Athens, 18 March 2003

Dear Members,

Having recently returned from a visit to Bosnia and Herzegovina, I would like to share with you my impressions on the situation in that country with a particular view to current and future EU policy, including a possible military engagement. I will be travelling to Belgrade this week to continue my series of meetings with Balkan political leaders and experts on and in the region.

I was in Sarajevo when the Serbian Prime Minister, Zoran Djindjic, was assassinated. Some time ago, I had the opportunity of meeting him in Belgrade and was impressed by his determination to bring Serbia back into the group of democratic nations. I am sure you will agree that this senseless murder is a sad waste of political talent for a region in cruel need of visionary leaders capable of implementing difficult policies.

In Bosnia and Herzegovina there were talks at the Office of the High Representative, Lord Paddy Ashdown, with the Minister for Foreign Trade Relations of the Central Government, the Secretary General of the Military Committee and the Ambassadors of the EU member states to Sarajevo under the chairmanship of the Ambassador of Greece. A further meeting took place with the Chairman of the Helsinki Committee.

I also spent a full day with SFOR and had a long discussion with the SFOR Commander, US General William Ward.

The many discussions that took place during my visit confirmed my opinion that we should continue to closely monitor developments in this country. This is all the more necessary, now that the EU has its first police mission there and has initiated the process for a possible takeover of SFOR operations in 2004.

After almost seven years of implementation of the Dayton Accords we are now seeing progress on important issues such as the reestablishment of a secure environment, the return of refugees, a reduction of the armed forces and the reconstruction of homes and infrastructure. There is, however, a disappointing lack of progress in other fields.

The High Representative is now concentrating on justice, jobs and institutions, having realised that the initial focus on organising numerous elections in order to establish the basis for democracy may have led to a neglect of the abovementioned areas. Elections themselves do not necessarily generate transparency and democratic behaviour. The High Representative has also initiated Operation ‘Bulldozer’ with the aim of doing away with all the red tape in the economic sector which is preventing both local and foreign investors from helping to develop the country’s economy.

One positive conclusion is that cooperation between the various international organisations has improved considerably. However, many observers mentioned the fact that over recent years and before the eyes of the international community, intricate networks have been established between organised criminal groups and parts of the political establishment, while the lack of economic development and the low level and irregular payment of wages have paved the way for widespread corruption.

The more we do to create synergy between the different international organisations and the governing bodies of Bosnia and Herzegovina and to encourage all efforts to achieve accountability, the easier it will be to improve the situation as regards organised crime and corruption.

Given that, in principle, all the countries of former Yugoslavia will eventually become members of the EU, the EU has a specific and major responsibility to help solve the existing problems.

The EU has now taken over from the UN police force (IPTF) with its own EU police mission (EUPM). It should be noted, however, that the new mandate given by the EU member states to the EU police force does not make provision for joint patrols with the Bosnian police forces.

SFOR troops are trying in a number of areas to fill the gap that has arisen following the departure of the IPTF and the arrival of the EUPM with its new mandate. This could lead to problems, unless there is a thorough review of SFOR’s mandate. In most European countries, the military would not be permitted to perform police tasks. Mission creep could create problems for many of the European forces being deployed.

In preparing a takeover of SFOR by the EU, a new policy plan should be drawn up on the basis of a thorough analysis of the threats. Any future EU military force should be robust enough to deal with crisis situations, including the possible apprehension of indicted war criminals and the consequences of such operations.

Depending on its size, the EU military force may have to rely for emergencies on assistance by over-horizon forces on stand-by outside the territory of Bosnia and Herzegovina. Good intelligence on the situation and possible future developments in the country will remain essential for the implementation of its tasks.

Discussions on a possible EU takeover of SFOR have only just started, but analysts agree that this can only be done after a restructuring process involving the setting up of several points of presence in the country combined with a possible reduction, as of now, of the current SFOR forces. The Russian Government has already announced that it would not take part in an EU-led military force. Involvement of the US military in a number of crucial areas where Europeans still have a capability gap remains essential for the successful functioning of any EU-led force in Bosnia and Herzegovina.

Furthermore, I am deeply convinced that interparliamentary oversight of the SFOR operation in transition and its possible transfer to the EU is vital in order to ensure that our troops are given a feasible mandate and the best possible conditions for their difficult and potentially dangerous tasks.

Once again our citizens must be aware of what our Governments are trying to achieve in their name. EU will have to use the experience it will gain in FYROM in it first real military mission. I shall be in Skopje in a week’s time.

With best wishes.

Yours sincerely,


Jan Dirk BLAAUW