Previous SectionIndexHome Page


Mr. Michael Howard (Folkestone and Hythe): I thank the Foreign Secretary for his statement.

It has been clear for some considerable time that a clear ultimatum is required to halt the violence in Kosovo and to bring the two sides to the negotiating table. As the Foreign Secretary said on Friday, the international community cannot simply allow the current stalemate to continue while the ceasefire crumbles and people continue to be killed. In truth, the ceasefire crumbled some time ago; the October agreement is in tatters; and, as the Foreign Secretary has just said, more than 200 people have been killed since that agreement was entered into.

In the light of those dire facts, the Opposition fully support the summonsing of both sides to talks, by 6 February, and the setting of a clear deadline for conclusion of the negotiations. We also support the decision by the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation to authorise the possible use of force, provided that it is based on clearly defined objectives.

NATO forces are reported to be on 48 hours' notice. Will the Foreign Secretary say more about British preparations for the possible use of force? Should military strikes be authorised, what plans exist for extraction of the OSCE verifiers--I join the Foreign Secretary in paying tribute to them, and to what they are doing in Kosovo--before any such action?

The Foreign Secretary also mentioned the possible deployment of ground troops to enforce any settlement. Would all leading NATO nations take part in such a deployment? Is the United States, in particular, now showing greater willingness to deploy such troops?

The whole House will wish to condemn unreservedly the killings that continue to take place in Kosovo. The Foreign Secretary referred to the discovery, on Friday, of the bodies of 24 Kosovo Albanians in the village of Rugovo. Will he tell the House what progress has been made by the verifiers and others in investigating who was responsible for those deaths? Does he accept a role for international war crimes investigators in that work, as he did after the massacre of 49 Kosovo Albanians at Racak?

The head of the OSCE has reaffirmed his belief that he has "absolutely no doubt" that Serbs were behind the Racak outrage. What discussions did the Foreign Secretary have with President Milosevic on access for war crimes investigators to that area? What response did he receive? Will he comment on weekend reports that United States surveillance teams uncovered evidence of direct involvement by senior Serb politicians and military representatives, both in the massacre itself and in the attempted cover-up that followed? Will he comment also on claims by United Nations human rights monitors that Serbian authorities have launched a new campaign of arresting and torturing Albanian political activists?

Does the Foreign Secretary recall that it is now almost eight months since he issued what he called a last warning to the Yugoslav President? Threats have been made

1 Feb 1999 : Column 600

repeatedly since, but they were not followed through. The response of the international community, led--as he constantly reminded us--by him, was described by the Prime Minister's press secretary as "dithering and disunited". Will the Foreign Secretary now give an assurance that those days are over and that, if the current ultimatum does not succeed, resolute action will be taken?

Mr. Cook: I shall respond to the right hon. and learned Gentleman's concluding remarks before I sit down, but, meanwhile, I shall respond to his questions.

Britain will take full part in any action that is taken by NATO. For that reason, we have already made appropriate arrangements for our airplanes to be ready in Italy.

If military action were in contemplation, the verification mission would of course have to be withdrawn. While I was in Skopje, I had the opportunity of meeting some of those who are deployed to the extraction force, which would assist in that task if it were necessary. Of course, the requirement to remove that verification mission, which is doing valuable work in Kosovo, must also be a factor in our decision on whether to take military action.

There is discussion in the United States Administration on ground troops. No conclusion has been reached, but there is growing recognition among many NATO members that a political settlement would have a better chance of success if it were backed by ground troops.

I have presented President Milosevic with the full conclusions of the Contact Group, which include the demand that the International War Crimes Tribunal be given access to Racak to carry out an investigation. I am well aware of the reports of what happened at Racak. I made my position on that plain when I spoke in the House two weeks ago. It is clear that the prime responsibility appears to lie with the Serb security forces, who were in the vicinity.

On Friday, the Contact Group of the United States, Russia and the major European nations was united without reservation behind the strategy that I have outlined to the House. Since then, the strategy has been backed without reservation by the 15 members of the Security Council and the 16 members of NATO. I regret that the right hon. and learned Gentleman could not give the same full support without indulging in party politics.

The right hon. and learned Gentleman talks about a period of eight months. I remind him that President Milosevic suspended the autonomy of Kosovo in 1990. Today's storm has been gathering in the eight years since then. For seven of those years, the right hon. and learned Gentleman's party was in power. Having done nothing throughout those long years to avert the crisis, it is a bit rich to complain that we have not solved the mess that we inherited from the Conservatives in eight months.

Mr. Donald Anderson (Swansea, East): With the exception of the right hon. and learned Member for Folkestone and Hythe (Mr. Howard), there must surely be admiration and congratulation from all parties for the leading role that my right hon. Friend has played in the flurry of international conferences and initiatives in recent days. Although there are clearly loopholes and problems, including the extent to which we can rely on the promises of President Milosevic and uncertainty about who can speak properly on behalf of the Kosovo Liberation Army,

1 Feb 1999 : Column 601

surely we must all recognise that the initiative is the only serious way out of the crisis. Those who reject it will bring a heavy burden on those whom they purport to represent--a burden that will be borne through greater bloodshed and destruction of property.

Mr. Cook: I entirely agree that the situation is very complex, and the best way to resolve those complications is for both sides to get around the table and thrash the issues out together. I am sad to endorse my hon. Friend's last remark, having had first-hand contact. I sometimes feel that the deaths on both sides are not necessarily the prime consideration of those involved with whom I discuss the matter. Undoubtedly the best prospect of peace and stability for the people of Kosovo lies in the process. I urge their leaders to take that step. The best way to halt casualties on the Serb side and to protect the rights of the Serb community in Kosovo also lies in the process.

Mr. David Heath (Somerton and Frome): I thank the right hon. Gentleman for his statement. Does he accept that the proposed talks at Rambouillet will be widely welcomed, providing a renewed momentum to the political process, firm proposals for discussion and a clear political objective should force be required--the three prerequisites that the Liberal Democrats have long advocated? I welcome his personal contribution to an overdue process still fraught with military and political risks.

I should like three assurances. First, will every effort be maintained to ensure common purpose with our European partners, particularly France and Germany? Secondly, if Dr. Rugova and President Milosevic are prepared to come to the table, will it be made clear to Dr. Demaqi and the KLA that they have no veto to prevent effective talks from proceeding? Lastly, will the Foreign Secretary confirm that the jurisdiction of the International War Crimes Tribunal and the eventual indictment of individuals in Kosovo guilty of crimes against humanity are not negotiable?

Mr. Cook: I thank the hon. Gentleman for his welcome for the initiative. On his first point, we will work hard to maintain the common purpose with our European allies, and as the event is jointly chaired by me and by the Foreign Minister of France, that is essential to the success of the enterprise. Germany will be represented throughout at Rambouillet at a high official level, and it is important that the President of the EU remains engaged in the process.

Secondly, there can be no veto by any specific party on whether the talks take place. We would be willing to conduct talks in the event of Dr. Rugova, Mr. Surroi and Mr. Qosja attending Rambouillet. However, we are anxious to make sure that we receive an Albanian team that is as representative as possible, and therefore we very much hope that Mr. Demaqi and the KLA will give us a positive answer. It is in the KLA's interests to be represented in the discussions.

Finally, the hon. Gentleman is of course correct to say that the demand for access for the International War Crimes Tribunal to Kosovo has been made by the UN Security Council and is in no way open to negotiation at Rambouillet.

1 Feb 1999 : Column 602


Next Section

IndexHome Page