| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Mr. Donald Anderson (Swansea, East): The Russian swoop on the airfield may not be a major impediment, but it is a possible precedent for problems. Of course, it was right to engage Russia politically and militarily in the solution--it should have been done earlier--but the suggestion that the swoop on the airfield was a misunderstanding strains credulity. Therefore, what lessons have the Government learned in terms of ensuring that there is now a watertight agreement and clear lines of communication to ensure that such misunderstandings, if they arise in future, will speedily be ended?
Mr. Cook: My hon. Friend describes the Russian presence as an impediment, but I repeat to the House that the Russians have provided no practical impediment to the work of KFOR. As I pointed out in my statement, that work is already going on and it is ahead of schedule, not behind schedule.
However, my hon. Friend touches on an extremely valid point: not all the explanations given by Moscow for the deployment of those Russian troops are mutually consistent. We need to achieve clarity in our relations with Russia and in the unified chain of command in order to ensure that there is no repetition of unilateral action. At present, two sets of talks are going on: the talks between General Jackson and his opposite number on the ground about the troops at the airport; and the talks between the United States and Russia about the wider question of the integration into KFOR of the larger Russian contribution that is coming.
Our understanding is that the Russian Government want to find a satisfactory and practical solution to the matter. We should not lose sight of the fact that it is in Russia's interests to solve the problem. It is only a few days until the weekend when all the Heads of Government of the G8 countries will meet in summit; a major part of the agenda should be--and will be--the difficulties of the Russian economy and the need for a closer and better relationship between it and the west. We want to be able to focus on that at the weekend; we know that the Russian Government also want to do that, so there should be good will on both sides to resolve this problem.
Sir John Stanley (Tonbridge and Malling):
Does the right hon. Gentleman agree that, were a separate Russian sector to be created and were the Russian forces in that sector to be placed outside the NATO command and control structure, that would, in effect, amount to a de facto partition of Kosovo that--as the right hon. Gentleman rightly pointed out in his statement--is in no way provided for in the peace solution?
Mr. Cook:
The reason that negotiations are continuing and have not concluded is precisely because we stoutly resist such a model--for the very reasons given by the right hon. Gentleman. We should recall that one civil administrator will be responsible for the civilian reconstruction of Kosovo. His or her writ will run through all sectors in Kosovo, and he or she will be responsible
Mr. Dale Campbell-Savours (Workington):
This is the third time in 20 years of my membership of the House that Ministers have come to Parliament to announce, in essence, the routing of the dark forces of fascism in different parts of the world--in the Falkland Islands, in Kuwait and now in Kosovo.
My right hon. Friend referred to economic regeneration. Given that we shall be dealing, in effect, with a de facto international protectorate, and given that the relationship between Kosovo and Serbia will now be strained, is it not now necessary to consider the whole question of the future of the currency? Otherwise, we may well find that the reconstruction of the economy of Kosovo is undermined by the problems that exist in wider Serbia.
Mr. Cook:
My hon. Friend is absolutely right to say that, in Kosovo, we have witnessed the defeat of fascism. There was no clearer basis for Milosevic's action than the doctrine of ethnic superiority, which we have now comprehensively defeated.
As for my hon. Friend's question, I am not sure that the first thing currently needed by Kosovo is a central bank. There are an immense number of tasks to be carried out in order to ensure that we repair the physical fabric, rebuild homes and get people back there and into their careers. Of course, as that process develops, it will be necessary to work out an economic reconstruction package. The European Union stands ready to assist with that--so too do other institutions of the world community. In Kosovo, we can develop an economy that will provide lessons for the people of Serbia and bring home to them the extent to which they are both impoverished and deprived of freedoms that are now being taken for granted in the rest of Europe.
Kosovo could be a good model and a useful lesson to help to encourage the forces of opposition in Serbia.
Mr. Tom King (Bridgwater):
In paying tribute to the achievements of our armed forces and the other forces in NATO, does the Foreign Secretary accept that now is the really dangerous time for them and that the days ahead might pose far greater dangers than any they have faced so far? He calls for an end to ethnic cleansing, and, in the same breath, mentions the scale of the atrocities that are every day being discovered, in the knowledge that they will reinforce in the minds of others the desire for revenge for the atrocities that have been committed against them. Preventing acts of revenge will pose a great challenge to NATO forces.
The right hon. Gentleman proudly paid tribute to the fact that we are making by far the largest contribution to NATO's current land forces, and our forces are likely to remain in the region for some considerable time. Is that predominance of contribution likely to continue?
As for Russia, I have heard some alarming stories of impetuous suggestions--not, I am pleased to say, made by anyone in this country--about how the current difficulties with the Russians might be dealt with. In view
of the confused nature--to put it mildly--of the current Russian Government and the various elements within it, may I strongly suggest that that matter be left to General Jackson for sensible resolution on the ground?
Mr. Cook:
I agree absolutely that the issue of the airport is much better resolved by dialogue, which, as far as possible, should take place on the ground among those who can see the situation at first hand rather than from a remote position.
On the question of British forces in KFOR, we expect the large predominance and strong representation of the British in KFOR to be reduced after a number of months, as the rapid reaction corps is no longer needed for KFOR headquarters. We are in the lead during the current operation because we are the designated lead country in the rapid reaction corps.
I strongly share the sentiments expressed by the right hon. Gentleman in his opening remarks. The work is dangerous and no one should underrate the courage needed of our armed forces to enter territory in which there is as yet no secure peace. Our commitment is to create a multi-ethnic, pluralist Kosovo--a place where people of all ethnic identities will feel safe and secure. However, after the past two months of atrocities, that task will be far more difficult than it would have been before. One of the real tragedies for Kosovo and for Serbia is that President Milosevic did not accept the package offered at Rambouillet, which would have given Serbia a better result than it now has, and without any of the pain, bloodshed and brutality of the past two months.
Mr. Tam Dalyell (Linlithgow):
The right hon. and learned Member for Folkestone and Hythe (Mr. Howard) specifically asked about Kacanik, where the most dreadful things have happened. Could there also be an investigation into the brutal murder in Kacanik on 28 February of the Serb police inspector, Bogulduk Staletovic, who was doing his best to bring ethnic Albanians and Serbs together? What will happen to any member of the KLA who is found to have been equally brutal? What is NATO's attitude now to its obligations to the protection of those innocent Serbs who may themselves be ethnically cleansed?
Finally, during the debate of 25 March 1999, I asked the Foreign Secretary about relations with the Russians, and especially about the valuable work that he was then doing with the governor of Murmansk and others on the millennium bug--[Interruption.]
Madam Speaker:
Order. Would the hon. Member whose pager is going off leave the Chamber? Some hon. Member must be guilty. I am sorry, Mr. Dalyell--please continue.
Mr. Dalyell:
I was referring to the question of the millennium bug, Murmansk, and the Soviet Arctic fleet. My right hon. Friend the Foreign Secretary replied:
Mr. Cook:
Our commitment to protect the people of Kosovo extends to all, including the Serbs. In fact,
"I am confident that they will want to proceed with what they know is a solution to a pressing problem."--[Official Report, 25 March 1999; Vol. 328, c. 540.]
Is that, in fact, being done?
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |