PRESS CONFERENCE BY FOREIGN MINISTER OF GERMANY

Press Briefing

PRESS CONFERENCE BY FOREIGN MINISTER OF GERMANY

Germany not only had an interest in continuing to strengthen the United Nations, it also believed that there was no alternative to the Organization as a platform for peace, development and security in the world, Germany's Minister for Foreign Affairs, Joschka Fischer, told correspondents at a Headquarters press conference today.

Mr. Fischer said he had assured the Secretary-General of this during a 30-minute meeting today, where they had also discussed important political issues, such as the situations in Kosovo and in the Middle East in the period leading up to elections in Israel. Recent developments in Iraq as well as the threatening situation in Africa, including the very hot war between Ethiopia and Eritrea and the dramatic civil wars in western and eastern Africa, had also been mentioned.

In addition to reaffirming Germany's commitment to the United Nations, he had also told the Secretary-General that it was deeply concerned about recent developments in the direction of unilateralism, he said. Germany believed that the United Nations was most important when it came to balancing the different interests of very different nations, and it intended to strengthen the Organization as best it could.

He expressed pleasure about the Secretary-General's forthcoming visit to Berlin, which the German Government believed would be very important not just for Germany but for the European Union as a whole. In the Contact Group, he added, all European members placed great importance on the Security Council's continuing to play a constructive and productive role in the search for peace.

Germany deplored the decision on the extension of the mandate of the United Nations Preventive Deployment Force (UNPREDEP) taken by China in the Security Council, he said. The consequence of that decision was the end of the United Nations mandate in the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia. Such decisions, whilst they may be quite understandable from a national perspective, had quite different and far-reaching consequences when translated into action in the Security Council. They did not strengthen the Council.

China's decision was senseless, he continued, and Germany believed it was wrong. It was to be deplored that, as a consequence, the Council had not been able to play the role it ought to have played, and that the mandate of an excellent mission in a very difficult region at a very difficult time -- a mission Germany believed was necessary -- had not been extended.

Yesterday he met with a number of United Nations Under- Secretaries- General in the German House and held in-depth discussions with them on many issues that were at the top of the agenda right now, he said. Germany and the Secretariat officials clearly agreed on the need for a common international

platform, and that the United Nations must be that platform. That was indispensable in a globalizing world. All countries would have to work together and pool efforts when it came to problems of the environment, of social development, of refugees and refugee flows, of peacekeeping and of the world food situation. The United Nations must have weight, and it must be allowed to perform its role because, Germany believed, it would be an indispensable platform for the issues and the decisions of the twenty-first century.

Human rights would play an ever increasing role in the world of the future, he told correspondents. The Asian financial crisis presented the world with three challenges. The economic crisis went hand-in-hand with the suppression of human rights and the destruction of the environment. The necessary degree of transparency that could have been the basis for free economies could not exist whilst human rights were suppressed. At the same time, the industrialization that had occurred had been based on the destruction of natural resources. Policies needed to be developed to meet those challenges.

With the Secretariat officials he had also discussed freedom, democracy and respect for human rights -- issues that were linked and that would increase in importance, he said. Violations of the rights of women were a very specific form of suppression of human rights -- a gender-related suppression. Women's rights would play an ever-increasing part in international politics and Germany wanted to support positive developments in that area, and the positive role the United Nations could play.

Asked what necessary steps could be taken to avoid further violence in Kosovo and whether he preferred military of diplomatic measures, the Minister referred correspondents to the Secretary-General's remark that diplomacy was good, but diplomacy backed by force was better. In Kosovo, matters were both very complicated and very simple. Without a robust international peace force led by the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) there would be no peace. He was dissatisfied that both sides were not able to sign the peace treaty that was in hand at Rambouillet, and both sides were obviously engaged in shooting in Kosovo. He appealed to both sides to enter into the agreement. But the agreement would only be a piece of paper without an implementation force. That was the lesson of Bosnia, he stressed.

Neither Germany nor France nor the United States nor the United Kingdom was interested in sending soldiers to Kosovo, he said. He would be very happy "to keep my guys at home", but it was obvious that without an implementation force, the fighting and killing of innocent people in Kosovo would not stop. A political solution existed. For its implementation, the agreement of both sides was needed. Political pressure must be used to get those signatures on the agreement, and to get acceptance, especially from Belgrade, for a NATO-led peace force. He hoped that both Belgrade and the Albanian side would act

Germany's Press Conference - 3 - 3 March 1999

responsibly. He had been sitting in the room when the Albanians had said they could not sign the treaty, he added.

In response to a request for his opinion on the decision by the Governor of Arizona not to stay the execution of Walter LaGrand, he said he was very sad about that development. He had spoken to the State Department just before he had entered the press conference room. Last night he spoke to the Governor of Arizona. Germany had appealed to the International Court of Justice and it would make its decision in a few minutes. Germany needed more time. The parole board had decided to allow 60 days, so he had been hopeful, but the Governor had decided against that.

In the European Union, capital punishment had been abolished, he said, and the Union did not accept the death penalty. Therefore Germany was opposed to the execution on principle. However, it was obviously also very engaged because the LaGrands were German citizens. Capital punishment was not acceptable, even in the case of very severe and terrible crimes. That was the position of Europeans, as Americans well knew. Whatever Germany could do, it would do, but the Governor would ultimately make the decision and he was not very hopeful about the outcome.

Asked whether he included United States bombing of Iraq in his criticism of unilateral action, he said unilateralism was an objective result of, and reflected the distribution of power after, the cold war. It was not a moral, but a realist concept of that distribution of power. Unilateralism would not be the answer even for the strongest Power in a globalized world, because it would be pluralistic and multinational. That was why the United Nations was so important.

The situation in Iraq, as everyone knew, was very complicated and difficult, he said. The Security Council should find a common strategy. That was very important.

Asked about the size of the reparation fund established by German business, and whether any new companies had joined it, he explained that he could not give precise details today. He hoped it would be finalized within a week. It was being discussed with the business community because it was their obligation now. The discussion was not just about the survivors of the Holocaust. When he spoke with Eastern European leaders the matter came up often because organizations of the survivors of enforced labour and their governments were now pushing forward, understandably, as the discussion had started. What he was emphasizing to the organizations was the need for a quick solution, he said, because the people concerned were very old and the solution could not wait for two or three years. It must be found in weeks or months -- immediately.

Asked about how he reconciled NATO's position on Kosovo with his support for the Security Council, given that the Russian Federation would veto the use

Germany's Press Conference - 4 - 3 March 1999

of force in the Council, he said he was not so sure that would be the case. He underlined that Russia had played, and was playing, a very responsible role on the Kosovo question. As a result of its responsible role in the Contact Group, the Group had received the support of the Security Council immediately through two presidential statements. That was very important. The Contact Group, NATO, the European Union, the 41 nations of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) and the Security Council all supported the Contact Group.

Germany believed it was very important to have a clear decision from the Security Council, he said. Russia had agreed to the Rambouillet agreement. It had not agreed to push through chapters two and seven -- the military and police chapters -- but it had stated that if Yugoslavia signed it would accept the whole treaty. If one understood the domestic restrictions on Russian policy and the situation in the Duma, one would see that this was a very responsible position.

Asked where he saw the review of NATO's strategic policy going, particularly with regard to nuclear weapons where the NATO position was at odds with Germany's, he said that in answering that complicated question he must think about tomorrow's headlines. In the review, everything that a member State in an alliance of free nations wished to discuss would have to be discussed. A solution would be found.

It would be discussed after the Washington anniversary meeting, he said, in the proper way and in the proper institutions within the NATO framework.

Asked whether Germany had changed its position on the Kurdish Workers' Party (PKK) given the turbulence of the last few weeks, he said that organization was not legal in Germany. It was forbidden by the General Prosecutor as a criminal organization, and there had been no change in the position of the Government. He thought it should lay down its arms and return to democracy and peaceful means to achieve its ends.

About 2.1 million people with Turkish passports were living in Germany, he said, adding that 500,000 were ethnic Kurds and 1.6 million were ethnic Turks. His Government wanted people to live together peacefully. It had worked very hard to change Germany's citizenship law and it hoped the problem in south Turkey was a Turkish problem. Turkey now had a big chance to solve that problem and to reach a sustainable peace in the south-east if it acted wisely.

Asked what advice he would give Turkey, he said he did not have to give Turkey advice in public, and that it would not be wise to do so. However, everyone knew that there was a big opportunity at the moment. A criminal problem and a political and cultural problem existed. What would not be wise would be to produce a new martyr. Therefore, the concentration in the legal process on a fair trial was very important. It was sometimes very difficult

Germany's Press Conference - 5 - 3 March 1999

to avoid responding emotionally, and he understood the emotions of many families on both sides. However, it would be unwise to underestimate the problems that could emerge from an unfair trial. Therefore a fair trial for Mr. Ocalan, based on legal procedures and independent justice, was very important.

Asked to comment on the Arizona Governor's rejection of the request from the International Court of Justice to delay Mr. LaGrand's execution, he said he was not in a position to comment at the moment. A decisive part of the process had just been reached. He must think about the political implications and talk in an appropriate way with Germany's American allies. If there were any implications, they would have to be discussed in a appropriate way, not publicly. Germany was in close contact with the United States and understood its position. It was not Germany's position. He hoped the United States understood Germany's.

In response to a question about expulsion from Germany of trouble- makers, he said decisions on expulsions were made by the legal system. Germany was a constitutional State. Everyone had the right to an appeal and many were appealing. Germany was a signatory of relevant United Nations and European Council conventions. All decisions would be made by the legal procedures, not by political procedures.

Asked why he had interfered in the situation in Turkey, he explained that he had not interfered. He had spoken with Germany's Turkish friends about problems, but he had not interfered. Even the European Union had not interfered. However, it had a clear position on the matter. It was in the interest of Turkey that Mr. Ocalan received a fair, internationally-accepted trial. That was all he had said.

Asked to comment on the alleged American espionage activities in the United Nations Special Commission (UNSCOM), in the light of his remarks on the trend to unilateralism, he said that the basic issue on Iraq and UNSCOM was not whether United States intelligence activities had occurred, but that the Government in Baghdad had refused to comply fully with many Security Council resolutions. A way must be found to put an end to Saddam Hussein's practice of taking the Iraqi people hostage. A way to end the disastrous humanitarian developments that have taken place for seven or eight years must be found. Those were the problems that must be tackled.

A unified Security Council position must also be found, he said. A number of interesting proposals were on the table right now, but it was important that a position received the unanimous support of the Council. Otherwise a move on sanctions or monitoring would not be possible.

Asked whether he expected a solution to the Remembrance Foundation fund issue would be possible in the near future, given that German businesses needed legal certainty, he said legal certainty was important, but in the

Germany's Press Conference - 6 - 3 March 1999

framework of what was possible. What would be required to provide it in this case would be a law that would pass through Congress and the Senate, and he could not envisage that taking place.

Nevertheless, he added, German companies should learn a lesson from the recent experience of Swiss banks. They should not wait until the pressures of public opinion and of circumstances had grown so strong that they were forced to take up their responsibilities. He had received signals from the German business community that they had realized what needed to be done.

There was no doubt that there was a moral and humanitarian justification for the claims of the forced labourers, he continued. German companies must find a satisfactory response. That would be in the best interest of the German people.

Asked whether the image of Germany would suffer as a consequence of the recent failure to pass a law on dual citizenship, he said that what his Government had sought was not a dual citizenship law but a new citizenship law. A result of the new law would be the possibility of dual citizenship. However, the Government had lost a state election. It needed a majority in both houses to pass the law. A majority of states supporting the change must be found in the second chamber and he hoped it would be found and the reforms could be finalized before the summer.

* *** *