YouSaid · the spoken record

Djokic

lines on the record: 144
first: 1993-02-19
most recent: 1995-09-08
sittings or episodes: 11
sources: un-security-council

Every line below is reproduced as it was said and linked to the record it came from. Nothing here is summarised or generated. Directory · Search · Corrections

“To that end, it is of the utmost importance that the peace process be revived, with the full engagement of the parties concerned and the United Nations, the European Union, the Russian Federation and the United States. Any taking of sides in the civil war bears with it the risk of a loss of credibility, and this is exactly what could happen to the United Nations. The policy of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia is directed towards establishing peace and a political solution in the former Bosnia and Herzegovina. A political solution is not possible if one of the sides in the conflict is approached as an adversary. It is to be hoped that the lesson of Gorazde will be well studied and that appropriate conclusions may be reached.”
1994-04-21 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3367 (1994) · source
“Despite repeated proposals by the Bosnian Serbs for the comprehensive cessation of hostilities, the Muslims were vigorously attempting to improve their military standing and to portray themselves as victims so as to provoke a foreign military intervention. There will not and there cannot be peace in Bosnia and Herzegovina if the pressure is put only on one side - the Serb side - demanding that only it make concessions whereas the Muslim side enjoys massive political and even military support to advance the military option. The only solution to the Bosnian crisis should be a peaceful and negotiated outcome which takes into account legitimate interests of all three peoples in Bosnia and Herzegovina on the basis of full equality.”
1994-04-21 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3367 (1994) · source
“In the interest of truthful presentation of the events around Gorazde, it has to be acknowledged that the real cause of the current escalation is primarily the failure of UNPROFOR to prevent the abuses by the Muslim side of the safe area for military action. Before NATO air strikes on Bosnian Serb positions, the Serb side offered the Muslims an immediate and unconditional cessation of hostilities throughout Bosnia and Herzegovina. However, the Muslims wanted a partial cease-fire, namely in Gorazde, where their air offensive was facing a defeat and, at the same time, they wanted to have a free hand to continue the offensives against the Serbs elsewhere in Bosnia.”
1994-04-21 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3367 (1994) · source
“By military intervention against the Republic of Srpska and the Serb people, the United Nations and NATO have entered the civil war in the former Bosnia and Herzegovina, siding with the Muslims. By this decision, the United Nations has abandoned neutrality in dealing with the crisis in Bosnia and Herzegovina; this constitutes a dangerous precedent for peace operations all over the world. In doing so, the United Nations discredited its reputation as a peace-keeper as well as its mediating role in the peace process in the former Yugoslavia. The pretext 12 that military action has been carried out to protect the vaguely defined safe areas is neither convincing nor acceptable.”
1994-04-21 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3367 (1994) · source
“On the other hand, the Muslims took advantage of the presence of UNPROFOR in the safe area of Gorazde, and with its consent and tacit approval, used it to launch attacks against the Bosnian Serbs. The United Nations and the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), though fully aware of the situation, did not prevent the Muslims from abusing the safe area. In such circumstances the Bosnian Serbs had no other option but to defend themselves. Fifthly, instead of deterring the Muslim forces from escalating the military activities, the United Nations and NATO not only tolerated this but even took part themselves in the military intervention against the Serb side by carrying out the aerial bombardment of the Serb positions near Gorazde.”
1994-04-21 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3367 (1994) · source
“Fourthly, the newly created situation has further encouraged the Muslim side to fulfil its intentions and acquire a military advantage by launching fresh offensives against the Bosnian Serb forces on virtually all fronts throughout Bosnia. As is confirmed in the report of the Secretary-General, the Muslims abused the sanctuary of the safe areas "as locations in which its troops can rest, train and equip themselves as well as fire on Serb positions ...". Particularly in the region of Gorazde 8,000 combatants were additionally armed in violation of the existing arms embargo. From the time of the establishment of a safe area around Gorazde, the Bosnian Serbs refrained from any military activity and withdrew their forces from the area.”
1994-04-21 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3367 (1994) · source
“One side to the conflict, the Bosnian Serbs, have been totally excluded from the negotiating process. The basic premise - negotiations on the basis of equality - has again been abandoned. All attention has been focused on a rapprochement between the Bosnian Croats and the Bosnian Muslims. The Bosnian Serbs, on the other hand, have been excluded and isolated from negotiations, and no serious effort has been made to determine the basis for their inclusion in the political 11 process. The hesitation of the international community about putting pressure on the Bosnian Muslims - and they have been putting pressure all the time on the Bosnian Serb side - to join negotiations in good faith and provide their bottom-line demands, has contributed largely to the break- down of the negotiation process and the escalation of hostilities.”
1994-04-21 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3367 (1994) · source
“The agreement, containing a detailed set of arrangements on constitutional and military issues, regarded by the co-Chairmen of the Conference on the Former Yugoslavia as fair and reasonable, did not materialize because it was in the interest of the Bosnian Muslims to protract the war, and they were unfortunately supported by some influential international factors, including in the United States. The Bosnian Muslims were obviously determined to persist in the military option; this can be best illustrated by the fact that they constantly insisted on makximalist demands and demonstrated a total lack of readiness for a reasonable settlement. Thirdly, instead of an agreement having been concluded and implemented, steps contrary to peace have been taken.”
1994-04-21 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3367 (1994) · source
“With this aim in mind, the Muslim side obstructed the negotiation process and rejected the plan of the European Union. Peace was within reach on several occasions last year and this year, but it has always been spiked by the Muslims and their patrons, who were not interested in the restoration of peace. The Bosnian Muslim leadership flatly rejected the agreement reached in negotiations in which they themselves took part on the British aircraft carrier Invincible last September.”
1994-04-21 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3367 (1994) · source
“They have taken advantage of the situation in the wake of the Washington agreement to regroup their forces and launch large-scale offensives throughout Bosnia and Herzegovina, in the region of Gorazde in particular. Counting on the continued support of the international community, and particularly encouraged by the positions of certain important factors, they have rejected all proposals on a comprehensive cease-fire and cessation of hostilities. Secondly, since the beginning of the conflict, it has been the Muslim side that has been opposed to a political agreement which would take into account the vital interests of the three parties to the conflict; it has been the Muslim side that has been trying to provoke foreign military intervention, whose aim would be to establish a unitary Bosnia and Herzegovina under Muslim domination.”
1994-04-21 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3367 (1994) · source
“The situation on the ground is much too serious and complex for the Security Council to take decisions according to rhetorical outbursts and unsubstantiated and biased media reporting. If the Security Council is truly seeking to contribute to resolving this crisis it is imperative that the facts be separated from assessments based on political interests. These, however, are the facts: First, for almost a year, until the Washington agreement of 17 March 1994, the war in Bosnia was waged primarily between the Bosnian Croats and Muslims. Unfortunately, in past days we have been able to witness that the long announced spring offensive of the Bosnian Muslims against the Serbs has begun to materialize. That evidently indicates that the Muslims have continued to persist in the military option regarding the resolution of the civil war.”
1994-04-21 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3367 (1994) · source
“A civil, interethnic and religious war provoked by unconstitutional separatism and forceful secession has been treated as aggression by one indigenous and constituent nation of Bosnia and Herzegovina - the Bosnian Serbs - against the others. Instead of seeking a comprehensive solution which would take into account the vital interests of the three constituent peoples on the basis of equality, support and legitimacy have practically been given to one side only: the Bosnian Muslims. At the same time, only the Bosnian Serbs and the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, which is not a party to the conflict, have been confronted with harsh sanctions as well as with an unprecedented media campaign directed against the whole Serbian nation.”
1994-04-21 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3367 (1994) · source
“Mr. Djokic: The international community, the United Nations and the Security Council have been exerting great efforts in the past two years with a view to resolving the crisis in the former Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina. Despite the enormous political and material resources which have been invested, the prevailing circumstances on the ground and the chances for a political resolution and the stabilization of the situation are still precarious. The fact that peace is still elusive in former Bosnia and Herzegovina is due primarily to the fact that the approach and the activities of the international community have been based on false premises and misconceptions concerning the nature and origin of the conflict and concerning ways to resolve it.”
1994-04-21 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3367 (1994) · source
“Peace in Bosnia and Herzegovina cannot be achieved through one-sided accusations or irrational demands for the lifting of the arms embargo for one of the sides, nor through the escalation of military activities in Bosnia and Herzegovina. The only possible solution is and must be a political one.”
1994-02-15 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3336Resumption2 (1994) · source
“On the contrary: those statements, and the findings of a number of foreign and also Yugoslav experts indicate that the Bosnian Serb side did not commit and could not have committed this tragic and criminal act. Those delegations that have chosen to advance uncorroborated allegations have, by their biased positions, shown their true intentions, which are not directed towards reaching a just and9 ) lasting peaceful solution in Bosnia and Herzegovina. They are clearly attempting to use this tragic event as a pretext for foreign military intervention against one of the parties in the civil war. Such positions do not contribute to ending the ethnic and civil war in Bosnia and Herzegovina: on the contrary, they generate a further escalation of the flames of war, whose consequences are increasingly being felt by the innocent population.”
1994-02-15 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3336Resumption2 (1994) · source
“In connection with some of the statements made during our debate, my delegation would like to offer the following comments. We categorically reject the ill-intentioned, biased, unwarranted and unfounded allegations against the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia that have been put forward by certain delegations. It is particularly disturbing that some of them have gone so far as to condemn, without any reservation, the Bosnian Serb side for the tragic massacre of innocent civilians in the Sarajevo market-place on 5 February. It is indeed surprising that they are so sure in their conclusions while it is well known that United Nations Protection Force representatives in Sarajevo have been explicit in their official statements that, so far, it has not been possible to establish which side was to blame for the tragedy.”
1994-02-15 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3336Resumption2 (1994) · source
“The Yugoslav Government wishes to reiterate its firm support for the current negotiations in Geneva, and strongly urges the international community and the United Nations, including the8 ) Security Council, to reinforce their support for the only possible solution to the conflict in Bosnia and Herzegovina - a solution achieved through political means. Therefore, rather than threats and ultimatums, it would be more useful if we all, particularly those who can exert great influence on some of the Bosnian parties, helped them put an end to the nightmare in which they have found themselves. Once you pull a trigger, it is difficult to stop. If that proves to be the case, the Council will certainly have its share of responsibility.”
1994-02-15 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3336Resumption2 (1994) · source
“Although not a party to the civil war in Bosnia and Herzegovina, the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia will spare no effort to help remedy the present situation and find a just and lasting solution based on the legitimate interests and rights of all peoples in Bosnia and Herzegovina. The members of the Council are aware of the efforts of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia within the International Conference on the Former Yugoslavia in Geneva and of its firm commitment to peace, despite the harsh and inhumane sanctions unjustly imposed against it.”
1994-02-15 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3336Resumption2 (1994) · source
“In contrast, the Bosnian Serbs, who have proved their readiness to accept a viable compromise by offering numerous concessions, are constantly being subjected to pressure and threats. Yugoslavia expects that, in the light of this situation, the international community will make it clear to the Muslim side that it only stands to lose if it persists with the war option. Unfortunately, instead of convincing the Muslim side to go along with the peace proposal, we are faced with the fact that some influential countries are now ready to use force, thus jeopardizing the results of the negotiations reached so far. The Federal Republic of Yugoslavia will, as it has done so far, continue to make its full contribution to the peace process and to ending the war in the former Bosnia and Herzegovina.”
1994-02-15 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3336Resumption2 (1994) · source
“Unfortunately, the third side, namely the Bosnian Muslims, opted for a continuation of the war, and has repeatedly been advancing new conditions in order to obstruct the achievement of a peace agreement. For months now, the Muslim side has rejected all peace projects which have been portrayed by the Co-Chairmen as fair and reasonable. They have unfortunately been encouraged in this position by influential elements in the international community that have been driven by ulterior motives and their own strategic interests. It is obvious that this has led the Muslim side to7 ) believe that foreign military intervention in Bosnia and Herzegovina would be forthcoming.”
1994-02-15 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3336Resumption2 (1994) · source
“In that context, we also believe that the international community and particularly the United Nations, including the Security Council, bear primary responsibility, and that they should do everything in their power to contribute to finding a political settlement and that they should encourage the Bosnian parties along the path towards peace. A Co-Chairman of the International Conference, Mr. Stoltenberg, just two weeks ago informed the members of the Council about the present status of the peace negotiations. He pointed out that the parties involved are close to a final agreement and that major parts of the peace package have been agreed. He also mentioned some obstacles, but from his statement it was obvious that two parties were ready to sign the peace package.”
1994-02-15 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3336Resumption2 (1994) · source
“If a true objective is peace for Bosnia and Herzegovina, then the use of force cannot be the instrument to that end. The use of force is extremely dangerous in the prevailing circumstances in Bosnia and Herzegovina. Those who advocate it shall bear the responsibility for the inevitable consequences and the possible spillover of the conflict.6 ) From the very onset of the crisis, the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia has strongly believed that there is no alternative to an overall political settlement. A settlement can be reached only in negotiations between the three constituent peoples of Bosnia and Herzegovina: the Serbs, Muslims and Croats. The Yugoslav Government is ready to accept any political solution reached by those parties.”
1994-02-15 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3336Resumption2 (1994) · source
“This is yet another in a series of grave mistakes which have been made by the international community in addressing the Yugoslav crisis, which, as many are now increasingly aware, started with the premature recognition of some former Yugoslav republics. The NATO decision has only made the prospects for the solution of the crisis more uncertain and bleak. We believe that the Security Council should very carefully and cautiously review the present situation, fully aware of its gravity and complexity. The decision of the Council of NATO clearly does not fall within the purview of the relevant resolutions of the Security Council authorizing air strikes. Therefore, any attempt to carry out air strikes on the basis of that decision will represent a direct involvement in the civil war on one side.”
1994-02-15 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3336Resumption2 (1994) · source
“Today's meeting of the Security Council is taking place ata time when some important international actors have opted for the use of force as a method of putting pressure on one of the sides in the conflict in Bosnia and Herzegovina instead of encouraging all three sides to achieve peace through negotiations. The recent decision by the Council of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) is politically and militarily unwise and could have serious consequences on the ground which will undoubtedly aggravate the5 ) already complex situation in Bosnia and Herzegovina. It is very unlikely that the decision on the use of air strikes against any - I repeat, "against any" - of the three sides to the conflict in Bosnia and Herzegovina may help bring about a lasting political settlement. Therefore, my country strongly opposes any such decision.”
1994-02-15 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3336Resumption2 (1994) · source
“The Yugoslav Government has appealed to all those involved in the peace process not to allow any political or media manipulations of this tragic event and to invest vigorous efforts in order to prevent any obstruction of the peace process and demonstrate perseverance and resolve while striving to achieve a just and lasting peace in the former Bosnia and Herzegovina. Unfortunately, instead of considering what can be done in Bosnia and Herzegovina to give a decisive impetus to the peace process, some countries took advantage of this event to promote their own political and propaganda goals.”
1994-02-15 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3336Resumption2 (1994) · source
“Mr. DJOKIC: The brutality of the 5 February massacre of innocent civilians in the market-place in Sarajevo has painfully demonstrated once again the necessity of urgently reaching a political solution to the civil and ethnic war in Bosnia and Herzegovina. The Government of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia received with dismay and horror the news of this massacre and strongly condemned this terrorist act. Those who were killed or wounded in Sarajevo were victims not of war but of war criminals. Such a cowardly act, which appalled all those who truly seek to achieve peace in the former Bosnia and Herzegovina, requires a vigorous and impartial investigation so that the perpetrators of this horrible act will be brought immediately to justice.”
1994-02-15 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3336Resumption2 (1994) · source
“The proposed draft resolution is one of war rather than peace. We would therefore hope that the Security Council, which under the Charter bears the primary responsibility for the maintenance of international peace and security, will be guided by the noble principles enshrined in it and will not adopt the proposed draft resolution.”
1993-06-29 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3247 (1993) · source
“The Federal Republic of Yugoslavia accords absolute priority to the immediate and unconditional cessation of hostilities in Bosnia and Herzegovina. It is our firm conviction that there is no alternative to an overall political settlement and that the international community and the United Nations, including the Security Council, should do everything in their power to facilitate a negotiated settlement and encourage the Bosnian parties to reach one. At a time when intensive and constructive negotiations are under way in Geneva, the adoption of this draft resolution, regardless of its motives, would take us farther from that goal. The Federal Republic of Yugoslavia is committed to helping the Bosnian parties find the road to a just peace on the basis of equal respect for the legitimate rights of all three constitutent peoples.”
1993-06-29 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3247 (1993) · source
“It is pacticularly disturbing and sad that this initiative has come at a moment when the peace process, after a long Stalemate, is showing signs of progress towards a settlement based on the vital interests of all three sides. The Federal Republic of Yugoslavia is rendering its full contribution to a peaceful and just resolution of the crisis in Bosnia and Herzegovina. Despite the unfair and inhumane sanctions that have unjustly been imposed against my country, the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, which is not a party to the civil war in Bosnia and Herzegovina, will spare no effort to help prevent further bloodshed between the three constituent nations and to find a solution based on their legitimate interests and rights.”
1993-06-29 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3247 (1993) · source
“As a result, Bosnia and Herzegovina, which is already replete with arms, would be enguifed with even more weapons and destruction, resulting in further killings, atrocities and suffering by the innocent. Lifting the arms embargo and supplying arms to one side would invariably lead to an arms race between the warring parties in Bosnia and Herzegovina, with unforeseeable consequences. It would be erroneous to assume that arming the Muslim forces in Bosnia and Herzegovina would lead to peace: on the contrary, it would surely represent a serious setback to a political settlement. Those sponsoring the draft resolution are evidently not committed to a peaceful resolution of the conflict, but are instead trying to achieve their own limited political objectives.”
1993-06-29 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3247 (1993) · source
“Mr. DJOKIC: The Government of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia strongly opposes exempting one side involved in the civil war in Bosnia and Herzegovina from the arms embargo imposed by Security Council resolution 713 (1991). Such a proposal, as an example of political myopia, is not only unacceptable but is fraught with danger and would result in the continuation and further escalation of the civil, inter-ethnic and religious war in Bosnia and Herzegovina. Should the proposed draft resolution be adopted, the Security Council would, under the false pretext of protecting the exercise of the inherent right of self-defence, merely contravene its past efforts to contain the crisis and find a lasting political solution.”
1993-06-29 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3247 (1993) · source
“Although the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia considers that UNPROFOR's mandate should have been extended for a year, we support the proposal contained in the draft resolution that, for the time being, it be extended until 31 March 1993. We hope that the necessary conditions will be created in the meantime so that UNPROFOR's mandate can be further extended, as envisioned by the plan, until a comprehensive and peaceful solution is reached.”
1993-02-19 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3174 (1993) · source
“If it fails to do so, the Security Council would embolden Croatia's apparent aspirations to the military option and make a peaceful solution ever so distant and unattainable. The Federal Republic of Yugoslavia has declared on many occasions that it will strictly abide by all the commitments that the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia assumed internationally. Therefore, it shall respect and fulfil the rights and obligations the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia undertook vis-4-vis the territories of Krajina that have been placed, within the framework of the United Nations peace-keeping operation, under the Protection of the world Organization.”
1993-02-19 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3174 (1993) · source
“The role of the Republic of Croatia has often been ignored in the deliberations within the Security Council, and its responsibility brushed aside. As a result, the Republic of Croatia has been further encouraged to persist with its policy and practice of aggression, which has been particularly evident lately. The Security Council can no longer let such a policy stand without firm response. It has an obligation to take all appropriate measures, including those envisaged by Chapter VII, to make the Republic of Croatia honour the United Nations Charter and all relevant Security Council resolutions. If the Security Council truly seeks to contribute to the peaceful resolution of the Yugoslav crisis, it should take an impartial attitude towards all parties to the conflict.”
1993-02-19 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3174 (1993) · source
“The proposals contained in the letter are fraught with grave dangers for the situation on the ground and could jeopardize further implementation of the peace plan. The present policy pursued by Croatia is not only in contravention of the peace plan but also in defiance of the relevant Security Council resolutions. It should be recalled that President Tudjman, in his letter addressed to the Secretary-General of 6 February 1992, accepted fully and unconditionally the Secretary-General's concept and plan which defined the conditions and areas where the United Nations forces were to be deployed. Security Council resolution 740 (1992) of 7 February 1992 noted that President Tudjman's unconditional acceptance removed an obstacle to the deployment of the peace~keeping operation.”
1993-02-19 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3174 (1993) · source
“The letter from the President of the Republic of Croatia of 9 December 1992 addressed to the President of the Security Council raised very serious concerns about the intentions and willingness of the Republic of Croatia to honour the commitments it has accepted under the Vance peace plan. In that letter, President Tudjman even proposed that the United Nations take: "efficient steps resembling those taken in the case of aggression against Kuwait and with regard to the present-day situation in Somalia" and that it: "Authorize UNPROFOR to implement its task within the scope of the Vance Plan, if necessary by use of force as well". (S/24934, para. 6) Such positions represent a clear departure from the commitments and obligations arising from the Vance peace plan.”
1993-02-19 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3174 (1993) · source
“Since the outbreak of the conflict, 60,000 soldiers of the Croatian Army have been actively engaged in the war in Bosnia and Herzegovina, as has been confirmed by the United Nations Secretary-General, the Security Council and the General Assembly. Croatia has, in effect, expanded its authority to the territory of Bosnia and Herzegovina under its occupation. The Republic of Croatia has openly violated the arms embargo imposed by Security Council resolution 713 (1991). Croatian territory is also being used: for channeling arms to the Croats and Muslims in Bosnia and Herzegovina. That has been documented and reported by the world media, many independent observers and international organizations.”
1993-02-19 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3174 (1993) · source
“The Serbs, in those parts of the protected areas controlled by the Croatian Army, have been subjected to a systematic "ethnic cleansing" that is proportionately huge in relation to the size of the territory and the number of people it affected. In the region of Western Slavonia alone, 180 villages were completely "cleansed" of Serbs, and, as a result, more than 200,000 Serhs from Croatia sought refuge in the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia. The present policy of the Republic of Croatia is undoubtedly a major obstacle to finding a peaceful and durable solution to the Yugoslav crisis. The victims of that policy are no longer only the Serbs but also the Muslims and United Nations forces.”
1993-02-19 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3174 (1993) · source
“President Tudjman has even gone so far as to publicly announce, on 31 January 1993, that Croatian troops would go ahead and capture more of the United Nations protected areas. In that regard, we should like to recall that the Security Council has undertaken to consider ",.. what further steps might be necessary to ensure that resolution 802 (1993) and other relevant Security Council resolutions are fully implemented." (S/PV.3165, p. 3) These developments and permanent armed provocations on the part of the Republic of Croatia are a serious impediment to the complete demilitarization of the protected areas and to the implementation of the peace plan.”
1993-02-19 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3174 (1993) · source
“The aggression of the Croatian Army against the United Nations protected areas, UNPROFOR and the Serbian civilian population represents a flagrant violation of the Vance peace plan and relevant Security Council resolutions, in particular 724 (1991) and 762 (1992). That has seriously jeopardized the credibility of the United Nations and its ability to defend the population and ensure peace in the territories under its protection. Furthermore, the Republic of Croatia has totally ignored the latest Security Council resolution, 802 (1993), as well as the presidential statement of 27 January 1993 and the demands contained therein - to immediately cease all military activities and withdraw its army to the original positions. Quite to the contrary, it has continued and stepped up its aggression against the United Nations protected areas.”
1993-02-19 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3174 (1993) · source
“The basic goals of UNPROFOR's mandate are to protect the local population in the protected areas and to create the conditions of peace and security required for the negotiation of an overall settlement of the Yugoslav crisis. The responsibility for the non-implementation of the peace plan rests primarily with the Republic of Croatia. Only recently, it launched a major military attack against the United Nations protected areas. It has violated cease-fFires on many occasions, infiltrated terrorist groups in protected areas and amassed troops on the borders of those protected areas.”
1993-02-19 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3174 (1993) · source
“5) The Secretary-General was even more specific in his report of 4 February 1992, Saying: "the United Nations force would not be withdrawn before an overall political solution was found to the Yugoslav crisis". (8/23513, ara. )) Those goals have not yet been attained. Negotiations on an overall settlement of the Yugoslav crisis are under way within the framework of the International Conference, and peace is conditio sine qua non for its success. Moreover, the local population in Krajina needs United Nations protection now more than ever. For those reasons, the continuing role of UNPROFOR is essential at this crucial juncture. The Federal Republic of Yugoslavia had expected UNPROFOR's mandate to be extended for a longer period of time rather than a short interim period.”
1993-02-19 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3174 (1993) · source
“Our position from the very beginning has been that a durable and just solution can be reached only through dialogue between the parties directly involved; mutual respect for each other's interests; cooperation; and political goodwill. We shall also continue in the future to contribute our share to the Geneva Conference, despite the unjust and one-sided sanctions imposed on us that punish one nation as a whole, which we expect to be lifted soon. I should like to recall that the Vance plan states: "Subject to the Council's agreement, the operation would remain in Yugoslavia until a negotiated settlement of the conflict was achieved." (S8/23280, annex III, para.”
1993-02-19 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3174 (1993) · source
“Mr. DJOKIC: The Federal Republic of Yugoslavia has accepted the Vance plan, fully supports it and has invested efforts in its complete implementation. For its part, the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia has fulfilled all obligations undertaken under the plan, but further efforts need to be made so that other signatories do likewise. The United Nations Protection Force (UNPROFOR) peace-keeping operation has proved to be justified, thus creating the basic prerequisites for all open questions to be resolved. 'The Federal Republic of Yugoslavia supports further engagement of UNPROFOR and most energetically demands that Security Council resolution 802 (1993) be fully implemented.”
1993-02-19 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3174 (1993) · source