THE CASE FOR KOSOVO'S INDEPENDENCE

By U.S. Ambassador to Luxembourg, Ann L. Wagner

 

The United States applauds the strong and effective leadership of The Grand Duchy of Luxembourg and other nations in Europe in advancing the goal of a continent whole, free and at peace.  Recognition of Kosovo's independence frees both the people who live there and their neighbors to move beyond the conflicts of the 1990s and pursue a wider vision of integration with an undivided Euro-Atlantic community.  It marks the final stage of Yugoslavia's slow-motion breakup.

Peace and prosperity in Europe has been a fundamental goal of President Bush's foreign policy and of those who preceded him for almost a century.  From our entry into the Great War, through World War II and the Marshall Plan, to support for NATO and EU enlargement after the fall of the Berlin Wall, the United States has shown its commitment to Europe's security and well-being. 

Beginning in 1989, ethnic Albanians, who constitute over 90 percent of Kosovo's population, suffered brutal repression and ethnic cleansing at the hands of the regime of Slobodan Milosevic.  After NATO's intervention brought a halt to the violence in 1999, UN Security Council Resolution 1244 ended Belgrade's rule over Kosovo and established a temporary UN administration.  For nine years, the people of Kosovo waited patiently for clarity about their future.  Nine years is long enough.  Europe and the U.S. supported negotiations to find a mutually-acceptable solution to the problem of Kosovo's status.  Despite two years of talks led first by the UN Special Envoy Martti Ahtisaari and then by a troika made up of the EU, Russia, and the United States, the two sides remained irreconcilable on the basic question of whether Kosovo should be independent. 

Acknowledging this deadlock, Special Envoy Ahtisaari developed a comprehensive proposal for Kosovo's status, including a recommendation that Kosovo become independent subject to a period of international supervision.  The United States, Europe and a majority of UN Security Council members supported this plan.  Independence is the only viable outcome for Kosovo.  Due to the legacy of conflict and mutual mistrust, there is no way in which the people of Serbia and Kosovo could remain in functional, democratic state.  The broken pieces of Yugoslavia simply cannot be put back together again.  Instead of letting the situation deteriorate into crisis, Europe and the United States decided to act.  We could not let the status quo continue -- more years of limbo would have turned Kosovo into an incubator for frustrations and instability, with woeful consequences for all of Europe.  We could not let Kosovo's uncertain future cloud Kosovo's economic prospects, further depriving Kosovo of badly needed loans from the IMF and World Bank. 

Kosovo is now independent.  Our task now is to help the leadership and the people of Kosovo develop this new state into a self-sustaining, multi-ethnic country that is no longer a ward of the international community.  We were deeply impressed that in their declaration of independence, Kosovo's leaders committed themselves to achieve the highest standards of democracy, including freedom and tolerance for citizens of all ethnic backgrounds.  As President Bush has remarked, "these are principles that honor human dignity; they are values America looks for in a friend." 
No country in Europe will benefit more from Kosovo's independence than Serbia itself.  Further anxiety over the outcome would have continued Serbia's obsession with Kosovo and encouraged false hopes, distracting Serbia's leaders from addressing the concerns of their citizens and Serbia's own European future.  Serbia's own people deserve better, and are actually demanding it.  Much has been heard of the strong nationalist impulse and the romantic attachment that Serbs feel for Kosovo.  In fact, polls show that more than 70% of Serbians want integration with the EU and cite unemployment as a greater concern than Kosovo's fate.  Serbia needs to take up its rightful place in Europe, the Transatlantic Community, and the world.  Europe and the United States stand ready to welcome them. 

The great prosperity and stability that has come to the other waves of nations that have joined the Euro-Atlantic community is the promise that now beckons the great nations of southeast Europe.  The tragedy of Yugoslavia's demise is now history.  Together we can move beyond the legacy of war toward a brighter future for all.

 

AFGHANISTAN: OUR WORK IS NOT FINISHED

By Ambassador Ann L. Wagner

Prior to the start of Operation Enduring Freedom (OEF) and the deployment of the NATO International Security and Assistance Force (ISAF) in 2002, Afghanistan was in crisis.  The Taliban regime exerted its power by brutally repressing its citizens and stifling progress.  Women were stoned to death and girls forbidden to attend school.  From the time of the Soviet invasion of 1979 until 2001, 6 million refugees had fled the country.  The now infamous training camps for terrorist recruits operated beyond the reach of law enforcement authorities. 

How have things changed? 

The economy is growing.  Afghanistan's current economic growth rate hovers between 12 and 14 percent, higher than even India.  Where no formal banking system existed in 2001, today we see a central bank with 30 regional branches and an internationally traded currency. 

Social changes are everywhere.  Four million refugees have returned to their homes.  School attendance is up five-fold and includes 1.5 million girls each day.  80 percent of the population has access to health care, as opposed to just 8 percent in 2001. 

Infrastructure is being built.  Three mobile phone companies serve 3.5 million customers and 7,400 kilometers of paved roadway stretch across the land where 50 kilometers existed under Taliban rule. 

Security is improving.  The terrorists find their movements restricted and far fewer places to hide.  The Afghan Army and Police are taking on greater roles in their own security.    

The Taliban and al-Qaeda recognize our progress and are desperately trying to weaken our resolve.  Not only would this be a catastrophe for Afghanistan, it would threaten regional stability and spawn increased risks for the West.  These groups pose an immediate threat to U.S. and European security by cultivating and exporting dangerous drugs and even more dangerous ideology and extremism.  Our open societies enjoy individual liberties, freedom of movement, modern communication systems, unfettered commerce and robust public transportation; all of which make us especially vulnerable despite the best defensive measures.       

The opium supply chain starts in Afghanistan and ends in Europe.  Germany alone had more than 1,300 overdoses last year.  Addiction treatment is costing Europe 540 million euros annually.  Last November, Antonio Maria Costa, Executive Director of the UN Office on Drugs and Crime, warned 63 European mayors that an increase in opium production in Afghanistan leads directly to a purer, more potent form of heroin being sold on the streets to children.       

Al-Qaeda's efforts to attack Europe are no secret.  From the well-known tragedies in Madrid and London, to the plot foiled by German authorities two months ago, to numerous plans to attack embassies, stadiums, marketplaces, cafés, journalists and national landmarks, Europe has been one of the terrorists' prime targets. 

Why is this?  It is because they hate what our societies stand for – our values.  Values which Europeans and Americans cherish such as the freedoms of speech, religion, and the press, as well as the equality of the sexes, the tolerance of diversity, and the right to education.  In short, al-Qaeda-linked militants want nothing less than to destroy the European and American ways of life. 

Luxembourg is a country that has risen to the pinnacle of economic success.  Its population knows that this accomplishment would have been impossible without the North Atlantic Treaty promises of security and the development assistance of the Marshall Plan.  The lessons of history are clearly reflected in the generosity of the people of Luxembourg and their military's consistent deployment of troops to ISAF to protect Kabul International Airport.  We applaud Luxembourg's significant contributions of bilateral and other aid.  Luxembourg is supporting the Afghan National Army and the training of counter-narcotics forces.  Development funds from Luxembourg have helped build infrastructure, protected food supplies in remote areas, improved maternal health, strengthened civil society and sustained elections.  We recognize and commend Luxembourg's long-term support and compassion for the people of Afghanistan. 

Unfortunately, some polls show the commitment of the European people to Afghanistan is diminishing; some quarters are even calling for the withdrawal of NATO troops and assistance.  History will judge us harshly if we allow the vision of the Taliban and al-Qaeda terrorists to prevail.  The idea of leaving Afghanistan to the Taliban is morally indefensible and a threat to our safety and security.   
  
The campaign in Afghanistan started with a shared conviction to defeat extremism.  We must remember that 19 terrorists, trained in Afghanistan, killed almost 3,000 people from 90 different nations on September 11, 2001.  The U.S. offered the Taliban the opportunity to avoid conflict by simply surrendering Osama bin Laden and other key al Qaeda leaders, and they refused.  In response, the U.S. exercised Article 51 of the UN Charter, the right of self-defense.  The UN Security Council recognized the U.S. right to protect itself in UNSCR 1368. 

Within 24 hours, NATO invoked Article V of the North Atlantic Treaty, allowing it to participate in Operation Enduring Freedom.  Likewise, a UN mandate authorized ISAF, which includes 26 NATO countries and 11 non-NATO partners.  The battle against this enemy was collectively joined, and we must renew our multilateral efforts to liberate the Afghan people and ensure their land is never again a bunker from which to strike the free world. 
      
Our hard work in Afghanistan is making the country a better place for the Afghan people and enhancing security worldwide.  We must remain steadfast in our commitment to bring about a lasting peace and a more prosperous society in that part of the world.  In this noble endeavor, the United States of America and the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg stand united.

Ann L. Wagner is the U.S. Ambassador to the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg  

60th ANNIVERSARY OF THE MARSHALL PLAN

Celebrating a Great Partnership

By Ann L Wagner
United States Ambassador to Luxembourg

June 5, 2007

Sixty years ago this week, United States Secretary of State George C. Marshall invited the people of Luxembourg to help America rewrite the history of Europe.  Marshall had just returned from a fact-finding tour of war-torn Europe.  When he saw the desperate economic situation there he knew he needed to act quickly.
So, on June 5, 1947, he gave a 12-minute speech to the graduating class of Harvard University that changed the world.  He reached out to a devastated Europe. On that morning he announced the European Recovery Program - what soon became known as “the Marshall Plan.”  Marshall spoke to America’s friends and former enemies in Europe as equals, with compassion for their suffering in wartime, and shared hope for a brighter future together.  He announced America’s goals:  “Our policy is not directed against any country or doctrine but against hunger, poverty, desperation, and chaos.”  Luxembourg and the United States had stood together against tyranny and now they had the opportunity to build a better future. 
The year after Marshall’s speech, European statesman and Luxembourg Foreign Minister Joseph Bech said: “The Marshall Plan brings home to old Europe the necessity of putting its house in order, by forcing it to help itself if America is to help it.”
 Bech’s call for action was answered in May 1950 when Luxembourg-born former French Prime Minister Robert Schumann proposed a joint management plan for the French and West German coal and steel industries.  His “Schumann Plan” led the following year to the birth of the European Coal and Steel Community, which in turn made possible the Treaty of Rome in 1957.  The Rome Treaty established Europe’s first full customs union -- the European Economic Community – which is considered the founding organization of the modern European Union.  Today, the EU is an economic powerhouse, home to 500 million people with a combined gross domestic product of 10 trillion euros.

From the very beginning of the Marshall Plan, America was deeply committed to its European partners. Beginning in 1948, and over the next four years, the United States dedicated 1.2 percent of its GNP and an average of 7.5 percent of its yearly budget to fuel Europe’s recovery and reconstruction.  America’s goal was to help Europe re-establish the economic prosperity and, as a result, restore political stability.   This commitment by citizens and statesmen on both sides of the Atlantic was an outstanding success.  World Bank figures show the annual trade between Europe and the United States as the world’s largest commercial partnership.  When we look at the trade relationship between Luxembourg and the United States in 2006, the numbers are equally impressive.  There was 740 million euros in combined trade - double what it was just ten years ago!
 Achievements like these are only possible when we work together in support of our common goals.  Today I join the people of Luxembourg and America in celebrating the greatest economic success story in the history of the world…and the best is yet to come.

U.S. Leadership on Climate Change

By Ambassador Ann L. Wagner

When it comes to climate change, the United States and Europe have more in common than we often realize.  We share the goal of reducing greenhouse gas emissions.  We share the goal of introducing new, cleaner technologies and alternative, cleaner-burning fuels.  We share the goal of ensuring that our populations have a secure and consistent supply of energy to meet diverse needs.  And we share the goal of reducing the impact of human activities on the global climate system.

But Europe and the United States are facing different contexts in which to achieve these climate goals.  We have different economic and population growth rates, resources, and energy needs.  There are multiple paths to achieve reductions in emissions, and each nation will achieve its climate goals in conjunction with overall objectives for energy security and economic growth.  Yet we can and should expand our cooperation in achieving those goals.  

Since taking office in 2001, President Bush has championed an environmental agenda that mixes mandatory measures, incentives, and voluntary programs.  It relies on the new technologies that will allow for a future of both environmental stewardship and economic growth.  Importantly, the U.S. is determined not to “export” the problem of emissions by regulating industry to the degree that industries simply relocate to the developing world.  Not only would this cost jobs and economic growth in the United States, it would actually increase overall global emissions due to less efficient industry practices and lower environmental standards in those countries.

The United States is taking concrete actions to address the issue of carbon emissions.  For instance, President Bush recently announced a plan that will reduce gasoline usage in the United States by 20 percent over the next decade.  We call it “Twenty in Ten.”  It will stop the projected growth of carbon dioxide emissions from U.S. cars and SUVs and will also reduce our dependence on oil that has left us vulnerable to hostile regimes and terrorists.

Two features of the plan stand out immediately.  The first is the focus on road transportation, which is the second largest source of U.S. greenhouse gas emissions.  The second is that we are rapidly accelerating the deployment of renewable fuels.  The United States is already the global leader in the production of biofuels.  Under the President’s new plan, we will raise the existing mandatory fuels standard to require the use of 130 billion liters of renewable and alternative fuels by 2017 – nearly five times the 2012 target now in law.

President Bush’s plan builds on a long record of U.S. action on global climate change that all too often is overlooked.  We have in place a diverse portfolio of policy measures, including dozens of mandatory, incentive-based and voluntary programs to reduce greenhouse gas emissions – and results to show for them.  According to United Nations data, from 2000 to 2004, U.S. greenhouse gas emissions increased by 1.3 percent while emissions from the EU-15 grew by 2.1 percent.  We managed this relatively low increase despite the fact that our real GDP grew by 9.6 percent during this period, and our population increased by 11.5 million people, which is roughly the population of Luxembourg and Belgium combined.  

Simply put, despite robust economic and population growth, our emissions performance since 2000 has been among the best in the developed world. 

Since 2001, the U.S. Government has committed more than $29 billion for climate change activities.  We have made major progress on developing new, cleaner engines for automobiles, clean-coal technology to produce electricity, and more efficient wind, solar, and battery technology, just to name a few.  These technological breakthroughs will enable us to achieve our climate goals in the context of a growing economy and a growing population.  Importantly, we have invested heavily in researching climate change.  Much of the international dialogue on global warming and other issues is based on research mandated by the Bush Administration and paid for by the American taxpayer.
 
In addition to taking action at home, the United States is taking the lead and collaborating with countries around the world to address climate change.  For instance, we are engaged in a variety of partnerships with other countries to promote development and deployment of new, cleaner technologies and to share expertise.  These include partnerships to collect and reuse methane – a powerful greenhouse gas; to capture and safely store carbon dioxide; and to develop cost-effective hydrogen and fuel-cell technologies.  Since the developing world is an increasing source of greenhouse gases, we have placed a special emphasis on working with developing countries to address environmental and energy issues.

A year ago, the United States created the Asia-Pacific Partnership on Clean Development and Climate (APP) together with Australia, China, India, Japan, and South Korea.  Through the APP, our six countries are working together to tackle complementary energy, economic, and environmental goals.  In each APP country, governments and the private sector have forged partnerships to develop and deploy clean, efficient energy technologies.  The six countries of the APP account for about half of the world’s economic output, energy use, and greenhouse gas emissions.  Since emissions from developing countries – most prominently China and India – are forecast to surpass emissions from developed countries by 2010, the importance of our engagement with these countries through the APP is obvious.

For both developed and developing countries, tackling global climate change need not impact economic growth; in fact, we believe strongly that sustained economic growth is the solution, not the problem.  As President Bush has said, “a nation that grows its economy is a nation that can afford investments in efficiency, new technologies, and a cleaner environment.”  Equally important, economic growth keeps citizens onboard for tougher regulatory practices and the mandatory measures that are part of the policy mixture against global warming.  Without public support, nations will get nowhere on this critical issue.

It is easy to sensationalize the issue of climate change, and far harder to develop concrete ways to address the issue.  In part thanks to the recent scientific study released by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), international momentum is building for governments and industry to take further, meaningful steps to address this global challenge.  The United States and Europe must seize the moment.  As major players on the world stage, we have a responsibility to move beyond the rhetoric and work together for the common good.

Ann L. Wagner is the U.S. Ambassador to the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg