a difficult, painful period for them and for our 
relationship, but I'm not--I haven't given up on the WTO. I'd still like 
to see it finished this year. And I think we'll work through this.
    Chancellor Schroeder. Last question.

Congressional Support for Reconstruction Funds

    Q. Mr. President, your ability to keep your commitments on the aid 
to the region is dependent upon a Congress that has been very reluctant 
to come up with money. Do you anticipate difficulty there? And have you 
done anything to lay the groundwork with the Congress?
    President Clinton. Well, yes and yes. Yes, I anticipate some 
difficulty; and yes, I've worked hard to lay the groundwork.
    We have had lots of meetings on Kosovo, as you know, larger meetings 
with Congress. I have said all along that I thought that we had to 
participate in the long-term reconstruction, that I thought that we--
just as in the peacekeeping--we can have a marginally more modest role 
in peacekeeping and reconstruction because we had a relatively larger 
role during the air campaign and paid a lot of the cost of that.
    But we have--the Congress did give us funds, for example, in this 
supplemental, to help to pay for the relocation of the Kosovars' home 
and the attendant costs related to that. So I think that if we can make 
the case, that they will be willing to support it. And it's part of our 
responsibility.
    You know, I just want to urge you to give us some time to come up 
with a plan for the short run, and then let the leaders in the region 
come up with a long-term plan and let us all sort of join together.
    I think that our Congress and our taxpayers will be like most 
people--they want to know what is the big picture; what is the long-term 
objective here; how does it relate to the interests of ordinary families 
in Germany and the United States, throughout Europe? And I think these 
are questions we'll be able to answer, and I think we'll get the support 
we need.
    Do you want to take a European journalist question? Equal time here. 
[Laughter] You guys owe me one. [Laughter]

President's Visit to Slovenia

    Q. Mr. President, you are going now to Slovenia. What's the purpose 
for the visit, and also the message of your visit in Slovenia?
    President Clinton. Well, first of all, I'm going to Slovenia to 
highlight our partnership, our shared values, and our shared future. But 
I want the American people and the rest of the world to see a successful 
country in southeastern Europe that has done a good job of promoting 
democracy, of advancing prosperity, of working for integration in the 
region and with the rest of Europe.
    They represent what I believe a whole region can become. So the 
Slovenians have been, in my view, very good citizens and good partners 
with all of us, and I have to highlight that. But I also want the trip 
to spark the imagination of others, both within the Balkans and beyond 
it, about the kind of future, the kind of societies we can build in all 
those countries if we work at it.
    Thank you.
    Q.  Mr. President, take one more? Mr. President?
    Chancellor Schroeder. One question for a European journalist. 
[Laughter]

Administration of Kosovo/Duration of U.S. Troop Involvement

    Q. Thank you very much, Mr. Chancellor. Thank you, Mr. Chancellor.
    Kosovo obviously now urgently needs an administration. How quickly 
do you think that can be facilitated via the OSCE or the European Union, 
and can the U.S. Americans contribute to that?
    And now, one thing regarding President Clinton--6,000 soldiers on 
the ground; how long are they going to stay there for? How long will you 
want them to stay there? How

[[Page 1162]]

long will your Congress, which has actually taken a bit of a negative 
attitude, be able to maintain that period?
    Chancellor Schroeder. Well, the question as to who's going to chair 
the civilian administration is a decision that lies in the field of the 
United Nations Secretary-
General, and I think it would not be appropriate to give him advice from 
here. But he knows that we need a highly qualified person who links two 
things: firstly, the kind of political degree of skill and sensitivity 
and, on the other hand, experience with administration, somebody who--I 
think in economic terms, as well. All of those I think are the job 
profile descriptions. And I think the Secretary-
General will very, very speedily pick and choose that kind of person who 
will then dominate the reorganization in the civilian sense.
    President Clinton. One is, I agree entirely with what Chancellor 
Schroeder said about the person the United Nations should pick. I called 
the Secretary-General, and I said that I had no particular candidate and 
I did not care from what country the candidate came; that the most 
important thing was that we get someone who can do the job--someone with 
high energy, with organizing skills, with vision, with the ability to 
communicate.
    It's a fascinating job; I'd give anything if I could do it. It's a 
wonderful job if you think about it. It's a very interesting job. But 
it's very important that we pick the right person. There will be no 
politics in this, nothing. So I made it clear: I don't care where the 
person is from; I just want the right person picked.
    The second question you asked me is, how long could we stay? I hope 
we will stay until the objectives of the mission are completed. And I 
went out of my way, since I thought, and our military thought, in Bosnia 
we knew how long it would take, and we were wrong. I went out of my way 
not to make the same mistake twice and not to put a timetable on our 
involvement, but to say here are our objectives; when we've achieved our 
objectives, we'll get out.
    Now, in Bosnia, we've gone way down, all of us have. You know, the 
military force in Bosnia is only about, I think, 30 percent, maybe 25 
percent of what it was when we first went in. But we are still there. 
And I personally believe, again, having a modest force there, if it 
avoids war, promotes peace and prosperity, it is much, much less 
expensive than letting these conflicts occur. So I hope we will stay 
until our mission is complete.
    Thank you.
    Q. This is my last shot. Are you going to take----
    President Clinton. Your last shot?
    Q. My last shot.
    President Clinton Why? You're not leaving us, are you? Where are you 
going?
    Q. I'm going to ``60 Minutes.''
    President Clinton. All right, you guilt me into doing it. If you ask 
me a lousy question, I'll never speak to you again. [Laughter] Go 
ahead--[laughter]--which would make you happy----
    Q. Thank you, Mr. President.
    President Clinton. Anything for the farewell.

Slobodan Milosevic

    Q. That's right. Sir, the last administration left you Saddam 
Hussein, and you have spent billions of dollars trying to keep Saddam 
Hussein contained. I understand that there are many covert things that 
you can't discuss, but can you assure the American people that you did 
not send their sons and daughters into harm's way just to leave 
Milosevic in power?
    President Clinton. Well, first of all, I can ensure the American 
people that we sent our soldiers, our airmen, into harm's way to get the 
Kosovars home, to get the Serbs out of Kosovo, and to have--the Serbian 
forces, not the people, the Serbian forces out--and to have an 
international peacekeeping force. That's what I defined as our 
objectives, and we achieved them. And I thought they were worthy.
    Now, I have, furthermore, said that I would be adamantly opposed to 
any reconstruction aid going to Serbia as long as Mr. Milosevic is in 
power. He has now been indicted by the International War Crimes 
Tribunal, and every day we see fresh evidence of mass killing and 
oppression taken under his guidance and with his orders. So, I think 
that is clear. And I can assure the American

[[Page 1163]]

people that I'm not going to change my position on that.
    But you know, if we never did anything in the world until we could 
get everything done we wanted, we often would not do anything at all. 
What we have done here is to reverse genocide and ethnic cleansing, and 
it is very important. Would it also be good if we could have a new 
leader in Serbia? Of course it would. But the main beneficiaries would 
be the Serbian people.
    And our ability to build the kind of future in southeastern Europe 
we want would be enhanced if we had new leadership and full 
participation in Serbia, but we can do an awful lot of good whatever 
happens there.
    Let's don't mix apples and oranges, Mr. Pelley [Scott Pelley, CBS 
News]. I told the American people what the objectives are. We've 
achieved those objectives. Now we just have to win the peace. But would 
it be a good thing if Serbia had a democratic leader who didn't do 
things like what we've seen in Bosnia and in Kosovo? Of course it would. 
And I can't wait for the day when that happens.
    Thank you.

Note: The President spoke at approximately 11:55 a.m. on the lawn at 
Palais Schaumburg. The President met with Chancellor Gerhard
Schroeder of Germany in his capacity as President of the European 
Council and President Jacques Santer of the European Commission. In his 
remarks, he referred to Hashim Thaci, leader, Kosovo Liberation Army 
(KLA); President Jacques Chirac of France; European Trade Commissioner 
Sir Leon Brittan, vice president, European Commission; U.N. Secretary-
General Kofi Annan; and President Slobodan Milosevic of the Federal 
Republic of Yugoslavia (Serbia and Montenegro). The President also 
referred to OECD, the Organization for Economic Cooperation and 
Development. Chancellor Schroeder spoke in German, and his remarks were 
translated by an interpreter.