19 November 2008
Update on Georgia Talks in Geneva
Diplomat praises “productive discussions of ... tough issues”
(begin transcript)
U.S. Mission to the United Nations in Geneva
Daniel Fried, Assistant Secretary of State
for European and Eurasian Affairs
Press Conference
United Nations Office – Palais des Nations
Geneva, Switzerland
November 19, 2008
Assistant Secretary Fried: Thank you for coming and I am happy to report to you that today’s session of the Geneva discussions was far more successful than the unsuccessful session last month. It was a constructive day. No one walked out. There were in fact productive discussions of some of the tough issues.
The structure of the talks was two working groups. We divided into two working groups. One on security and stability and the other on IDP returns. Obviously these two themes are linked because refugees, IDPs, cannot return to their homes when there is no security, but a lot of the technical issues can be discussed separately, and they were.
This was the first occasion since the Russo-Georgian War in August that all of the parties had met face to face. Everyone was in the room.
There was agreement that the security situation on the ground is not satisfactory and indeed, of course, it is not. There are almost daily incidents. Shootings, explosions, a general sense of insecurity on both sides of the administrative line with South Ossetia, in the Upper Kadori, in many other places. There are a number of flash points. I think you know what they are. It was agreed by all parties that the security situation is not satisfactory.
There were some areas of common ground that were developed including the need to facilitate IDP returns. There was a good and productive discussion about a mechanism for settlement of disputes and management and containment of incidents. There was a discussion of increasing the international community’s capabilities of monitoring. There was agreement that the next session will be held on December 17th and 18th, but there was also agreement that between now and then the Geneva process will continue. The co-chairs will develop proposals based on the discussion, particularly with respect to incident containment monitoring and resolution. This was an important meeting.
There were and remain vast areas of fundamental differences between the parties. For instance, on status. There were, to use the American idiom, a lot of third rail issues, poisonous issues, that could easily have disrupted the talks at any moment. But it is notable and I will say in a tentative way hopeful that no delegation insisted on driving the discussion over the cliff by insisting on resolution of issues that are not resolvable now.
The overwhelming spirit in both working groups was of practical cooperation forward.
Now I attended the working group on security and stability, my colleague, Matt Bryza, Deputy Assistant Secretary of State, led the American side for the discussion of IDPs. Just a couple of sentences on that.
Deputy Assistant Secretary Bryza: Happily.
First and foremost, this is a sign that the Geneva process is underway, and the parties all agreed by consensus that we must focus on the right of voluntary, dignified and secure return of IDPs and refugees. That’s significant. No question about that.
We agreed as well that of course security and the IDP returns are interlinked.
We also came to a consensus that the distribution of assistance to IDPs needs to be fair. It needs to be balanced. It needs to address the needs of anyone who was displaced by the conflict, regardless of what their ethnicity is.
To be able to deliver assistance in that way, to populations whether they be Abkhaz or South Ossetian or Ossetian or ethnically Georgian or Armenian, there needs to be access. Immediate, unfettered access by international humanitarian observers and workers to be able to assess what the needs are. There’s been some limited access into South Ossetia, but not enough to conduct a serious needs assessment, so we need full access, and access from any direction.
I’ll stop there.
Assistant Secretary Fried: To conclude and then I’ll take questions, it was a constructive day. We are dealing with a very tough set of problems and the situation on the ground is not good.
Our challenge is to advance the Geneva process and to use that process to build confidence and to set up mechanisms to develop that confidence so we do not get into another cycle of tension and violence leading to catastrophe.
We have to take this a day at a time, but this was a good day. So with that, I’ll be happy to answer any questions.
Question: Can you tell me about the status of the participants? Did they participate on the meetings as individual or a delegation of states? And if it was the individual states, will it be the rule of the Geneva process?
Assistant Secretary Fried: Today’s session consisted of two working groups, not a plenary session. The participants were there as individuals, though let me state an obvious fact, everybody knows who everybody else is. And while every delegation at some point made clear its bottom line position on the larger issues, no delegation tried to drive the discussions over the cliff by insisting that it had to be their way or this could go no farther. That was a much, I will say frankly, a much improved spirit from last month, and you had all delegations at pains, working hard to focus on practical issues. So let’s be modest. I’m not saying this solves any of the problems, but it was a good day on a problem which has not had a lot of good days.
Question: Would it be the rule of the Geneva process?
Assistant Secretary Fried: We will, Pierre Morel and the other co-chairs have done a masterful job organizing this. I leave this to them. Not every session will be just like this one, no.
Question: Do you have any chance Do you have any chance of getting international police forces in South Ossetia and Abkhazia? Because every day is getting worse and worse and worse.
Assistant Secretary Fried: You’re certainly right that the security is, let me put it mildly, not satisfactory. I myself have been in Georgia as close as I could get to the South Ossetian administrative line, both near Akhalgori and north of Gori. It’s a very bad situation. Yes, in fact we did discuss increasing international monitoring presence, and yes, let us say on both sides of the administrative boundaries. There was a lively discussion of this.
I would say many believe it’s important to do this, and others believe we have to work at this in a step by step process. But this is clearly one of the key issues for us to deal with. It isn’t a side issue. It’s pretty central.
I’ll tell you my own view, the view of the United States, is that the more international presence we have in South Ossetia and Abkhazia and in the rest of Georgia, the better off we are. The EU monitors in Georgia help. The OSCE monitors help. They should have access to South Ossetia and we hope there will be more of an international presence. That brings nothing but good if it is well organized.
Question: Does the American election or the results of the American election make any difference to the way the U.S. delegation will be working or your positions?
Assistant Secretary Fried: No. I’m in close touch, obviously, with people I need to be in touch with, and I would say that – I cannot possibly characterize the incoming Obama team, but throughout the process starting in August I was in touch with old friends of mine from the Clinton administration and I’m quite confident that there will be continuity in American policy. Given the caveat that I cannot possibly speak in any way on behalf of an incoming administration and I don’t pretend to. Okay? I hope that’s clear.
Question: There’s still, it’s still unclear where exactly the demarcation lines are. Even though there’s no hot war going on people are saying it could break out any moment just because there’s uncertainty about who’s allowed to go where, which troops are allowed to be where.
What progress in reaching some sort of certainty in this regard was achieved today?
Assistant Secretary Fried: You’re quite right that in some cases uncertainty can be a problem. In other cases it’s quite clear. But for instance around Perevi there is ambiguity, there are differences I would say, and one of the reasons there was such intense focus on a dispute settlement and incident containment mechanism was precisely because you don’t know where the next problem will arise and there are a lot of people with guns around there, which is to state the obvious. There are militias, there are gangs, there are freelancers, there are all manner of people who can’t seem to help themselves, just want to shoot.
I’m not making accusations here, I’m just stating a kind of objective fact. And it’s important that the international community improve its ability to respond in real time to these incidents.
The European Union deserves a lot of credit for getting monitors on the ground fast and they’re getting up to speed. Frankly, I continue to hear consistently good reports about the leadership of the EU monitoring mission in Georgia. But they can’t be responsible by themselves. There needs to be strengthened institutions to help the monitoring and there has to be a mechanism by which all the parties are able to communicate freely. I think we made some progress toward that today, but there is a lot more to do. One good day doesn’t make a settlement. It just gives us the chance to have other good days and keep moving forward.
Question: Do you describe [inaudible]? Were there any specific subjects which both sides were tense on?
Assistant Secretary Fried: I don’t want to give away individual positions, that’s not fair. There are obviously deep differences about the status of South Ossetia and Abkhazia, about responsibility for the conflict. However, no person, no party tried to create a crisis. There was a constructive atmosphere in both working groups. And you could see on several occasions an issue would arise which was clearly unproductive and it would force people to take clashing stances, and everyone would try to pull away from it without compromising their own position. That is clearly an indication of sufficient goodwill to make progress. That’s why I say it was a good day. But again, one good day is only that. Still, we haven’t had many.
Voice: Last question, perhaps?
Assistant Secretary Fried: Really? I must say, what an incurious group. [Laughter]. But that’s okay.
Question: Can I perhaps ask what the U.S. specifically is doing to help the refugees in the region? That presumably is an area where you can do more than on the security issue.
Assistant Secretary Fried: We have been doing a great deal. A lot of immediate U.S. assistance has been going to help the refugees. I’ve met with refugees, I’ve talked to them. A lot of the funds are being well spent. I was in Georgia a month ago and you could already see housing. I don’t mean prefab kind of cheap looking stuff, I mean solidly constructed housing going up in organized emergency settlements, and it’s rather impressive to see this. A few weeks means the Georgian government acted pretty quickly, used the international support it had rather effectively. I’m not making a final judgment, but it’s nice to see that stuff going up. The United States is quite pleased that we were able so quickly to put so much into helping refugees, and that this assistance is being used.
That said, there are many refugees whose situation is just, well, bad. More needs to be done. That was why there was an entirely separate group focused on the IDPs.
A last point, we are going to move forward. Almost the final words of the wrap-up session in the afternoon was agreement by all parties of the Geneva process is now launched and it is moving forward.
Thank you.
(end transcript)
