YouSaid · the spoken record

Jovanovie

lines on the record: 46
first: 1996-01-15
most recent: 1999-05-14
sittings or episodes: 5
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

“The sooner this is understood, the quicker the solution will be found for all the problems caused by the unprovoked and unauthorized attack by the United States of America and its NATO confederates against the independent and sovereign Federal Republic of Yugoslavia.”
1999-05-14 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4003 (1999) · source
“However, the attempt to legalize the aggression of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization against my country by means of this so-called humanitarian resolution is unjustified. The bypassing of the Security Council, the body charged with the maintenance of international peace and security, prior to the commencement of the aggression, and the subsequent attempts to get the Council on board in order to legalize the aggression deal a heavy blow to the reputation of the United Nations and sets a dangerous precedent for international relations in general. The draft resolution must, therefore, contain a demand by the Security Council that the NATO aggression against the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia be stopped immediately and unconditionally. For without addressing the causes, no success will be achieved in addressing the consequences.”
1999-05-14 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4003 (1999) · source
“Of all the mayhem wrought to date, one of the worst incidents was on 14 April, when a convoy of refugees returning to their homes in response to a public appeal by the authorities of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia was struck along the Djacovica road. Seventy-five civilians were killed and more than 40 were wounded. NATO bombs have also hit many refugee camps, killing Serbs expelled from Croatia and Bosnia and Herzegovina. More than 100 people - primarily women, children and the elderly - have been killed in those camps. So these people's sad and sorry exodus ended in a most tragic and careless fashion. Regrettably the draft resolution makes no mention of these tragic consequences of the NATO aggression. The concern of the Security Council about the humanitarian situation in the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia is justified.”
1999-05-14 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4003 (1999) · source
“NATO has flagrantly violated international conventions and covenants on human rights and freedoms, in particular the Geneva Convention relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War. In destroying radio and television stations in my country, NATO is trying to prevent the public around the world from being informed about the shameful campaign and is trying to impose its own mendacious propaganda as the only and the whole truth. NATO has cited its concern for protecting the Albanian national minority from alleged mistreatment and ethnic cleansing by Serbian security forces as a post-facto pretext for its aggression. The best evidence of the fallacy of this claim is the humanitarian situation before and after the NATO bombs began to fall. Refugees took to the roads as soon as the first bomb was dropped.”
1999-05-14 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4003 (1999) · source
“The destruction of much of the Yugoslav industry has rendered half a million people jobless, and more than 2 million are without any source of income whatsoever. The indirect damage from the enforced halts in production cannot be calculated. As we all witnessed, only a few days ago the Embassy of the People's Republic of China in Belgrade also fell prey to this reign of terror and twilight of reason. Three persons were killed, and a large number were wounded. This act of barbarism is without precedent in the recent history of international relations and constitutes a flagrant violation of the 1973 Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of Crimes against Internationally Protected Persons, including Diplomatic Agents.”
1999-05-14 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4003 (1999) · source
“My country has informed many United Nations specialized agencies about this disaster. NATO is increasingly using weapons banned by the Convention on Prohibitions or Restrictions on the Use of Certain Conventional Weapons Which May Be Deemed to Be Excessively Injurious or to Have Indiscriminate Effects, of 10 October 1980. These weapons include cluster bombs, which afflict children the most, depleted uranium ammunition and graphite bombs aimed at short-circuiting the power grid of the country. NATO has caused deliberate, indescribable suffering, especially to the most vulnerable segments of the population, such as pregnant women, babies in incubators, the hospitalized and the elderly. The most recent estimates put the damage done by NATO bombs at more than $100 billion.”
1999-05-14 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4003 (1999) · source
“So far more than 1,200 people have been killed and more than 5,000 wounded, while more than 300 schools, dozens of hospitals and a great number of civilian factories, bridges, railways, public roads, churches and cultural and historical monuments have been destroyed. NATO's strikes against downtown Nis and Belgrade have caused many civilian deaths, while entire city blocks, marketplaces, hospitals and even foreign diplomatic missions have been destroyed or damaged. This is telling proof that NATO is perpetrating a deliberate and premeditated genocide in an attempt to intimidate the population and erode its morale, which stands in the way of NATO's conquest and occupation. NATO bombs have caused an ecological disaster in the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia and in the region.”
1999-05-14 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4003 (1999) · source
“It is a gross violation of the Charter of the United Nations and the basic principles of international relations. Notwithstanding many requests by the Government of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, the Security Council took no steps to uphold the Charter of the United Nations, to prevent the arrogation of its authority and the violations of international peace and security. Had this legitimate request been heeded, vast human suffering and material destruction would have been avoided. NATO's campaign of terror and devastation targets civilians, infrastructure and the economy, inflicting a humanitarian catastrophe on the 11 million citizens of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia.”
1999-05-14 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4003 (1999) · source
“Mr. Jovanovie: In its latest ferocious attack, North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) aeroplanes bombed refugees in Korisa, near Prizren, and killed over 80 civilians, predominantly children, women and elderly people who were returning to their homes in Kosovo, in Metohija. Many were wounded, 58 seriously. Is this tragedy going to be once again cynically interpreted as collateral damage of NATO humanitarian bombings? How many more innocent victims have to die before the international community and the Security Council react by condemning and stopping this brutal NATO aggression against Yugoslavia and insisting on a political solution? The aggression of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization against the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, now in its fifty-first day, is continuing, expanding and intensifying.”
1999-05-14 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4003 (1999) · source
“The consequences of the bombing on the region's environment are devastating. This criminal aggression against Yugoslavia should cease immediately. The Security Council has failed until now to condemn the aggression and to halt the bombing. The entire international legal system is at stake. This morning the Security Council has perhaps the last chance to exercise its duty and reaffirm the authority invested in it by the Charter of the United Nations.”
1999-05-08 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4000 (1999) · source
“The Embassy was hit by at least two missiles. According to preliminary information, 26 Embassy staff members were wounded, two very seriously, and two persons were killed. The Embassy building is in the exclusive residential area of New Belgrade. There is no military target around there. The attack is in gross violation of the Geneva Convention of 1949 and of international law. It is, without any doubt, a war crime. It is more and more evident that NATO is waging a total war against a sovereign country and its people. It is not only Yugoslavia that is targeted, but peace and security in the region as well. The neighbouring countries are already involved in the aggression. The economy of the region is seriously disrupted by the aggression. The main waterway in Europe, the Danube, is out of use.”
1999-05-08 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4000 (1999) · source
“I would like to remind members of the Security Council that all activities of the armed forces of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia in Kosovo and Metohija were unilaterally stopped on 6 April, that the Government of Serbia and Yugoslavia has called on all refugees and displaced persons to return home, guaranteeing them safety and security, and that constructive talks were conducted on a number of occasions between the highest representative of Serbia and Yugoslavia and Dr. Ibrahim Rugova. However, the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia has the right and the duty to protect itself from aggression. The right and the duty are enshrined in the constitution as well as in the Charter of the United Nations and international law. Yesterday, the aggressors' warplanes targeted and destroyed the Embassy of the People's Republic of China in Belgrade.”
1999-05-08 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4000 (1999) · source
“Scores of television transmitters have been hit too, including the television transmitter on Mount Avala, the largest facility of its kind in Yugoslavia and the beacon above Belgrade which greeted passengers and beckoned to many generations of Yugoslavs from afar that they were coming home at last. The Federal Republic of Yugoslavia has been committed to a peaceful solution of the crisis in Kosovo and Metohija.”
1999-05-08 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4000 (1999) · source
“No army so far has vandalized Serbian medieval monasteries and churches. They survived centuries, eliciting the respect of all except NATO strategists. The NATO countries, which in their conceit like to think of themselves as standard bearers of democracy and of the right to hold a different opinion, dispatched their planes to drop bombs on television centres in my country, thus committing a crime against freedom of speech and of the media. The buildings of TV Belgrade and TV Novi Sad have been totally destroyed, as well as the Ustje business centre in Belgrade which housed three private television and four radio stations.”
1999-05-08 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4000 (1999) · source
“However, the NATO bombs threaten the lives of the entire population of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia. Who can live in a country in which houses, bridges, roads, railroads, schools, hospitals, water-supply systems, heating or house appliance plants or public transport are being systematically destroyed? Graphite bombs have short- circuited the power grid of the country, leaving more than 5 million people without power or water and by extension without the most essential provisions. NATO has used weapons banned by international conventions, causing an ecological catastrophe. Over 20,000 cluster bombs have been dropped thus far, while depleted uranium ammunition has also been used. No exception has been made for cultural monuments, cemeteries or memorials to victims of Nazi atrocities in the last war.”
1999-05-08 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4000 (1999) · source
“Using over 1,000 planes, NATO has made over 12,000 sorties thus far, has launched over 3,000 cruise missiles and has dropped more than 10,000 tons of explosives. The tragic toll is 1,200 civilian lives lost and the over 5,000 people wounded, many of whom will remain disabled for life. Can the lost or ruined life of any human being be cynically called collateral damage? Is this term fitting to describe the deaths of over 100 children brought on by NATO bombs? No mention of collateral damage or incidental killings of people and destruction of property is made in the Geneva Convention of 1949 or in the statutes of the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia. Human life has no price tag and cannot be compared to anything else.”
1999-05-08 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4000 (1999) · source
“Mr. Jovanovie: The Federal Republic of Yugoslavia sent a timely warning to the Security Council of the unforeseeable consequences of the illegal and brutal aggression of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) and requested on a number of occasions that the aggression be stopped immediately. If this legitimate request had been heeded, vast human suffering and material destruction would have been avoided. My country has been a Victim of NATO aggression for 45 days now. NATO attacks have been concentrated primarily on civilian targets, threatening lives, the environment and the basic human rights of the entire population of the country. The principle for selecting allegedly legitimate military targets looks like: hit anything, anytime, anywhere.”
1999-05-08 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4000 (1999) · source
“It is up to the Council to decide whether it will retain the responsibility that it bears under the Charter for the maintenance of international peace and security, or whether it will cede that responsibility to NATO. Today, the Council has made its choice. The right of might will be enthroned instead of the might of right.”
1999-03-26 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3989 (1999) · source
“Their aggression is unjust, illegal, indecent and unscrupulous. The aggressor displays arrogant contempt for the United Nations and its Charter and arrogates the prerogatives of the Security Council as the only organ in charge of maintaining international peace and security. The United Nations should not allow them to rob it of its rights and duties. The Security Council is in a position to prevent this if it strongly condemns the aggression today and requests NATO to stop it immediately and unconditionally. If the Security Council fails to do so it will be responsible for the breakdown of the present system of international relations. Today the Security Council is not taking only a decision on the fate of my country, but a historic decision on its own future as well.”
1999-03-26 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3989 (1999) · source
“If the aggression goes on, the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia will continue to protect its sovereignty and territorial integrity on the basis of Article 51 of the United Nations Charter. However, once the aggression is stopped, we will be ready to resume negotiations about political solutions of the problem in Kosovo and Metohija on the basis of the 10 principles adopted by the Contact Group on 29 January 1999 and the document signed in Paris by the members of our delegation. By attacking Yugoslavia, NATO has not solved the alleged humanitarian catastrophe in Kosovo and Metohija, which they so maliciously presented as a casus belli; on the contrary, they themselves are creating a catastrophe of enormous proportions for all citizens of Yugoslavia and for peace and stability in the region and beyond.”
1999-03-26 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3989 (1999) · source
“In 1941, the Axis Powers gave the Kingdom of Yugoslavia an ultimatum to join them or be destroyed. The Serbs refused to capitulate and rejected the ultimatum once again. Now Yugoslavia is faced with another ultimatum, this time from NATO - from so-called democratic countries. It has been offered two alternatives: either voluntarily to give up a part of its territory or to have it taken away by force. This is the essence of the "solution" for Kosovo and Metohija that was offered by way of an ultimatum at the "negotiations" in France. The flagrant aggression by NATO countries, led by the United States, cannot be justified on any grounds whatsoever. The fact that they change position and objectives every day is telling proof that they do not believe in what they are saying themselves.”
1999-03-26 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3989 (1999) · source
“The aggression and the massive and reckless bombing campaign is not limited to the so-called military targets alone, but brings death to hundreds of civilians and destroys property. In a callous act, the aggressors did not spare the memorial park in the martyr city of Kragujevac, in which tens of thousands of victims of Nazi genocide from the Second World War are buried, or the museum town of Cetinje, which have no military significance at all. Two camps of Serbian refugees from Croatia and Bosnia and Herzegovina and two student hostels were hit, as well. For the third time in this century, the Serbian people have been presented with an ultimatum. In 1914, the Habsburgs issued an ultimatum, demanding the Kingdom of Serbia so as to throw its sovereignty underfoot, but the Serbian people rejected it.”
1999-03-26 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3989 (1999) · source
“They disgracefully distort the truth about the events in Kosovo and Metohija, openly supporting and assisting separatists and terrorists and demonizing the Serbian people and my country in a shameless attempt to manipulate the world public and provide a cover for their aggression. By attacking Yugoslavia, NATO aircraft have become the air force and the ally of the terrorist Kosovo Liberation Army (KLA). The NATO aggression has stepped up the KLA terrorist activities, not only against the Yugoslav security forces, but also against civilians, including Albanians. A victim of this aggression, we have no choice but to defend ourselves and preserve our sacred land of Kosovo and Metohija, which is the soul of the Serbian national being. Opposing the aggression, we also uphold the basic principles of the Charter of the United Nations.”
1999-03-26 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3989 (1999) · source
“Mr. Jovanovie: My country has been a victim of the brutal unlawful aggression of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), led by the United States of America, for the third straight day. The most powerful war machine in the world has made a sovereign and peaceful country and its proud people into a killing field and a testing ground for its most sophisticated weaponry and military games. Tramping upon each and every principle of international relations, defying the authority of the Security Council of the United Nations and its resolutions and out- performing even the Nazis in its animosity towards and hatred of the Serbian and Montenegrin people, NATO, led by the United States of America, has engaged in a mad orgy of destruction and havoc against one small and peace- loving country.”
1999-03-26 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3989 (1999) · source
“If the aggression is not stopped, the precedent of such unpunished aggression will, sooner or later, lead to aggression against a number of other, smaller and medium-sized countries. The real question is: Which country is next? Sixty-five years ago, the Emperor Haile Selassie, whose country was subjected to aggression by Fascist Italy - as the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia is today by NATO and the United States of America - entered history with his prophetic outcry that the League of Nations and international peace would be fatally wounded if the aggression did not stop. The United Nations is at the crossroads today, as the League of Nations was then. I hope that, this time, the United Nations chooses the right path.”
1999-03-24 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3988 (1999) · source
“The NATO air strikes have already resulted in heavy destruction and great loss of human life. If this aggression is not stopped immediately and unconditionally, its consequences for peace in the world will be catastrophic. I call on the members of the Security Council to act swiftly and in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations to condemn this act of aggression and to take appropriate measures to stop it immediately and unambiguously so that all problems may be resolved by political means. The Government of my country extends an urgent appeal to all States to categorically oppose the current aggression of NATO and the United States of America against the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia.”
1999-03-24 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3988 (1999) · source
“It is fully in line with the highest European standards relating to human rights, democracy and multi-ethnicity. As in the past, we remain committed to a reasonable political settlement of the problems in Kosovo and Metohija that respects the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Serbia and Yugoslavia and guarantees the equality of the rights of all citizens and national communities living there. If the Security Council does not protect a State Member of the United Nations against such aggression, it will undermine the entire system of international peace and security as we know it. The question is: What has happened to the credibility of the Security Council and who is responsible for maintaining international peace and security? Is it the Security Council or the usurper, NATO?”
1999-03-24 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3988 (1999) · source
“The meetings in France were not negotiations about the autonomy of Kosovo and Metohija, but a crude and unprecedented attempt to impose a solution clearly endorsing the separatists' objectives, under pressure, blackmail and the threat of use of force against my country. The Government of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia was and is ready to find a political solution. We give it absolute priority, but we cannot agree to the secession of Kosovo and Metohija, either immediately or after the interim period of three years. Our delegation had submitted a document on the substantial autonomy and genuine self-government of Kosovo and Metohija on the basis of the 10 principles agreed by the Contact Group. That document is signed by all the members of our delegation.”
1999-03-24 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3988 (1999) · source
“We expect and request the Security Council to take immediate action strongly to condemn and stop the aggression against the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia and to protect its sovereignty and territorial integrity. Until this happens, my country has no alternative but to defend its sovereignty and territorial integrity by all means at its disposal, in accordance with Article 51 of the Charter of the United Nations. The NATO attacks have been made against my country only because Yugoslavia, as a sovereign and independent State, refuses to allow foreign troops to occupy its territory and to reduce its sovereignty. The excuse for this NATO action was the alleged refusal of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia to sign the so-called agreement, which had neither been endorsed by all members of the Contact Group nor negotiated with my country.”
1999-03-24 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3988 (1999) · source
“By bombing massively and indiscriminately the cities and towns of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, NATO has become the air force and mercenary of the terrorist Kosovo Liberation Army (KLA). The United States of America and NATO must assume full responsibility for all consequences of their act of open aggression, both foreseeable and unforeseeable. By committing the aggression against the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, NATO has trampled upon international law and the fundamental principles of international relations by endangering peace and security in the world in the most irresponsible and criminal way. That is why my Government requested, on the basis of Chapter VII of the United Nations Charter, an urgent meeting of the Security Council.”
1999-03-24 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3988 (1999) · source
“This blatant aggression is a flagrant violation of the basic principles of the Charter of the United Nations and is in direct contravention of its Article 53, paragraph 1, which states that, "no enforcement action shall be taken under regional arrangements or by regional agencies without the authorization of the Security Council". Today, NATO was unmasked. It ceased to be a defensive military alliance and became an aggressive military alliance, disregarding its own statute, the Charter of the United Nations, and the Paris Charter of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE), as well as the system of international relations based on respect for the sovereignty and territorial integrity of States.”
1999-03-24 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3988 (1999) · source
“Mr. Jovanovie: Today, the armed forces of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) committed a unilateral act of the most brutal and unprovoked aggression against the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, a sovereign and independent State and a founding Member of the United Nations. The Federal Republic of Yugoslavia has not threatened any country or the peace and security of the region. It has been attacked because it sought to solve an internal problem and used its sovereign right to fight terrorism and prevent the secession of a part of its territory that has always belonged to Serbia and Yugoslavia. The decision to attack an independent country has been taken outside the Security Council, the sole body responsible, under the Charter of the United Nations, for maintaining international peace and security.”
1999-03-24 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3988 (1999) · source
“The Federal Republic of Yugoslavia is ready, on the basis of relevant mutual agreements on this question, as well as of Security Council resolutions, to continue to negotiate with Croatia, on condition that the other side approaches the problem in a responsible and conscientious manner. If one seeks the normalization of relations, one should demonstrate wisdom and readiness to overcome problems in a peaceful and negotiated manner, rather than strive to create new ones.”
1996-01-15 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3619 (1996) · source
“We commend the Security Council for having decided to accept the recommendations of the Secretary- General contained in his report of 12 December 1995 and to extend the presence of the United Nations monitors on the Prevlaka pending a mutually acceptable solution. In so doing, the Security Council has demonstrated political wisdom, as well as a sense of reality. This is the best contribution to the strengthening of stability in the region, preventing new and unnecessary problems. We are confident that the question of Prevlaka can be resolved peacefully, as was the case with many other even more complex issues in the territory of the former Yugoslavia. Historical events in Dayton and Paris bear witness to that.”
1996-01-15 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3619 (1996) · source
“This is indeed a very strange development, since Croatia has been involved in negotiations or talks with the representatives of the Republic of Montenegro and the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia for more than four years on this question. The international community nevertheless has noted that there is a territorial dispute; it did so the moment the Security Council decided to deploy the United Nations military observers with the mandate of monitoring the demilitarization. Considering the sensitivity of this issue, as well as the strategic relevance of the area, we feel that the further presence of the United Nations troops would be the best guarantor, if misunderstandings and new problems are to be avoided.”
1996-01-15 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3619 (1996) · source
“The guarantees concerning the tripartite exchange of territories among the Republic of Croatia, Bosnia and Herzegovina and the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia and the solution of the Prevlaka dispute in favour of the Republic of Montenegro and the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, which the Republic of Croatia agreed to on that occasion, are known to all participants in the proximity peace talks in Dayton. However, since the Dayton Agreement, the Croatian side has called the agreed arrangements into question in a number of public statements of high-ranking officials of the Republic of Croatia. Recently, the Republic of Croatia has begun to deny that what is at stake is a territorial dispute on Prevlaka.”
1996-01-15 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3619 (1996) · source
“On that occasion, after having decided to demilitarize Prevlaka, the two sides concurred that the general security of the Boka Kotorska Bay and Dubrovnik would be solved through further negotiations. The Agreement was confirmed by Security Council resolution 779 (1992), by which the United Nations resumed responsibility for monitoring the arrangements agreed to and the observance of the United Nations security regime pending the reaching of a peaceful solution to the contentious issue. During the peace negotiations in Dayton, the delegation of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia did its utmost to reach a negotiated solution to the dispute in direct contacts with the representatives of the Republic of Croatia, in the presence of the representatives of the United States.”
1996-01-15 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3619 (1996) · source
“In essence, what is at stake is a classic territorial dispute which has been noted as such since Croatia's secession from the previous Yugoslavia, by both the Croatian side and the international community. The Croatian side, in negotiations that took place as early as 1991 with representatives of the Republic of Montenegro, in principle accepted the possibility that the dispute could be resolved through a tripartite exchange of territory between the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, the Bosnian Serbs and Croatia. The present legal status of the disputed part of territory incorporating the Cape Oetri Rt and a part of the Prevlaka hinterland was regulated by the Joint Declarations of the President of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia and the President of the Republic of Croatia of 30 September and 20 October 1992.”
1996-01-15 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3619 (1996) · source
“Following the signing of the peace Agreement for Bosnia and Herzegovina and the reaching of the Basic Agreement for Eastern Slavonia, Baranja and Western Sirmium, we feel that conditions have been created for the resolution of other outstanding questions in a new atmosphere. One of those issues is certainly Prevlaka. The dispute over the Prevlaka peninsula is one of the most complex and significant issues in the search for a solution to the crisis in the previous Yugoslavia. It is of particular importance for the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, considering that access to the Montenegrin Bay of Boka Kotorska is fully controlled from the Prevlaka peninsula.”
1996-01-15 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3619 (1996) · source
“Therefore, it should be pointed out that the implementation of this major and politically significant Agreement, as well as mutual confidence-building, cannot be ensured by non- compliance and gross violations of human rights, sending false signals, destruction of property belonging to the other side, violation of the Security Council resolutions - in short, by embracing behaviour that is unacceptable and contrary to the new spirit of relations prevailing after Dayton and Paris, to which one of the sides very often and easily resorts, with the tacit approval of the major international factors. We expect that the United Nations peace operation to be established today will be successful and that it will fulfil the tasks set by the Security Council. That would best exemplify the fact that even the greatest problems can be solved peacefully.”
1996-01-15 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3619 (1996) · source
“The basic precondition for the successful implementation of the Agreement is that the security of the population be fully maintained. Any departure from the signed Agreement will generate additional tensions and problems, with unforeseeable consequences.”
1996-01-15 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3619 (1996) · source
“The primary responsibility for its full implementation lies with the two sides, which, with the assistance of the Co- Chairrnen of the Conference on the Former Yugoslavia and United States representatives, signed this Agreement. They are expected to translate the Agreement into action. Should those two sides, in good faith and mutual agreement, with the help of the international community, fulfil their obligations, that would defuse the situation on the ground and restore confidence and understanding essential for the success of the operation. In this framework, it is essential that confidence- building measures should be urgently established and the full security of the local population be ensured. Only in this context can the peaceful demilitarization of the region be carried out.”
1996-01-15 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3619 (1996) · source
“The successful implementation of the Agreement should create the necessary conditions for the development of the region and ensure stability, which would eventually generate calm among the citizens. The transitional authority, enjoying the trust of the population, should take control of and enhance all existing public services and administration. It is imperative that the proportionality of the ethnic structure of the region be maintained in the number of people employed, especially in top management jobs. The principle of proportionality must be respected especially in the police and the judicial system. It is obvious that the implementation of the Basic Agreement cannot depend solely on the United Nations.”
1996-01-15 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3619 (1996) · source
“The Federal Republic of Yugoslavia commends the conclusions contained in the report of the Secretary-General and rightfully expects the United Nations forces to efficiently and impartially contribute to the full implementation of the Agreement. We consider that a sufficient number of soldiers should be dispatched to Eastern Slavonia in order to enable the United Nations to entirely fulfil all the tasks that lie ahead. Should that not be the case, both United Nations credibility and the efficient implementation of the Agreement would be at risk. In addition to the military part of the operation, the United Nations also has important duties in the field of civilian administration, where the major tasks should be the protection of the civilian population and their human rights, as well as enabling an unimpeded return of the refugees.”
1996-01-15 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3619 (1996) · source
“After Dayton, London, Paris, Bonn and Vienna, it is evident that the outstanding questions can be resolved only by peaceful and political means and only if all parties demonstrate willingness to be flexible and readiness to compromise. The Federal Republic of Yugoslavia particularly wishes to emphasize that, under the Basic Agreement, the Security Council has undertaken the responsibility to guarantee peace and stability in Eastern Slavonia in the transitional period, which means to ensure the equality of all citizens and the protection of their human rights, including those of the refugees and other persons who, in accordance with the Basic Agreement, choose to return to live in Eastern Slavonia.”
1996-01-15 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3619 (1996) · source
“Mr. Jovanovie: At the outset, I wish to express satisfaction at the exemplary fashion in which you, Mr. Ambassador, have discharged the functions of the President of the Security Council during the month of January. I also wish to commend your predecessor, Ambassador Lavrov, for the outstanding manner in which he presided over the Security Council in December. The conclusion of the Basic Agreement on Eastern Slavonia, Baranja and Western Sirmium, together with the Peace Agreement for Bosnia and Herzegovina, represents a major step towards the establishment of a lasting and just peace in the territories of the former Yugoslavia. The Basic Agreement provides a solid foundation for full respect for and protection of the Serb people in the region, guaranteeing them peace, freedom and equality.”
1996-01-15 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.3619 (1996) · source