Sub-committee on future security and defence capabilities
Download 38.15 Kb.
|
- Navigate this page:
- INTRODUCTION
- Summary of Meetings in Serbia and Montenegro
- Status of Kosovo
- Future of the State Union of Serbia and Montenegro
- Progress toward integration into Euro-Atlantic institutions
DEFENCE AND SECURITY 226 DSCFC 05 E Original: English 
NATO Parliamentary Assembly SUB-COMMITTEE ON FUTURE SECURITY AND DEFENCE CAPABILITIES visit to SERBia and montenegro Secretariat Report
* This Secretariat Report is presented for information only and does not necessarily represent the official view of the Assembly. Assembly documents are available on its website, http://www.nato‑pa.int 1. The Sub-committee on Future Security and Defence Capabilities visited Serbia and Montenegro on 24-26 October. Led by Sub-committee Chair Vahit Erdem (Turkey), the delegation met with their parliamentary counterparts and many government officials in Belgrade and Podgorica. Most discussions revolved around the prospects of Serbia and Montenegro to join Partnership for Peace (PfP), the final status of Kosovo and the prospects for the future of the State Union between Serbia and Montenegro. 2. Serbia and Montenegro continue to make progress on defence reform. The military is being dramatically downsized and the ultimate goal is a small, profession force capable of operation with NATO militaries. The main issue blocking the entrance of Serbia and Montenegro into the PfP programme, however, is the lack of full compliance with the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY). Although many indicted persons have surrendered this year, there are still seven outstanding cases including Radovan Karadic and Ratko Mladic. 3. The visit of the Sub-committee coincided with the release of the UN report on the final status of Kosovo and the decision to open negotiations on the province. Serbian officials and members of parliament were consistent in their position that Kosovo be allowed “more than autonomy but less than independence”. The NATO Parliamentary Assembly delegation was assured that although Serbia was willing to consider a range of options, independence for Kosovo was the only unacceptable option. This of course directly conflicts with the ethnic Albanian Kosovar position demanding nothing less than independence. Given those irreconcilable positions, it seems unlikely that a mutually acceptable resolution to the situation can be found in the near future. 4. The State Union of Serbia and Montenegro is a weak structure that appears to have far less popular support in Montenegro than in Serbia. The two republics already use different currencies, have different customs regimes, and patrol their mutual borders with different police forces. Montenegro plans to hold a referendum on independence in the Spring of 2006. The population is divided over the question of independence, although the current government is in favour. Serbian and Montenegrin officials were united in their belief that the two republics would remain close and that a dissolution of the State Union would take place amicably if that was the outcome of the referendum. Summary of Meetings in Serbia and Montenegro5. In Belgrade, the delegation met with their counterparts in the Assembly of Serbia and Montenegro and several government officials in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and the Coordination Centre for Kosovo. In Podgorica, the delegation met with members of the parliament of the Republic of Montenegro and the Minister of Foreign Affairs. Most discussion focused on the future of Kosovo and the State Union, and progress toward greater integration into Euro-Atlantic institutions. In addition to those meetings, the delegation also toured the National Defence School and watched an exercise of a Serbian army counter-terrorism unit. Status of Kosovo6. Serbian members pointed out that many Serbs were killed or driven from their homes in Kosovo over the last six years and that the March 2004 riots were a carefully orchestrated attempt to ethnically cleanse the region of non-Albanians. They insisted that Serbia is committed to a political resolution and would like to start discussions with Pristina, although they would accept some form of “shuttle diplomacy” at first if that is necessary to move the process forward. Serbia’s main concern is the protection of minorities in Kosovo including Serbs, Roma and Turks. They are concerned that this is being pushed further down the agenda. As an advisor to the President of Serbia and Montenegro told the delegation, “It used to be ‘standards before status’, now it is ‘standards and status’. We don’t want it to become ‘status and then we will see about standards’”. 7. Serbia will not accept any changes in its borders. The Serbian participants emphasized that creating an independent state out of the sovereign territory of Serbia would set a dangerous precedent and warned against feeding the aspirations of those who advocate a “greater Albania.” Unlike other parts of the former Yugoslavia that are now independent states, Kosovo was not a separate member of the Yugoslavian federation. It was, and still is, an autonomous province of Serbia. 8. An often repeated statement by Serbian participants is that Kosovo should have “more than autonomy but less than independence.” A number of members of the delegation pressed for a further definition of this idea. In sum, Serbia is willing to accept Kosovo as a self-governing region responsible for most of its internal affairs. Serbia will not accept, however, a Kosovo with its own Ministry of Foreign Affairs, military or other attributes commonly recognized as the hallmarks of an independent state. 9. Some members of the delegation expressed their concern that this was in fact a “hard-line” position wrapped in diplomatic language. If Pristina is intransigent in its insistence on independence, and Belgrade is intransigent on its insistence that independence in any form is unacceptable, then negotiations over the final status of Kosovo will be extremely difficult. Members of the delegation also emphasized that NATO will not maintain an indefinite commitment to providing security forces in Kosovo. Future of the State Union of Serbia and Montenegro10. A stark difference of opinion regarding the future of the State Union was revealed between Serbian and Montenegrin officials. Serbian officials argued that the State Union was important to the future of both Serbia and Montenegro as the two republics move closer to both NATO and the European Union. Because the process of stabilization and accession to the EU has already begun, they believe that it would be counterproductive to dissolve the State Union now and confuse the situation. That being said, they recognize the right of Montenegro to become independent and would not take any action to prevent such a development if the referendum on independence in Montenegro passes when it is offered to the population of Montenegro in the Spring of 2006. 11. Montenegrin officials were quite adamant about their desire to dissolve the State Union. They believe that their integration into Euro-Atlantic institutions is being held back by Serbia and the issue of full compliance with the ICTY. They insist that there are no persons indicted for war crimes on their territory and that the issue is entirely on the Serbian side of the federation. They see Montenegro as a successful multi-ethnic society and believe they can integrate in Europe more easily as an independent State. They note that there is little holding the two republics together. They use different currencies, have different customs regimes, and patrol their borders separately. Montenegrin officials were confident that the planned referendum will succeed. 12. The Foreign Minister of Montenegro pointed out that is it impossible for Montenegro to “break away” or “secede” because the State Union is an entity composed of two distinct republics. He also stressed that he expected Montenegro to retain close relations with Serbia following the expected dissolution of the state union. 13. The outcome of the referendum is not clear. The Montenegrin population is divided over the issue and there is the question of if Montenegrins who live in Serbia should be allowed to vote on the referendum. Regardless of the outcome, officials in both Serbia and Montenegro were confident that the process could be managed without generating sour feelings on either side. Progress toward integration into Euro-Atlantic institutions14. The main issues under discussion were the security sector reforms being undertaken to meet NATO standards and compliance with the ICTY. Despite having fought a war with NATO only six years ago, the population is well-disposed to joining PfP, the EU and to a lesser extent NATO. About 65-70 % of the population would like to see Serbia and Montenegro join PfP, 90 % would like to join the EU and about 40 % would like to join NATO. 15. The Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs and two principal advisors to Prime Minister Kostunica told the delegation that the Serbia has made considerable progress in the past year on full compliance with the demands of the ICTY. 16 indicted persons have been sent to The Hague this year, and most of them surrendered themselves to the ICTY. There are still 7 Serbs indicted for war crimes still at large and for the most part they are presumed to be in Serbia. The Serbian participants in the meetings assured the delegation that they were doing everything possible to comply fully with the demands of the ICTY and they clearly understood the impact of this issue on the future of Serbia and Montenegro. 16. Members of the delegation underlined that this issue would remain the stumbling block to entry into the PfP programme. Some members were particularly critical of the government’s policy of encouraging the surrender of indicted persons by offering significant financial incentives to the families of the indicted in return for their surrender. They felt that this sent the wrong message and had the perverse effect of rewarding individuals suspected of some of the most egregious violations of human rights in Europe since World War II. Serbian participants countered that they have to tread softly on this issue. Some of the indicted persons are seen as heroes in the broader public and government officials warned that there is a danger that a an overly aggressive pursuit of those individuals would trigger a political backlash that would bring the highly nationalistic Serbian Radical Party into power. This would almost certainly end cooperation with the ICTY and stall progress on other reforms that would lead to integration into Euro-Atlantic institutions. 17. Security sector reform was discussed with the Assistant Minister of Defence, current and retired military officials and the members of parliament charged with oversight of the military. In general, Serbia has radically reorganized its military creating a Ministry of Defence with civilians in key leadership roles. The general staff has been incorporated into this structure. Border control functions are increasingly being transferred to the Ministry of the Interior. Conscription has been reduced to six months and a fully professional military is envisioned in the near future. The overall size of the military is being reduced from the current 43,000 to 35,000 by 2007 with additional cuts in the force to reduce to 22,000 by 2012. Several units are being developed for peace-keeping missions as part of coalition operations, in particular, military police, medical and engineering units. 18. Several retired Generals with whom the delegation met with at the Atlantic Council Office in Belgrade were critical of the degree of civilian control of the military. They noted that the parliament does not have control over how the defence budget is spent and that the parliament does not have an independent means of investigation. They also expressed concern about the intelligence services and their level of autonomy. 19. Some of those concerns were borne out in the meetings with the Defence Committee of the Assembly of the State Union. As the members of that committee told the delegation, much has changed for the better, but much remains to be done. They recently held the first-ever visit of a parliamentary committee to a military facility, and are asserting a greater oversight role, but it is still limited by access to information. They are still trying to define the role of the parliament and are starting from scratch in their efforts to assert full civilian control over the security sector. Directory: sites -> default -> files -> documents documents -> North Mankato Taylor Library documents -> In the Red and Brown Water documents -> - documents -> Cbp and Trade Automated Interface Requirements Appendix: pga december 22, 2015 documents -> Ace abi catair customs and Trade Automated Interface Requirements documents -> Ace abi catair customs and Trade Automated Interface Requirements documents -> Mobile audio/video recording systems documents -> The south australian government gazette documents -> All public acts appearing in this gazette are to be considered official, and obeyed as such documents -> Union interparlementaire inter-parliamentary union Download 38.15 Kb. Share with your friends:
|