HIGHLIGHTS OF PRESS CONFERENCE BY CO-CHAIRS OF GENEVA DISCUSSIONS

The three Co-Chairs of the Geneva International Discussions, Pierre Morel, Special Representative of the European Union, Antti Turunen, Special Representative of the United Nations Secretary-General for Georgia and Bolat Nurgaliev, Special Envoy of the Chairperson-in-Office of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) updated the press this afternoon on the outcome of the tenth round of the Geneva Discussions, which was held over the last two days at the Palais des Nations in Geneva.

Mr. Morel, reading out the Chairperson’s joint press communiqué, said that the participants of the Geneva Discussions had met again in two Working Groups and had discussed security and stability issues and humanitarian matters. They had also agreed to meet again on 8 June 2010.

Working Group I had reviewed the overall security situation since the last round of Discussions. Against the background of a relatively calm and stable general situation, it had been noted that tensions continued to exist. It was also highlighted that provocative actions and rhetorics were not helpful for the ongoing efforts to stabilize the situation on the ground and should therefore be avoided, said Mr. Morel. In this respect, the Co-Chairs had emphasized the stabilizing role of the Incident Prevention and Response Mechanisms (IPRM) and all participants had agreed that these were essential instruments to address issues pertaining to stability and security on the ground. The Co-chairs together with all participants would take concrete steps to ensure the full functioning of the Mechanisms.

The participants had also touched upon the issue of missing persons and welcomed the ongoing contribution by the Council of Europe Commissioner for Human Rights. They had also reviewed the issue of release of all detainees and had agreed that a solution leading to the release of all detainees would be a further development, said Mr. Morel.

The participants have also continued their discussion on different draft proposals on the non-use of force and international security arrangements. The Co-Chairs would pursue their work to facilitate exchange of information on this subject, said Mr. Morel. They had also agreed on the need to further advance on confidence-building measures, in particular on voluntary exchange of information on sensitive activities.

Turning to the activities of Working Group II, on humanitarian issues, Mr. Morel said that participants had made further progress in the negotiation of the draft Agreed Undertakings. This time they had focused on go-and-see visits of displaced persons and on human rights observation and promotion in affected areas. The participants had taken part in two information sessions covering technical aspects of the registration, sampling and profiling of affected populations, as well as the organization of go-and-see visits to the places of former habitual residence. The Co- Moderators would explore ways how lessons learned from other conflicts areas could be used to further the objectives of the Working Group. Information sessions on human rights observation and promotion, utilities and property rights would also be organized at next round of the Geneva Discussions.

Assessing this tenth round of discussions, Mr. Morel said that by looking objectively at the situation, one could see that they were now carrying in-depth discussions. They were now moving into a stage in which they were addressing much more specific topics with specific proposals.

Mr. Morel also noted that while the IPRM in Abkhazia was regularly meeting under the chairmanship of the United Nations, the South Ossetian IPRM had not met for several months now. However, the framework of the South Ossetian IPRM was still existent and hotlines were functioning. Steps towards the full re-establishment of this mechanism would be taken.
Mr. Turunen said that the Co-Chairs were facing a challenging task as the whole process had to happen under the rule of consensus. They had to take into consideration all the views of all of the participants. It was sometimes difficult to identify in which areas they could move forward but there was no other option available than this one in order to build trust and confidence.

The United Nations supported the continuation of the Discussions, said Mr. Turunen and one good example of their outcome was the Abkhazian IPRM. Thanks to the Geneva Discussions they had also been able to address certain concrete issues and concerns of the people on the ground. It was a good basis on which to build further trust and confidence. Concerted efforts by all participants were now needed in order to make compromises and further progress.

Mr. Nurgaliev said that the tenth round of the Geneva Discussions could be described as another important step in easing the tension in the region. While they had not been able to reach consensus on all issues, there was no other alternative to the Discussions. Provocative actions and rhetorics were of concern. Further work should be undertaken to further the activities of the Mechanisms as lack of dialogue on the ground could create further tensions. It was regrettable that the South Ossetian IPRM was not functional and the OSCE called for its full resumption.

Questions & Answers

Answering to a question asked by a journalist, Mr. Morel said that, on the question of detentions, a person accidentally crossing the line of separation, which was not a clearly defined line, should be dealt with administratively and that there should be no trials and no detentions in this connection.

Turning to the question on whether the resolution of the issues being discussed in the Geneva Discussions had gained any urgency after the bombings of the Moscow subway, Mr. Nurgaliev said that all participants had expressed their condolences to the Russian delegation at the beginning of the Discussions yesterday. This had been the expression of the solidarity of people who viewed the threat of terrorism as a challenge that had to be address together.

Another journalist asked whether the recent TV-programme aired by a Georgian TV channel depicting the false invasion of Russian troops into Georgia and the influence of this programme on the stability in the region had also been addressed during the discussions. Mr. Morel said that this had been in fact touched upon during the discussions. As they had highlighted it in the communiqué, provocative actions and rhetorics were not helpful for the ongoing efforts to stabilize the situation on the ground and should therefore be avoided. All participants had agreed on this.

Further, the monitoring mission of the European Union in Georgia had allowed to immediately puncture the “balloon of fear and uncertainty” during the airing of the programme, as the alleged events had been immediately countered by field monitoring of the European Union Mission, said Mr. Morel.