Briefing by SRSG Hans Haekkerup

May 3, 2001

We are in the process of trying to see if we can agree on the outstanding questions on the Legal Framework. I have had meetings today with leaders of the Kosovo Albanian parties, and tomorrow we will continue discussions and see if we can reach some common ground. We have also had contacts with Kosovo Serbs in this process, especially through yesterday and I also hope to see them tomorrow to participate in the process. But anyhow, we are trying to move the agenda. I can also say I saw some of the comments in the press from Belgrade this morning. I don't think that it reflects the reality as I see it. I don't think we have a situation where we can say that there is no movement and we will certainly do our best to make sure that things move in the right direction. But of course, if by the end of the week this is not the case, then we will have to take stock of where we are and I will finish the work.

Q: You met the representatives of QUINT. What have they advised you and is referendum passed in these discussions with you?

HH: I can say that the QUINT does not support the idea of referendum. But basically I think they should speak for themselves. They have meeting today and tomorrow.

Q: What the position on referendum and other open questions?

HH: As you know there are about five outstanding problems with Kosovo Albanians and there are also some questions with Kosovo Serbs. We would like to include some of the questions raised by Kosovo Serbs in the Framework. On the Kosovo Albanian side the first questions is the title and there is no agreement, although there is some flexibility on that one. The other one is the question about the constitutional court. Our position is that it should be dealt with by the Supreme Court, it could have a special chamber or whatever. So there is some flexibility there. When it comes to the president of Kosovo, there are certainly different opinions, those on the Kosovo Albanian side and there are some nuances within the international community on this one. On KPC, I don't see any movement in the international community. We think that the text is as it should be. When it comes to the reference to the will of the people, I think this is a question.  It is in Rambouillet, but it is one amongst several other factors that you would be taking into account when reaching the final political settlement. I think it is very important to underline that this document is not the final political settlement, it is a temporary thing, but it will stand until a final political settlement is reached. I don't think the international community will have any timelines. It's a question about the political situation, when it will be possible to reach a final settlement.

Q: Won't the delay in reaching the final agreement on the interim constitution, endanger holding elections this year, having in mind that OSCE has still not assigned the money for it. Secondly, since you say it is a temporary document, what would be the time frame and why are the Albanians so stubborn to call it a constitution.

HH: I try to see if I can remember all your questions. As for the timeline, although there should be a different defined timeframe, of course this would be decided by the final political settlement. So I think it would be unwise to set a deadline for this document. It is a temporary document, but it is temporary until a final political settlement has been reached. And I don't think the international community will accept anything else. As for holding the elections, I am working on is to reach an agreement otherwise I will have to make a decision. But if we could get an early agreement, then we would know when the elections could be held. There was one dimension to what you said that the OSCE had not got the money. I cannot confirm that. OSCE has got the first tranche of the money, so they can start building up the organization for elections.

Q: Could you say clearly your position on the referendum and the President issue?

HH: I don't think the UNMIK position is so interesting and certainly not my personal opinion. My job is to try to see if I can find common ground, I represent the international community, the UN first and foremost, but also those countries who went to war to decide the future of Kosovo.

Q: How long would let the talks go on until you take the final decision.

HH: I will try to finish it as soon as possible. But it will be unwise to say when. But by the end of this week we will take stock and see where we are.

Q: Will it be still possible to have elections by the end of October and beginning of November.

HH: It will still be possible to have elections late this year.

Q: In case you have to use veto and Mr. Annan has to use his veto, do you see the political leaders here saying that they don't recognize the document because they don't agree with some part of it.

HH: They will recognize the document.

Q: If not?

HH: Well what will they do, if they don't do?

Q: They can say they don't recognize some political status or something because we didn't sign this document and we didn't support this document and it should start from the beginning.

HH: The only one who will sign this document is me. The plan has never been anything else. This is a regulation and we don't know the name yet, we are still discussing that, but it will be basically a regulation, which will set out the framework of provisional self-government and of course the parties will participate in the elections. I hope also the Kosovo Serbs will. But I will be surprised if they did not and they participate in the institutions and play according to the rules. They will most likely say that they have different opinions and that they would have liked it to look otherwise.  That is fair enough, but I think they will accept the document in the sense that I have mentioned here.

Q: You said the international community will not accept any deadline on this document because it is an interim document. Do you think that the people of Kosovo will accept something which is not according to their will.

HH: I think this is a major step forward for the people of Kosovo. They will have to deal with day to day questions that concern the big majority of the people. They will have to make decisions, they will have responsible ministers, responsible to an assembly that will pass laws in these fields, fields that are very important for all people in Kosovo-social welfare, health, education, environment, agriculture, industry, trade and so on. There will be a lot to do and I think also for the process of Kosovo and the development of politicians' political culture in Kosovo, this will be a very important step. And whatever is the final arrangement is, I think this is a necessary step to get there, anyhow and the Kosovo leaders know that, I can assure you.

Q: I am not speaking of the Kosovo leaders. I am speaking about the people of Kosovo. We were told by the Working Group that this document is for the people of Kosovo. So it is not for the leaders.

HH: But they will have a chance to decide, they will have a chance to elect their own politicians, who will then make decision on their behalf like all other representative democracies and the real test of course will be whether they will or not.  So we will see, but my expectation is that the turnout will be high.

Q: Yesterday you had meetings with the Serbian representatives. You said it was a good dialogue. So why have they published today and Trajkovic has called the session of the Serb parliament today on this issue.

HH: I think they realize that we are very close to the end of the negotiations. I am not so surprised.

Q: What is different between Serbs and Albanians on the issue of president?

HH: The Serbs basically do not want a president of Kosovo and the Kosovo Albanians want one.

Q: And the internationals?

HH: Well, as I said there are some nuances on this question.

Q:  Mr. Haekkerup you said you can sign the document by asking anyone. Why don't you do that. You keep talking to the leaders?

HH:  As long as there is a possibility of reaching a consensus or get closer to each other, I will continue talking to them because I think it is important that they accept as much as possible of the document. But if in the end I cannot reconcile on a few points then I have to take a decision and actually they will be happy about that. Otherwise there would be no decision.

Q: How long will UNMIK's timeframe in Kosovo and when do you expect the final political settlement for Kosovo. 

HH: I don't know when it will be that's not in my hands. But the expectation for UNMIK is that what we are doing now in creating this legal framework is so that UNMIK can take a step back. A lot of things will be left to the Kosovars themselves to deal with. There will be continued Kosovarization in the administration. The but the big change would be that the administration will be moved, the departments will be moved from UNMMIK to the self-government. The internationals will continue to be there but Kosovarization of the departments will continue in the future. So basically they have to run most of the business of Kosovo themselves. The long-term perspective is to reduce the presence of UNMIK. The immediate effect will not be there, but that's the direction we want to move so that UNMIK will gradually fade out, but we will stay here until the final settlement is made, maybe beyond in some set up. I don't know about that. That's open depending on the final settlement and when it comes.

Q: Vetton Surroi called you the king of Kosovo. Would you agree with that.

HH: No.

Q: You would not be like a king of Kosovo after the Legal framework is approved.

HH: No, I think Kosovo will have a president or a president of the presidency. They will have a prime minister, ministers of government. My role will be limited. It will really be except for a few areas to make sure that 1244 is respected.

Q: Does 1244 tries to push Kosovo into the hand of Yugoslavia, with this running administration in Kosovo?

HH: No, as I said what we do has to be neutral to the final political settlement. At the same time it is a precondition or it is facilitating that a final political settlement can be reached.

Q: Why are you and the international community opposed to the referendum?

HH: It is very important to underline that. First and foremost, nobody has talked about referendum. The mention in Rambouillet was among other factors that should be taken into account in reaching the final political settlement. The will of the people is only referred to in this context, the final political settlement and it is even not spelled out how this will of the should be expressed because it can be in many ways. Referendum is just one possibility. It could be through an elected assembly or through a constitutional assembly or whatever. So it is not expressed very clearly. If you mean referendum generally, I come from a country and referendum is a very bad idea. I can assure you, we had one last year when we didn't join the Euro and I really think it was not a very wise decision. So it's not an institution I would recommend to anybody. I would also say that referenda, if you used it generally, it would be the 51 per cent deciding and actually in the legal framework, we have been building a lot of guarantees for minorities and groups so that nobody can be overruled and I think it is a much better way to do things.

Q: But you mention the minorities. There would be 15 to 20 per cent minorities, even if they came back to Kosovo. That means in a referendum on independence, you would have 70 to 80 per cent of population, do you mean the will of 15 or 20 per cent population will have to be imposed on 90 per cent.

HH: We have been building this in a way so that it will be difficult for a majority to overrule a minority in a non-acceptable way. And that's the point. It will be too easy just to call a referendum and then hope that a majority 51 per cent will decide over the 49 per cent. I think it is much better and it develops the political culture to have to make compromises. That you have to sit down and discuss things before making a decision, that one group cannot down vote the other group and you have mechanisms that at least make sure that before that happens you have been through all the procedures and had the discussions.