STANDING COMMITTEE ON NATIONAL DEFENCE AND VETERANS AFFAIRS

COMITÉ PERMANENT DE LA DÉFENSE NATIONALE ET DES ANCIENS COMBATTANTS

EVIDENCE

[Recorded by Electronic Apparatus]

Tuesday, June 1, 1999

• 1519

[English]

The Co-Chairman (Mr. Bill Graham (Toronto Centre—Rosedale, Lib.)): I'd like to call this joint meeting of the defence and foreign affairs committees to order. I'm glad to have Mr. Wright and General Henault back to brief us.

Members, I would like to remind you that today we had agreed that those of us who were in Macedonia last week, that is to say Monsieur Laurin, who is here, Mr. Martin, and myself, and Mr. Mills if he comes, will be briefing the committee on our trip. So we'd be more than pleased to both tell you about what we did when we were there and what we found out when we were there, and answer any questions. However, I think we should have our normal briefing from Mr. Wright and General Henault first and have any questions for them. Then we'll have time for our briefing.

Mr. Wright, are you going to go ahead?

Mr. Jim Wright (Director General for Central, East and South Europe, Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade): Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.

If it's all right with you, I'd like to discuss very briefly some of the latest developments with respect to diplomatic activity, and then talk about the report that Mary Robinson, UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, has issued, and leave with the committee some documentation.

• 1520

European Union foreign ministers met in Brussels yesterday and adopted a declaration on Kosovo.

[Translation]

The foreign affairs ministers of the European Union met in Brussels yesterday and adopted a joint declaration on Kosovo.

[English]

It calls on Yugoslavia to translate its reported statements into a firm, unambiguous, and verifiable commitment to accept the G-8 principles and the UN Security Council resolution. It also reaffirmed European Union support for the efforts, including a possible mission to Belgrade in the coming days of Finnish President Ahtisaari in order to advance the diplomatic process.

[Translation]

The foreign affairs ministers were also very pleased to receive some solid support from the international community for their stability pact for southeastern Europe.

Canada welcomes and firmly supports this important European Union initiative. It participated in the May 27 discussions in Bonn on this proposal.

We agree with the European Union that priority consideration must be given to the speedy adoption of the declaration. Ratification by Euro-Atlantic institutions would give us continued hope for the future of the Balkans. Canada will continue to do everything it can to support this process.

[English]

On Thursday, May 27, Canada participated in discussions organized by the European Union on the “stability pact”. The OSCE, OECD, EBRD, World Bank, IMF, NATO, and Japan, as well as the United States, were among the participants. We discussed at that meeting a blueprint for the stability pact for the Balkans. The process should formally be set in motion with a conference at ministerial level in Germany later this month.

The goal of the stability pact is to coordinate reconstruction efforts in the Balkans and to ensure political, economic, and social stability is achieved in the region through integration in the Euro-Atlantic dynamic. The pact will further develop existing economic and trade relations within the Balkans and provide assistance for democratization, civil society, education, and institution building.

Canada welcomes the development of the stability pact as a concrete sign of the kind of future the Balkan region can enjoy by pursuing the pact of greater integration into the European-Atlantic mainstream.

Back on the diplomatic track, German Chancellor Schroeder is meeting this evening with Russian Envoy Viktor Chernomyrdin, with Finnish President Ahtisaari, and U.S. Deputy Secretary Strobe Talbott. They are discussing Mr. Chernomyrdin's recent mission to Yugoslavia and tomorrow's planned Chernomyrdin, and possibly Ahtisaari, trip to Belgrade.

Mr. Axworthy also spoke today with German Foreign Minister Joschka Fischer. They discussed the way ahead for the G-8 plan. G-8 political directors—for Canada that is Mr. Paul Heinbecker—will meet in Bonn on Thursday of this week, and G-8 foreign ministers will meet in Cologne next week.

The G-8 political directors' meeting set for this Thursday is focused on Kosovo only, and the political directors will be getting a report from the Russian team that was in Belgrade with Mr. Chernomyrdin.

Concerning the release of Mary Robinson's report on Kosovo,

[Translation]

We have read the report on Kosovo issued yesterday by the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights.

[English]

This report makes it very clear that the crisis has its roots in the grave and systematic violations of human rights committed by Serb authorities. I quote:

The grave humanitarian tragedy taking place in Kosovo... and neighbouring countries has its roots in a human rights crisis.

The high commissioner and her staff have received

substantial evidence of gross human rights violations which have been committed in Kosovo, including summary executions, forcible displacement, rape, physical abuse, and the destruction of... identity documents.

• 1525

[Translation]

The report leaves no doubt whatsoever that an orchestrated, brutal campaign has been carried out against ethnic Albanians in Kosovo. The carefully planned, methodically executed campaign prompted the mass exodus of Kosovars.

[English]

Again, I'm quoting from her report:

A high number of corroborating reports from the field indicate that Serbian military and police forces and paramilitary units have conducted a well-planned and implemented programme of forcible expulsion of ethnic Albanians from Kosovo. This appears to have affected virtually all areas of Kosovo as well as villages in southern Serbia, including places never targeted by NATO air strikes or in which the so-called Kosovo Liberation Army (KLA) has never been present.

This last fact strengthens indications that refugees are not fleeing NATO air strikes, as is often alleged by Yugoslav authorities.

In the report's conclusion, the high commissioner calls upon NATO to respect the principles of international humanitarian law, including the principle of proportionality in their military actions against the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia. Mr. Chairman, we agree that NATO has always and will continue to do everything it can to avoid civilian casualties.

Finally, Mr. Chairman, I'm pleased to leave with the committee copies of the following documentation on the Kosovo crisis: one, the report of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, tabled yesterday; two, the report of the May 31 European Union General Affairs Council, which addresses both Kosovo and the southeast Europe stability pact conference; three, Mr. Chairman, the indictment, by the chief prosecutor of the international criminal tribunal of the former Yugoslavia, of Yugoslav President Milosevic and four others in this regime—they are charged with crimes against humanity, specifically murder, deportation, persecutions, and violations of the laws and customs of war.

That, Mr. Chairman, concludes my opening remarks.

The Co-Chairman (Mr. Bill Graham): Thank you, Mr. Wright.

General Henault.

Lieutenant-General Raymond R. Henault (Deputy Chief of the Defence Staff, Department of National Defence): Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman, Mr. Co-Chairman,

[Translation]

honourable members.

[English]

As you're all aware, the NATO military campaign, the air campaign, continues unabated against the federal forces of the Yugoslav Republic, whether they are military or paramilitary forces. Today is day 70 of the air campaign, which has continued and intensified, quite frankly, once again over the last several days and is now and continues to be a 24-hour-a-day operation.

Over the past few days the weather has in fact improved dramatically. The arrival of more aircraft in theatre, coupled with the better weather, has allowed NATO to intensify yet again its bombing efforts in Yugoslavia, and in particular in Kosovo.

[Translation]

As mentioned previously, NATO strikes continue to target Serb forces and support infrastructure inside Kosovo. Strategic Serbian targets include, as before, Yugoslav army installations, munitions depots, bridges, oil storage facilities, command centers and air fields.

[English]

There are now more than 900 NATO aircraft in theatre, flying an average of 700 sorties a day at this point in time. The situation for the Yugoslav forces is of course becoming increasingly difficult and unpleasant as a result of the air activity and of course the intensification of the campaign. The Serbian air force and its air defence system is basically a shadow of its former self, unable to defend effectively against our medium and high-level attacks. FRY and MUP ground forces are losing more equipment every day that we're able to engage them in Kosovo. The military infrastructure is becoming more and more degraded by the day. The forces are in desperate need, of course, of resupply, reinforcements, and so on. Furthermore, the FRY and MUP forces cannot move effectively or conduct operations, whether it's day or night, without the threat of an aerial attack from NATO aircraft.

[Translation]

Regarding Canada's effort, our CF-18s in Aviano have flown 59 of the 60 sorties assigned to them over the past four days. Our pilots continue to combine air combat and air patrol missions. This has been the case since the beginning of the NATO operation.

• 1530

Canadian aircraft continue to target army barracks, warehouses, radio transmission towers, traffic tunnels, command centers and air fields.

[English]

I had the good fortune and the great pleasure of visiting our contingent in Italy last week, not only the contingent in Aviano, but also the commanders of the air forces at the combined air operation centre in Vicenza, and I was not only impressed with the very high morale of our troops in theatre, the great comfort they're taking from the good support they are receiving from Canadians overall, but also much with the dedication and professionalism with which they're carrying out this very difficult mission. Both our men and women are working very hard on a seven-day-a-week basis to satisfy the objectives of the international community and of course the Canadian government.

I also had the opportunity to meet with Lieutenant-General Mike Short, who is the commander of Air Forces South, and also the commander of the air forces in theatre and the overall air campaign, and Lieutenant-General Vannucchi, who is the commander of the Fifth Allied Tactical Air Force stationed primarily and normally in Vicenza. Both expressed to me their continuing commitment to the air campaign and their great belief in what the international community is trying to achieve, and of course the high regard in which they hold Canadian airmen, airwomen, and all of the personnel who are supporting operations in Aviano. It was very heartfelt, and I can assure you that Canadians are considered to be amongst the best of the NATO air forces and air support personnel who are in theatre.

Turning for a moment to Op Kinetic, which is our land force in the process of deploying to Kosovo for peacekeeping operations, the deployment of our 800-person-strong contingent to the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, primarily in the area of Skopje, and as part of an international peace implementation force, which I know you're well aware of, remains on schedule. We have now approximately 250 members of the Canadian Forces in theatre. That number is increasing daily as we continue to flow in our advance party and as our equipment continues to be transported overseas through a combination of air and primarily sea-lift transport.

[Translation]

I believe you've already been advised that NATO has already updated its peace implementation plan for Kosovo. The plan calls for increasing our military strength in theatre from the current level of 26,000 to either 45,000 or 50,000.

[English]

Canada continues to consider its options in support of this larger force, as mentioned by the minister previously.

Finally, just to give you a feel again for costs, as I've been reporting to you on a periodic basis, the total cost since March 24, which is the day the air campaign started—and I iterate that this is incremental cost—is approximately $42 million. The cost of the air campaign, that is Op Echo, our 18 CF-18s, and roughly 300 persons in Aviano and Vicenza, to date has been in the neighbourhood of $20 million to $21 million, incremental.

That completes my statement for today, Chairman, and we now stand ready for your questions.

The Co-Chairman (Mr. Bill Graham): Now for questions. We have Mr. Martin on the list.

Mr. Keith Martin (Esquimalt—Juan de Fuca, Ref.): Thank you very much.

Thank you very much again for coming to educate us. I have three questions.

First, in the long run, with respect to Kosovo, it seems to me there are three options: there is autonomy within Yugoslavia, independence, and partition. If we look at Bosnia as an example of what may happen in the future, is partition the only viable long-term option for Kosovo?

My second question is, with regard to the thousands of sorties that have taken place, what has been the impact upon the tanks and artillery of the Yugoslav army?

Lastly, Kosovo has been likened to another Vietnam, and if we're going to put ground troops in, the nature of the war will likely be a guerrilla-type war with a lot of casualties, a bloody war. Can you give us a sense, General, of what we'll be confronted with if ground troops go in, what the resistance will be like on the part of the Yugoslav army? Thank you.

Mr. Jim Wright: Mr. Chairman, I could respond to the first question.

In the three options you inquired about—autonomy, independence, partition—the only option the international community is looking at is autonomy. That was the agenda for the international community right from the very beginning. We have stated right from the outset that independence was not on the table, that we are not interested in changing borders.

• 1535

The Rambouillet accords, the statement issued by the NATO leaders at the end of April in Washington, the G-8 principles issued by the foreign ministers in the beginning of May in Bonn all emphasize the respect for Yugoslavia's territorial integrity. The peace plan that is going to emerge will be one that respects territorial integrity but tries to give back to the people of Kosovo the autonomy they enjoyed in the 1970s and 1980s, before it was taken away in 1989 by President Milosevic.

So independence is not an option; autonomy and self-government are. Partition is not something the international community is looking at, particularly right now. I know there is some discussion out there. As I say, the option favoured by the international community, and that includes, I would add, neighbouring states... My understanding is that the question of autonomy, the respect for territorial integrity, the respect for borders is something neighbouring countries prefer.

Mr. Keith Martin: Sir, may I just interrupt for one second. The KLA has no interest whatsoever in autonomy and we know that. We're talking about a situation where there is no middle ground on autonomy right now, so how are you going to do this?

Mr. Jim Wright: The KLA was a factor leading up to the Rambouillet negotiations. When they initially approached the negotiations, it was very much from the perspective of independence or nothing. When the Kosovar team arrived at Rambouillet, it's fair to say it was quite divided. By the time the negotiations in Rambouillet concluded in February or March of this year, the Kosovar team was fully united behind the Rambouillet plan. They were the only ones who signed it. There was no commitment in that plan to independence. There was an acceptance on the part of the full Kosovar delegation, including the KLA representative, that autonomy was what was on offer. And that remains the case today, Mr. Chairman.

LGen Raymond Henault: In the next two questions you asked about the impact on tanks and artillery in Kosovo as a result of the air strikes. I would probably expand that to include armoured fighting vehicles and military trucks, transport systems, and so on.

We do know that confirmed losses to the Yugoslav army in Kosovo were somewhere in the neighbourhood of 15% to 20% of those vehicles. The more likely losses, which we have some difficulty in confirming since some of them are inside buildings, or in other cases difficult to actually see, probably take that total to around the 30% range at the moment. So that's the figure I would use—guardedly, mind you, as there are some anomalies there.

In terms of a ground force point of view, the plan continues to be to go into Kosovo after a peace agreement is reached. So we do not intend to go into Kosovo under a fighting context. Therefore, I wouldn't want to speculate on what the losses would be.

Losses in this case, in a peacekeeping operation, are never expected to be zero. When Canadian forces or other allied forces go into a peacekeeping operation they go in there with a certain amount of risk associated. That risk, we know, is a little bit higher now as a result of the activities of the last several weeks. That risk is higher as a result of the destruction to the infrastructure, the laying of mines in the region, the unexploded ordnance that's now all over the countryside, and so on.

So that's where the risk is a little bit higher for us. And the type of risk we're talking about at the moment is likely medium from a military point of view, meaning there is always a risk that you're going to take a casualty. The casualties we're talking about are primarily from the specific types of things I've just talked to you about, not from a combat operation.

I might add that there are always risks in the rogue element, in the discontent out there, in the terrorist activities, and these are the same for any peacekeeping mission we're involved in. So that can't be discounted, and it becomes part of the risk analysis we do as well.

• 1540

So that covers off basically where we see we may be going in terms of the casualties themselves. Again, it's very difficult to give you a percentage at this point in time.

The Co-Chairman (Mr. Bill Graham): Mrs. Finestone.

Hon. Sheila Finestone (Mount Royal, Lib.): Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And thank you, gentlemen, for your updated report. Each time it's most interesting and well presented.

My first question really is to you, General Henault. Given your statement in response to our other colleague with respect to the unexploded ordnance, the state of the roads, just in general the state of the infrastructure, what is the potential expectation... Let's say we get good news, that Friday will be good news day. Then what? What is the timeline and the planning so that the potential for return of the Kosovars to their homeland is effected, given the electrical system, the water system, the road system, the ordnance there, the landmines, and the housing that's been destroyed? That would be my first question.

Secondly, in terms of the planning of mobile homes or prefabricated homes, how do you plan to handle that aspect?

Thirdly, with respect to that, in terms of the support that will be required to the host country, what are our obligations? Are they going to be defined in any way? You have massive amounts of people who have been living on that land, and it has disrupted the normal daily lives of people in Albania, Macedonia, and Montenegro. What are foreseen as the obligations for Canada in those areas?

Last but not least, with respect to Madame Arbour's report, was any reference made to Bosnia, Croatia, or Slovenia? Was that included in the observations made to arrive at her decision to declare him a war criminal?

Thank you.

LGen Raymond Henault: Mrs. Finestone, I can't give you an exact timing as to when the actual refugee movement back into the country will start because that will depend—

Mrs. Sheila Finestone: Sorry, General. In my mind's eye, I see that winter comes soon in that area—October. Is there some plan that starts, let's say, October 15 and backs up so that there is some indication we could ever get anybody in?

LGen Raymond Henault: I can give you an indication of what the sequencing would be once a peace agreement is reached and everybody agrees that we can go into Kosovo. I would say that, conservatively, within 48 hours of reaching or signing a peace agreement, the forces that are currently on the ground under General Jackson, which are the KFOR forces that are now in there—and there are in excess of 15,000 troops on the ground under General Jackson's command, from a multitude of nations. There are about 17 or 18 nations, to my recollection, that are involved, including Canada, of course, with forces on the ground in the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia. Those forces would go in very quickly after an agreement and would do, initially, an assessment of the situation you've just talked about.

As you well know, the only indications we have are from overhead imagery and unmanned aerial vehicles and so on that are giving us an indication of what the damage on the ground is and so on. We aren't going to be able to do a clear assessment of that until we're able to actually go into Kosovo and do an assessment right there.

At that point, the first order of business will be to do an assessment of what the risk is on the ground in terms of the mines you've talked about, unexploded ordnance, and the damage to the infrastructure, especially the lines of communication. At that point we must do an assessment of what's required to establish or re-establish the basic essentials or the essential needs—water, food, infrastructure, at least a minimum basic infrastructure that refugees can come back to—and then to do a bit of an assessment in conjunction with the NGOs of what type of support can be provided to the refugees, and the IDPs, I might add, to come back into their homes. All of that will take some time.

So there is no expectation that it will happen very quickly or at least immediately. I would say it's going to take a matter of weeks, if not months, given the current state of the infrastructure as we know it there.

I would only add to this that there is no way for us to know how soon the refugees will want to return to their homes, despite the fact that they know that in several cases those homes have been destroyed and those homes have been damaged; the infrastructure has been damaged. But we do know that refugees will go where they want to go, and they will probably return very quickly if they possibly can.

• 1545

We saw that in a different context, if you like, with the return of the refugees from eastern Zaire back into Rwanda, for example. When they saw the situation had become stable again, they made a very quick movement back into the country. In fact, as we were moving troops, they were going back into their own home country.

So it's a little bit unpredictable, but I think we've all recognized—the international community has recognized—that there will be a requirement to support refugees in terms of their basic essentials for some time, and likely through the winter as well.

Mr. Charles Bassett (Vice-President, Central and Eastern Europe Branch, Canadian International Development Agency): Mr. Chairman, I would add one comment to what General Henault has just said. I was at the meeting last week on the return of refugees. Both the OSCE and the UNHCR reported that in their extensive interviewing of the refugees in Albania, in Macedonia, the vast majority would prefer to go back as quickly as possible, notwithstanding the state of their homes. If they have plastic sheets or tarpaulins, something to keep them warm in the short term while they're provided with materials to rebuild their houses, the expectation of both UNHCR and OSCE is that they will go back in droves in the first weeks.

Mr. Jim Wright: I would add also that the UN High Commission for Refugees has already hosted a meeting in Geneva to discuss the issue of winterization. Planning is proceeding in that respect. Some supplies are already being purchased. So as Charles and the general have indicated, we know that while we hope always for the best, you have to, in this set of circumstances, plan for the worst. Our experience in Bosnia suggests that a lot of people will go back. Even though their villages may have been largely destroyed, people will go back to their homes and will want to rebuild very quickly.

I'm not sure the issue of mobile homes will necessarily be a factor here. My recollection was we looked at this pretty carefully in the context of Bosnia. It just didn't work. But in terms of providing money for building supplies to help locals, to help the UNHCR, yes. The international community is already mobilized to deal with the reality of an early winter, not only in Kosovo but also in the neighbouring countries of Macedonia and Albania. In terms of support for those countries in the region, in particular Albania and Macedonia, I know the delegation from these committees was in both of those countries. They saw for themselves the human face of this tragedy and the damage the economies have suffered, especially in the case of Macedonia, where their foreign trade has been devastated. They have unemployment, I think, which is running at about 50%. So we are working very closely with those governments.

I know through the good support of CIDA a package of economic assistance is on offer to both the Albanian and Macedonian governments. In addition, the Canadian government has put forward something in the order of $35 million in humanitarian assistance since March 24, which is dedicated in many respects to assisting the refugees in those countries and to reducing the costs as much as possible to Albania and Kosovo. But the fact of the matter remains that both these countries are going to need a lot of help, not just in the short term but in the medium term and in the long term. That means working with them and with international financial institutions such as the World Bank and IMF. It means looking at loan rescheduling to try to assist them as much as possible.

I mentioned in my introductory remarks this reference to a south European stability pact process, which is underway, led by the European Union but essentially involving all of the major international organizations, OSCE, World Bank, IMF, European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, NATO, UNHCR, to go ahead and rebuild this area. It's also about values, trying to go ahead and instil in the next generation of political leadership, especially in Yugoslavia but in Kosovo as well, the kinds of values... respect for human rights, the rule of law, democratization, and good governance, some of the areas, frankly, that we have not seen practised in the Balkan area, which has caused so many problems not just for Canada but for European nations over the course of the last decade.

• 1550

Finally with respect to—

Mrs. Sheila Finestone: With respect to the last half of the question, I was curious about transportation. How are you going to get the people in there? Do you have sufficient transportation, if you have all the other things in place?

The Co-Chairman (Mr. Bill Graham): Sorry, Mrs. Finestone. We're trying to keep this to two-minute periods. You've had nine minutes already.

[Editor's Note: Inaudible]

Mrs. Sheila Finestone: —

The Co-Chairman (Mr. Bill Graham): Well, if you ask five questions, you get more than... it's very difficult for them to... I'm not saying that critically. It's just that we had hoped to be able to move to phase two of this by 4 o'clock, releasing both General Henault and Mr. Wright, who have other things to do. We do have five other people on the list. So I'm wondering if we could cut things down.

Why don't we go to Mr. Mills then? He's the next questioner.

Mr. Bob Mills (Red Deer, Ref.): I have several questions as well. Mr. Chernomyrdin has been meeting with the EU ministers and Strobe Talbott today, and I understand he has a proposal to carry with the Finnish prime minister to Mr. Milosevic tomorrow morning. What hopes do you hold out for that being accepted by Mr. Milosevic?

Mr. Jim Wright: We remain realistic. We are faced with a very difficult set of circumstances right now. Mr. Chernomyrdin has been working extremely constructively, as has the Russian government, with the G-8, and bilaterally with Mr. Talbott, the deputy secretary of state for the U.S., and with Mr. Ahtisaari, the Finnish president. We know they are working on elements of a package to flesh out the G-8 principles, to turn it into a peace plan. We also know that G-8 countries are working very diligently with a view to come up with a UN Security Council resolution, as European foreign ministers called for yesterday at their meeting in Brussels.

We hope the signals we're hearing from Belgrade in terms of their acceptance of the G-8 principles prove correct. We will be guided more by their actions than by their words. In this respect, we are waiting for a much clearer signal from Belgrade about the acceptance of the conditions that have been set out by the international community, and also some demonstrable and verifiable steps taken by Yugoslav authorities, in particular a ceasefire and the commencement of a withdrawal. If those signals are in place, NATO will respond accordingly.

The Co-Chairman (Mr. Bill Graham): Monsieur Laurin.

[Translation]

Mr. René Laurin (Joliette, BQ): Mr. Wright, the World Court is scheduled to render a judgement tomorrow in the matter pitting Canada against Yugoslavia. Do we have some contingency plans in the event the ruling goes against Canada and we are forced to withdraw our forces? How would this withdrawal proceed?

Secondly, could immunity be requested for Mr. Milosevic as a settlement condition?

Could the Serbian government demand that no retaliatory action be taken against Milosevic in exchange for his signing a peace accord?

[English]

Mr. Jim Wright: First of all, on the question of immunity for President Milosevic, that is not on offer from Canada. It's not on offer from the chief prosecutor of the international criminal tribunal in the Hague, and it's not going to be on offer from any NATO country. I don't see anyone being willing to negotiate with Yugoslav authorities on the question of immunity. Mr. Milosevic is obliged under international law to present himself to the court in the Hague. If he does not do so, his government is obliged to go ahead and turn him over to the court in the Hague. So there will be no deal on the question of immunity.

• 1555

Secondly, with respect to the International Court of Justice case, the preliminary judgment will be rendered tomorrow. Yes, we have given thought to the different scenarios out there, but this remains a hypothetical question. We'll be delighted to comment on this tomorrow when the judgment is rendered by the court. The Canadian government will be prepared for all contingencies.

Remember, however, that this is not a legally binding decision by the court. It's a preliminary judgment. It is recommendatory in nature, and it will have, frankly, more of a political angle to it than necessarily a legal angle. Depending on the judgment of the court tomorrow, the case will play out over a very extended period of time.

But the short answer to your question is yes, the Canadian government has looked at all aspects of this very carefully, and we will be prepared to speak about this substantively tomorrow once the judgment is rendered.

The Co-Chairman (Mr. Bill Graham): Thank you.

Mr. Cannis.

Mr. John Cannis (Scarborough Centre, Lib.): Mr. Chairman, I will be very brief due to the time constraint you outlined. Let me just say welcome once again, General, Mr. Wright, and the panel.

Let me start with this comment. I was very pleased, Mr. Wright, to hear earlier your response to Mr. Martin in terms of what is being discussed, that is using the word “autonomy” as opposed to “independence”, which I think is very crucial if this peace process indeed is going to have a successful end.

I just want to comment on what Mary Robinson, the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, said earlier. She spoke about the crimes committed by the Milosevic regime. I should be very clear that I agree with her comments. She talked about addressing these war crimes at the tribunal, but she also condemned the unfortunate, and I believe unintentional, loss of life caused by the NATO initiatives.

Could you just comment on how that might be addressed in the future should it be brought formally to the tribunal?

Mr. Jim Wright: NATO has in recent weeks made a very conscious effort to double and triple check the targeting process, to look carefully at munitions that are intended to be used in each attack against legitimate military targets. If the judgment is made that there is a risk for civilian casualties with respect to a particular target or given munitions, then NATO either rejects the target or they go ahead and select different munitions that can better guarantee that the risk to civilians is reduced to the absolute minimum under the circumstances.

I would also add that in terms of Mrs. Robinson and the UN High Commission for Human Rights, she has made it very clear from the outset that there is no moral equivalency between the humanitarian campaign that NATO is engaged in right now to try to protect the rights of Kosovo citizens who have been driven from their homes and Mr. Milosevic and his regime, who are purposely targeting civilians and driving them from their country. So she is on record on this issue of moral equivalency, recognizing full well the just motives behind what NATO is trying to do.

The Co-Chairman (Mr. Bill Graham): Thank you.

Mr. Earle.

Mr. Gordon Earle (Halifax West, NDP): Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I had several questions, but I'll try to limit them in respect of the time element here.

First, I noticed a news report a couple of days ago in which our foreign affairs minister is saying that there'll be no more talks with Milosevic. He said:

We're not negotiating with Milosevic. The G-8 foreign ministers set down basic conditions for ending the activity or the action going on in Kosovo. And it's simply getting the authorities in Serbia, in Belgrade, to accept those conditions.

I guess I have a little difficulty understanding how one can negotiate a settlement or an end to a war with someone with whom one is fighting if you're not going to talk to him. Can you perhaps elaborate a bit on how that process will unfold?

Second, I know, Mr. Wright, you'd probably be a bit disappointed if I didn't ask you if you have any more information on the letter I talked to you about before, on which you undertook to find out more information.

Mr. Jim Wright: As the minister...

Mr. Gordon Earle: I respect the process.

• 1600

Mr. Jim Wright: The minister was very clear in his remarks, in terms of saying neither Canada nor NATO were engaged in a process of negotiating the conditions that have been set out by the international community. Those are cast in concrete. What we're looking for from Belgrade are actions—a specific response accepting these conditions, as the minister said; getting the authority from Belgrade and making it very clear that they accept the G-8 principles and the five NATO conditions; that they are willing to end the violence, stop the killing, withdraw their forces, and allow in an international security force. NATO argues that there must be a core NATO presence there. Relief agencies would be facilitated; refugees would be given the right of return; and political talks would ensue, based on the principles set out in Rambouillet.

Having said that, what we're engaged in right now is not a negotiation with Belgrade, with the Yugoslav leadership. We are not talking about a process whereby we are negotiating a new set of Rambouillet accords. We are simply waiting for acceptance from Belgrade of the conditions that have been put before them. If we get that acceptance and there is a clear, demonstrable, verifiable signal of acceptance, then NATO countries have indicated they are prepared to suspend the bombing.

We want the diplomatic track to succeed and end the bombing as soon as possible. That's the reason why the G-8 process is continuing and why Mr. Chernomyrdin, Mr. Ahtisaari, and Mr. Talbott are as active as they are. But Mr. Axworthy is quite correct. He is joined in that observation about not negotiating by all his NATO colleagues. Mr. Chernomyrdin, Mr. Ahtisaari, if he goes there—it won't be with a view to negotiate the elements of a security council resolution or a peace agreement; it will be simply to get acceptance of the conditions that have been set out before them.

With respect to the letter you've raised on a number of occasions, I can confirm that the letter that was sent by President Milosevic to Mr. Clinton via Mr. Jesse Jackson, when he went there to secure the release of the three American soldiers, has not been released. We checked with American authorities and that has been confirmed to us. It has also been confirmed that there is absolutely nothing new in this letter. It restated Belgrade's conditions for ending the conflict, which came nowhere near meeting the allies' basic conditions. To the best of my knowledge, it is the United States government's communication, it's privileged communication, and at the present time it has not been made public. But we have been reassured that there is nothing new in the letter at all. It simply reconfirms our own suspicions as to what was in the letter. Frankly, we saw it as being more of a publicity gesture on the part of President Milosevic, as opposed to a substantive signal of willingness to accept the conditions set out by the international community.

The Co-Chairman (Mr. Bill Graham): Thank you.

Mr. Bachand.

[Translation]

Mr. André Bachand (Richmond—Arthabaska, PC): First of all, I'd like to congratulate Ms. Beaumier, who's just joined the Conservative Party. We're extremely proud of her.

Some hon. members: Oh! oh!

[English]

The Co-Chairman (Mr. Bill Graham): It turned out to be a thorn in your side.

Ms. Colleen Beaumier (Brampton West—Mississauga, Lib.): Well, that depends. Can I be a cabinet minister?

Mr. André Bachand: Sure. It's because of the new poll in Ontario.

The Co-Chairman (Mr. Bill Graham): Have you ever read your ancient history, Mr. Bachand, on the Trojan horse?

[Translation]

Mr. André Bachand: You're blushing, Mr. Chairman. The colour doesn't become you.

I would simply like to make a comment. I'm not blaming anyone, but increasingly, we're hearing reports that Canada and NATO have clearly lost the war. The propaganda machine is in high gear. The people I meet with say that NATO is responsible for more deaths than the enemy forces.

• 1605

Of course, we're told that it's impossible to verify all of the claims made by journalists since no international observer has been able to report from inside Kosovo. It's important that something happen soon on one side or another, that the peace everyone is hoping for comes to pass and that we prove that atrocities were in fact committed in Kosovo. Because I have to say that people are losing interest in the conflict. When a country is at war, the worst enemy it faces is its own citizens. I simply wanted to make that point.

I'd like to get back to a subject that we discussed last week, Mr. Right, namely the indictment issued by the Justice Louise Arbour. You stated at the time that either Mr. Milosevic could turn himself in, or the authorities in Belgrade could take steps to turn Mr. Milosevic over to the International Tribunal. I'm not an expert in human psychology. While I recognize that you do have some special qualifications, you're probably not an expert in this field either. However, I'd like you to explain to me what role the international force will have in Kosovo, Serbia or Yugoslavia. We're told that there will be an international presence beyond even the Kosovo border to monitor military activities in Serbia. Could this international force receive orders to apprehend Milosevic?

[English]

Mr. Jim Wright: First of all, in terms of your comment, I would like to make one observation: we all want this campaign to end sooner rather than later. We know there are innocent victims there. There have been right from the very beginning; over a million of them: Kosovars who called Kosovo home. So we can't lose sight of that. We cannot become numb to the pain and suffering that has been inflicted on them that is recounted in chilling detail by Louise Arbour in her indictments; by Mr. de Millo, who led the humanitarian mission into Yugoslavia; and by Mary Robinson, the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights. Their plight cannot be forgotten.

We are there to protect values that Canada and the international communities stand by. There is one person who, right from the very beginning, could have stopped this campaign, and there is still one person who can go ahead and do that, and that's Slobodan Milosevic. So he has an opportunity right now. The international community remains as committed today to the diplomatic process as we did 70 days ago.

We hope this time, when Mr. Chernomyrdin and possibly Mr. Ahtisaari are there, this man will finally see reason and reality, because NATO and the G-8 are not going away and the military campaign will continue. The impact on the Yugoslav economy will continue to be degraded, and others around President Milosevic who follow his lead will also be held to account by the international criminal court in the Hague. So there is a price to pay, and we know that the Yugoslav leadership are reflecting very carefully on this set of circumstances they face right now.

Turning specifically to your question with respect to Louise Arbour and the possible role for an international security presence in Kosovo, in relation to Mr. Milosovic's indictment, as you may know, in the case of Bosnia there is a NATO-led international security force there with over 40 countries participating. When NATO representatives come across indicted war criminals in their activities, when it is safe to go ahead and try to apprehend these indicted war criminals, they do so. This is part of the ongoing activity of the NATO-led mission in Bosnia. I would add that they have been remarkably successful in respect of 84 individuals who have been publicly indicted in Bosnia-Herzegovina, Croatia, and other countries. Only 31 remain at large right now.

• 1610

[Translation]

Mr. Andre Bachand: I apologize, Mr. Wright.

Mr. Jim Wright: That's quite all right.

Mr. André Bachand: You are not Milosevic, not by any stretch of the imagination, but if you were he, would you agree to the presence of international force that had received orders to apprehend you? Haven't we come to an impasse, diplomatically speaking?

[English]

Mr. Jim Wright: Not at all.

[Translation]

Mr. André Bachand: Milosevic is not such a masochist that he would allow into the country people who have orders to arrest him.

[English]

Mr. Jim Wright: Quite the contrary. I see this as the clearest possible signal to all members of the Yugoslav leadership that they are running into their own cul-de-sac. Their leadership is taking their country to ruination and they have to start reflecting on where they want to see their country go, whether they stand by Mr. Milosevic, whether they want to run the risk of facing their own individual indictment. We hope the nascent forces of democracy—the people who are committed to the rule of law and good governance in Yugoslavia—will take heart at the action by the international community and will start to speak up.

We also know that even within the Yugoslav government there are those who are not as ideologically nationalistic as Mr. Milosevic and some of his other co-indictees. So we'll have to see how the indictment plays out in the days and weeks to come.

But we feel as though this represents an opportunity for a sea change in the political environment in Yugoslavia. The indictment reconfirms—if it was necessary—the justification for why NATO undertook the action it has taken right from the very beginning.

With respect to the international security presence in Kosovo, if this proceeds the way NATO would like it to proceed, we will have a peacekeeping force on the ground in Kosovo, whose mandate will be to oversee an agreed peace process, the return of refugees, and the establishment of autonomy and self-government for Kosovars. If the example that has been followed in Bosnia relates to Kosovo, then there is a possibility that individuals who have been indicted, who make themselves available to such an international security presence in Kosovo—I'm not talking about Belgrade—could be picked up.

The Co-Chairman (Mr. Pat O'Brien (London—Fanshawe, Lib.)): Thank you, Mr. Wright.

[Translation]

Thank you, Mr. Bachand.

[English]

I want to thank Mr. Wright and General Henault and the other staff for attending here again today.

As we announced last week, there is no briefing scheduled for Thursday. There is a motion from Mr. Laurin, which we'll deal with.

Thank you very much. I know you have other functions to attend to, and we appreciate your attendance here once again.

I will invite our colleagues, Mr. Graham, Mr. Martin, Mr. Laurin, and Mr. Mills, to assume the witnesses' places in this case for a briefing on their recent trip.

While they are taking those places, I will refer members to a notice of motion from Mr. Laurin. As both committees require a 24-hour notice period, Mr. Laurin will need unanimous consent to put the motion. So we'll start with that question. Does Mr. Laurin have unanimous consent...

We have to first get it on the floor, René. It's not on the floor yet. If it comes on the floor, I can give you a—

[Translation]

Mr. René Laurin: Can I at least read the text of my motion, Mr. Chairman?

[English]

The Co-Chairman (Mr. Pat O'Brien): Okay.

[Translation]

Mr. René Laurin: Wouldn't it help if I could explain to my colleagues why I am seeking their unanimous consent?

[English]

The Co-Chairman (Mr. Pat O'Brien): That's the part I can't allow. The members can read it themselves, and I can let you read it for the record, if you want, but I can't allow you to speak to it until it's on the floor. That's the part I can't do. You can only read it; you can't give your reasons, unless it's accepted. You can't put a—

[Translation]

Mr. René Laurin: No, I don't wish to debate the motion, Mr. Chairman, but I would simply like to point out that Mr. Wright has noted that following tomorrow's ruling, he would be in a position to comment on some of the options being considered. That's why I think it would be useful for us to discuss them today. The ruling by the World Court will have a major impact on Canada's future decisions.

• 1615

Therefore, I'm seeking the unanimous consent of the committee to agree to a briefing session to be held on Thursday, from 3:15 p.m. to 4 p.m. to discuss the judgement scheduled to be rendered by the International Court of Justice on June 2 in the case of Yugoslavia vs. Canada. I think such a briefing is urgently needed.

[English]

The Co-Chairman (Mr. Pat O'Brien): Thank you, Mr. Laurin.

You have heard the request. Is there unanimous consent?

Some hon. members: No.

The Co-Chairman (Mr. Pat O'Brien): There is not unanimous consent. I don't hear unanimous consent, Mr. Laurin. Thank you.

Before we go to the briefing, I want to refresh colleagues' memories and tell others who weren't here last week that in Mr. Graham's absence to this troubled spot in the world, I conferred with his staff and the members of the defence committee and a good number of the foreign affairs committee and found that a good number cannot or will not be in Ottawa on Thursday. Therefore, as chair of the defence committee, along with Mr. Graham, through his staff, I announced that the normal Thursday briefing would not be held.

At the request of Mr. Bachand, we've reviewed that decision. I've conferred with Mr. Graham. I've double-checked with my colleagues on defence, as has he, and since there will be very few members available on Thursday, there would be no point to a briefing.

Having said that, I remind all members that the daily technical briefings continue at DND HQ, at which all members of Parliament are welcome, and in addition may ask their questions. You have that opportunity on Thursday, as you've had now for many weeks.

With that reminder, colleagues, I'll turn this over to Mr. Graham and our other colleagues. Mr. Graham headed up a delegation to Macedonia. Would you like to—

[Translation]

Mr. André Bachand: I asked to speak, Mr. Chairman, but you did not recognize me.

[English]

I asked to speak prior to the witnesses—

The Co-Chairman (Mr. Pat O'Brien): You asked to speak when, Mr. Bachand?

Mr. André Bachand: After Mr. Laurin spoke.

The Co-Chairman (Mr. Pat O'Brien): Oh, I didn't see your hand. If you put your hand up nice and high, I'll guarantee you, Mr. Bachand, I will never deny you a chance to speak. But I did not see you, sir. Would you like to speak on the procedural matter?

[Translation]

Mr. André Bachand: Mr. Chairman, I find it absolutely ridiculous for us to cancel a briefing because of provincial elections in Ontario, at a time when Canada is at war. There's a great deal more I could say on the subject. Canada won't halt the bombing of Yugoslavia just because some members will be absent so that they can get out the vote on election day. This is unacceptable. I would have liked us to discuss this issue openly, but you've nixed that idea. Neither you nor Mr. Graham consulted me. You only consulted members of the government party. There's nothing we can do about it now, but I find it totally unacceptable.

[English]

The Co-Chairman (Mr. Pat O'Brien): I find that a very interesting comment coming from a Conservative member, Mr. Bachand, because one of the members of my committee who most insisted she could not be in attendance and cited an election—not in the province of Ontario—was Mrs. Wayne. You may wish to take up your complaint with Mrs. Wayne. But as far as I'm concerned, Mr. Bachand, there's not enough attendance indicated, and quite frankly—

Mr. André Bachand: But I—

The Co-Chairman (Mr. Pat O'Brien): It's my turn now, Mr. Bachand. Quite frankly, I think your comment is simply inappropriate and out of line. The first person who asked me to change the meeting was Mrs. Wayne, and she does not reside in the province of Ontario.

Mr. Graham, would you like to begin, sir?

Mr. Bill Graham, M.P. (Toronto-Centre—Rosedale, Lib.): Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.

I'm pleased to report to you and our colleagues on the trip that Mr. Mills, Mr. Laurin, Mr. Martin, and I made to Macedonia last week. We had an opportunity to visit several camps where refugees are located. We went to the border with Kosovo. We met with Canadian and international NGOs in the camps and with international organizations, and we met with local political leaders.

I thought this afternoon I would present a sort of overview of who we saw and what we did. Then each one of the members of the delegation would present their personal views. Obviously, I will try to tell you what we saw and what we did and give you some of my personal impressions as well.

First, I'd like to thank the ministry for their idea in sending us. I think it was a good idea. When we were there we certainly learned that many members of Parliament and many members of Congress are going there regularly, and that it's a good thing for members of Parliament to be informed of these issues as well as government. I think it was an excellent initiative on behalf of the foreign affairs minister to decide to send four parliamentarians there.

• 1620

What did we see and what did we learn? First, as I said, we went to two refugee camps and we went to the border. What can we tell you about the refugee camps? If we were to tell you that we talked to individuals who'd suffered incredibly and had been expelled from their homes, you'd begin to understand a little bit. You see children playing there who used to play in their own fields, at their own homes, and they're now in a camp. One camp, for example, has no hot meals. They haven't seen a hot meal since they've been there. It's a transition camp, a transit camp, where there will sometimes be 18,000 or 20,000 people—sometimes there will be 10,000 people—in conditions that are marginal at best.

To try to understand that, multiplied a million times when you realize there are a million refugees in this position, it seems to me to be well beyond what human imagination can understand and deal with. But this is what is happening there. We went up to the border and were able to stand at the border and see 5,000 anguished people waiting to try to come across the border, all comprising a huge herd of people. It was just an extraordinary sight, and you were powerless to do anything about it.

So what we saw and learned was that there was an enormous humanitarian tragedy. We know that from television, but to be there and see it and feel it was something else. I believe it's fair to say it may well be that while we were there, some 30,000 people came across that border into Macedonia alone, in the three days we were in the country. That just overwhelms the capacity of these camps to deal with those numbers, and we have to look at that. Those refugees we talked to were determined to go home, but they will not go home unless they have security, and they are not going to have security if Mr. Milosovich is still in control of Kosovo.

There is a tremendous pressure to resolve this matter soon. It's more than simply a political pressure. It's a human pressure. In those camps, within a few weeks, the temperatures will be around 40 degrees centigrade. Think of some 20,000 people—children, women, men—squashed into that small space at 40 degrees centigrade, with very few facilities—health facilities, toilet facilities, showers, etc. Worse still, if this matter continues and drags through the month of August, we will have to seriously look at the fact that they will not be back in Kosovo this coming winter, and we will have to consider constructing winter accommodation in countries where the temperatures can go to 30 to 40 degrees centigrade below zero. This would be for a million people at a cost that would be astronomical, not only in monetary terms but in human terms.

Our NGOs are doing heroic work there. We saw MSF; we saw other Canadian NGOs. We met our officials from the immigration department who were there and who had put the final touches on the 5,100 refugees who have come to Canada. We are the first country to have lived up to our obligation to take the number of refugees we took, and the politicians we met were grateful for that.

We also had the opportunity to meet with the UNHCR, for whom there was quite a bit of criticism at the beginning about the way in which they ran the system. I think we would agree, as a result of our conversations with them, that they have a much better control of the situation than they did at the beginning, but there certainly were huge human problems in running the camps at the beginning, and it still is a very confused organizational structure. The UNHCR is the titular head of these organizations, but different camps are run by different organizations. Then, within the camps, there are all sorts of different organizations from different nationalities that must be coordinated. So it's a sort of Tower of Babel problem of organization.

We met with the World Food Programme, which is delivering food to people, and we heard from them the problem of how much food they buy locally, because the local authorities would like them to purchase as much food as they can locally since that's important for an economy that's been totally devastated. I'll come back to that later.

We met with the Red Cross.

The financial requirements of these organizations are that they are only about 70% funded to the end of June. There is need for more money from the international community to fund the international obligations of those things that are there to just keep people alive and feed them properly.

We then met with political groups. In the evening we had dinner with Kosovar politicians, and I must say that whatever you may hear, they approve of the conduct of what NATO is doing. They believe this is the only way in which they are going to go back into their homes. But their description of the loss of civil society... I mean, it was tragic to talk to people who had backgrounds just like ours. They'd done the same sorts of things we do. They were members of Parliament. One of them was an anthropologist and she'd written plays; another was a chemical engineer. They'd had ordinary lives. They'd been in the political process. Then, suddenly, their civil society was completely shut down by Mr. Milosevic. They were originally driven out of their professions; they were not allowed to practice their professions. The plays she wrote were shut down. Gradually, civil society was shut down, and ultimately the total consequences were that they were driven completely out of the country. All this since 1989.

• 1625

We met with Macedonian politicians. We met with the Speaker of the House. We met with the health committee, the economic committee, the foreign affairs committee, the deputy foreign minister.

What points would I leave you with as a result of those meetings? The first point is the total devastation of the economy of the country of Macedonia. I don't know how... I could give you an analogy. Members, imagine that Canada—you know how close we are to the United States economy—was shut off from the United States today, as Macedonia has been shut off from Serbia, that major economy that was beside them and upon which they were totally dependent because of the previous way in which Yugoslavia operated. Assume that we were shut off from the United States and at the same time we had three million refugees arrive in the country—that is about in proportion to what they're having to deal with. Can you imagine what would happen to our health care services, our ability to cope, our social services?

They are living through an absolutely extraordinary period. It was a country that had a budget of about $600 million U.S. a year. I'd say $1 billion Canadian—small economy, small budget. Well, the refugees alone cost them more than $1 billion Canadian a year. So the economic adjustments are phenomenal. We were told by some politicians there that there's some social tension because there are some Macedonians who resent the arrival of the Kosovo refugees. In fact, because of their own socio-economic position, where they have lost the chance of having welfare, have no social security and no health care, there are some who are looking at some of the camps and saying those people are getting fed and getting health care in the camps. So you can appreciate the social tensions within the country. There's an economic tension that is extraordinary.

Politically, it was clear from all of them who spoke to us that they would like to join NATO, they would like to join the EU, but they also don't want to offend Serbia, which is their closest neighbour, their largest market, and through which they used to send all their goods into Europe and deal with. They are in a very, very difficult position, and they impressed upon us their concern that maybe some countries were not living up to the financial promises that have been made to them.

My own personal conclusions would be that... Mr. Bachand's point, I think, was very good. In the short term this war must be ended soon by whatever means.

In the long term we are going to need a Marshall Plan for the Balkans that will have to include Serbia. We're going to have to rebuild; we're going to have to spend more money rebuilding than we did on the bombs we've been dropping on people. I think it's going to be first to rebuild Kosovo but then rebuild the whole region.

I was very pleased to hear Mr. Wright talk about the stability pact, because there's no doubt about it, we have to be thinking now about the long-term economic stability in the area. Otherwise, we'll just create a new tinderbox and we will not escape from this vicious circle we're in.

I don't know how many of you had the opportunity to see the National Post on the weekend. It had a section on Kosovo in it that contained a lot of very interesting information. Just coming back and reading it over the weekend, I reflected on the tremendously difficult issues we had to look at and what we're trying to wrestle with around this table amongst ourselves and when we were there.

I'd just like to read to you the concluding paragraph of Mr. Michael Ignatieff's article of this weekend. I think it sums up, for me, something of where we are:

Kosovo is more than a test of military resolve. It has become a trial by fire of everything we believe. We talk about human rights. What are we prepared to do to defend them? We talk about a right of humanitarian intervention. Is this nothing more than words? We talk about “one world”. Do we suppose that there is such a thing when an entire nation is deported before our eyes and we do not stop it? We have reached one of those occasions when we cannot split the difference. We are in the middle of the dark wood and we must keep on walking to the end of the road.

Thank you very much.

The Co-Chairman (Mr. Pat O'Brien): Thank you, Mr. Graham.

Did the other members of the delegation wish to make some additional comments before we go to questions? Mr. Mills.

• 1630

Mr. Bob Mills, M.P. (Red Deer, Ref.): Sure.

We were asked to just make a few comments, and I won't repeat what Mr. Graham has said. I think all of us were deeply touched by what we saw, and certainly it will affect our thinking far into the future.

I should also tell you that I had the rare opportunity before this trip of going to New York for a day's briefing, and then to Washington for a briefing from the State Department and the Pentagon. They presented a very chilling American approach to this solution. Then we went to Moscow for four days, where we met with the foreign affairs minister, a number of committee members, a number of Duma members, and the Speaker of the House, and we heard how unhappy they were with NATO and the unipolar world that they saw being developed around NATO. Then we went from there to Macedonia.

So in a 10-day period I had an opportunity to see all sides, and then actually be on the ground in Macedonia. I consider that a great advantage to getting a full picture of what's happening.

I'll start with Macedonia, the crisis there. Certainly if 70% of your trade was with Yugoslavia, you know your problems. Then if 30% went to the European Union, and you've lost your trucking routes... So you know the problem you have. They have 40% unemployment, a fragile government, and a real distrust of the Albanian minority, which was already there at 27% of the population.

That all leads to 250,000 Albanians coming in, which is a real concern in terms of destabilization. I think, going even further, if that destabilization did happen and it became the next Kosovo, I certainly got the feeling that Albania would then be drawn in, Greece would be drawn in, and the potential for a great many other expansions of this conflict would be there.

I think it's fair to say as well that they want the refugees out of there as fast as possible. They've agreed to keeping them there, but they don't want them there permanently. I think the solution needs to be found very soon.

I'll talk about the refugees themselves. I heard about how they've been loaded into trains from deep into Kosovo and then brought by train to the border and then thrown off that train. We saw them, 10,000 of them, lined up and having to come across a no-man's zone carrying little plastic bags with all of their possessions. I heard that a lady gave birth to a baby in the mud in that no-man's zone, and the baby died. I talked to the guy who owned the shoe store and he told me that he was forced out of his shoe store with no shoes on, he and his wife, and forced on to a train and then across that border. A girl called me over to see her baby, and when that baby was unwrapped, I saw it was totally white and motionless. I asked, is it alive? As far as I could see it wasn't, but she said it was, and asked me to please help her get some milk for her baby. And of course, I was frantically asking, where is someone who can help that person?

Certainly, I think, all of us could feel that emotion and realize that nobody should be allowed to treat other people that way. No one should ever be allowed. And to imagine that this is 1999, going into the 21st century. We started the century off this way. How can we be ending it this way?

I think of the total hopelessness of all that, and we can't forget it. I think Mr. Wright said it well when he said we cannot become numb to those kinds of people.

I'm a great picture taker. I took 14 rolls of slides in the camp and I drove these guys crazy with my camera. But they said, take our picture, because we want you to tell our story. I do it through pictures and find that that's a good way to do it.

Finally, I think today, hopefully, there is a breakthrough. I really have great hopes, having listened to Mr. Chernomyrdin and the foreign affairs minister in Moscow. I have great hopes that what's going to happen tomorrow morning in Belgrade will be a positive thing, and you will see a ceasefire and some real movement.

• 1635

So I think we should all be, I guess, giving our prayers—and I'm not a religious person—to Mr. Ahtisaari and Mr. Chernomyrdin tomorrow when they meet with Milosevic. Hopefully that will be the end, or the beginning, for these people getting back to normal.

The Co-Chairman (Mr. Pat O'Brien): Thank you, Mr. Mills.

[Translation]

Mr. Laurin.

Mr. René Laurin, M.P. (Joliette, BQ): I'll try not to repeat what my colleagues said because they have given a very good description or overview of the situation. I would just like to say something about the emotional state of the people we encountered. I didn't hear any of the refugees in the camp complaining. I didn't hear anyone make any threats or talk about revenge. They no longer seem capable of complaining. I even have to wonder if they were still able to shed tears.

We're talking about exhausted, defeated people. All of their hopes and dreams have been destroyed. All they can do is sit around and wait. They wait for food, for clean drinking water, for the opportunity to wash themselves. They wait for news of a son lost in the camp or of a brother or spouse in some other camp. All they can do is wait.

They are not resigned to their fate, but they seem to be suffering, and suffering with dignity. I didn't see any signs of outright rebellion. All I saw were defeated people with traces of hope remaining. When newcomers arrived in the refugee camps, they would ask if there was any news. They wondered if our presence gave them cause for new hope. When we explained why we were there, they would go back to their daily routine.

Conditions in the camp weren't that bad. No one was living in squalor. Obviously, it doesn't compare with the comforts of home, but they have food, conditions are good, and their health and general hygiene needs are attended to.

My colleague Bob Mills mentioned economic circumstances. Concerns about the economy were expressed by the politicians we met, not by the refugees. Politicians seemed far more concerned about their country's economic situation then about the fate of the refugees. We can understand why they are concerned, because the country's economy is on the verge of collapse. In Macedonia, unemployment has now reached 40 per cent. Refugees, who accounted for 13 per cent of the country's population last year, now make up over 30 per cent of the population. Obviously, these are reasons for the country's leadership to be concerned.

Arrangements have been made to ensure that refugee children are educated. UNICEF has dispatched several teachers to the camps, but what will happen when classes resume in the fall? If the children remain in the refugee camps, they won't be able to attend classes. The schools in Macedonia are not equipped to take in a massive influx of new students. There aren't enough schools or teachers to handle the overflow.

The country is counting a great deal on international assistance. Many promises have been made. Some countries, like Canada, have already kept their word. Canada was praised for its actions, but other countries are dragging their heels and haven't yet sent all of the money pledged. We were told that if all of the promises were kept, all commitments could be met.

Officials shared their hopes with us. They hope that countries will take in even more refugees and increase their financial support and that G-8 countries in particular will agree to assist Macedonia's economy as well as the economies of other neighboring countries. They realize full well that the Serbs will now view them as enemies and most likely will stop doing business with the people of Macedonia for several generations to come. Trade with Serbia accounted for 30 per cent of all trade with Yugoslavia. They have pretty much given up on any future trade. They hope to refocus their economic activity on trade with G-7 or G-8 countries.

• 1640

That's all I wanted to say. I would be happy to answer your questions.

The Joint Chairman (Mr. Pat O'Brien): Thank you, Mr. Laurin.

[English]

Mr. Martin, did you have some comments as well?

Mr. Pat Martin (Winnipeg Centre, NDP): Yes, thank you, Mr. Chair. I'll be very brief. I'd just like to thank the committee for the opportunity to be able to witness first-hand the refugee and humanitarian crisis over there, and Canada's role, of course, in providing humanitarian relief.

I'd like to recognize Bill as the leader of our delegation. He did a wonderful job representing us in terms of protocol and meeting the Macedonian dignitaries. I thought that aspect of it went very well.

Bill's done a very thorough job of outlining most of the details, so I won't repeat that, other than to say there was a lull, I believe, in the days leading up to our arrival at the border crossing. There were few people actually crossing, for instance, when Svend was there a couple of days earlier. But when we arrived it actually coincided with a huge influx—numbers of 5,000 or 8,000 people at the border on the day we arrived.

The relief workers and the NGOs we spoke to indicated that this seemed to indicate some escalation in the level of clearing or forced deportation in the area immediately around the border. They also pointed to an escalation in the level of violence that coincided with the deportations. We spoke to some who felt that with regard to the deportations, while a couple of weeks earlier you might be thrown out of your home, now you'd be thrown out of your home and beaten, possibly having a sexual assault take place. This huge influx almost indicated that there was sort of a rush or hurried atmosphere to what they may sense as the final days, trying to get as much done as humanly possible.

We were very heartened by the Canadian NGOs we met and the amount of work being done by these very dedicated people.

All the issues that were raised with us seemed to fit into three main categories: the actual camps, which are bursting at the seams, as people said; the condition and the safety of those ethnic Albanians who are still trapped within Kosovar, as many as 400,000 or 500,000 who haven't crossed the border; and the social and economic stress and pressure on the neighbouring countries like Macedonia, as was outlined, with the loss of trade, the loss of their economy, etc., which could in fact lead to social unrest, which, as Mr. Mills says, could spread throughout the whole of the Balkans and we'd be faced with similar situations for many years to come.

Having said that, it was a real honour to be a part of this delegation and I appreciated the opportunity. Thank you.

The Co-Chairman (Mr. Pat O'Brien): Thank you, Mr. Martin.

I think I can speak for all members here and all members of the House in thanking you, Mr. Graham, and your colleagues for taking the time, the effort, and indeed the risk to go to Macedonia and to experience what you did. I'm not sure I would have wanted to experience it, but it's important that we have Canadian members who do. I think your very eloquent testimony about that here at this committee certainly brings it home for me even more graphically than it already has been brought home. So thank you for those comments.

I want to go now to questions from members, indicating first, though, that we have to finish at 5 p.m. sharp. A number of colleagues have other commitments before the vote. I have a long list, so I'm going to ask members to prioritize. Please pick your first question, ask it briefly, and we'll get the response. We'll try to get through everyone, and if we have more time we'll just continue the questions. We'll start with Mrs. Finestone. We just have 15 minutes, as I'm trying to spread the time around.

Mrs. Sheila Finestone: Thank you very much.

I just want to say thank you. I'm still listening to what you had to say.

The Co-Chairman (Mr. Pat O'Brien): I'm sorry, I thought you had your hand up for a question.

Mr. Reed.

Mr. Julian Reed (Halton, Lib.): Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Did you get any sense when you were there talking to the refugees about what the prospect may be for healing this when it's all over, when you have this accelerated animosity that was built on ethnic nationalism, if you like, which precipitated this whole thing? Do you get any sense of what it's going to be like for the refugees when they return to their homeland and how they're going to get along with their neighbours?

• 1645

Mr. Bill Graham: That's going to be the huge problem, of course. There's a sense of enormous mistrust. I can't say we got that from the members we talked to in the camps, because we didn't have an opportunity to have long conversations with people. We met children; we met people. But certainly in talking to the political figures we met and at the dinner we had with the political figures, they clearly indicated there's a mistrust in terms of any administration that's put in place. It's going to have to be one that guarantees personal security, and that's going to need NATO forces or United Nations forces there to do it. So that level of mistrust will take a long time to go away.

Look at what we're experiencing in Bosnia-Herzegovina at this time. It's not just trying to get people to move back; it's a generation's operation, and as some people have pointed out, in this area these generations have been doing this every other generation for a long time.

Mr. Bob Mills: The Albanian situation has largely existed about 500 or 600 years in the area, and there is hatred. It's fair to say it's hatred.

I think I got the best when I was in Bosnia. I went to the high schools and talked to the people there, and so on, on the ground for nine days and really got the feeling of how they're captive of their history. They hate from another generation, and so you need the UN force or the NATO force there to keep them apart so that maybe—maybe—if you could build enough infrastructure, schooling, education, you could get over that. But it's a long-term project. It's not going to happen just because you're there.

The Co-Chairman (Mr. Pat O'Brien): Madame Guay.

[Translation]

Ms. Monique Guay (Laurentides, BQ): Thank you for your comments and for your excellent status report. My question is for all of the members.

You witnessed the situation firsthand. You saw the tents and the refugee camps. Winter will soon be on its way. It will arrive quickly and there won't be enough time to rebuild everything. Even if an agreement were reached today with Milosevic, it would be impossible to rebuild in time. Have any contingency plans been made? It's impossible to heat tents. What's going to happen? What plans have been made? Have you had discussions with the people on site?

Mr. Bill Graham: Officials with the UN commission are the ones responsible for this rebuilding effort. For the moment, they maintain that if the refugees are allowed to return home before August, they will do everything possible to ensure that homes are rebuilt in their part of the province. However, if they can't go home until later, a number of winter shelters will have to be built. As you said, refugees cannot withstand harsh winter conditions while living in tents. Some initial planning is underway. Concrete plans are not yet in place, but people have at least recognized that they need to do some planning. They told us that they would be holding a conference shortly to review this whole issue.

Mr. René Laurin: That's right. They told us that with the existing infrastructure, they could shelter approximately 60,000 refugees during the winter. They told us that they would use all of the available buildings to house these people. They are also appealing to other countries to increase the number of refugees they are prepared to take in.

The Joint Chairman (Mr. Pat O'Brien): Thank you.

Mr. Bertrand.

Mr. Robert Bertrand (Pontiac—Gatineau—Labelle, Lib.): I would like to thank you for your very interesting overview of the situation.

My question is for Mr. Laurin. Usually, you're the one asking me questions. You stated that none of the refugees you saw were complaining, that they were defeated people waiting and living in dignified silence. Were the refugees that you encountered still supportive of NATO strikes? Did any of them blame NATO for making them refugees, or were most of them fairly supportive of NATO's actions to date?

• 1650

Mr. René Laurin: We only spent half a day in the refugee camps. For a day and a half, we met with representatives of government and international agencies. I didn't hear directly from the refugees, but some of the people accompanying us stated that the Macedonians disagreed with NATO actions. The politicians, on the other hand, expressed support for NATO strikes, but hoped that these weren't inflicting too much damage on the Serbs, since the Serbs were their neighbors and they would have to continue living side-by-side with them. On the one hand, they expressed support for NATO strikes, while on the other hand, they didn't want the strikes be too effective because this might alienate the Serbs and make them view the Macedonians as their enemies. Once the conflict is over, there'll still be a Kosovo, a Serbia and a Macedonia. Regardless of what happens, these people will one day have to live as neighbors. It won't be easy. That's why they seem to be playing both ends against the middle.

I didn't receive any first-hand reports from the refugees themselves. However, I did hear from other persons living in Macedonia.

[English]

The Co-Chairman (Mr. Pat O'Brien): Mr. Graham commented about that earlier on. Did you want to add to that, Mr. Graham?

[Translation]

Mr. Bill Graham: I totally agree with Mr. Laurin. The air strikes are causing the Macedonians much grief, but I got the impression from the handful of refugees and Kosovar representatives that we met with that they accepted NATO's policy and the air strikes because they were the only guarantee they had that one day they might be able to return to their homeland.

If we call a halt to the air strikes and go home, and if we tell ourselves that we cannot force Milosevic to let the Kosovars return to their homeland, then all hope will be lost. A million persons will remain in the refugee camps for generations, much like the fate that befell the Palestinians. We can't let that happen.

The Joint Chairman (Mr. Pat O'Brien): Thank you, Sir.

Mr. René Laurin: They oppose Milosevic and support NATO, but above all, they are hoping for a diplomatic resolution to the conflict. They support NATO, but are opposed to the air strikes as well as to the Milosevic regime.

The Joint Chairman (Mr. pat O'Brien): Thank you very much.

[English]

Mr. Pratt.

Mr. David Pratt (Nepean—Carleton, Lib.): Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I'd like to share the sentiments of some of the other members of this committee in thanking the members for providing this briefing. I think it's very important for us to hear about your trip and your experiences. I had a similar experience not too long ago in terms of visiting refugee camps in Guinea, north of Sierra Leone. You certainly come away from those experiences thinking more and more about the big picture and what's happening in the world and the hopefully meaningful contribution Canada can make in terms of dealing with some of these crises. Of course, the situation in Kosovo is only one crisis that's taking place in the world today as far as refugees are concerned.

I don't mean to be cute with this question, but I would be interested in hearing the comments of all of the members before us as far as their big picture impressions as to what Canada can do. But I'm particularly interested in hearing Mr. Mills' comments with regard to the amount of money we're putting into official development assistance and relief operations, and from Mr. Martin as well in terms of the amount of money we are putting, and perhaps could or should put, into our military spending. Do you have any thoughts, gentlemen?

The Co-Chairman (Mr. Pat O'Brien): In answering that, just try to allow time for Ms. Augustine's question. We have to finish at 5 p.m., and I think Ms. Augustine has the last question. So perhaps we can answer Mr. Pratt, and then we'll go to Ms. Augustine.

Mr. Bob Mills: I think that's an important point. The amount of $71 million has been pledged up till the end of June for the food aid—$32 million from the U.S., $10 million from Japan, and then a whole page of other countries. Our share is obviously relatively small, but based on our population and so on it's probably in the ballpark. I think you have to help these people, and I think that's important.

• 1655

As far as the military question is concerned, from the terrain we saw there, I would really have a lot of questions to be sure that our troops are ready if they were put in a combat role in a front-line situation. I'd really want to know that they were equipped for what they were going into, because that's rough terrain and it would be very difficult.

I think most Canadians would support what we're doing at this point. In the big picture, I think Canada, like Finland, has a really important role to play as a negotiator for a diplomatic settlement, which would be far preferable to a military settlement.

The Co-Chairman (Mr. Pat O'Brien): Does anyone else wish to comment? Mr. Martin.

Mr. Pat Martin, M.P. (Winnipeg-Centre, NDP): If I can add just one thought, in this modern era of the globalization of capital, somehow there has to be a globalization of humanitarian standards as well and a globalization of the rule of law. If we're going to have that, somebody has to be the police that are going to enforce it. I'm not sure that should be NATO, frankly. I'm not sure any of our international institutions are actually capable of doing what needs to be done in all the hot spots around the world. If we are going to look at the global village, then we have to have a global police force, and I don't think any of our international institutions are capable of performing that role.

In terms of overall development aid, you know where Canada stands. We're down at 0.25% when we should be at 0.7%, and Norway and Great Britain are up at 1.2%. So certainly our position is that we aren't doing enough globally to pull our weight as one of the richest and most powerful civilizations in the world.

The Co-Chairman (Mr. Pat O'Brien): Thank you.

Mrs. Augustine, the last question goes to you.

Ms. Jean Augustine (Etobicoke—Lakeshore, Lib.): Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I also want to add my compliments to the gentlemen for going into what was a risky situation at the time and still is.

I want to ask two very brief questions. One has to do with what we hear in the media around the fact that there are very few men who have joined families. Did you see lots of family units, that is, father, mother, and their children? Did you see lots of disabled people? Were they able to make it across? Were there people who might be on medication and other things that might present a difficulty in a camp situation?

My second question has to do with groups such as CARE, World Vision, Doctors Without Borders, and all of those groups my constituents and others would be giving financial donations to in terms of whether those moneys are reaching people there. Did you see any of those groups on the ground while you were there?

Mr. Bill Graham: We did see quite a few Canadian NGOs. Actually, we didn't see World Vision. One of the problems is that different ones are located in different camps. As was pointed out, we went to Stenkovac, and Blace, I think, was another, so our chances of seeing a lot of Canadian NGOs were limited. But we did have an opportunity to talk to various Canadian NGOs at dinner one night. They are very active, and the money is getting through. I don't think there's any doubt about that. That is good.

On your first question, Jean, I think there's a lot of evidence of the lack of family units, but we did see young people and young men in the camps. I spoke to one young man, who must have been around 20 or so, and he said he had a brother in Toronto. So I got quite excited. I introduced him to the immigration officer and said, look, he qualifies for the program. It turned out that it wasn't really his brother. It was his uncle's cousin or something. Anyway, it was kind of an exciting moment. So there were some young people we met.

Mr. Bob Mills: If I can just butt in here, I think the sad part, Jean, is that when the men come across the border and ask where their family is, the answer is they might be here; they might be in Albania; they might be in any one of seven camps; or they might be in Canada, Australia, or Germany. That must have just a terrific impact on you. You've been in prison for a couple of months and now you're out, and no one knows where your family is. It's being worked on, but today they don't know where their family is.

The Co-Chairman (Mr. Pat O'Brien): This will be the last comment.

Mr. Bill Graham: A very interesting sort of modern technology thing that was rather fun to see in one of the camps was a thing called Telephones Without Borders. An organization actually was making mobile phones available to people for a few minutes. They would maybe phone a cousin in Finland, Toronto, or Switzerland, and they'd say, we learned that your family is in another camp down the road, or, we've heard this. It was an extraordinary way of making use of global communications to solve this terrible problem.

The Co-Chairman (Mr. Pat O'Brien): We'll have a final comment from Monsieur Laurin.

• 1700

[Translation]

Mr. René Laurin: I observed a number of people waiting in line at a medical clinic run by Doctors Without Borders. Women were waiting with their children, because generally, the children are the ones in need of medical attention. I was told that people had to wait no more than 30 minutes for treatment. I congratulated the clinic workers and told them that people had to wait longer than that to see a doctor in Canada. Yet, Canadians don't live in refugees camps.

I would like to commend these international agencies for the work they are doing in the region. The level of care they are providing is excellent.

[English]

The Co-Chairman (Mr. Pat O'Brien): Thank you very much.

These briefings are scheduled to reconvene on Tuesday, June 8, 1999, at 3.15 p.m.

The meeting is adjourned.