HIGHLIGHTS OF THE PRESS CONFERENCE BY THE CO-CHAIRS OF THE GENEVA INTERNATIONAL DISCUSSIONS AT THE END OF THE THIRTEENTH SESSION

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, this evening presented to the press the outcome of the thirteenth round of the Geneva Discussions that was held today at the Palais des Nations.

Reading from their joint press communiqué, Mr. Morel said the participants of the Geneva International Discussions completed today their thirteenth session and agreed to hold the next round in the same format on 16 December 2010. In Working Group I, dealing with security and stability, the participants reviewed developments on the ground since the last round. The overall situation was assessed as relatively calm, but fragile. The importance of fully functioning Incident Prevention and Response Mechanisms was acknowledged by the participants. The report on monitoring of investigations into cases of missing persons by the Council of Europe Commissioner for Human Rights, Thomas Hammarberg, received particular attention. The co-Chairs noted that this report completed a substantial work which started one year ago. The need for all involved participants to comply with all its recommendations was emphasized by the co-Chairs, as well as the need to pursue the work on detained persons. The co-Chairs registered the agreement on the resumption of the Ergneti/Dvani Incident Prevention and Response Mechanism by the end of the month.

Mr. Morel said the co-Chairs welcomed today’s announcement in the session of the imminent removal of the Russian checkpoint in Perevi as a positive development on the ground. The participants continued discussing the issue of non-use of force and international security arrangements by focusing on the sequential approach tabled by the co-Chairs during the previous round. Further consultations on this issue would be pursued ahead of the next round. Following an information session on Voluntary Exchange of Information and Facilitation of Communication, held on 13 October, the participants also discussed possible confidence-building measures, in the first instance by realizing the full potential of the Incident Prevention and Response Mechanisms.

Continuing to read out the joint press communiqué, Mr. Morel said the co-Chairs noted with regret the decision of some participants not to attend the Working Group II session dealing with humanitarian issues. Full contribution by all participants and resumption of the usual format of Working Group II was essential for confidence building and resolution of immediate humanitarian problems. In Working Group II, participants took part on 13 October in an information session on the technical aspects of property restitution and return, in which experience gained in other regions was shared by the invited expert. The co-Moderators would continue to explore how field experience and lessons learned could be used to further the understanding of the issues at stake and the concrete objectives of Working Group II. Participants in Working Group II heard a review of the humanitarian situation on the ground, in which the needs of the affected populations in the run-up to the winter were emphasized. As part of this review, an initiative was welcomed to launch a series of water projects proposed by the OSCE and financed by the European Union. The co-Moderators introduced their intentions regarding further work on the issues relating to displaced populations. They proposed to follow a gradual approach that would include establishing the factual situation of the affected populations, with the aim of starting as soon as possible concrete humanitarian activities to address the needs of the refugees, IDPs, displaced persons and other affected populations. The co-Moderators intended to resume in the next session discussions on the draft document previously tabled by them and discussed in the previous rounds.

Making addition comments, Mr. Morel said it had been possible to take a modest step forward in understanding the current situation and what might be needed to make progress. The participants of the Geneva Discussions were now entering into a better understanding of what they could achieve. The Co-Chairs had shown that they were ready to make progress regarding the non-use of force and overcoming obstacles. The discussions had allowed everybody to express their situation very clearly.

Mr. Morel went on to say that specific field events had been discussed today. The clearest of these events was the imminent removal of the Perevi checkpoint, which had become a fixation. The Co-Chairs welcomed the closure of that checkpoint.

The Geneva Discussions were in transition towards what was hoped would be an operational approach. However, some participants had chosen not to take part in the discussions of Working Group II, Mr. Morel said, adding that this had been one of the real problems encountered in today’s discussion.

Mr. Turunen said open and frank discussions had been held and encouraging signals had been seen. Mr. Turunen emphasized the link between the Geneva Discussions and the practical work that contributed to the security on the ground, saying the Incident Prevention and Response Mechanism had demonstrated its effectiveness in building a base for confidence and trust. Mr. Turunen further stressed the phased approach on the agreement of non-use of force. Progress in Geneva must be supported by concrete measures on the ground. The most important denominator was political will to enter into further dialogue and compromises. It was important that all participants were committed to this.

Mr. Nurgaliev said the Geneva Discussions had come into existence as concerted efforts to breach the gap which had widened after the tragic August 2008 events and since then the Discussions had proved to help all participants to express their views and concerns. They were on the final stages of agreeing on the technical side of the water projects initiated by the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe and financed by European Union, said Mr. Nurgaliev.

Questions & Answers

Asked whether more could be said about who did not attend the Working Group discussions and why, Mr. Morel said the aim was to work together despite fundamental differences, and that was what had jointly been done, with some results and modest progress. Because of a resolution on refugees that came up for discussion at the General Assembly some participants had not participated in the discussion of the Working Group that dealt with refugee issues. Nonetheless, participants would continue to work together despite fundamental differences.

Asked whether the decision on the checkpoint had been made today, Mr. Morel said things had not fallen in place at the last minutes. All of this had been done after careful considerations and the expectation had existed for around two years. It had not been the question of a give and take and there had been no bargaining, Mr. Morel underscored.