HIGHLIGHTS OF PRESS CONFERENCE BY THREE CO-CHAIRS OF GENEVA
INTERNATIONAL DISCUSSIONS

Pierre Morel, Special Representative of the European Union for the crisis in Georgia, Johan Verbeke, Special Representative of the Secretary-General for Georgia, and Charalampos Christopoulos, Special Envoy of the Chairman-in-Office at the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE), the three co-Chairs of the process known as the Geneva International Discussions, spoke to journalists after the conclusion of the sixth round of discussions, which were held today at the Palais des Nations in Geneva.

Mr. Morel, reading out a joint statement by the three Co-Chairs, said participants in the Geneva Discussions had just completed the sixth round. All the participants had met in two parallel working groups to discuss security and stability in the region and humanitarian matters. The discussions again took place in a constructive spirit.

In Working Group I, participants had discussed the joint incident prevention and response mechanisms, agreed during the Geneva Discussions in February 2009. Mr. Morel recalled that that was a twofold mechanism, noting that those mechanisms remained the best way for all sides to respond swiftly to security incidents on the ground, and represented important practical progress in helping to maintain security and stability. In that context, the co-Chairs welcomed the continued commitment of participants to the mechanisms. It was agreed that the first consultative meeting of the new mechanism would take place in Gali on 14 July 2009, a development which demonstrated flexibility and good will. Participants also agreed on the importance of resuming meetings for the existing mechanism as soon as possible.

With regard to the broader issue of security and stability, participants had also agreed on the importance of the principle of the non-use of force, exchanged views on possible ways to formalize arrangements and exchanged proposals between themselves. Humanitarian cases had also been discussed, Mr. Morel said.

Participants in Working Group II discussed substantive issues and agreed to move towards a comprehensive plan to address the multifaceted displacement issues, including adequate conditions for return, including security, confidence-building and human rights; issues related to the socio-economic rehabilitation of infrastructure and the provision of public services, including gas and electricity, to persons returning home and receiving communities; and a structure for registering displaced persons and refugees, documentation, and the restoration of property to enable the safe, voluntary and dignified return of the concerned population. There had also been an agreement to start immediately a joint assessment of the rehabilitation needs of the water supply system, both for potable and irrigation water.

Participants agreed to meet again on 17 September 2009.

Summing up in his own words, Mr. Morel said that, as usual, discussions at this sixth session had been difficult. However, they had had some very substantive discussions, and there was now an impetus in the Geneva process that had been confirmed at this sixth session. In particular, he highlighted the progress on the twofold settlement mechanism, with the agreement to meet in Gali, and the starting up of specific work with precise proposals for non-use of force and security arrangements. Finally, with regard to Working Group II, they had managed to move to an operational dimension. In the past, it had identified and reaffirmed principles relating to humanitarian issues, whereas, during this round, the Group had passed to an operational dimension, looking at conditions of return, a structure for registration, and water supply.

Mr. Verbeke said it was a good sign that the number of journalists attending the briefings by the co-Chairs of the International Geneva Discussions was diminishing. That meant that those meetings were now considered as "normal” “routine” meetings. That was what they should be. The fact that the dramatic edges of the meetings were disappearing was good news for them as they worked to help resolve outstanding issues.

Today, Mr. Verbeke felt that there had been a very concrete “deliverable”. The Abkhaz side – which had always been committed to the prevention mechanism – had indicated that they would now move to the implementation stage. Proof of that was that on 14 July they would meet in Gali, Abkhazia, for the first meeting under United Nations auspices. The other two points were the question of the non-use of force and that of international security regimes. In addition, they had agreed to follow up on those discussions at the next round. They had set the ground to work for the necessary basis for progressing step by step to that legitimate concern.

The question of international security regimes was not new. The feeling around the table was that the time for scoring points had passed and that now they should sit down as technicians to decide what a secure security regime meant. That had been a good discussion, away from hot political one-liners to technical issues, discussed on their proper merits, Mr. Verbeke felt.

Mr. Christopolous said this had indeed been a useful round of the Geneva Discussions, and the participants had taken a welcome, constructive approach. From the OSCE's perspective, the key elements of this sixth round were the continued commitment of all participants to the joint incident prevention and response mechanisms, and their agreement to start immediately a joint assessment of the rehabilitation needs of the water supply system. Second, the OSCE informed the participants about its efforts in the field of missing persons and detainees, and was pleased to announce that an informal meeting of contact persons from both sides under OSCE auspices had taken place on 22 June. That meeting had been constructive and the contact points had agreed to hold another meeting in the near future. Third, the OSCE had been able to report back on its efforts so far on putting together a joint needs assessment team to look at repair needs to guarantee water supplies. OSCE had identified experts on both sides for that assessment. In that respect, OSCE was satisfied that agreement had been reached to immediately start a joint assessment mission on water supply.

Finally, Mr. Christopolous highlighted that the Foreign Ministers of the 56 OSCE participating States had met last weekend on Greek island of Corfu and launched the Corfu Process, which aimed to tackle the new and existing security challenges in Europe and rebuild trust through a wide-ranging and inclusive dialogue. The ministers had suggested a number of priority areas, among them the resolution of regional conflicts.

The floor was then opened to questions from journalists.

Asked how the security mechanism would work without the two missions to the region, which had not had their mandates renewed, Mr. Morel responded the answer was simple. The mechanisms were a flexible practical system and the one already in existence involved an operational contribution from the European Union Mission and the OSCE. The OSCE presence had evolved over time, but was still under discussion in Vienna. So nothing had been ruled out for the future.

On the new mechanism, which was agreed by all the parties in February 2009, Mr. Morel noted that was still under discussion, but given the situation today the understanding was that the United Nations good offices would be fully used for the first meeting. Future arrangements would be made by the participants themselves. Despite changes that had occurred, then, they encountered no particular difficulties.