Interview
Presentation of Medal to Mihailovic's Daughter Was not A Political Message
"Novi list" - May 22, 2005
Interview with Kathleen Stephens, Deputy Assistant U.S. Secretary of State, Comments on the Medal for the Chetnik Leader
by Boris Pavelic
Kathleen Stephens is the Deputy Assistant to U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice for Central and Southern Europe. During a visit to Croatia on Wednesday [18 May], she spoke exclusively to our newspaper, explaining the recent presentation of a medal to the daughter of Chetnik leader Draza Mihailovic. She also spoke about obstacles in relations with Croatia, as well as about U.S. views of the situation in the region.
Q: Why did the United States present the medal to Draza Mihailovic's daughter?
A: Because we were asked to do so. A few months ago, the U.S. Government received a request to present the medal to the next of kin. U.S. military regulations allow for a medal conferred on somebody to be presented to the next of kin. This had nothing to do with history.
Q: Why was the day of victory against fascism, May 9, chosen for this?
A: It took some time to find the medal and send it to Belgrade. At the same time, veterans saved in 1944 were traveling there. The opinion prevailed that the veterans, who were probably visiting for the last time the place where they had fought during the war, should be honored. It seemed right to us that they should present the medal to the next of kin. This was not a political signal, just as it was not a matter of the U.S. Government or its foreign policy. We know that this has caused tensions here and reawakened old sentiments, and we regret that. We wanted to enable U.S. veterans to take part in a commemoration of what had happened -- nothing more and nothing less.
Not Competent To Judge Draza
Q: There was no political message in this action, then?
A: Absolutely not. There are clear rules how such medals are kept and we have to obey these rules. The medal happened to be presented at a time that caused great tensions about history. We are aware that there are some painful sentiments associated with this man and we recognize that there was an unfortunate confluence of circumstances. However, we would like the whole region to turn to the future, not the past.
Q: Is this your message to the public related to this case?
A: Absolutely. The United States believes that the future of this region lies in the Trans-Atlantic community of democracies and does not want this to be impeded by reopening old historical divisions.
Q: What do you personally think about Draza Mihailovic? Do you believe that he was an antifascist?
A: I do not know enough about the history. I know that the history of Partisans and Chetniks was very complex. Many things happened back then. I would not like to judge, because I do not feel competent to do so. All I know is that people under his command were involved in saving U.S. pilots. I know that other armies, too, saved soldiers, but this operation was recognized by the U.S. President.
Sending B&H Troops to Iraq -- Excellent
Q: You had talks with Croatian officials in Zagreb. Are there any new ideas as to how to surmount the obstacle of the so-called Article 98 Agreement on non-extradition of U.S. citizens to the International Criminal Court (ICC) in The Hague, and have there been any new developments in Croatia's readiness to help America in Iraq?
A: Article 98 is indeed an obstacle, and it is true that we would like this issue to be resolved. However, it is up to the Croatian Government to decide whether it wants to resolve this or not. There are no new solutions at the moment. As for involvement in operations, there are plans for Macedonia, Albania, and Croatia to send medical teams to Afghanistan. We welcome the readiness of the Adriatic Charter countries to cooperate in Afghanistan. There is a wish to maintain the dialogue.
Q: Has Croatia changed its mind about not wanting to send troops to Iraq?
A: I did not discuss that with Croatian officials. I do not think so.
Q: Is there a connection between resolving the problem of Article 98 and the United States' position toward Croatia's cooperation with the Hague tribunal [International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia -- ICTY]? Would the United States, as it is sometimes speculated in Croatia, soften its position toward the extradition of Gotovina if Croatia signed the agreement on the non-extradition of U.S. citizens?
A: No, we do not make connections like that. Bosnia and Herzegovina has signed the agreement and is preparing to send troops to Iraq, which the United States regards as excellent, but this does not mean that Bosnia and Herzegovina, and especially Republika Srpska, do not have to cooperate with the Hague tribunal. The work of the Hague tribunal is especially important to us, particularly since it has become clear that it is helping the entire region to leave the past behind and move on. This court consolidates the rule of law in all countries in the region and helps them deal with the problem of war crimes.
Kosovo Problem
Q: What is your assessment of the situation in the region, especially since President Mesic cancelled preparations for his visit to Belgrade?
A: All I know about this is what I read in the papers, and I would like to take a broader view. In recent years, there has been visible intensification of efforts for rebuilding ties throughout the region after an obviously tragic period. Efforts to rebuild these ties are being made by President Mesic, the United States, and other factors. I am sure that President Mesic is determined to do so. I do not know exactly what is behind his decision to postpone the visit, but I do know that he is promoting ties and that he is focused on the future and the common agenda for the region to be integrated with the Euro-Atlantic community of democracies, to come closer to the European Union, and to work together with NATO.
Q: Will the United States recognize Kosovo as an independent state?
A: The United States has been considering for some time now how to resolve the uncertainty about the status of Kosovo. There has been much talk about this, because everybody is aware that this problem weighs heavily on the region and that it needs to be resolved. There are some ideas. The basic principles are, primarily, that there is to be no return to the situation from before 1999. Then, that there is to be no division of Kosovo. Also, we do not want to see Kosovo united with other countries in the region. These are the three principles that we consider important and we have put them forward to both Belgrade and Pristina. Steps need to be taken that will benefit all ethnic communities in Kosovo. Irrespective of the final outcome, we believe that an international military and civilian presence is still necessary in Kosovo. Last, but not least: whatever the final status of Kosovo might be, it should speed up the region on its way to Euro-Atlantic integrations. Despite this, we believe that time has not come yet to say what the final status should be. The U.N. negotiator should discuss this with all the interested parties. At the moment, Belgrade is offering "more than autonomy, less than independence." Pristina, on the other hand, is demanding full independence. We believe that there is room for negotiation.
Q: Would the United States support Montenegro's secession if it was voted for in a referendum?
A: I return to the fundamental principles on which the leaderships of the countries in the region have agreed: it is necessary to join the European Union as soon as possible. I believe that Montenegro should consider what the shortest route to this goal would be. We are focused less on a discussion of Montenegro's status than on the fundamental interests of Montenegro, Serbia, and the region as a whole in terms of stability, progress, and democracy. However, whatever happens, we would like it to be democratic and transparent.
Box:
We Expect Changes in Bosnia and Herzegovina To Come From Its Citizens
Q: What about Bosnia and Herzegovina? The Dayton Agreement has not ensured a self-sustainable state.
A: This is a very important year for Bosnia and Herzegovina, in the symbolic sense as well. It is the 10th anniversary of the Dayton Agreement and the 10th anniversary of Srebrenica. It is time to answer the question as to what good and what bad has happened during this period. I think that great progress has been made, but it needs to be answered whether the Dayton Agreement allows Bosnia and Herzegovina to get closer to the European Union. The NATO operation, which ended last year, was a brilliant success -- not a single soldier was killed and the war has ended. What now needs to be done is consolidate the institutions, because Bosnia and Herzegovina is not yet a "normal" state. We have noticed, for example, that people's interest in elections is waning instead of strengthening. Perhaps this is because they feel that their representatives do not have the power to make decisions when everything is being decided by the international community's high representative. This certainly is not good. The question that needs to be answered here is like the one about the chicken and the egg -- how to make politicians responsible before making responsible politicians? That is the challenge -- to create responsible politics in Bosnia and Herzegovina. The European Union, too, should play its part. We all know that Bosnia and Herzegovina will not become a perfect place overnight. Another important question is the question of constitutional reform. But this has to come from the bottom up, from the people of Bosnia and Herzegovina, not from outside. We know that it will be hard.
Q: Does it mean that we should not expect Dayton II?
A: If you mean a new structure that the international community should "adopt" for Bosnia and Herzegovina, then no. We can help, but we expect change to come from inside.
