Kosovo

HC Deb 14 June 1999 vol 333 cc21-33 3.31 pm

The Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs (Mr. Robin Cook)

With permission, Madam Speaker, I will make a statement on recent developments on Kosovo.

Today is the fifth day since the entry into force of the military agreement. I can report to the House that Serb forces are leaving Kosovo broadly in line with the phased withdrawal set out in that agreement. Meanwhile, NATO forces have entered much of southern and central Kosovo and are ahead of the planned timetable for their deployment. A quarter of all troops so far deployed are from the United Kingdom—the largest single national contingent. The whole House will wish to congratulate our troops on the professionalism with which they have deployed so quickly and efficiently.

Members of the House will have seen pictures of the spontaneous welcome the troops have received from Kosovo Albanians wherever they have gone. The warmth with which those Albanians have expressed their joy at our arrival speaks volumes for the brutality and the terror from which our campaign has liberated them. For the past two months they have seen their neighbours massacred, their young relatives raped and their homes burnt. Now, they can see a future in which none of those crimes can return to haunt Kosovo.

The presence of the Russian troops around the airport has not interfered with the deployment of NATO forces. Our forces are entering as planned from Macedonia. It is important to keep a sense of perspective on the numbers involved; there are only a couple of hundred Russian troops in Kosovo, compared with 14,000 NATO troops today.

General Jackson this morning had a business like meeting with General Zavarzin, the commander of the Russian troops at Pristina airport. He has just reported that he hopes that agreement can be reached on assimilating the Russian troops into KFOR. Nevertheless, it was plainly unsatisfactory that Russian troops should have entered without co-ordination. Yesterday, I spoke at length to Igor Ivanov, the Russian Foreign Minister, and we agreed that there should be no more surprise moves. He gave an undertaking that Russia would not deploy any further troops without prior agreement. Earlier undertakings about Russian deployments have not all been respected. It is crucial that this undertaking should be fully respected.

Negotiations, led by the United States, continue over how Russia's contribution to KFOR can be integrated into the overall operation. Those have been protracted negotiations. On the Russian side, its military have sought a sector of their own. On our side, we have insisted that any outcome must meet the terms of the peace plan for a single operation with a unified chain of command. There is no provision anywhere in the peace plan for partition of Kosovo.

Several non-NATO countries will contribute to forces in Kosovo. I have always made it clear that we would welcome Russia also working with us as partners in the peacekeeping force, but it must be as part of a single, integrated operation, not as an independent force. That reflects our commitment to liberating the whole, not part of Kosovo.

We now face a major challenge in helping Kosovo to recover from the atrocities of the past year. There are four immediate priorities. First, we must ensure that there is security and safety for all the people of Kosovo, whether Albanian, Serb or from any other ethnic group. KFOR will be alert and robust in ensuring that all Serb forces withdraw from Kosovo within the agreed timetable, which should be completed over the next week. KFOR will also be responsible for the demilitarisation of the Kosovo Liberation Army. I spoke last night to Hashem Thaqi, the leader of the KLA, and stressed that we expect restraint from the KLA as the Serb forces withdraw, and co-operation in our efforts to end all violence in Kosovo.

Secondly, we must provide urgent relief to the hundreds of thousands of displaced persons who have spent the past two months hiding from Serb forces on the hillsides and in the forests of Kosovo. A convoy with much British support delivered humanitarian supplies to Pristina yesterday on behalf of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees and is reloading today in Macedonia.

Thirdly, we must manage the return of the masses of refugees who were deported as part of Milosevic's failed plan for the ethnic cleansing of Kosovo. We should not be too glib about refugees returning to their homes. Many of those homes have been blown up or burnt down by Serb aggression. We face a major task in helping the bulk of the refugees to rebuild their homes before the Balkan winter sets in. My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for International Development has today announced a further £50 million for humanitarian relief, on top of the £40 million already provided.

Fourthly, we must record the evidence of the war crimes that have been committed in Kosovo to enforce its ethnic cleansing. There has already been the horrific discovery of a mass grave containing a large number of villagers massacred at Kacanik. We have already started the deployment of a British police team to Macedonia, in order that the International War Crimes Tribunal can draw on its forensic skill and experience in exhuming victims of atrocities and identifying the cause of death. Although we have brought peace to Kosovo, its people will not live at peace with themselves unless we bring to justice those responsible for such atrocities.

For the immediate future, responsibility for the government of Kosovo will be in the hands of an international civil administration, which will be led by the United Nations but will draw on the contributions of the European Union, the Organisation for Security and Co-operation in Europe and the UNHCR. It will be charged with rebuilding the physical infrastructure of Kosovo, regenerating its economy and supervising free elections to new political institutions. Over a period it will transfer its powers to the local people, in line with our goal of democratic self-government for Kosovo.

From the start of the conflict, the Government have stressed that we want it to be a turning point for the whole region. All Serbia's many neighbours have shown total solidarity with the NATO campaign. We must not now forget the courage and commitment that those Governments showed in aligning themselves with us.

On Thursday I attended the launch of the stability pact, a forum bringing together the countries of the region with the European Union, the United States, Russia and other key international players. I pledged that, for our part, Britain would be their partner in helping to accelerate their integration into the modern Europe. To do that we must open up the wealthy markets of the European Union so that those countries can share in our prosperity through increased trade. We must invest in developing their democratic institutions, civic society and open media in order that they can share in our standards of freedom.

We hope that one day the people of Serbia will also be able to share in the benefits from the stability pact, but first it will be necessary for the Government in Belgrade to renounce the policies of Milosevic, which have brought so much violence to their neighbours and so much poverty to themselves. We cannot embrace Serbia in the modern Europe until Serbia embraces our values of belief in the equality of all citizens, irrespective of ethnic identity, and respect for the rights of minorities.

There would have been no turning point for the countries of the region if the international community had not demonstrated that we would not tolerate the brutality and the ethnic cleansing that Milosevic visited on Kosovo. The revulsion around the world at the expulsion of the Albanians from Kosovo is confirmed in the text of the Security Council resolution, which was drafted by the G8 Foreign Ministers over 12 hours of negotiation last week.

The resolution condemns the violence against the people of Kosovo and demands full co-operation with the International War Crimes Tribunal. It meets all our key objectives: the withdrawal of all Serb forces, the deployment of an international military force with a unified command and the return, without hindrance, of all refugees.

There is much hard work still to be done before we have created a Kosovo that will give its people the opportunity to earn their living in peace. The time to celebrate will be when we have settled all refugees in their homes.

However, all those in the House who supported NATO's campaign can be satisfied with an outcome that has vindicated the strategy of the alliance and its resolve to defeat the forces of ethnic cleansing. We have compelled an end to the atrocities in Kosovo and secured for its people a future free from fear. We have shown that the era of forced mass deportation of a whole people belongs to Europe's past, and that we will not tolerate it coming back again.

We promised the refugees that we would take them back to Kosovo under our protection. We now have the opportunity to fulfil that promise, and we will not slacken in our resolve or our determination until we have helped them all to go home.

Mr. Michael Howard (Folkestone and Hythe)

I thank the Foreign Secretary for his statement. The whole country has been encouraged by the progress made over the past few days. NATO's resolve to see the action through has yielded substantial results. I congratulate the Government and our armed forces on what has been achieved.

As I am sure that the Foreign Secretary will acknowledge, recent developments also demonstrate the extent of the problems still to be overcome and the difficult decisions that must be taken. I join the Foreign Secretary in paying specific tribute to the crucial role played by General Jackson and to the exemplary performance of the forces that he leads.

Does the Foreign Secretary agree that the ultimate test of success is whether all the refugees feel able to return home across Kosovo? The issue of the composition and deployment of the peacekeeping forces continues to be crucial in this respect. There is obvious concern about the deployment of Russian forces at Pristina airport.

Will the Foreign Secretary confirm that NATO originally planned for British paratroopers to enter Kosovo on Friday morning? Does not article II, paragraph 2a, of the military-technical agreement signed by General Jackson specify that, one day after its entry into force, Yugoslav forces would have vacated zone three and that the international security force would deploy "rapidly" to avoid a "security gap"?

Why were those plans cancelled? Why was a technical and logistical briefing arranged for reporters earlier on Thursday, at which NATO officers would outline the deployment of forces, also cancelled? When did NATO first learn that Russian troops were entering Kosovo?

Is the Foreign Secretary aware that Brcko Radio reported at 10.30 am on Friday that Russian troops had departed from their barracks in Lopare and Zivinice and had crossed the border into Serbia at Pavlovica Cuprija, and that those reports were confirmed by SFOR? Is not it also the case that if, even at that point, British troops had been allowed to move to Pristina, they would have arrived before the Russians? Is the Foreign Secretary aware that a further 150 Russian troops were reported yesterday morning to be waiting at Bijeljina ready to move into Serbia to reinforce Russian troops at the airport?

On the question of the future control of the airport, when does the Foreign Secretary expect that to be resolved? More fundamentally even than that, will he comment on media reports over the weekend that, following the stand-off at the airport, the American envoy Strobe Talbott offered to allow Russia a "zone of responsibility" in Kosovo? Is not that wholly inconsistent with what the Secretary of State for Defence has said in ruling out any suggestion of such a zone in Kosovo, which he described as tantamount to partition of the province?

Will the Foreign Secretary say whether the position in Bosnia, where the Russians are spread across the US-led multinational division (north), is seen as a model for Kosovo? Does he agree that these events have demonstrated once again that any agreements have to be absolutely watertight?

The Foreign Secretary mentioned this morning that the Russian Government provided a commitment over the telephone yesterday that their troops would be integrated into the overall peacekeeping force. When will the terms of that arrangement be finalised? Can he reassure the House that the extent of the buffer zone across the border in Kosovo will be adequate, and will he comment on reports that concessions were made on that issue and on the timetable for the withdrawal of Serbian forces?

There are reports today of further evidence being uncovered—at Kacanik, for example—of horrific war crimes. What arrangements are being made for investigators of war crimes to be given unhindered access to the evidence that they will need?

Last, but by no means least, I welcome today's announcement by the Secretary of State for International Development of further aid for humanitarian relief. Is the Foreign Secretary satisfied that arrangements are in place to ensure that humanitarian and reconstruction efforts are co-ordinated sufficiently?

Recent events have provided cause for hope in the future in Kosovo. We must ensure that our efforts to secure a lasting settlement that will provide security for all Kosovo's population are not diminished.

Mr. Cook

The Defence Secretary has advised me that there were no plans of the kind described by the right hon. and learned Gentleman for British paratroops. The entry into force agreement prescribes that VJ units will leave from zone three on the first day. Zone three is in the north of Kosovo, adjacent to the Serb border. It was specified for the first day so that the VJ units could show good will and earnest intent by withdrawing into Serbia from the area nearest to it. It was not possible for KFOR forces to occupy the north of Kosovo until forces began to withdraw from the south. There was no way in which to occupy the north without first travelling up from Macedonia.

There has been no security gap. The time of entry into Kosovo by the KFOR forces was determined by the commander, General Jackson, and by no other consideration. It would not have been possible for General Jackson to have reached Pristina airport in advance of the Russian troops for the simple reason that it remained ringed by a large part of the VJ army between the Macedonian border and the airport.

The right hon. and learned Gentleman asked about the negotiations on the military-technical agreement and the buffer zone, and about the time lines. The military had full control on those matters and reached agreements that reflected its practical understanding. I do not regard any extensions of time lines as concessions. They were necessary to provide a realistic time scale for the withdrawal of all Serb forces.

We must recognise that we have substantially reduced the infrastructure during our military campaign. It will therefore take the Serbs a little longer to get out of Kosovo, but get out they will. All of them will have to withdraw. The great advantage of the military-technical agreement is that it provides a day-to-day benchmark by which to measure progress.

I am pleased to confirm that we hope soon to have a scene of crime team in Kosovo. Other nations are considering providing similar assistance to the International War Crimes Tribunal. The team will carry out full investigations of any mass grave or other evidence of atrocity that we uncover, and I fear that we will find much more as we fan out across Kosovo. It was because of British intervention that the Security Council resolution contained a strong demand that all—including the Government in Belgrade—should co-operate with the tribunal.

Finally, I was asked about the arrangements for reconstruction and humanitarian aid. My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for International Development has collaborated closely with international agencies on those matters. At the Cologne meeting on the stability pact I took the opportunity to speak to Mrs. Ogata, of the UNHCR. We are working hard to try to make all the relevant organisations pull together for a major task. No one should underestimate the challenge or the difficulty of carrying it through.

I thank the right hon. and learned Gentleman for the generosity with which he congratulated the Government and the British forces on what they have achieved during the past few days and in the preceding 10 weeks. There is a long way to go. We must wake every morning alert for the latest trick played by Milosevic. On most days, we will not be disappointed. We have shown in the past 10 weeks that we are more resolved and more determined successfully to see through the campaign. We must now show that we have more resolve and determination than he does to ensure that we win the peace.

Mr. Menzies Campbell (North-East Fife)

May I also pay tribute to both the Government and the armed forces for the success of the operation—a success that we see every time we turn on our television sets? Behind the understandably careful language of the Secretary of State would we not be realistic to recognise that the unilateral action of the Russians is a potential source of political embarrassment for NATO? If it were repeated, it could cause disruption and increase tension. Indeed, it might even prejudice the effective administration of Kosovo. Do not those difficulties arise directly out of the ambiguity of the United Nations resolution and the annexes to it? If the right hon. Gentleman has read paragraph 7 of the resolution and paragraph 4 of annexe 2, he will know that they are capable of interpretation that does not provide that NATO should have the responsibility for command and control. How is that ambiguity to be resolved satisfactorily? What intelligence assessment, if any, was made of the likelihood of unilateral action by Russia? If none was made, why not?

Finally, the reports of the massacre that are most recently available to us suggest that on this occasion doctors and nurses may have been systematically murdered. Does that not tell us all that we need to know about those with whom we have been dealing in Kosovo—that they should think it right to take the lives of those whose duty it is to preserve life?

Mr. Cook

I echo the right hon. and learned Gentleman's final remarks. It is important to recognise that Kosovo remains a place of some danger. Our forces will show their full professionalism and alertness in ensuring that they maintain their own self-defence while securing security for the people of Kosovo. I invite the right hon. and learned Gentleman to keep the Russian forces in perspective. They are in one part of Kosovo where there are no Albanians and there is no need to return refugees. At the moment, the Russians cannot leave that part and move elsewhere without an agreement with ourselves. We should not get over-exercised by that being a major impediment to the deployment of KFOR and the work that it is carrying out throughout Kosovo. I agree, however, that the unilateralism with which the Russian troops were deployed is disturbing. That must not be repeated if we are to achieve the confidence, trust and sensible agreement that we need for the management of one co-ordinated, whole and integrated operation. A model is available—the right hon. and learned Member for Folkestone and Hythe (Mr. Howard) referred to it—and that is the Bosnian one. For some years, NATO and Russia have worked side by side in partnership in Bosnia with integration at all levels of command. I was pleased that, yesterday, Igor Ivanov volunteered a reference to the Bosnian model as a way forward in the immediate future. I hope that it will help us to proceed with the assimilation of the Russian troops with NATO into KFOR. We want Russia to be there. Frankly, we want a bigger Russian contribution to securing peace in Kosovo, but it is to be integrated in overall operations.

Mr. Donald Anderson (Swansea, East)

The Russian swoop on the airfield may not be a major impediment, but it is a possible precedent for problems. Of course, it was right to engage Russia politically and militarily in the solution—it should have been done earlier—but the suggestion that the swoop on the airfield was a misunderstanding strains credulity. Therefore, what lessons have the Government learned in terms of ensuring that there is now a watertight agreement and clear lines of communication to ensure that such misunderstandings, if they arise in future, will speedily be ended?

Mr. Cook

My hon. Friend describes the Russian presence as an impediment, but I repeat to the House that the Russians have provided no practical impediment to the work of KFOR. As I pointed out in my statement, that work is already going on and it is ahead of schedule, not behind schedule.

However, my hon. Friend touches on an extremely valid point: not all the explanations given by Moscow for the deployment of those Russian troops are mutually consistent. We need to achieve clarity in our relations with Russia and in the unified chain of command in order to ensure that there is no repetition of unilateral action. At present, two sets of talks are going on: the talks between General Jackson and his opposite number on the ground about the troops at the airport; and the talks between the United States and Russia about the wider question of the integration into KFOR of the larger Russian contribution that is coming.

Our understanding is that the Russian Government want to find a satisfactory and practical solution to the matter. We should not lose sight of the fact that it is in Russia's interests to solve the problem. It is only a few days until the weekend when all the Heads of Government of the G8 countries will meet in summit; a major part of the agenda should be—and will be—the difficulties of the Russian economy and the need for a closer and better relationship between it and the west. We want to be able to focus on that at the weekend; we know that the Russian Government also want to do that, so there should be good will on both sides to resolve this problem.

Sir John Stanley (Tonbridge and Malling)

Does the right hon. Gentleman agree that, were a separate Russian sector to be created and were the Russian forces in that sector to be placed outside the NATO command and control structure, that would, in effect, amount to a de facto partition of Kosovo that—as the right hon. Gentleman rightly pointed out in his statement—is in no way provided for in the peace solution?

Mr. Cook

The reason that negotiations are continuing and have not concluded is precisely because we stoutly resist such a model—for the very reasons given by the right hon. Gentleman. We should recall that one civil administrator will be responsible for the civilian reconstruction of Kosovo. His or her writ will run through all sectors in Kosovo, and he or she will be responsible for bringing together one set of political institutions—including election to one, single Kosovo Parliament. Therefore, it is most important that all military commanders, in whatever sector, recognise the objective of working together to create one, single Kosovo under democratic self-government.

Mr. Dale Campbell-Savours (Workington)

This is the third time in 20 years of my membership of the House that Ministers have come to Parliament to announce, in essence, the routing of the dark forces of fascism in different parts of the world—in the Falkland Islands, in Kuwait and now in Kosovo.

My right hon. Friend referred to economic regeneration. Given that we shall be dealing, in effect, with a de facto international protectorate, and given that the relationship between Kosovo and Serbia will now be strained, is it not now necessary to consider the whole question of the future of the currency? Otherwise, we may well find that the reconstruction of the economy of Kosovo is undermined by the problems that exist in wider Serbia.

Mr. Cook

My hon. Friend is absolutely right to say that, in Kosovo, we have witnessed the defeat of fascism. There was no clearer basis for Milosevic's action than the doctrine of ethnic superiority, which we have now comprehensively defeated.

As for my hon. Friend's question, I am not sure that the first thing currently needed by Kosovo is a central bank. There are an immense number of tasks to be carried out in order to ensure that we repair the physical fabric, rebuild homes and get people back there and into their careers. Of course, as that process develops, it will be necessary to work out an economic reconstruction package. The European Union stands ready to assist with that—so too do other institutions of the world community. In Kosovo, we can develop an economy that will provide lessons for the people of Serbia and bring home to them the extent to which they are both impoverished and deprived of freedoms that are now being taken for granted in the rest of Europe.

Kosovo could be a good model and a useful lesson to help to encourage the forces of opposition in Serbia.

Mr. Tom King (Bridgwater)

In paying tribute to the achievements of our armed forces and the other forces in NATO, does the Foreign Secretary accept that now is the really dangerous time for them and that the days ahead might pose far greater dangers than any they have faced so far? He calls for an end to ethnic cleansing, and, in the same breath, mentions the scale of the atrocities that are every day being discovered, in the knowledge that they will reinforce in the minds of others the desire for revenge for the atrocities that have been committed against them. Preventing acts of revenge will pose a great challenge to NATO forces.

The right hon. Gentleman proudly paid tribute to the fact that we are making by far the largest contribution to NATO's current land forces, and our forces are likely to remain in the region for some considerable time. Is that predominance of contribution likely to continue?

As for Russia, I have heard some alarming stories of impetuous suggestions—not, I am pleased to say, made by anyone in this country—about how the current difficulties with the Russians might be dealt with. In view of the confused nature—to put it mildly—of the current Russian Government and the various elements within it, may I strongly suggest that that matter be left to General Jackson for sensible resolution on the ground?

Mr. Cook

I agree absolutely that the issue of the airport is much better resolved by dialogue, which, as far as possible, should take place on the ground among those who can see the situation at first hand rather than from a remote position.

On the question of British forces in KFOR, we expect the large predominance and strong representation of the British in KFOR to be reduced after a number of months, as the rapid reaction corps is no longer needed for KFOR headquarters. We are in the lead during the current operation because we are the designated lead country in the rapid reaction corps.

I strongly share the sentiments expressed by the right hon. Gentleman in his opening remarks. The work is dangerous and no one should underrate the courage needed of our armed forces to enter territory in which there is as yet no secure peace. Our commitment is to create a multi-ethnic, pluralist Kosovo—a place where people of all ethnic identities will feel safe and secure. However, after the past two months of atrocities, that task will be far more difficult than it would have been before. One of the real tragedies for Kosovo and for Serbia is that President Milosevic did not accept the package offered at Rambouillet, which would have given Serbia a better result than it now has, and without any of the pain, bloodshed and brutality of the past two months.

Mr. Tam Dalyell (Linlithgow)

The right hon. and learned Member for Folkestone and Hythe (Mr. Howard) specifically asked about Kacanik, where the most dreadful things have happened. Could there also be an investigation into the brutal murder in Kacanik on 28 February of the Serb police inspector, Bogulduk Staletovic, who was doing his best to bring ethnic Albanians and Serbs together? What will happen to any member of the KLA who is found to have been equally brutal? What is NATO's attitude now to its obligations to the protection of those innocent Serbs who may themselves be ethnically cleansed?

Finally, during the debate of 25 March 1999, I asked the Foreign Secretary about relations with the Russians, and especially about the valuable work that he was then doing with the governor of Murmansk and others on the millennium bug—[Interruption.]

Madam Speaker

Order. Would the hon. Member whose pager is going off leave the Chamber? Some hon. Member must be guilty. I am sorry, Mr. Dalyell—please continue.

Mr. Dalyell

I was referring to the question of the millennium bug, Murmansk, and the Soviet Arctic fleet. My right hon. Friend the Foreign Secretary replied: I am confident that they will want to proceed with what they know is a solution to a pressing problem."—[Official Report, 25 March 1999; Vol. 328, c. 540.] Is that, in fact, being done?

Mr. Cook

Our commitment to protect the people of Kosovo extends to all, including the Serbs. In fact, the evenhandedness of our forces was demonstrated when the Gurkha Battalion disarmed 70 members of the Kosovo Liberation Army whom it encountered in an armed formation.

As to the murder of the Serb policeman to which my hon. Friend referred, it is the remit of the International War Crimes Tribunal to pursue war crimes of all kinds against all ethnic groups. To be fair, the House should note that the tribunal in Bosnia has indicted Serbs, Croats and Bosniaks without respect to ethnic identity.

Finally, I assure my hon. Friend of my personal commitment to taking forward the work at Murmansk on nuclear waste. I am pleased to say that Igor Ivanov has accepted my invitation to visit Britain as my personal guest, and that issue will certainly be high on our agenda.

Mr. Nicholas Soames (Mid-Sussex)

First, will the right hon. Gentleman accept that, while the Russians have been handled without great difficulty, their behaviour has been reprehensible and they have taken up much of the time of General Sir Michael Jackson, who has better things to do than worry about them? When the right hon. Gentleman speaks to the Russians at the weekend, will he tell them not only that their behaviour has been reprehensible, but that he expects to see Russia immediately replace its troops from SFOR who have been sent to Kosovo?

Secondly, will the right hon. Gentleman comment on the use of the airport at Pristina? Despite the Russians' presence, can it be used for all forms of military transport and aircraft? If so, will the right hon. Gentleman consider moving one or two of the Harriers so that they might be used sooner? Thirdly, when will the right hon. Gentleman be able to comment more precisely on the disarming of the KLA?

Finally, has the right hon. Gentleman considered speaking to the building industry in this country to see whether it might lend the development service some of its experts on rebuilding? The chaos that will face the refugees upon their return to Kosovo will be terrible to behold and they simply will not know where to begin.

Mr. Cook

I agree absolutely with the hon. Gentleman's last point. All European nations will have to contribute to ensure that we can rebuild Kosovo before winter, and I am sure that the British building and construction industry will be willing to play its part.

The hon. Gentleman expressed certain views about Russian behaviour, but he will understand that it might not necessarily be helpful for me to confirm whether I share that sentiment. We are concerned about the Russian situation, which has consumed a lot of time that we could have devoted to other parts of the Kosovo crisis. I thoroughly endorse his point that the Russians' unilateral arrival in Kosovo is as unfortunate and unhelpful as their unilateral departure from SFOR, where a gap has been left in the Bosnian forces.

We have no present requirement for the airport, nor do we plan to use it. However, it is important that, in the fullness of time, the airport be brought back into use for all members of KFOR and be operated on a multinational, not simply national, agency basis.

Ann Clwyd (Cynon Valley)

My right hon. Friend knows that I supported the aims of NATO throughout the war. I obviously support the reconstruction of Kosovo and the assistance that we will give that country and its people. I hope that economic assistance will also go to Montenegro, Albania and Macedonia. Will my right hon. Friend re-examine the decision not to assist Serbia until Milosevic is got rid of? I want to see Milosevic brought before a war crimes tribunal so that he can answer for his war crimes and other crimes against humanity. However, at the same time, I believe that Serbia will join the community of nations faster if we show a willing hand in assisting it to reconstruct and rebuild Serbian lives.

Mr. Cook

I thank my hon. Friend for the consistent support that she has given to our campaign and to our objectives, which she has expressed at all times in the past 10 weeks. I am glad that my hon. Friend mentioned Montenegro because it gives me an opportunity to underline our commitment to that country. President Djukanovic and his Government demonstrated tremendous courage and steadfastness, despite pressure from Belgrade, in bravely standing out against Belgrade's policies and in opening their borders without restraint to refugees from Kosovo. Our agreement with the Serb forces makes it plain that they must withdraw to Serbia, not to Montenegro, and we shall continue robustly to support the democratic Government in Montenegro.

On support for Serbia, a distinction will have to be made. We want to help the people of Serbia. They, too, face the problem of the coming winter, and we must be prepared to provide humanitarian relief where it is necessary and appropriate. But the international community cannot become involved in major economic reconstruction of Serbia while the country is led by the present Government, if for no other reason than that their economic policies would make any such attempt futile and might well result, as in the past, in much of the money that should be spent on Serbia ending up in foreign bank accounts that do not belong to the people of Serbia.

Mr. Bowen Wells (Hertford and Stortford)

Which bank account has the £50 million for the relief of refugees, which I very much welcome, come from? Has it come from the Treasury contingency reserve or the reserves held by the Department for International Development? To whom will that money be given and for what purposes? Is it intended to provide prefabricated housing to enable returning refugees immediately to reoccupy their ruined villages and towns and begin reconstruction—and possibly to be part of the work force?

Mr. Cook

The money has just been announced and we have not yet earmarked how all that £50 million will be spent, but we shall take that forward in consultation with agencies, particularly the UNHCR. I am advised that the money comes from DfID's reserves and will therefore be provided without any cost to DfID's programmes in Africa, Asia and poorer countries.

Mr. David Winnick (Walsall, North)

Will it be possible for a report on war crimes to be presented to the House and placed in the Library so that the crimes, rapes and atrocities that have taken place can be understood not only by us, but by generations of parliamentarians in the next century? They would then be able to understand why the operation took place and why it was so essential that Kosovo be liberated.

I want to ask my right hon. Friend a question about a matter that he has touched on before. What reassurance can be given, as soon as possible, to Serbian civilians in Kosovo that NATO troops are there as an international force to protect all, and that we will not tolerate any pogroms or persecution of Serbians because we are there to protect all communities?

Mr. Cook

I am happy to repeat my earlier assurances that our commitment is to protect all people in Kosovo, whatever their ethnic identity. Our objective is to create not a single ethnic state, but a multi-ethnic state under the democratic rules and values that we understand.

I shall consider my hon. Friend's request for a report on war crimes and find out whether we can respond to that in the fullness of time. It is important not only that we know what happened in Kosovo, but that the people of Serbia know what happened. Too many of them are still ignorant of what was done in their name in Kosovo, and I am sure that if they fully understood that they would share our repugnance and revulsion. That education is probably an important part of putting Serbia on the road to democracy and freedom.

Mr. Douglas Hogg (Sleaford and North Hykeham)

What proposals does the right hon. Gentleman have for the political reconstruction of Kosovo? I am sure that he agrees that there should be an elected Albanian-Kosovar authority in Kosovo as soon as possible. I recognise that it is difficult to have elections before the refugees return, but could he tell the House what proposals he has for the creation of a democratic body in Kosovo? In the meantime, whom does he regard as having authority to speak on behalf of the Albanian Kosovars? Is it Mr. Rugova, is it the head of the Kosovo Liberation Army, or is it someone else; and on what basis does that person have authority?

Mr. Cook

The short answer to the right hon. and learned Gentleman's last question is that it is not for me to decide who speaks for the Kosovo Albanian community. It is for those in that community to decide. Our commitment is to provide a democratic process, with guaranteed free and fair elections, in which they can decide for themselves who they wish to speak on their behalf. In the meantime, until we can achieve that, it would be helpful if all those representatives of Kosovo Albanian opinion were to work together to help us to co-operate with them in the salvation of Kosovo.

On the political structure, the terms of the Security Council resolution are explicit: a political settlement should take account of the Rambouillet accords. They provide for an elected Parliament of Kosovo. To correct the right hon. and learned Gentleman, they provide not for an Albanian Parliament but for a Parliament representing all the ethnic groups in Kosovo. The OSCE will be charged with the duty of carrying out elections for the creation of that Parliament. We will seek to proceed with that as quickly as is reasonable, but it will not be done overnight. The simple task of creating an electoral register in Kosovo following the past two months will itself take some months.

Mr. Robert N. Wareing (Liverpool, West Derby)

Should we not be rejoicing at the presence of Russian troops in Pristina and Kosovo because it not only gives the Serb population in Kosovo a sense of security, but underlines Russia's feeling that ethnic cleansing should go no further in the province? In view of my right hon. Friend's statement that he wants more Russians in Kosovo, should he not be making representations to the Government of Hungary to ensure that Russian troops can be taken into Kosovo, overflying Hungarian airspace?

Mr. Cook

The Government of Hungary, as a member of NATO, will of course permit overfly as and when there is agreement with NATO for those troops to arrive in Kosovo. I reiterate that I would welcome a strong Russian contribution to Kosovo and to the Kosovo force, but the time for rejoicing will be when we have the agreement that enables those Russian troops to take part in an integrated operation with a unified chain of command.

Several hon. Members

rose

Madam Speaker

Order. We must now move on.