The Work of the OSCE in Russia, Central Asia and the Balkans

 Real Audio of Briefing

Copyright (c)2002 by Federal News Service, Inc., 620 National Press Building, Washington, DC 20045, USA.   For information on subscribing to the FNS Internet Service, please email Jack Graeme at info@fnsg.com or call (202) 824-0520.

AMB. MINIKES: Well, good afternoon. Let me just say that I am in Washington for about a week of consultations on the Hill and with the State Department, after having been on the job in Vienna for five months now. It's, I think, one of the most exciting jobs that we have in the State Department, in terms of the breadth, the geographic breadth of coverage, covering, I think, 15 time zones, and of course encompassing 55 countries.

       And when I arrived in Vienna, with -- I actually arrived in Bucharest, with Secretary Powell, for the OSCE ministerial, which takes place once a year, this most recent time in Bucharest because the Romanians were the chair -- chairman in office for the year 2001. For this year, it will be in -- just outside of Lisbon because the Portuguese are the chair in office.

       And when I arrived in Vienna a couple of days later, following the Bucharest ministerial, we started in, and I looked at where the organization was. Marc Grossman, the undersecretary of State for Political Affairs, had said to me, "Why don't you give me a report on what you saw, you know, a month or so after you've gotten there?" Of course, I said to him, "A month? Within a month, I'll just barely know where the bathrooms are. But a little while later, I'd be glad to give you a report." Which I did.

       And what I saw was an organization that had had, I think, a very fine history of pursuing the most basic of human needs and desires, which is freedom and democracy and economic development, security in many respects, including arms control.

       As you may know, the CFE and the adapted CFE treaty are within the jurisdiction of OSCE, as is, of course, the implementation of the Dayton Accords.

       But what I saw was an organization that had gone through good times and rough times, and that, I think, needed some reinvigoration, as every organization does from time to time, where in a way you almost have to reinvent yourself in order to adapt and be relevant to the present day's environment. And what I saw there was that, first of all, I thought that Russia needed to be more engaged for the organization to function productively. I think I also felt that some of the smaller countries who might have been a little more quiet in the early years needed to be more engaged. And the third thing that I felt was important was that NATO and the EU and OSCE needed to work more closely together. That hadn't always been the case in the past.

       In the process of going out to Vienna, one of my friends, who had been the U.S. ambassador to NATO during the Clinton administration, said to me that one of the things that he regretted -- this is Bob Hunter -- was that he had really not spent any time in Vienna, nor do I believe the U.S. ambassador to OSCE spent any time in Brussels. And we decided to change that. Nick Burns and I talked, just before he went out to assume his position, and we agreed to spend time together, and I wound up going to Brussels; he's going to be coming to Vienna in a couple of weeks. And I also spent time with our ambassador to the EU, Rock Schnabel, in the same vein, because NATO, EU and OSCE are all really working towards the same objective, which is the security and the democratization of the part of the world that is covered, which is, you know, east of a line, I guess, that you could draw from Poland and Romania. And different -- each of the organizations has its own unique focus based on its history, its charter, its mandate.

       But we were all aiming at the same goal, and I felt that coordination among the three organizations would be very important, and I've spent a good bit of time doing that.

       And the third thing is, while NATO and the EU, of course, are taking up much of the oxygen of the policymakers, I felt that EU needed some new attention -- that OSCE needed some new attention, and have spent a good bit of my time with policymakers here, took a trip to Moscow in late March, which we felt was very productive, and am here again now, of course meeting with senior officials in the State and Defense Department and on the Hill, bringing them up to speed in very much the way that I'm doing here with you right now, on what OSCE is doing.

       I think the organization has an extraordinary mandate. It is a most unusual organization, in that it is committed to the most basic precepts of the human condition, of human rights, of security and of economic development. I also, by the way, when -- after I had been in Vienna for a time, recognized that the economic dimension of OSCE, which is one of its three baskets that were the foundation of OSCE back on the Helsinki Final Act in 1975, was the economic basket, and that that also needed more attention because for a civilized a society, the three components of security, of economic development and of human rights really go hand in hand. It's almost impossible to say which of them comes first. They have to move together pretty much in tandem in order to yield the result where the lives of the citizens of the particular country are improved.

       So that's been my focus, and that is what has received much of my attention in the five months that I've been there.

       With that said, perhaps it might be good based on that to open myself up to questions that you might have. And be glad to respond to whatever you have. Hopefully I can answer questions that you might have.

       Please.

       Q Hello, sir. My name is Dmitri Tersanofam (sp), a correspondent with Russian news agency TASS here. You just stated that OSCE should re-invent -- basically re-invent itself in order to make it relevant in the new world -- new conditions, saying at the same time that Russia and OSCE should make their cooperation more energetic. What fields were you talking, what specific fields you were talking about? And the second question, if I may: what about the Russian-OSCE cooperation with regard to Chechnya? I have to admit I don't follow this topic very closely, so I would appreciate if you provide me with some specifics, problems and goals and successes -- something like that. Thank you.

       AMB. MINIKES: Well, taking your first question again, that was on what areas you feel are worthwhile for U.S.-Russian Federation cooperation, we have a meeting coming up based on a meeting, an earlier meeting that I referred to with Deputy Foreign Minister Gusarov in Moscow. We're having a meeting in Vienna on the 4th of June for that very purpose: to come up with a common agenda.

       You know, my view is that the lead that President Bush and President Putin have provided and the tone that they have set provides an excellent opportunity for Russia and the United States to work closely together. And I think there are many areas where we can take a common proactive affirmative approach to issues of security, to issues of economic development, and to issues of human rights. And what we're going to try to do in Vienna is to come up with an agenda of shared values and shared objectives that we can then work with our colleagues at the OSCE to achieve. I think this is a wonderful opportunity in a context that was set with September 11 in particular, where the Russian Federation and the United States can work productively together on matters that would be of mutual interest rather than parrying with each other, which has been so characteristic of much of the post-World War II period.

       And I think we in the United States very much look forward to that opportunity in the various contexts, ranging from, of course, the summit meeting in Moscow, to Mr. Gusarov coming to Vienna, and where we work together not just in the context of OSCE, but in the context of NATO and also in -- with the EU to reach objectives which I think are very much shared, and it's a matter of identifying them and working together in common cause in these areas. And I think there is more of an opportunity for that right now than there has been, perhaps, at any time in -- I would even say modern history, certainly since the end of World War II, to do so. And I think it's important that we grasp that opportunity now while it's there because history has taught us when you don't grab the moment, it sometimes passes and can't be recreated.

       So I think we're entering this under the best of circumstances with goodwill. The Russian Federation ambassador in Vienna, Alexander Alexeyev, is a very fine man. It's like when President Bush said of President Putin, "This is a man I can work with," I feel the same way vis-a-vis Ambassador Alexeyev and look forward to working with him in common cause here.

       On your question with Chechnya, the OSCE has a small presence in Chechnya. We have a very capable -- extremely capable diplomat there, Ambassador Inki, from Finland, who, I think for this purposes, because of legal issues involving privileges and immunities, is accredited to the Portuguese embassy. And I think he is a very sensitive and a thoughtful person who is carrying out his mandate in a productive way.

       MODERATOR: Other questions?

       Ma'am?

       Q I'm with daily newspaper Novosti, Belgrade. My name is Dubro Kasavic (ph). And I would have three questions, if I may, on Balkans.

       AMB. MINIKES: Mm-hmm. Maybe you want to give 'em to me one at a time -- (laughs) -- because when you come up with three, it's sometimes hard to remember them all.

       Q Okay. Okay. We have just heard from new prime minister of Kosovo that independence of Kosovo would be the best way of stabilization of the region. What is your comment on that?

       AMB. MINIKES: That's an issue which I couldn't really meaningfully comment on yet. Besides the things that I mentioned that I've done, one of them is also to make field trips out into the areas where OSCE is very active. And I've been to Macedonia. I've been to Bosnia. I've been Kyrgyzstan and Kazakhstan. But -- and my next trip is to Kosovo, and if you would -- (chuckles) -- ask me in a couple of weeks, I think I could give you a better answer than I'd be able to right now.

       So on that one, it's really meaningful -- meaningless for me to give you a response. Your next question?

       Q Then, I don't know if you could answer me also about new agreement between Serbia and Montenegro. How do you think that it adds to the stability of the region?

       AMB. MINIKES: Well, that one is also, I think, very difficult. It certainly appears to be a positive step. It's something that the EU has been pursuing very assiduously, and you know, what works in particular circumstances is -- you really have to know the circumstances better than I do at this point to make a comment on that.

       But I am a great believer in cooperation. I think there's great strength in cooperation. And I think the movement that you see in the world today is in that direction. It's towards multilateralism. It is towards cooperative groupings. That is in good part what the EU is all about, what NATO expansion is all about and what the OSCE is all about, because the strength of what these organizations bring is in a unity and consensus of action. And I think the same thing holds true to the situation that you mentioned.

       Q And third, you have mentioned cooperation between NATO and OSCE. And there are some signals from Belgrade that Yugoslavia should apply for Partnership for Peace, and I would like to hear a reaction on that.

       AMB. MINIKES: Well, on Partnership for Peace, of course that's under the NATO umbrella, and -- but again, my earlier answer really applies. And while I can't comment on the particulars of that recommendation and what might happen, I think it's important that NATO Partnership for Peace, OSCE work together. And I think as much -- where we have overlapping memberships, which we increasingly do, I think that only adds strength, because each organization brings a unique focus to the problems that each of those countries face. So I think to broaden memberships, where it's appropriate, is a very good thing. And that's why I said earlier that the initiative of NATO expansion is such a very propitious and encouraging and very, very important development in bringing peace and prosperity and freedom to that part of the world.

       Yes, please?

       Q My name is Nicolae Manunescu (sp). I am the Washington correspondent of the Romanian public television. In your opening remarks, you said that smaller countries should be more engaged in continental matters. But what exactly is the way that this can happen in the context where NATO and EU enlargement is somehow stealing the show at the European level? Thank you very much.

       AMB. MINIKES: To this question, I don't really think -- I think it may be stealing the show in terms of the public attention and the news media. But it doesn't -- they don't steal the show in terms of what they bring to bear, and the people who are running these organizations and who are active in the member countries of these organizations work very, very cooperatively together. And I have not seen where there is an elbowing or an effort by one to exclude the other, because of the recognition of the strength of the organizations working together.

       When I met with Secretary Robertson two weeks ago in Brussels, we spent a good part of the meeting talking about how well -- in fact, almost in an exemplary way -- EU, NATO, in this case, the U.N. have worked together, for example, in Macedonia, in Bosnia, to bring about the situation -- the condition of peace and progress and democratization that we're seeing right now. So I don't see an obliteration of any organization, and not OSCE, certainly, in this.

       One of the wonderful things I find about OSCE is that -- of the many, many wonderful things -- is that the principles it stands for are so basic, so elementary, so indispensable to human welfare that there is always a very significant role for them. I was -- you know, about two weeks ago I visited Maut-hausen, which was, you know, a very infamous concentration camp in World War II. And I thought to myself how different the course of world history would have taken if we had had an OSCE in the 1930s. It would have made a significant difference. We would have had a different remaining 70 years of the 20th century had that been the case. And that is as true today as it was when OSCE was founded as a conference back in 1975.

       MODERATOR: Okay.  Ambassador, thank you very much.

       AMB. MINIKES: Thank you. Thank you very much.

Copyright (c)2002 by Federal News Service, Inc., 620 National Press Building, Washington, DC 20045 USA. Federal News Service is a private firm not affiliated with the federal government. No portion of this transcript may be copied, sold or retransmitted without the written authority of Federal News Service, Inc. Copyright is not claimed as to any part of the original work prepared by a United States government officer or employee as a part of that person's official duties. For information on subscribing to the FNS Internet Service, please email Jack Graeme at info@fnsg.com or call (202)824-0520.