HIGHLIGHTS OF PRESS CONFERENCE BY CO-CHAIRS OF GENEVA DISCUSSIONS

The fourth round of Geneva discussions were held at the Palais des Nations on 17 and 18 February 2009. At the end of the session the three Co-Chairs of the discussions: Pierre Morel, the Special Representative of the European Union for the crisis in Georgia; Johan Verbeke, Special Representative of the Secretary-General and Head of the United Nations Observer Mission in Georgia; and Charalampos Christopoulos, Special Envoy of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe and Chairperson-In-Office, spoke to journalists.

Pierre Morel, the Special Representative of the European Union for the crisis in Georgia, said the participants to the Geneva discussions had just concluded their fourth working session. Once again, the two working groups met in parallel sessions to discuss issues of security and stability in the region in Working Group One and humanitarian issues in Working Group Two. He said he believed they could say that they spent nine or ten hours working in parallel in both groups. The Co-Chairpersons representing the three international institutions working on the ground and responsible for chairing the discussions had welcomed with great attention and interest Security Council resolution 1866.

Reading out the text of the press communiqué issued by the Co-Chairs on the work of Working Group One, Mr. Morel said “In the 17 and 18 February 2009 Geneva discussions, participants have discussed and have agreed by consensus on proposals for joint incident prevention and response mechanisms. The mechanisms envisaged are created in the interests of supporting peace, stability and security, and are required in order to prevent and, where necessary, respond to incidents that could cause suffering to civilian populations or risk deterioration of the situation. The aim of the mechanisms is to ensure a timely and adequate response to the security situation, including incidents and their investigation, security of vital installations and infrastructure, responding to criminal activities, ensuring effective delivery of humanitarian aid, and any other issues which could affect stability and security, with a particular focus on incident prevention and response. The mechanisms will allow for regular contacts between structures responsible for security and public order in areas of tension, and relevant international organizations. They will meet on a weekly basis, or more often as required. Inaugural sessions will be convened soon. As a follow-up to incidents, agreed joint visits may be conducted. The agreed proposals are an important step in helping to bring stability and security”.

On Working Group Two, which dealt with humanitarian issues, Mr. Morel said that the participants had welcomed various positive developments on the ground, including the resumption of gas deliveries to Tsinkhvali, thanks to the efforts that had been undertaken by the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe. No agreement had been reached yet on a proposal to get humanitarian assistance to the needy populations by simultaneous convoys using routes from the north and the south. Discussion on this subject would continue on a bilateral basis. Participants had agreed to focus their future efforts on the facilitation of the voluntary return of refugees and displaced persons.

Mr. Morel noted that there was a strong interdependence between the subjects being dealt with by the two groups. Participants agreed to focus efforts in the future to facilitate the voluntary return of refugees, displaced persons and other concerned individuals in security and with dignity. Security issues in this context were of extreme importance, relating to the reconstruction of networks and infrastructure, social and economic rehabilitation in the areas of return, also issues relating to property and housing rights and legal obstacles to durable returns, in this context, they were talking about documentation, registration or identification requirements. All of this covered the organization of voluntary returns as well as visits in both directions. The question of access to water would also be discussed and they expected that it would become a very important issue in the next few weeks.

To conclude, Mr. Morel said that the participants agreed to meet once again during the spring and the date would be identified at a later stage. This related to the heavy calendar of meetings at the Palais des Nations.

In personal comments, Mr. Morel said that the Geneva discussions were moving ahead, and the fourth session was especially productive. They now had the first documents resulting from the Geneva discussions in the proposals for joint incident prevention and response mechanisms. They should neither exaggerate nor minimize the importance of this document, it was the first document resulting from the Geneva discussions and it dealt with the urgent issues of today. Now it was the intention of all concerned to continue this work and he looked forward to Geneva Five. They would be continuing their work between the sessions through field visits and various consultations. He could conclude by saying that they were quite satisfied with the results.

Johan Verbeke, Special Representative of the Secretary General and Head of the United Nations Observer Mission in Georgia, said he shared the views expressed by Mr. Morel and the summary which he had provided. Today, they had specific results from the Geneva discussions. The Security Council had discussed the situation in Georgia last week and resolution 1866 specified the three main elements: intensification of the work in the Geneva discussions, the need to achieve progress and he would report on this progress to the Security Council, and the need to work towards practical results. Today, he could say that their contract with New York had been respected. The spirit of New York had been hovering over the Geneva discussions, This source of motivation had contributed to today’s results. They had worked in a serious manner on questions on the agenda and this had contributed to the results that they were presenting today. The agreement was reached unanimously, as mentioned in the press communiqué. This was a very significant step, he did not want to exaggerate, but it was a very significant step, taking into account the political context which was a very difficult one. Participants in the discussions had shown the will to overcome this difficult climate and work on the documents on the table. The negotiations, which were difficult, made it possible to make distinctions between two things. In their previous press conference, they talked about the need to make tangible results to make progress on the ground, and other political issues that they were not able to deal with, and this approach was guiding their work. It made the negotiations difficult but they had managed to make the distinctions and had been able to achieve agreement related to a mechanism and prevention and resolution of incidents. The next step was the implementation of the commitments made by the parties today. They would start this work at the end of this week to translate the specific facts on the ground, and the mechanism would start work in the very near future. This was the first element that he could report to the Security Council as requested. The Security Council should adopt a new resolution before 15 June.

Charalampos Christopoulos, Special Envoy of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) and Chairperson in Office, thanked Mr. Morel for presenting the common position of the Co-Chairs. He welcomed agreement on the security mechanisms. This was a vital step forward and the OSCE was ready to assist to make it work effectively. The participants had welcomed the work of the OSCE to resume the gas deliveries and recognized the role the OSCE could contribute to a solution of other humanitarian issues to the benefit of the populations concerned and to security and stability in the region.

Turning to a question asked by a journalist, on why today’s adopted document was named a “proposal”, Mr. Morel said that they had worked with this description all along and they had come to a consensus that way. What counted most was the content, which asked to have a double mechanism. One element was already in place, these were the weekly meetings. Another element was an emergency hotline for communications. All these elements had been defined and agreed upon in the Geneva discussions. The political framework was very clear. The text adopted today was an operational text containing an established element and another one that had to be further developed. The important part was the content, everyone had agreed to the mechanisms and they would be put in place in the next few days. As negotiations progressed, they preferred to focus on substance rather than on the vocabulary.

Asked about how the agreed upon mechanisms would work on the ground, and who would participate, Mr. Verbeke said the journalist had asked a practical question and here was the practical answer. Basically this was a mechanism providing for the possibility to concert with all those with a stake in the issue, concert with a view to prevent incidents in the future and concert with regard to incidents that occurred in the past. It was clear that in order for it to be effective, representatives of both sides would co-participate in the mechanism, that was the purpose and the heart of the matter, to concert, create a dialogue and discuss. The representatives of the international organizations present in Georgia would also be there to continue to play our role. They would come together on a weekly basis at a minimum. In addition, there would be a hot line, a communication channel, to address incidents. The crux of the whole mechanism was that once they had it, there would be a strong dissuasive force coming out of it. They expected incidents to go down.

Answering another question on the status of humanitarian assistance in the region, Mr. Morel said that Working Group Two, which had talked about access of humanitarian assistance, had not yet agreed on proposals. They would continue to discuss these matters and they hoped to settle this question. There was a lot of feedback between what Geneva was trying to do and the general framework confirmed by Security Council Resolution 1866. Questions linked to the aspect of the return of refugees, such as registrations, conditions of return and return in dignity would need to be tackled with in the next meeting and beyond the Geneva discussions.

Mr. Christopoulos said he wanted to reiterate that the OSCE was ready to contribute to the resolution of other questions, like water, both potable water and water for agriculture. The OSCE could be very useful in helping the parties reach agreement.