NDVA Committee Meeting

STANDING COMMITTEE ON NATIONAL DEFENCE AND VETERANS AFFAIRS

COMITÉ PERMANENT DE LA DÉFENSE NATIONALE ET DES ANCIENS COMBATTANTS

EVIDENCE

[Recorded by Electronic Apparatus]

Thursday, May 27, 1999

• 1516

[English]

The Co-Chairman (Mr. Pat O'Brien (London—Fanshawe, Lib.)): I would like to call to order the joint committee meeting of the Standing Committee on National Defence and Veterans Affairs and the Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs and International Trade for our ongoing series of briefings. Our attendance might be a little lighter today, but I'm assuming members have questions.

Mr. André Bachand (Richmond—Arthabaska, PC): The quality is here.

The Co-Chairman (Mr. Pat O'Brien): That's right.

Am I right in assuming the members have some questions?

Some hon. members: Yes.

The Co-Chairman (Mr. Pat O'Brien): In the interest of our staff's time, do you want to proceed with the full introductory remarks they normally do, or would you like to go to questions? You'd like the full thing? Okay. We'll have the introductory remarks then.

Thank you very much for joining us.

Mr. Wright, are you going to start?

Mr. Jim Wright (Director General for Central, East, and South Europe, Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade): Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.

The chief prosecutor of the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia, Madame Justice Arbour, has indicted Yugoslav President Slobodan Milosevic and four other senior Serb officials for crimes against humanity and war crimes. International warrants have been issued to all member states of the United Nations and to Switzerland for their arrest. Other indictees include the Serbian President, the Deputy Prime Minister of Yugoslavia, the chief of the general staff of the Yugoslav army, and the Serbian internal affairs minister.

[Translation]

Canada is happy with this decision; it could mark a decisive turning point for Yugoslavia as for the rest of the region. It's the logical conclusion of a process undertaken by the United Nations Security Council in 1993 which, by setting up the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia, the ICT, recognized that the crimes which fall under the jurisdiction of that court constitute threats to international peace and security.

[English]

It is also a further corroboration of the facts that motivated NATO in its decision to undertake its collective security action in Yugoslavia to end the humanitarian crisis in Kosovo. It also responds directly to the cries for help from the hundreds of thousands of refugees from Kosovo who have been victimized by President Milosevic and his regime.

The tribunal is an independent judicial body. The prosecutor's responsibility is to investigate the facts and bring cases before the tribunal where there is sufficient evidence to prosecute. In this case, Chief Prosecutor Arbour has concluded that the tribunal now possesses enough evidence to indict President Milosevic and his key associates. A judge of the tribunal has independently reviewed the indictments and confirmed that the strict evidentiary requirements have been satisfied.

[Translation]

Canada has long supported the important work done by this court, like that of Judge Arbour and her team. We're convinced that it's impossible to have sustainable peace without justice. Impunity for such crimes only compromises whatever chance there is to come to a real reconciliation.

[English]

Canada has always said, throughout the wars in the former Yugoslavia over the past decade, that President Milosevic has much to answer for. Clearly the chief prosecutor has managed to build a strong case to support this, through criminal charges in a court of law. We hope President Milosevic will finally now put an end to the atrocities being committed by his forces in Kosovo. He should accept the opportunity to defend himself in a fair trial before this impartial judicial body, which operates according to the highest standards of international law.

• 1520

We have always argued that the targets in this war are not the people of Yugoslavia. They too have been victimized by their irresponsible leaders for too long already.

There are five names on the indictments issued by the tribunal today. This is a clear demonstration of the world's determination not to allow leaders who commit serious violations of humanitarian law to hide behind organs of the state.

[Translation]

These charge-layings send an absolutely unequivocal message both to the moderate leaders and the Yugoslavian extremists. The latter must understand that, at the end of the day, they will not profit from their crimes. Besides that, they will pay a heavy tribute if they continue to... [Editor's Note: Inaudible]... on President Milosevic whose regime is losing its legitimacy every day he carries out his campaign of terror and ethnic cleansing against civilians.

[English]

Equally true and at least as important, moderates in Yugoslavia cannot continue to be penalized for respecting the rule of law. They have been marginalized and threatened by President Milosevic but should now see that they can seize an opportunity here. A chance exists to turn the page on the mistakes of the past and to build a new democratic Yugoslavia that has a real chance to be integrated into the community of nations in Europe.

Our goals in Kosovo remain the same. The immediate priority is to ensure that refugees are able to return home in dignity and in safety.

In sum, the indictments brought down today confirm once again the importance of the initiative to provide protection for the people of Kosovo. The fact that the tribunal has provided evidence about the atrocities reinforces the case we've been making from day one: that what was going on was unprecedented and unacceptable and had to be stopped.

That ends my opening statement, Mr. Chairman.

The Co-Chairman (Mr. Pat O'Brien): Thank you very much, Mr. Wright.

General Jurkowski, do you have some additional comments?

Brigadier-General D.M. Jurkowski (Chief of Staff, J3 and Director General, Military Plans and Operations, Department of National Defence): Yes, I do have a few short comments, Mr. Chairman. Thank you very much. And I will take care of a question that was asked of my boss last week.

Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen. I'm Brigadier-General David Jurkowski and I am the chief of staff for joint operations. I work directly for Lieutenant-General Henault, who is in Europe today, as a matter of fact, visiting our forces in Italy and meeting with the Canadian and British representatives in London. He will appear before this forum again next week.

Turning to the NATO military situation very briefly, there have been no significant changes to the military campaign in the last two days, except that weather has improved, thereby permitting an intensification of NATO bombing. In the past 48 hours, over 1,300 sorties were flown. The main effort was to hit VJ/MUP fielded forces and supporting infrastructure inside Kosovo. Full battle damage assessments are still pending, but it is clear that FRY forces were hit very hard.

Targets in Kosovo included rocket launchers, artillery howitzers and mortars, tanks, armoured personnel carriers, transport aircraft, and air defence radars. Strategic targets in Serbia remain army and ammunition facilities, petroleum storage, command sites, and airfields. There are now approximately 900 NATO aircraft in theatre, flying an average of over 700 sorties per day.

[Translation]

The objective of NATO attacks is still to isolate, disturb and destroy the Serbian military and police forces perpetrating ethnic cleansing in Kosovo.

Together with the air campaign, the alliance is actively engaged in humanitarian rescue operations in Albania and Fyrom. NATO troops are improving the camps sheltering the ever-increasing number of Kosovo deportees to help stabilize the situation in the area. NATO forces are also providing logistical and technical support for the handling and distribution of necessities.

[English]

I'd now like to briefly follow up on a question on the jettison of ordnance into the Adriatic Sea. I can confirm that a Canadian CF-18 aircraft, for safety reasons, did jettison a hung bomb in accordance with authorized procedures in an emergency jettison area last week. A hung bomb is a bomb that does not release from the aircraft when you attempt to release it. Because of the potential for a heavy asymmetric load on one side or because of excessive drag not allowing you to get back to base, or because it could explode on landing—you don't know what it's going to do—the procedure is to jettison it in an emergency jettison area. That's what that aircraft did.

• 1525

This is a very important issue in NATO, and the whole process is under review. I'd note that ordnance has been jettisoned into the Adriatic Sea since the Second World War.

Currently several emergency jettison areas have been established in the Adriatic Sea to allow NATO aircraft engaged in Operation Allied Force to jettison unused ordnance if required for flight safety or ground safety reasons. Over 100 pieces of ordnance have been jettisoned to date in those areas. NATO is attempting to minimize the impact on fishermen in the northern Adriatic area by relocating emergency jettison areas. NATO is also considering a mine countermeasures clearance type of operation.

Turning to Canada's contribution, our CF-18s in Aviano flew 28 sorties over the past two days. Their missions were a combination of battlefield air interdiction and combat air patrol missions. Their targets included army barracks, storage depots, radio relay sites, and airfields.

Turning to Op Kinetic, the deployment of our 800-strong contingent to the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia as part of an international peace implementation force remains on schedule.

[Translation]

The ship chartered to ferry the major part of the heavy equipment left for Europe Tuesday. The entire contingent will be in the theatre by mid-June and operational by the end of June.

[English]

As mentioned on Tuesday, NATO is in the process of updating its plan for the peace implementation force in Kosovo with a view to increasing its strength to approximately 45,000 to 50,000 personnel. We continue to review our own options and develop a menu of capabilities that might be offered if and when we are asked by NATO to provide additional support. This of course will need to be taken to cabinet and government for consideration.

[Translation]

The reception of Albanian refugees from Kosovo in Canada has been completed. The final flight landed at Trenton yesterday. From a military perspective, as support for the CIC, this operation was extremely well handled.

[English]

A total of 5,244 refugees were received through our bases at Trenton and Greenwood, of which 165 are part of the Citizenship and Immigration Canada family reunification program. The CF has not received any additional requests for assistance at this time.

Mr. Chairman, that concludes my opening statement.

The Co-Chairman (Mr. Pat O'Brien): Thank you very much, General Jurkowski.

Mr. LeBane, do you have anything to add on the refugee situation?

Mr. Jeff LeBane (Director General, International Relations, Citizenship and Immigration Canada): Mr. Chairman, just very briefly, I would add to the general's comments that in addition to having met our commitment to Madam Ogata's appeal to provide safe haven to these 5,000 Kosovar refugees, we've also resettled permanently to Canada 430 Kosovar refugees who have family in Canada, and to date, 36 special-needs cases referred to us by the UNHCR.

On these family reunification and special-needs cases, there is no limit; that's open-ended. The arrivals of those persons will continue through June on a regular basis, from both Macedonia and Albania. They will be destined directly to their families in Canada.

As for the 5,000 refugees on the bases, we will begin moving these persons to various communities across Canada this weekend.

Thank you. I've provided a handout.

The Co-Chairman (Mr. Pat O'Brien): Very good. Thank you very much.

We'll begin some questions then from the members. We used to go with a minute for questions and answers. Maybe we can relax that a little bit today.

[Translation]

Mr. Réal Ménard (Hochelaga—Maisonneuve, BQ): Mr. Chairman, did you say two or five?

[English]

The Co-Chairman (Mr. Pat O'Brien): We usually go for a couple of minutes each.

Mr. Jim Wright: Mr. Chairman, could the representative from CIDA make a brief opening remark?

The Co-Chairman (Mr. Pat O'Brien): I'm sorry. Absolutely.

I didn't forget, but in past briefings I've been at, you haven't had remarks most of the time. But if you have remarks, by all means, please make those remarks, Madame Corneau.

[Translation]

Ms. Hélène Corneau (Program Manager, Central and Eastern Europe Program, Canadian International Development Agency): Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

• 1530

The Canadian government, through CIDA, very recently made a commitment to offer economic support to Albania and Macedonia. These are the two front-line countries which are most heavily affected by the crisis at the present time. This support will be in the order of $6 million for Albania and $4 million for Macedonia.

[English]

During her visit to Albania last Friday, Minister Marleau announced that CIDA will have representation in Tirana. This was warmly received by governmental interlocutors, who recognize Canada's commitment to Albania and to the refugees they are hosting.

[Translation]

This short visit was extremely productive. Ms. Marleau visited a refugee camp close to Tirana and had very productive discussions with the president, the prime minister and several ministers of the Albanian government. Thank you.

The Joint Chairman (Mr. Pat O'Brien): Thank you, Ms. Corneau.

[English]

Just by way of announcement to the members, on Tuesday the joint briefing will be extended. Mr. Graham and I have decided to extend the briefing to 5.30. Mr. Graham will be returning with the rest of the delegation that's been to Macedonia and wants to make a report on their activities. Also, Mr. Robinson, I'm sure, will be rejoining the discussion at that point. So we felt we would need more time.

I don't know whether the staff has been forewarned about that. The clerk is saying yes. Anyhow, whatever flexibility you have, that's Tuesday.

The other news is that next Thursday, because of commitments of most members of both committees, the briefing will not take place at all. So we'll ask you to give us a little more time Tuesday, but we won't have the briefing on Thursday.

With those announcements, let me go to the members and start with Monsieur Ménard for some questions.

[Translation]

Mr. Réal Ménard: Mr. Chairman, you say that you don't think you'll be calling a meeting of this committee next Thursday, which seems to create a problem concerning transparency and availability of information because, in any case, I think that those who want to get the information will show up. I'd like you to give us more information on this decision that the Bloc Québécois doesn't really find to its liking.

[English]

The Co-Chairman (Mr. Pat O'Brien): Well, it may be that the Bloc doesn't like the decision, but the fact of the matter is that most of the members of both committees have indicated to their chairpersons that they can't be in attendance. You'll note, Mr. Ménard, that this is a joint meeting of SCONDVA and SCOFAIT, and most of the members of those two committees have indicated they'll have a problem attending, have agreed that the meeting will be cancelled, and have agreed that it would be a very non-productive use of our staff's time to have them attend a briefing that very few, if any, members of the two committees will attend. I respect your disagreement, but the meeting won't take place.

[Translation]

Mr. Bachand.

Mr. André Bachand: Mr. Chairman, as chairman or co-chairman, you've made a decision with which I disagree. I would ask you to be more open because the Kosovo question is evolving very rapidly. Besides, today's questions will support this. Mr. Wright's report on Milosevic, among others, shows that the matter is evolving rapidly. I'd like you to show some open-mindedness and allow us to discuss this decision again next Tuesday. If the situation evolves, maybe the members of the committee, yourself included, will ask that the decision be reexamined so that we can have another meeting Thursday and maybe even before that. As the situation is evolving rapidly, we must remain open to the possibility of holding a meeting next Thursday.

[English]

The Co-Chairman (Mr. Pat O'Brien): Thank you. I will, as one of the chairs, confer with Mr. Graham, and we will, as you request, review the decision.

I've explained the rationale. The rationale doesn't change. I can't be here, I know Mr. Graham can't be here, and most of the members of both committees cannot be here. But we will review it. If other members of Parliament want to attend that briefing and if it can be organized, I suppose that's a possibility.

As one of the co-chairs of this committee and one of the members of Parliament, I agree with you on the comment on openness, but our staff and the government have been extremely open, if I might say, in trying to have ongoing briefings twice a week for weeks now, in addition to the technical briefings that go on daily, which all members of Parliament are very welcome to attend and indeed ask questions at. That still exists next Thursday. The daily technical briefing will still take place at DND next Thursday, where members can attend and ask questions.

• 1535

But at your request, I will on Tuesday raise the subject again, and we will see if we are going to continue to have the briefing on Thursday. At this point I just thought it would be fair to mention there was a decision to cancel it, but we will review it.

Thank you.

Now let's go to Monsieur Ménard.

[Translation]

Mr. Réal Ménard: You understand that we're showing a lot of enthusiasm for the International Criminal Tribunal's decision to issue warrants of indictment, but that doesn't go without posing a certain number of technical questions. The first one, of course, concerns the inventory of goods the accused have in Canada. Ms. Arbour asked the USA to go ahead and freeze their assets.

Has Canada come up with an inventory of the assets of the accused on its territory and, as the case may be, will we give a favourable response to the International Criminal Tribunal's request to freeze assets?

That's my first question and I'll have a few others later on.

[English]

Mr. Jim Wright: I can answer that question very easily. All UN countries are obliged to cooperate fully with the tribunal.

[Translation]

As for the question of the assets of the five people mentioned in the charges laid by the Tribunal, Canada is checking as to whether those five people have assets here. To our knowledge, they don't have any personal assets in Canada, but we are checking it out.

[English]

In addition, in essence the assets of the Yugoslav government are already frozen in Canada. There are very few of a governmental nature. There are government buildings here—an embassy, a consulate, a residence—not an awful lot. Those are frozen, for a variety of different reasons, including the fact that there continues to be a dispute between Yugoslavia and the other successor states from the former Yugoslavia over the division of assets from the former Yugoslavia. As a result of that particular dispute, which is still being sorted out at the United Nations, all assets of the Yugoslav government overseas have been frozen by members of the United Nations. So there are already in place in Canada a number of steps to freeze assets.

However, the decision by Judge Arbour relates to personal assets of the five indictees in question, and we will certainly look at this question very carefully to determine whether or not there are any such assets. If there are, of course the Canadian government will fully comply with that request, and it would be done, I believe, under the Special Economic Measures Act. I think that's the procedure we would normally be using.

[Translation]

Mr. Réal Ménard: Fine.

Will you allow me another question, Mr. Chairman?

The Joint Chairman (Mr. Pat O'Brien): Yes.

Mr. Réal Ménard: The laying of charges against the Yugoslavian leaders by the Tribunal seems to raise a certain number of problems and questions especially concerning the continuity of negotiations of the peace plan with the G-8 group.

What might that mean and what information are you in a position to give this committee? Could Canada pursue negotiations despite the fact that Mr. Milosevic himself, as main spokesman and president of his country, might be actively hunted down and probably be indicted himself at the very time negotiations are ongoing?

How could you reassure us or even worry us as to future events concerning the negotiation process for the peace plan?

[English]

Mr. Jim Wright: First, of course our hope is that the Yugoslav President would respond directly to the indictment that has been made by the chief prosecutor of the tribunal and that he would turn himself in to the court in The Hague to make his own case before this impartial, unbiased court.

• 1540

The second responsibility falls on the Yugoslav government to cooperate fully with the tribunal in The Hague. If the President does not turn himself in, then it is the responsibility of the Yugoslav government, and I believe the warrant for his arrest has been or will be served on the Minister of Justice of the Yugoslav government.

So in terms of the first order of business with respect to the President, our hope and expectation is that he would submit himself to the jurisdiction of the court, make his case, and see what the court decides about the indictment that has been brought down by the chief prosecutor.

With respect to the diplomatic process, we are at a delicate time right now. It's a very complex process. We've discussed this before at the committee. I should also say that

[Translation]

this is a situation the international community has not dealt with before. You have a head of State who has been charged by an international Tribunal for crimes against humanity. This is the first time this has ever happened in history and, because of that, we're working in a totally new political context.

[English]

Having said that, the objectives of the international community, of NATO, and of the United Nations remain unchanged. We are pursuing two tracks aggressively.

We are pursuing the military track, because we feel if there is not pressure on the military front, we will not get the kind of cooperation we are looking for on the diplomatic front. So the military campaign being pursued by NATO will continue day in and day out.

On the diplomatic front, a request has been in front of the Yugoslav government for over two months now to comply with five conditions that have been set by the UN Secretary-General and by NATO, and to agree to seven principles that were set out by the G-8 foreign ministers in Bonn in early May. Those conditions remain non-negotiable.

It's not as though we are at a stage in the diplomatic process where we need to engage in extensive negotiations with President Milosevic. That's not the case. We're not in the process of negotiating a Rambouillet peace accord, as we tried to do in the fall and winter and failed.

What we want from the Yugoslav leadership.... And it doesn't have to be President Milosevic. It doesn't have to be an indicted war criminal. In fact our preference would be to deal with someone other than an indicted war criminal. But the fact of the matter is, he is the President. He hasn't turned himself in to the court yet. What we want is simply a signal, a very clear signal, in response to those conditions.

The diplomatic process continues. My understanding is that Mr. Chernomyrdin, the Russian special envoy, will be visiting Belgrade probably tomorrow, and he will be pursuing his dialogue with the Yugoslav leadership. I know Mr. Axworthy, who is in Washington today for meetings with Madeleine Albright, the U.S. Secretary of State, also made it abundantly clear that the approach by the international community remains four-square behind the diplomatic and the military track. We hope it's going to be successful quickly.

Yugoslavia has a choice. They can decide to recognize the fact that in order to be part of the solution, they need to reject some of the nationalist, very divisive policies that President Milosevic has been following for years, or they can continue on the track of isolation and take Yugoslavia further and further away from the international community.

We believe we're starting to hear some voices of moderation from a number of political leaders and from the Yugoslav public, and we hope the indictment against the Yugoslav leadership will make it abundantly clear to the Yugoslavian people that their leadership has taken them in a direction that is destroying their country.

• 1545

The Co-Chairman (Mr. Pat O'Brien): Thank you, Monsieur Ménard.

Mr. Earle.

Mr. Gordon Earle (Halifax West, NDP): Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. Wright, would you not agree that as a member of NATO, Canada should have access to any information the partnership has that would be relevant to this particular situation?

I come back to the letter. I've raised the subject of this letter before, and I see you smiling. Have you yet found out the contents of that letter that went via Jesse Jackson from Milosevic to President Clinton? If not, why not?

The reason I raise that is you mention time and time again that NATO wants a very clear signal or indication that conditions will be met or that something will take place positively. If we do not know what's in that letter, how can we say there may not have been some clear signal in that letter? That's the first point.

Secondly, with respect to the bombing, from the information we are getting back now, it appears a lot of the Albanians have been cleared out of the villages and the villages are like ghost towns. So it appears Milosevic's goal has been accomplished, despite the bombing. Many Kosovars now are either in refugee camps or in hiding in the mountains in a critical situation, and the bombing does not seem to help that situation. If anything, it seems to prevent humanitarian aid from getting to those people.

So what now is the purpose of the bombing? Initially the purpose of the bombing was to protect the people who were being “ethnically cleansed”, but if they've already been moved out, what is the purpose of the bombing now?

Mr. Jim Wright: Thank you very much.

Let me say first of all the letter from President Milosevic to President Clinton no doubt is privileged communication between two sovereign governments. It's up to those governments to decide whether or not they wish to release that communication.

Secondly, you know perfectly well NATO would like nothing better than to see that signal from Belgrade in order to be able to end the bombing. Quite honestly, I remain deeply skeptical that there are any special messages in this letter that was carried by Mr. Jackson. If there were, I think the contents would have been released first and foremost by Belgrade and by President Milosevic himself to demonstrate good faith to the international community and that he's responding very directly to the conditions and principles that have been set out by the international community. Secondly, if there were something important in it, I know also the President of the United States would have made this communication public.

You've asked this question a number of times. The next time I'm speaking with my American colleagues, I will ask. I will.

Mr. Gordon Earle: The reason I ask is this. You say quite confidently that it's privileged communication between two sovereign countries, but this war is not between two sovereign countries. We keep saying this war is a NATO partnership, and that's why we as Canada are involved. So if we're involved and it relates to this war, I would assume we would have access, or should have access, to that information.

Also, you say quite emphatically that if there were anything important, the President would have released it. Well, if there's nothing important, why not release it? To me, there's something not transparent about the thing. To clear up any confusion, the simplest thing is to get an answer to what's in there.

Mr. Jim Wright: You're asking a fair question. I will enquire. I can't promise the letter will be released. It's not ours to release. It is privileged communication between two sovereign governments. I take your point. I'll explain it to my American counterparts, but as I say, I remain deeply skeptical that anything in there is newsworthy at all.

Mr. Gordon Earle: Your skepticism doesn't assure me.

Mr. Jim Wright: That's fine. That's fine.

The second question was on the purpose of the NATO bombing right now. You're right; we are facing now upwards of probably 1 million people who have been displaced as a result of the campaign of ethnic cleansing, many of whom are in neighbouring countries or in European countries or indeed in Canada. But it's very difficult to estimate how many people remain within Kosovo itself. Estimates run as high as 500,000 people on the ground.

• 1550

Some humanitarian aid is going in to Kosovo and indeed to Montenegro and to Serbia right now. This is in the form of aid convoys that are being coordinated by the UNHCR and the International Red Cross, in very close cooperation with NATO as well, to ensure NATO is well aware of the movements of these convoys. Very clear terms and conditions guide these humanitarian aid convoys, to ensure they are not put any more at risk than would normally be the case.

So people are trying to get some humanitarian assistance in there. We are seeing offices of the International Red Cross being set up in Yugoslavia. A consortium has been put together by three countries—Russia, Greece, and Switzerland—which are working to get humanitarian relief in to the people who have been most affected as a result of this crisis. So some humanitarian aid is getting in.

The purpose of the NATO bombing is very clear. We are dealing with an extremely sophisticated military machine in Yugoslavia, with assets that, for a fairly small country in the Balkans, reach well beyond what their needs would be. We are still targeting essential assets of the Serbian military machine. I know the general can give more specifics on the kind of targeting that's going on right now, but you are still seeing command and control communication assets on the ground, airfields, and airplanes being taken out day in and day out.

The purpose of this is to so degrade the Serbian military machine that it will become abundantly apparent to all concerned, including the Serbian military and the Yugoslav leadership, that they have no choice under the circumstances but to give in to the international community and accept the five conditions.

This is not a campaign directed against the Serbian people, against civilians. It is expressly directed at Serbian military targets and infrastructure, and it is taking its toll on that military machine.

The Co-Chairman (Mr. Pat O'Brien): We should give Monsieur Bachand a chance, and then we'll come back for more questions.

Monsieur Bachand.

[Translation]

Mr. André Bachand: First, I'd like to thank the General for having given us some answers concerning the accidental or voluntary dropping of bombs over the Adriatic. I hope they won't be dropping anything, if at all possible, in the Liberals' building. Unfortunately, I don't have a lot of time to put questions to you. I'd like to put other questions on the military aspect, but I'm sure I'll have the opportunity next Tuesday and, I'm also sure, next Thursday.

That said, I'd like to talk about the laying of charges against Mr. Milosevic in terms of timing. The laying of charges precedes the visit of the Russian envoy to Belgrade by some 12 to 24 hours. The terms you used, Mr. Wright, "irresponsible leader" and "he must turn himself in", are also those of this government, unless I am mistaken. It's the first time that a head of State in office has ever been accused and it's also the first time that the head of State in office, and at war, is being accused of war crimes.

Could you explain how we can negotiate in that sort of context? Mr. Wright, you doubtless remember that during our first meeting, where the Minister was present, I put that question also. Milosevic was being accused of all kinds of crimes, rightly or wrongly, even though we had no evidence. So I was wondering how you were going to negotiate with someone you were saying all these things about. Of what use are the democratic structure and the diplomatic structure at this time?

• 1555

Today, the terms you use are as strong as during the first week of the war and they are now backed up by charges laid by the International Criminal Tribunal. Please explain how the international community can sign an agreement with Milosevic. First of all, how can it even talk with Milosevic? Can Milosevic negotiate?

This is not a war between a union and an employer. Quite often, we can put a lick of paint or some stickers on some trucks, and once the collective agreement is signed, we say there's no problem and that no complaints will be filed about the actions taken. In this case, we're talking about war crimes. Will the government be opposed to any negotiation, to what is commonly called plea bargaining, with Milosevic? Can you guarantee that there will never be any plea bargaining? How can you negotiate with Milosevic and how can the international community continue to send its people to attempt to convince Milosevic now that the charges have been filed against him?

[English]

Mr. Jim Wright: Concerning the timing of the indictment and the fact that Mr. Chernomyrdin happens to be going to Belgrade tomorrow,

[Translation]

it is not a decision of the international community. It's a decision of the War Crimes Tribunal, and Ms. Arbour, not NATO, the G-8 or the United Nations. Ms. Arbour indicated today that there was now sufficient evidence against Milosevic and his colleagues to present their case to a Tribunal judge. He is the one who decided that we could now proceed with the charges. That's the first thing.

Secondly,

[English]

perhaps I'm mistaken. I don't think I've ever used the terminology “a monster” for President Milosevic. We have always said we believe he has an awful lot to answer for. We've even been very careful about using the term “war criminal”. We've always said it's not for the Canadian government to judge; it's for the international tribunal to make that particular determination. They have made that determination. The matter will now go before the court, and we'll see whether or not the court finds President Milosevic and his colleagues to be war criminals or not.

I know there's a lot of criticism out there from Belgrade in terms of the “bias” of this court. I would only emphasize that if there is a bias of Madame Arbour and the court, it's a bias for the truth, and that's all.

With respect to how we are going to sign a treaty with him, I don't think it's our intention to sign a treaty with him. It's our intention to hear acceptance of the five conditions from the Yugoslav leadership.

The Yugoslav leadership is more than simply Slobodan Milosevic. He is a very important player—I don't want to suggest that is not the case—but he is not the only individual in that particular government. What we are looking for is a clear signal of acceptance. We're not looking for negotiations. We're not looking for a new peace agreement. All we are looking for is a clear signal of acceptance of the conditions that have been set out by the international community.

In fact even for the UN Security Council resolution that we are in the process of working on with the Russians—-

[Translation]

Mr. André Bachand: I apologize for interrupting you, Mr. Wright, but time is running out. I don't want to be impolite, but I do want to say that...

[English]

Mr. Jim Wright: No immunity and no plea bargaining.

[Translation]

Mr. André Bachand: So what will the Russian envoy go and tell him? We know that Mr. Talbott was there.

Mr. Jim Wright: Yes.

Mr. André Bachand: The President of Finland was involved in that. When I listen to you, the message is quite clear. What are you going to do in Belgrade if there's no room for negotiation?

• 1600

The increasingly persistent rumours about sending ground troops seem plausible. What are you going to do in Belgrade?

Mr. Jim Wright: If the question is whether these charges complicate the diplomatic process my answer would be affirmative. How does it complicate it? It's very difficult for me to answer that question right now.

[English]

Mr. Chernomyrdin is going to be there tomorrow. Russia is a permanent member of the UN Security Council. Russia helped establish the tribunal in 1993. Russia has endorsed repeatedly resolutions before the UN Security Council that call for Yugoslavia to cooperate with the international tribunal. So Russia goes in there with a certain commitment already to the tribunal. Everybody knew the risks associated with Madame Arbour and her court looking into the circumstances of crimes against humanity, war crimes, as a result of the Kosovo crisis. The timing was decided by them.

In terms of the diplomatic process, as I indicated, I don't want to put words into Mr. Chernomyrdin's mouth. I have not heard any public statements by Mr. Chernomyrdin today. The only public statement I have heard is from the Russian foreign ministry. They have said they are absolutely committed to the diplomatic process trying to end this conflict as soon as possible. We are dedicated to that approach as well.

I know you're in a hurry, but if I could, I would make one other observation. In the Bosnian conflict and the post-conflict arena, there was an individual by the name of Dr. Radovan Karadzic, who was leader of Republika Srpska for a long period of time. He was an interlocuteur valable until such time as a war crimes indictment was brought against him by the same tribunal. When that happened, he was completely isolated, he was marginalized, he lost his political authority, and a whole new generation of political leadership developed over time—I'm not saying overnight, because it did take some time for the new leadership in Republika Srpska to come forward.

I don't have all the answers. I don't know what all the implications are going to be. But part of the answer is that the political landscape in Yugoslavia has changed as a result of this decision. The world community has turned around and said, “We think this man is a war criminal. We have passed an indictment. He has to appear before the court.”

So Yugoslavia has a choice. They can continue to absolutely isolate themselves, follow the path of Slobodan Milosevic, and run the risk of being indicted themselves before this UN-mandated tribunal, or there will be an opportunity for some of the moderates in Yugoslavia who believe in the rule of law and believe in good governance and democracy—the Djindjics, the Djukanovics, and the Draskovics of this world, who we've been talking about before this committee.... Maybe, just maybe, this presents an opening for them to come to the fore.

But the diplomatic process will continue. We will deal with the Yugoslav leadership. And we are not looking to negotiate. We are looking to get a simple answer, a nod of the head, a commitment of acceptance of the conditions set out by the international community, and the start of the withdrawal of Serb forces. That's what we're waiting for.

[Translation]

The Joint Chairman (Mr. Pat O'Brien): Thank you, Mr. Bachand.

[English]

We've reached the projected end time of the briefing. Do members still have a few additional questions? Okay. I have another commitment. Based on that, I'm going to ask Mr. Pratt, then, to take the chair.

I would just remind the members, though—and we have to make this point again on Tuesday, and I will—that the staff has been extremely busy with our requests. We have to try to work a little more assiduously to that 4 o'clock wrap-up time.

With that parting pleasantry, I'll ask Mr. Pratt to take the chair. Thank you.

The Co-Vice-Chairman (Mr. David Pratt (Nepean—Carleton, Lib.)): Who's next? Mr. Earle.

• 1605

Mr. Gordon Earle: I want to come back to a point raised by Mr. Wright.

You continually mention that the action is not directed against the Serbian people, and I understand the point you're trying to make, but I'll just use a little example, and you'll perhaps get the point I'm trying to make.

There are four people sitting up there. Let's say for some reason I took a dislike to you and I had something against you, Mr. Wright. I wouldn't, but let's say I did, and I tossed a bomb up there. I'm sure the other people would feel the effects of that bomb. It's all well and good for me to say I didn't direct it toward the brigadier-general or toward Mr. LeBane or toward Madame Corneau; I was directing it toward Mr. Wright. Nonetheless they're going to feel the results of that.

In effect, the Serbian people, whether the action is directed toward them or not, are the ones who are suffering. They are the ones who are suffering from the destruction of the infrastructure and from the pollution of the environment. The babies in the hospital who are cut off from incubators are the ones who are dying as a result of the bombing. I could go through a litany of things that are happening that are affecting the Serbian people because of the bombing campaign.

What I'm saying is at this point it appears to me that if you're saying there may be an opening to deal with the moderates, well, perhaps the moderates would appreciate some kind of pause or suspension in the bombing to talk about this issue. You say you're not looking for negotiation, and there has to be acceptance of the original five principles, but as you indicate, the political landscape has changed. Not just through the indictment process, but through the whole bombing campaign and through things that have happened since then, the landscape has changed.

We now have Kosovars saying they will not settle for autonomy, but they want complete independence, so those issues are coming up as well. It's all well and good to say we want people to come back to those original five points and agree to them without any negotiation, but it seems to me that in order to have peace, there has to be some kind of negotiation. There may be a little give and take in some areas, but it would still accomplish the overall goal.

This hard line, that we're looking for complete acceptance before we stop bombing, it seems to me is defeating the purpose.

Mr. Jim Wright: I understand the question and I understand why you're asking it. As a counterpoint, while of course we regret those instances, those few instances, when innocent Yugoslav victims have been affected by the NATO campaign.... That is regrettable. NATO has said that and Canada has said that. They are not the target of the action by the international community, but we understand some of the suffering that has resulted.

Having said that, I have to answer that in terms of moral equivalency, I am looking at the hundreds of thousands of Kosovars who have been driven from their homes, driven from their country. You talk about babies and incubators. Frankly most Kosovars over the course of the last year haven't seen a hospital anywhere. They have been thrown out of their homes. A lot of the men have disappeared. Thousands are suspected to have died. Hundreds of thousands are missing.

So from a moral equivalency point of view, I appreciate the concerns you have, but trying to put this in perspective, I must say I am always troubled when I hear people who I guess have become so numb to the situation of the refugees and the plight of the refugees that they are focusing more on some of the collateral incidents as a result of NATO.

Mr. Gordon Earle: I take a bit of exception to the implication that—

The Co-Vice-Chairman (Mr. David Pratt): Mr. Earle, please direct your comments through the chair.

Mr. Gordon Earle: Yes, Mr. Chair.

The Co-Vice-Chairman (Mr. David Pratt): And this is not a debate; it's a question-and-answer period.

Mr. Gordon Earle: I understand it's not a debate, but we have to respond to what's been set forth.

Mr. Chair, through to Mr. Wright, there is no numbness on my part with respect to the situation of the refugees.

Mr. Jim Wright: I understand.

Mr. Gordon Earle: I appreciate that very fully, and I'm not balancing one against the other. I am simply saying, given the situation that exists now with respect to the refugees, many of whom are in hiding or in camps and will be facing quite a bit of concern with the upcoming hot summer weather and the future cold in the winter, that is a very serious situation. I'm not trying to belittle that.

I'm saying the bombing is not assisting that situation either. The bombing campaign, in my view, is not helping that situation one iota. That's the point I'm making. It's not that we are not sensitive to those concerns.

• 1610

Mr. Jim Wright: Your interest is in seeing a bombing pause—

Mr. Gordon Earle: That's my interest.

Mr. Jim Wright: —to allow for negotiation.

Mr. Gordon Earle: Yes, to allow for negotiation, because I think the time is right for that.

Mr. Jim Wright: NATO has said that under certain conditions, it would welcome such a pause, and it has set out very clearly what those conditions are.

Minister Axworthy and others have said that a suspension without a clear signal from the Yugoslav authorities, frankly, based on the past track record of negotiations on the part of Mr. Milosevic and his regime, his broken promises.... We'd love to give the benefit of the doubt, but I'm afraid to say history suggests that with this particular regime and this particular leader, this is not a good bet.

We are committed to a bombing pause. We've set out conditions under which we would be pleased to facilitate such a bombing pause. We are pursuing the diplomatic track as actively as possible to get that bombing pause.

On your comment with respect to Kosovars now saying they will only be satisfied with complete independence, well, going into the Rambouillet process, we heard that as well, so frankly that's not something that troubles us deeply. We know independence is not on the table. The international community has made it abundantly clear. These are individuals within the Kosovar community who, for their own reasons, are advocating this question of independence, but it's not on the table, and it won't be on the table when the international security force and civilian force arrives in Kosovo to allow Kosovars to return home.

The Co-Vice-Chairman (Mr. David Pratt): Mr. Earle, Mr. Wright, and other witnesses before the committee, we're going to have to wrap up. I have another commitment myself to go to. We're already well past our time for this committee.

I would like to once again thank all of the witnesses for being here and providing the committee with information.

Thank you.

The meeting is adjourned.