FRY: Crisis Group Official Denies 'Anti-Serbian' Bias in Weapons Issue
Brussels, 5 Dec (BETA) - The International Crisis Group's [ICG] director for the Balkans, Nicholas White, stated today that the organization's report on the illegal exportation of weapons from the FRY and Bosnia to Iraq and Liberia was intended to encourage the introduction of civilian control over the military sector in Serbia and thereby to "contribute to greater stability in the entire region," and he emphasized that the ICG is not "anti-Serbian."
White told BETA that the ICG has never worked "systematically against Serbian interests," but that it has only pointed to the "bad politics of the Milosevic regime." Because Serbia is the key country in the region, the lion's share of judgments must be directed at Serbia, and not at any others, White said.
The private think tank's director for the Balkans stated that next week the Crisis Group will release a report on the return of refugees to Croatia and Bosnia, which, he stated, will make it clear that the ICG is "not anti-Serbian."
Asked then to say how he views the harsh criticism of the ICG's assessment by FRY political personalities and media, and especially Yugoslav President Vojislav Kostunica's statement that the Crisis Group's latest report is "disputable, like the previous ones," White answered, "President Kostunica, understandably, has a right to his opinion."
Kostunica also said that "this non-governmental organization provokes crises more than it resolves them, and that can be easily proven."
The ICG director thinks the case of the illegal export of weapons "has basically raised the issue of civilian control over the military sector, and especially the persistent violations of international laws committed by the Yugoslav Armed Forces."
"It is our duty is to bring that to light. We realize that it makes Mr. Kostunica's life difficult, but that is because he is president," said White.
To the comment that the authorities in Belgrade and the Yugoslav media consider many of the statements in the ICG report to be unfounded, White replied that he was "ready to discuss each item," but did "not wish to deal with general assessments."
"I stand behind our report, since we checked our sources very carefully and sought the opinions of independent analysts. Therefore I do not think that our report can be seriously faulted."
Asked to comment on opinions that the ICG systematically works to the detriment of Serbian interests in its reports, White replied: "As the report emphasizes, it is above all in the interest of the entire region for Serbia to be a democratic and progressive country. But the problem is that the question has now been raised as to whether Serbia is going that way."
"I think that it will be useful for Serbia to approach the issues that we raised in the report, for the good of the country. If soldiers are put under powerful civilian democratic supervision, it will be good for Serbia. Likewise, it will be good if the people who secretly exported weapons to Iraq and Liberia and violated international law are forced to bear the cost of what they did," he said.
To the remark that there is also plenty of entrenched conviction that ICG analyses always and relentlessly support the views and arguments of the "opposing side" whenever Serbian interests are involved -- whether in relation to Montenegro, in Kosovo, in Bosnia, with regard to the Serb Republic, or on the broader territory of the former Yugoslavia -- White answered that such thinking is "not honest."
"We show circumstances as we see them. I believe that everyone should think that Milosevic's politics were ruinous for the Serbs themselves; we compiled reports about those politics and therefore we were against Milosevic's regime."
"No," White emphasized, "we have never been anti-Serbian, but we are against the conduct of specific policies."
"But that will be apparent next week, when we release our report on the return of refugees to Croatia and Bosnia. I am convinced that it will be entirely clear that the ICG is not especially 'anti-Serbian' at all."
"After all," White concluded, "our job is not to be for or against any ethnic groups. We have assigned ourselves the task of determining facts and making recommendations for what should be done to increase the stability of the whole region."
White told BETA that the ICG has never worked "systematically against Serbian interests," but that it has only pointed to the "bad politics of the Milosevic regime." Because Serbia is the key country in the region, the lion's share of judgments must be directed at Serbia, and not at any others, White said.
The private think tank's director for the Balkans stated that next week the Crisis Group will release a report on the return of refugees to Croatia and Bosnia, which, he stated, will make it clear that the ICG is "not anti-Serbian."
Asked then to say how he views the harsh criticism of the ICG's assessment by FRY political personalities and media, and especially Yugoslav President Vojislav Kostunica's statement that the Crisis Group's latest report is "disputable, like the previous ones," White answered, "President Kostunica, understandably, has a right to his opinion."
Kostunica also said that "this non-governmental organization provokes crises more than it resolves them, and that can be easily proven."
The ICG director thinks the case of the illegal export of weapons "has basically raised the issue of civilian control over the military sector, and especially the persistent violations of international laws committed by the Yugoslav Armed Forces."
"It is our duty is to bring that to light. We realize that it makes Mr. Kostunica's life difficult, but that is because he is president," said White.
To the comment that the authorities in Belgrade and the Yugoslav media consider many of the statements in the ICG report to be unfounded, White replied that he was "ready to discuss each item," but did "not wish to deal with general assessments."
"I stand behind our report, since we checked our sources very carefully and sought the opinions of independent analysts. Therefore I do not think that our report can be seriously faulted."
Asked to comment on opinions that the ICG systematically works to the detriment of Serbian interests in its reports, White replied: "As the report emphasizes, it is above all in the interest of the entire region for Serbia to be a democratic and progressive country. But the problem is that the question has now been raised as to whether Serbia is going that way."
"I think that it will be useful for Serbia to approach the issues that we raised in the report, for the good of the country. If soldiers are put under powerful civilian democratic supervision, it will be good for Serbia. Likewise, it will be good if the people who secretly exported weapons to Iraq and Liberia and violated international law are forced to bear the cost of what they did," he said.
To the remark that there is also plenty of entrenched conviction that ICG analyses always and relentlessly support the views and arguments of the "opposing side" whenever Serbian interests are involved -- whether in relation to Montenegro, in Kosovo, in Bosnia, with regard to the Serb Republic, or on the broader territory of the former Yugoslavia -- White answered that such thinking is "not honest."
"We show circumstances as we see them. I believe that everyone should think that Milosevic's politics were ruinous for the Serbs themselves; we compiled reports about those politics and therefore we were against Milosevic's regime."
"No," White emphasized, "we have never been anti-Serbian, but we are against the conduct of specific policies."
"But that will be apparent next week, when we release our report on the return of refugees to Croatia and Bosnia. I am convinced that it will be entirely clear that the ICG is not especially 'anti-Serbian' at all."
"After all," White concluded, "our job is not to be for or against any ethnic groups. We have assigned ourselves the task of determining facts and making recommendations for what should be done to increase the stability of the whole region."