The Ambassador

Robert A. Bradtke: G. W. Bush Wants Sanader For Regional Adviser 25 October 2006

 By: Orlanda Obad

US Ambassador in Croatia Robert A. Bradtke is one of the highest rank diplomats from the US capital accredited to Zagreb. In 1999 President Bill Clinton appointed him the Executive Secretary of the National Security Council, political body that advises the President in the White House on decisions about external policy and national security. Later, during the George W. Bush term, Bradtke performed high level duties in the State Department, where his responsibilities were "European and Eurasian issues", which implies that he had a very important role in the last NATO enlargement with seven new members. Thus it is believed that during his mandate in Zagreb the Croatia admission to NATO will be at the top of political agenda.The conversation with the US Ambassador lasted for 40 minutes, and was almost exclusively focused on the two most frequently asked questions during the previous week in articles by political observers on PM Ivo Sanader's visit to US President Bush: what are the reasons Croatia has become the USA friend, whose admission to EU and NATO the US President calls "the world's interest"? And: "What do Americans ask in return for strong political support?"Bradtke knows the answers to those questions. Besides, he attended all official meetings during Sanader's visit and he listened to all discussions. If we had to telegram the following conversation, the main messages would be: realistic date for Croatia joining NATO is 2009. Croatia is considered a regional leader by USA. There will be more talks on Article 98. You were intensively included in the preparation of Oval Office meetings that afterwards you called the biggest day in your career. When did the preparations for the meeting start? - Before answering to your question, allow me to say that I was especially pleased to sit in the Oval Office next to the US President during the meeting with PM Sanader. I think that for each diplomat it is the bright spot in his career. That meeting reflects the long lasting progress of Croatia, in terms of its political and economic reform and in terms of its role in the Southeast Europe. The meeting is also the reflection of current international role of Croatia: yet in the mid 1990's your country had peace forces on its territory, and today it sends its own forces to 11 UN missions and to Afghanistan! There have been great changes and progress reflecting on the successfulness of this visit.You have just said that the visit was prepared for a long time. However, the preparations, most probably, did not start before the arrest and extradition of the General Ante Gotovina to the Hague Tribunal at the end of 2005?- The full cooperation with the Hague Tribunal was, in this case, very important of course, but there were many other things at the background of the event. What has changed so much in the relations between Croatia and USA in one year that President Bush declares that it is "of world's importance" to have Croatia in EU and NATO? - The changes inside Croatia as well as its role of stability factor in the region and its peace missions in the world. All of it affected this visit and the improvement of relations between the two countries. The statements of the PM and President Mesić, the statements coming from the Parliament and opposition parties, all wishing Croatia join the Euro-Atlantic organizations. Let me give you an illustration: in the birthplace of Nikola Tesla, Smiljani, this summer the Croatian PM Sanader and President Mesić have met with the Serbian President Tadić and thus showed clear request for reconciliation. President Bush stated after the meeting that he would personally engage in admission of Croatia to NATO in 2008. However, in the next days there were some explanations that in that year Croatia might get an invitation but not enter the NATO. What is the issue?- President Bush said that already in Riga, that is, this year in November; he would work on support to Croatia's admission to NATO and EU. He said that 2008 was the "reasonable date" to realize that. By that he meant that in 2008 the invitations will be sent out. Once the country is invited to join the NATO, it starts attending the meetings together with the members and, though it could not vote, it starts participating in the work of the organization as if it is the member. The Parliaments of NATO states then have to ratify the introduction of new members within the next 9 to 12 months. It should be said that President Bush did not speak on behalf of all NATO members: USA is the important NATO member, whatsmore, it plays the leading role in it, but other countries must support such decision.On our front page we had the year 2008 as the year of Croatia's admission to NATO, because President Bush said so, and afterwards it was repeated by the State Secretary Deputy Nicholas Burns. It seems that, maybe, there was a misunderstanding? - I think that both had on mind that every country that was invited to NATO was never rejected by the members. When in November 2002 in Prague we invited seven new members to join NATO, there was never a doubt that they would not be officially admitted though they became members two years later. Thus, the likely year for Croatia's official admission to NATO is 2009?- It is realistic that you will get invited in 2008 and that, after ratification by the member states, Croatia will join NATO in 2009.There are unofficial rumors that Croatia could get the invitation and join the NATO in the same year, 2008. Are there any grounds for those expectations?- As far as I know about NATO and the way it has worked so far, I do not think it is likely. Possible, but not likely. Does the strong US support for NATO admission refers only to Croatia, or also to Albania and Macedonia, the signatories of so-called American Adriatic charter? - I think that what President Bush said referred only to Croatia. Burns also pointed out that Croatia made quite a progress in that process so far. We would like Albania and Macedonia join NATO and we hope that by 2008 they will progress enough to be able to join it. But in the Oval Office Bush talked explicitly about Croatia.Some Croatian government officials say that there is no need for referendum for admission to NATO. What is your personal opinion about that issue, regarding the fact that support to Croatia's joining the NATO has been quite weak so far among Croatian citizens? - It is true that NATO has no rules stating that a referendum is needed. In some countries referendum was necessary because the Governments themselves wanted it, out of political reasons or because it was requested by the Constitution. I think that, once the serious debate about NATO starts in this country, citizens will understand what advantages and responsibilities are in question. I think they will then support joining the NATO.The term " Euro-Atlantic integration " has become common in Croatia and citizens are often explained that the admission to NATO and EU is related and that we should join the NATO first in order to end up in EU. That is not quite so, is it? - The membership in EU and NATO are two separate things, and I would not make direct comparisons of these two organizations. However, out of ten countries admitted to EU in the last enlargement, even eight of them were already the NATO members.How would you describe to citizens the benefit of NATO membership? - I would say that Croatia would give to itself the highest possible guarantee that it will not have any more wars. By joining the NATO, Croatia would never find itself in the position of being entirely alone and attacked. But, of course, you should be prepared to help in the same way to its other members.You and PM Sanader talk about Croatia as a "regional leader". What is expected of Croatia to do in the region? Is it expected to have perhaps intensified engagement in issues as solving the Kosovo status or, for example, constitutional reform in BiH? - Regional leader means several things. First, to be positive example in the region, the model of democratic progress and stability. Second, in this part of the world there is still some unfinished business present. Eleven years after the Dayton Agreement, BiH does not have an efficient and stable government that we would like it to have, as well as its citizens would. How to progress in Bosnia? What constitutional changes would help us there? Those are the issues in whose solution Croatia could play its role. The situation on Kosovo is similar: until the end of the year we are faced with a very important issue of its final status. That issue has implications on Serbia as well, potentially on Bosnia and Herzegovina. Thus we would like to know Croatia's opinion. I would even say that we would like its advice. Finally, that was what President Bush told PM Sanader.. Really?- Yes, he asked Sanader: "What is your advice on the Kosovo issue, on the basis of your knowledge on Serbian leadership and on the basis of your knowledge of the region. What do you think is the best way forward?"And, what was the answer?- It would remain between them; I would not talk about what they said to each other. But, President Bush asked PM Sanader for advice in action on Kosovo indicating what leader role we would like Croatia to have in the region. Besides, Croatia already plays that role.What about relations between Croatia and Serbia? Do you think that development of events in Croatia could affect Serbia?- It is very difficult for me to predict the outcome of the Serbian internal policy, but I find positive the effort Croatia makes in attempt to influence Serbia. For example, the assistance PM Sanader offered to their government in the form of Action Plan for War Criminals, based on the Croatian experience. The contacts between President Mesić and PM Sanader with Tadić and Koštunica are also important because they help democratic elements in Serbian government. How much that, or anything else, influences the internal events in Serbia, I could not say. But, the fact is that Croatia uses its influence to help Serbia see that its future is in the integration to European institutions. That is important.
Croatia has already done a marvelous job on CEFTA issue. It is an important contribution to the economic development of the region and supporting political cooperation. And that is also the leader act by Croatia. Slovenia has already left the region behind. What happens to your regional approach to Balkans if Croatia gets too far ahead and other countries will not follow it the way you expect? - I would like to be optimistic and believe that other countries in the region, when they see what Croatia has done, would realize that it is the model they should follow. What if your regional approach to Balkans fails?- I would not predict failure. I believe we will be successful in it. This region must prosper, even if its progress is not linear.The U.S. Secretary of Energy Samuel Bodman said that USA offers its assistance and support to the projects like construction of LNG terminal in Omišalj or construction of Pan European Oil Pipeline (PEOP) through Croatia. What does the diplomatic term "support and assistance" actually mean? - We do not offer economic assistance. It will be a market project based on market practice. We would like the US companies to join in and invest in this region, but on healthy market principles. In political terms, I think such projects are positive because they help Europe to provide itself more diverse energy resources. Diverse, thus, not only Russian?- Yes. I think that in the past months we saw how Russia uses its strong position to influence the prices, market and maybe politics as well. I think it is wise to have as much energy resources as possible, so that you are not under influence of one country on the market.Are the companies like Chevron prepared to invest in PEOP?- At present I am not in any negotiations with US companies though it is not excluded that some of them already work on such projects, at the entirely commercial level. General Dynamics is interested in sale of 126 armored vehicles to Croatian Ministry of Defense. Are there any chances it will get that job?- The talks about it are ongoing for some time and for Croatian Army that project is very important because armored vehicles enable the mobility of its forces in the missions they are sent to. The Croatian Government has been considering that purchase for some time. As a U.S. Ambassador I would like the US company to make that agreement that is usually agreed through an Austrian company. But the decision is on Croatian Government. It is not a political decision, it has nothing to do with whether you like more Finnish or American, and that is why it was not the issue in Washington. Financial Times has published an article this year arguing that US companies in cooperation with some European ones are interested in the purchase and construction of power plants in the region. Last week it was mentioned in the press that Americans are interested in Croatia's electric-supply industry. Is there anything in it?- I attended all meetings in Washington and it was never discussed.What about other open issues between USA and Croatia that, allegedly, were not discussed? Is it possible that the signing of the famous Article 98 about non-extradition of Americans to International Criminal Court was not discussed? - The visit was an opportunity for discussion about the issues at high, strategic level. The discussions were about Croatia joining the Trans-Atlantic institutions and its role in the region. Those were the most important issues. The details were not discussed. The Article 98 is not the focus of our relation. We shall continue work on it, but there are many other things that we can work on and cooperate in while the debate on this issue continues. So, the Article 98 was not mentioned?- It was not mentioned in the meetings of PM with President Bush. The Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld said afterwards that it was not discussed due to lack of time and that it would remain the issue of US interest.Rumsfeld said that USA still wants Croatia to sign that Article. Is it still high on the agenda in relation to Croatia?- We shall further discuss that issue with the representatives of Croatian government and we shall see whether we can overcome the differences in perception of International Criminal Court role. Was there any question about participation of Croatian military forces in Iraq?- USA knows the attitude of Croatian government on that issue and it knows that there is no consensus in this country on the basis of which Croatian soldiers could be sent to Iraq. Thus that question was not asked during the visit. It would not be accepted. But it does not mean that Iraq is not important to us. Considering the unofficial information, it is likely that Croatian contingent in Afghanistan will not be doubled, despite some announcements. Will that affect the relation between Croatia and USA?- It would be wrong to look at the participation of Croatian soldiers in Afghanistan as the service Croatia makes to Americans. What is important is that Croats in Afghanistan help to Afghanistan people, that Afghanistans have rights, that they have their own elected government and that their citizens are being educated, including women. Croatia will decide on the contingent based on its own assessments.

Croats still positively look at USA

You were in Zagreb at the end of 1970's, when many citizens here considered USA a country of freedom and democracy. Can you compare it to what you hear about USA today, when Bush's Administration gets severely criticized because of hundreds of thousands of innocent civilians that lost their lives in Iraq war, because of hundreds of people imprisoned in Guantanamo... - It is difficult to make such comparisons. But, since I have been here, apart from Zagreb, I have visited Istria, Vukovar and Karlovac as well and I've talked to ordinary, village people and to highly positioned people, up to the PM. I still believe that USA is regarded positively, as an open country, where disagreement is allowed and freedom of opinion rules, as a country that tries to make the right thing and stands up for what it thinks is just. I believe that that opinion is still prevailing, that the attitude towards Americans is still positive, which does not mean that each Croat agrees with the policy of this or any other US administration.