United Nations

A/50/412


General Assembly

Distr. GENERAL  

7 September 1995

ORIGINAL:
ENGLISH/SPANISH


Fiftieth session
Item 81 of the provisional agenda*


MAINTENANCE OF INTERNATIONAL SECURITY

Development of good-neighbourly relations among Balkan States

Report of the Secretary-General


CONTENTS

  Paragraphs  Page

I.  INTRODUCTION ........................................  1 - 22

II.  INFORMATION RECEIVED FROM GOVERNMENTS ...............  3 - 1222

  Austria .............................................  3 - 122

  Bulgaria ............................................  13 - 224

  Chile ...............................................   237

  Croatia .............................................  24 - 567

  The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia ...........  57 - 7514

  Turkey ..............................................  76 - 7918

  United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland  80 - 8419

  Yugoslavia ..........................................  85 - 12219


________________________

  *  A/50/150.


95-27209 (E)   041095/...
*9527209*
I.  INTRODUCTION

1.  On 16  December 1993, the  General Assembly adopted resolution 48/84  B,
entitled "Development  of good-neighbourly relations  among Balkan  States",
of which the relevant operative paragraphs read as follows:

    "The General Assembly,

  "...

  "4.   Requests the Secretary-General  to seek the views  of Member States,
particularly   those  from   the  Balkan   region,  and   of   international
organizations, as well as of competent organs of the United Nations, on  the
development of good-neighbourly relations in the  region and on measures and
preventive  activities aimed  at creation  of  a  stable zone  of peace  and
cooperation in the Balkans by the year 2000;

  "5.    Decides to  consider the  report  of the  Secretary-General on  the
subject at its fiftieth session."

2.     Pursuant  to   the  request   contained  in   that  resolution,   the
SecretaryGeneral, in a note verbale, requested  Member States to provide the
relevant information on the matter.   Replies received from Governments  are
reproduced in section II of the report.   Any other replies received will be
issued as addenda to the present report.


II.  INFORMATION RECEIVED FROM GOVERNMENTS

AUSTRIA

[Original:  English]

[31 May 1995]      

3.   Austria supports  all efforts  aimed at  creating favourable conditions
for a stable zone of peace and  cooperation in the Balkans.  The centrepiece
for stability  in this  area  is a  just  political  solution based  on  the
principles of  the  Charter of  the  United  Nations, the  Organization  for
Security  and  Cooperation in  Europe and  international law.   Only  such a
solution will promise to be enduring.

4.    Complementary to  such  an  agreement,  efforts  aimed at  longer-term
stability will have  to address, inter  alia, the question  of refugees  and
displaced  persons,  the  establishment  of  truly democratic  institutions,
respect for human rights and fundamental  freedoms, including the rights  of
national  minorities,  and  economic  rehabilitation.    To  achieve   this,
concerted action  by the  international community  through national  efforts
and through the relevant international organizations will be needed.

 5.   Austria would  like to  dwell on one particular  aspect of longer-term
stability in the Balkans, namely the question of military security.

6.   The JNA,  the armed forces of the  former Yugoslavia, was considered to
be the fifth largest army in  Europe.  The major part of this army was taken
over by  Serbia/Montenegro ("Federal  Republic of Yugoslavia"),  one of  the
five  successor  States  of the  former  Yugoslavia.   The  armed forces  of
Serbia/Montenegro possess  about 60  per cent  of the  battle tanks, 85  per
cent of the armoured  combat vehicles (ACVs), 65  per cent of  the artillery
pieces and 85 per cent  of the combat aircraft and attack helicopters of the
former JNA,  although the  size of the  territory and of  the population  of
Serbia/Montenegro is less than 40 per cent of  those of the former Socialist
Federal  Republic of Yugoslavia.  The armed  forces of Serbia/Montenegro are
stronger  in terms  of  quantity  and quality  than  those of  most  of  its
neighbours.

7.  While  most of the neighbouring countries  of the former Yugoslavia  are
bound by  the agreements under  the Treaty on Conventional  Forces in Europe

(CFE)  limiting the  personnel strength  and the major  conventional weapons
systems of  their armed forces, States  which have emerged  on the territory
of the former Socialist  Federal Republic of Yugoslavia  seem to be  engaged
in  an arms race  endangering the  stability of  the whole  region.   Such a
development is particularly  threatening because this region has for  nearly
3  1/2 years  been the  scene  of the  bloodiest war  in Europe  since 1945.
There is  also a high propensity in this region for  further violence due to
traditional  animosities, latent ethnic  tensions and  new enmities.   It is
therefore  imperative  that  the  military  imbalances  in  this  region  be
corrected through arms control measures and not through an arms build-up.

8.  It goes  without saying that negotiations  on arms control  measures for
south-eastern  Europe can  only begin  once  a  peace agreement  between all
parties to the conflict has been achieved and the relations between all  the
States which have emerged  on the territory of the former Socialist  Federal
Republic of  Yugoslavia  normalized.   However,  in  parallel to  the  peace
efforts undertaken by the international community,  one should consider  how
a political  settlement  could  be  reinforced  by  a set  of  measures  for
military  stability.  Without  military stability  peace in  this area would
remain  fragile.   At  the first  session of  the  OSCE Forum  for  Security
Cooperation  on 22 September  1992, Hungary  proposed as  "food for thought"
regional negotiations  on the  establishment of  a stable  balance of  armed
forces between  all new  States  on the  territory of  the former  Socialist
Federal Republic of Yugoslavia at the  lowest possible levels. Starting from
this proposal  a  group  of  countries  has  developed  a  number  of  ideas
pertinent to a possible arms control regime for south-eastern Europe. 

9.   The  concept is  not  aimed against  any country;  it  should  meet the
security needs of all the countries  in the region.  It is based on the idea
that the maximum levels of holdings  of conventional armaments and equipment
as  well as limits  for personnel  of the independent States  created on the
territory of  the former Socialist Federal  Republic of  Yugoslavia shall be
commensurate with their legitimate defence needs.

10.  The concept comprises the following elements:

  (a)  The maximum  levels of holdings and  personnel limits of these States
shall  be agreed by them  in regional negotiations with the participation of
other concerned OSCE  States.  The agreed  levels of individual States shall
take  into account  the principle  of  sufficiency.   Taken  together, these
levels shall not  exceed the  holdings of  the States  which existed  before
1991 in this region;

  (b)   Conventional armaments and equipment  of the successor States of the
former  Yugoslavia   shall  include   at  least  the   five  categories   of
conventional armaments and equipment limited by the CFE treaty;

  (c)    Paramilitary  forces  shall  be  limited  in  order  to  prevent  a
circumvention of obligations;

  (d)  All irregular forces in the region shall  be disbanded.  An effective
verification of reductions and holdings shall be established;

  (e)  In  addition to the obligations undertaken by these States,  a set of
appropriate   confidence-  and   security-building   measures   (CSBMs)  and
stabilizing measures will be  agreed among all  regional States.  Thus,  the
arms control regime for south-eastern Europe  would consist of two  tiers of
commitments.

11.   Obviously such  negotiations can  only begin  once all  States of  the
region  fully  participate  in  international   and  regional  organizations
offering an appropriate framework.   However, it would be  important for all
the parties to a political settlement, in the  context of such a settlement,
to agree in principle to the concept of military  stability in south-eastern
Europe.   Early progress in the  negotiations on  arms control, disarmament,
as well as confidence- and  security-building in south-eastern Europe, could

be  enhanced through a  variety of  incentives offered  by the international
community.

12.    Although  a  priority  task  of  these  negotiations  might  be   the
elaboration of  special CSBMs and stabilizing  measures reinforcing a  peace
agreement in  Bosnia and Herzegovina,  arms control through limitations and,
where  necessary,  reductions  should  be  on   the  agenda  from  the  very
beginning.


BULGARIA

[Original:  English]

[30 August 1995]   

13.  Situated in South-Central Europe, parts of which have today become  the
arena of  one of  the  most  intractable conflicts  in modern  history,  the
Republic  of Bulgaria  attaches primary importance to  regional security and
arms  control  issues.    A  particular  emphasis  is  put  on  the  further
enhancement of goodneighbourly  relations as  a basic  prerequisite for  the
establishment  of an atmosphere  of peace,  security and  cooperation in the
region, as well as on the entire European continent.

 14.   In  pursuing  this goal  Bulgaria  has  signed  treaties on  friendly
relations  and  cooperation  with  Greece,  Turkey,  Albania  and   Romania.
Through  regular highlevel  political contacts  and broadening  of  economic
cooperation  with  its  neighbours  Bulgaria  contributes  greatly  to   the
stability in South-Central Europe.

15.  Bulgaria has  also signed bilateral  confidence- and  security-building
measures (CSBM) agreements with Greece and  Turkey complementary to the OSCE
Vienna Document  1994, which  provide for lower thresholds  for notification
and  observation.  A  similar agreement  is expected to be  signed soon with
Romania. There seems  to be a  common understanding  among the above  States
that bilateral  CSBMs, once agreed, should  lead to  greater transparency in
military  activities, thus having a stabilizing effect, especially in border
areas, and  stimulating  contacts  between the  military of  the  respective
States at the lowest possible level.

16.    However,  promoting  multilateral  cooperation  in  the  region   and
achieving comprehensive security and confidence in South-Central Europe  are
impossible  under the conditions  of the  continuing conflict  in the former
Yugoslavia.

17.  Regretfully, the  international community has  not been able so far  to
find a  peaceful settlement.   In order  to avoid this  region becoming  the
source of a  broader and far more  devastating conflict, which would  impact
on  the whole European continent, the Government of the Republic of Bulgaria
would like to  submit to the attention  of the international community three
sets of tasks which require urgent consideration and immediate action:

  (a)   First,  to  reach, as  soon as  possible,  a peaceful,  lasting  and
balanced  settlement  to  the  conflict  on  the  territory  of  the  former
Yugoslavia;

  (b)    Second, to  prevent  the  "spillover"  of the  conflict  beyond its
present limits;

  (c)    Third,  to start  laying  even  now, the  foundations  for  lasting
stability, security and cooperation  in the South-Central European region as
an integral part of a united Europe of democratic values and institutions.

18.   Bulgaria has systematically pursued  policies designed  to support the
efforts  of the  international community  aimed at  resolving and containing
the  conflict  on  the territory  of the  former  Yugoslavia.   Bulgaria has

consistently  and in good  faith implemented United Nations Security Council
sanctions as  an instrument  for achieving  a negotiated  settlement to  the
conflict,  notwithstanding  the strong  negative  impact  on  the  country's
economy.    The crisis  in  the  former Yugoslavia  has,  in  fact,  blocked
Bulgaria's traditional transport and community links to the rest of Europe.

19.   Security and stability are  multidimensional.   Overcoming the serious
economic problems and integrating the infrastructure  of the region with the
whole of Europe are of paramount importance not  only to Bulgaria, but  also
to the  whole south-central  part of  the continent.   In  this respect  the
third set of tasks  indicated above should not be postponed until the  post-
conflict  period. The effort  should result  in the elaboration  of a common
forward-looking  comprehensive  stability- and  security-enhancing approach,
as well as in practical steps for its implementation.

20.    In  the  arms  control  field,  Bulgaria  shares the  view  that  the
establishment of  a future  harmonized arms  control  regime should  combine
measures  of an allEuropean  and a  regional character,  reflecting in every
concrete   situation   the   concept   of   indivisible   security.      Any
disproportional concentration of armaments, especially when combined with  a
lack of  control mechanisms, could  have a negative  impact on security  and
stability.   Therefore,  the establishment  of  a  credible system  of  arms
control and  SCBMs for  the territory of  the former Yugoslavia  will be  an
essential  part  of the  comprehensive  post-war  settlement.  The  relevant
international bodies  like  the  United  Nations and  the  Organization  for
Security and  Cooperation in  Europe should play  a very  important role  in
this respect.

21.   In  order  to realize  the concept  of a  peaceful, stable  and secure
SouthCentral European region as a part of  the whole European continent, the
Government  of  the Republic  of  Bulgaria would  like  to  put  forward the
following suggestions:

  (a)   Reaffirmation of  the basic  standards of good-neighbourly relations
and the existing internationally recognized borders,  as well as of all OSCE
principles and norms in the regional context;

  (b)  Development  of trans-border cooperation including modernization  and
upgrading of check-points  and border-crossing and customs procedures,  thus
facilitating  the  free  movement  of  commodities,  services,  capital  and
people, as well as promoting cooperation at the local level;

  (c)    Elaborating  ways  and  means  of  overcoming  the  stagnation  and
injecting  economic   dynamism  into  the   region  through   infrastructure
development and  properly structured  foreign investment  and financial  and
technical assistance;

  (d)      Development,   upgrading   and  interconnection   of   transport,
telecommunications and energy infrastructures in the region  with the trans-
European networks  as a  major instrument for  fostering sustained  economic
growth;

  (e)   Further improvement of the  legal basis for  trade and commerce,  as
well  as rapid expansion  of bilateral  trade flows  through trade promotion
facilities and mechanisms;

  (f)     Promoting   long-term   cooperation  for   social   and   economic
rehabilitation and for building democratic institutions and civic  societies
in an environment of political stability and economic growth.

22.   The Government  of the  Republic of  Bulgaria is  ready to  contribute
actively to the implementation of these goals.


 CHILE

[Original:  Spanish]

[31 May 1995]      

23.    Chile  supports  all  efforts  by  the  international  community, and
primarily by the parties concerned, to achieve peace in the region.


CROATIA

[Original: English]

[26 July 1995]    

24.  As a  Central European, Mediterranean and Danubian country, Croatia  is
vitally  interested in the  maintenance of  peace, stability and cooperation
and  the  strengthening of  European  integration  processes  in the  entire
region.  Hence the special  importance Croatia attaches to a real, efficient
and  lasting transformation of  the whole of South-Eastern Europe, including
the  Balkans, into  a zone  of good-neighbourly  relations, stability, peace
and cooperation, including the permanent stabilization of overall  relations
in this part of the continent.

25.  Croatia supports United Nations  General Assembly resolution 48/84 B on
the  development of good-neighbourly  relations among  the Balkan States and
awaits the report  by the Secretary-General to  the fiftieth session of  the
Assembly in  the hope that it will  give a realistic account of the state of
affairs  in the region and contain specific and well-elaborated initiatives,
as well as proposed measures and  actions for urgent stabilization, economic
reconstruction and development  of these areas, including the  establishment
of good neighbourliness in  the interest of  both the region and Europe  and
the  international community  as a  whole.   In this  connection Croatia  is
ready to  make its  full and active  contribution and assist  the Secretary-
General and the United Nations institutions.

26.   The south-east of  Europe is a  central and unavoidable  point in  any
general geo-strategic  definition and elaboration  of the Euro-Asian  system
of security.  Due  to its  historic  experience  of mixing  and  conflicting
civilizations, due  to the diversity of  interests manifested  by big powers
and unresolved  national issues,  this part  of the  European continent  has
been  more   often  exposed   to  instability,  conflicts   and  wars   than
characterized by stability and peace.

27.   In addition  to considerable material  and human resources,  this area
has an exceptional value  as an indispensable link between the European West
and East, North  and South, as well  as between Europe  and Central  Asia or
the Middle East.

28.   The  collapse  of  the communist  system  and  the end  of  cold  war,
accompanied  by the  victory  of democracy  in most  States arisen  from the
former Yugoslavia, have brought this region into a  new stage of history  by
having created the conditions  required for the  final self-determination of
nations and  complete emancipation of  States in  this region.   The  former
Yugoslav  federation has disappeared  as part  of this  historic process and
new internationally  recognized, independent and  sovereign successor States
with equal rights have emerged.

29.  Croatia firmly  believes that the indisputable fact of the existence of
these sovereign  States provides a  very sound and  the only possible  basis
for  establishing,  building  and strengthening  a  new  regional system  of
security  and  stability,  based   on  the  respect   for  independence  and
territorial integrity  of all  and each of  the States in  the region  being
equally responsible for the maintenance of regional peace.

30.   The United  Nations Security Council  resolutions 757  (1992) and  777
(1992)  and  General  Assembly resolution  47/1 from  1992,  as well  as the

Opinion 9 of the Arbitration Commission  of the International Conference  on
the Former  Yugoslavia, confirm that the  State formerly  known as Socialist
Federal Republic of Yugoslavia  (SFRY) ceased to exist  and that neither  of
the  equal  successor  States  could  claim   the  exclusive  right  to  the
succession of the rights and obligations of the former Yugoslav federation.

31.   SFR Yugoslavia finally ceased to exist in the  war of aggression waged
by  the  Yugoslav  People's  Army  (JNA)  and  Serbia  -  following  illegal
decisions by  a part of the Presidency  of that federal  State - against the
former   constituent  units:     Slovenia,  Croatia  and   then  Bosnia  and
Herzegovina.

32.   Prior to the proclamation  of independence Croatia  and Slovenia, both
jointly and  separately,  came up  with  several  proposals for  a  peaceful
resolution of  the crisis  in  the former  State:    they first  proposed  a
confederation and, finally, a commonwealth of  independent States.  This was
met with  resolute  and outright  rejection  by  Serbia and  its  leadership
whereas, at  the same  time, JNA  completed intensive  preparations for  and
then started its  aggression against each of  the mentioned States  with the
aim of coming to and drawing the so-called western borders of Serbia.

33.   This basic and indisputable responsibility for the ensuing crisis, war
and suffering in the  area is best exemplified  by the international status,
including  within   the  United   Nations  and   almost  all   international
organizations, which the State  that has caused  and waged the war -  Serbia
or FRY  (Serbia/Montenegro) has held for  several years,  on which sanctions
have  been  imposed  and  which  has   been  excluded  from  virtually   all
international organizations.

34.  Croatia believes that lasting stability in  the Balkans and the  south-
east of Europe can  be established only  if it is based on the  principle of
full equality and equal rights and obligations of all States in the  region.
In  this manner  it will be  possible to  do away  with the  security vacuum
which has opened the  door to aggression and  the ensuing war crisis, caused
by the  hegemonistic aspirations of Serbia  and Montenegro  to the sovereign
territories of Croatia and Bosnia and  Herzegovina, combined with the policy
of the threat and use of force against other neighbouring countries.

35.   One  of the most  obvious aspects  of the  open aggression  and use of
force against Croatia and Bosnia and  Herzegovina is the continuous presence
and  activity  of  the manpower,  including  top-ranking  officers,  of  the
Yugoslav Army in the parts of the sovereign  territories of these two States
Members of the United  Nations.  Such continuous presence of these troops is
the main reason why the  relations between the States of the area cannot  be
normalized.

36.   Peace and  good neighbourliness in  the south-east of  Europe and  the
Balkans can be  ensured only by establishing  an integral regional order  of
mutual  relations in compliance with  the Charter of the United Nations, the
Helsinki and Copenhagen Documents and  the Charter of Paris.     Such  a new
regional  order  must  be  specifically  based  on  independence,   complete
sovereignty and territorial integrity of all the existing States.

37.    A  prerequisite  for  overall   normalization  and  the  creation  of
conditions   for   good-neighbourly   relations  and   cooperation   is  the
application of and respect  for the highest democratic standards in the area
of human and minority rights.  The elements of such  a framework for the new
regional order should include:

  (a)   Unconditional recognition  without further  delay of  all new States
within  their  internationally  recognized  borders,   especially  by  "FRY"
(Serbia  and  Montenegro), plus  consistent  and  strict  respect for  these
borders as  condicio sine  qua non  for a just  and lasting solution  to any
individual aspect of the  crisis, as well as the stabilization of the former
Yugoslav Republic of  Macedonia and  its position through implementation  of
relevant Security  Council resolutions in  accordance with  the standards of

international  law.        As  far as  Croatia  is  concerned  such peaceful
settlements  imply complete  restoration of  the territorial  integrity  and
sovereignty of Croatia  within its internationally recognized borders,  with
full guarantees of minority rights given to the Serbian ethnic community  in
Croatia  accompanied, should there be a need, by international monitoring.  
A peaceful  settlement  in Bosnia  and  Herzegovina  should be  achieved  by
implementing  the  peace  plan  of  the  Contact  Group  and  the Washington
Agreements and  through the establishment  and international affirmation  of
the Federation of Bosnia  and Herzegovina as a  model of and  a precondition
for, as well as  a vital cornerstone of, a new balanced regional order.  The
stabilization of the position of the  former Yugoslav Republic of  Macedonia
implies in the first  place that it should  regulate its relations  with the
neighbouring  States, subject  to  strict mutual  respect  for  sovereignty,
independence  and non-interference  in internal  affairs and  combined  with
proper guarantees of minority rights;

  (b)   Ensuring the  right to safe  and dignified return  of all  displaced
persons and the  reconstruction of war-ravaged areas, with preconditions  to
be  created  for  continuous  development  assisted  by  the   international
community;

  (c)   Normalization of  relations between  the States in  the region  with
consistent  respect for  international borders,  the implementation  of  the
highest  European   standards  in  dealing  with  minority  issues  and  the
inclusion  of  bilateral  and multilateral  instruments  regarding  minority
issues in  the Stability Pact in  Europe, as well  as addressing other  open
issues by political means, negotiations or through international mediation;

  (d)   The  establishment  of open  relations and  transparent  cooperation
among the  States in  the  region in  all  areas,  such as  economy,  trade,
transport, telecommunications, environmental protection  and other areas  of
common interest for independent and versatile  development of the States and
of  the region  as  a whole  based on  the  openness of  the  region  to all
neighbouring regions in order  to ensure unimpeded flow of people, goods and
capital;

  (e)   Intensifying the  process of  including each  individual State  and,
ultimately,  the whole region  in the integration of  Europe, subject to the
fulfilment of the existing conditions, especially  with respect to human and
civil  rights, with international support and supervision  through OSCE, the
Council of Europe and other international institutions;

  (f)   The  establishment of  the  CSBM  system and  stabilizing  measures,
including a  balanced arms control system  based on and within the framework
of the CFE agreement, as  initiated by Croatia within CSCE  by the letter of
9 September 1993 from  the Croatian President and  as proposed by Croatia at
the Rome CSCE Ministerial Conference of 30 November 1994.

38.   Within  OSCE Croatia  continues  to  cooperate with  several  European
States (Austria, Turkey,  Hungary) in order to  move the process formally in
this direction once the right opportunity arises.

39.  The new  regional security order must  be based  on the existence of  a
defence potential  necessary  for the  exercise  of  the right  to  national
defence along  with a new security system to be built in Europe, which is to
say that:

  (a)  Military doctrines  of the States in the region should be exclusively
defensive  and in all  respects adapted  to the  international agreements on
restricted  use of military  force and  non-use of  chemical, biological and
nuclear weapons;

  (b)   The successor States  to the former  SFR Yugoslavia  should reach an
agreement  on  the highest  level  of armament  they  are  allowed  to keep,
including manpower restrictions in conformity with their legitimate  defence
requirements;

  (c)   The highest  potentials and  manpower restrictions  in the successor
States to the former SFR Yugoslavia,  taken together, should not  exceed the
level and  restrictions fixed for  the former SFR  Yugoslavia to  the effect
that  neither of the States can be allowed to have more than a fair share in
the potential of the former SFR Yugoslavia (defence sufficiency principle);

  (d)  The conventional  armament of the successor  States to the former SFR
Yugoslavia, thus restricted,  should include all  categories of  weapons and
equipment subject to CFE restrictions;

  (e)  Irregular forces should be disbanded;

  (f)  Manpower restrictions should comprise paramilitary troops;

  (g)  An efficient verification mechanism  should be established to monitor
arms  reduction  and adherence  to  the fixed  ceiling.   Also  required  is
initial inspection to define the starting state of affairs;

  (h)  A set of appropriate stabilizing measures should be agreed.
  40.  It goes without saying that negotiations can begin  only when all the
States  in the  region accept  the United  Nations and  OSCE principles  and
standards  of  international   relations.    Such  negotiations  should   be
conducted at  the level of  a regional group  to be set  up within the  OSCE
Forum for  Cooperation in the  Area of Security.   Croatia  will continue to
contribute to  the establishment of  the kind of  relations within  OSCE and
the  United Nations which are likely to lead to a peaceful settlement in the
region and good neighbourliness.

41.   Adhering  to  the Charter  of the  United  Nations, the  standards  of
international law and  the Declaration  on Principles  of International  Law
concerning Friendly  Relations and  Cooperation among  States in  accordance
with the Charter  of the United Nations, as  well as the principles  defined
within OSCE,  since gaining  independence Croatia has been  actively engaged
in  developing good-neighbourly relations  with all  its direct and indirect
neighbours.   In this  area significant  results have  been achieved  in its
relations  with  Albania,   Austria,  Hungary,  Bulgaria,   Italy,  Romania,
Slovenia, Turkey and, especially, with Bosnia and Herzegovina.

42.  Croatia attaches special importance  to regional cooperation in  Europe
and thus  pursues an active policy  within the  Central European Initiative,
the AlpsAdria Working Community and the Community of Danube Countries.

43.   Croatia  is also  actively  engaged  in negotiating  the institutional
links  with the  European  Union  (EU) and  the  Council of  Europe  and  is
interested  in taking part  in the  Partnership for Peace  with the ultimate
aim  of  joining  the  North Atlantic  Treaty  Organization  (NATO)  itself.
Croatia believes that the extension of the existing and the creation of  new
security instruments to encompass the countries of the region are an  urgent
and  vital  prerequisite  for  stabilization  and  overcoming  the   present
security vacuum in this  part of the Euro-Asian area.  Croatia's views  stem
from its geo-strategic  position and its political, economic,  technological
and  cultural  features,  and  are  thus  closely  linked  to  its long-term
strategic interests, including a political settlement  to the crisis in  the
region as a precondition for democratic and independent development.

44.   The new regional  order in South-East  Europe and  the Balkans must be
and can be based on the overall normalization  of the relations between  the
Croatian  and Serbian peoples, which is to say,  between Croatia and Serbia.
Such normalization should be  based on mutual and permanent respect for  the
real  national interests of  the two peoples and  their States, dealing with
issues   by  peaceful  political   means  and   laying  the  foundation  for
cooperation between two completely independent and  sovereign States.   This
implies  proper  solutions  to  the  position  of  their  respective  ethnic
communities, the Croatian in Serbia and the Serbian in Croatia.

45.   Croatia  is putting  its  best  efforts to  this  end.   However,  any

normalization process must be preceded by  recognition of Croatia and Bosnia
and  Herzegovina by  FRY (Serbia/Montenegro),  within their  internationally
recognized  boundaries,  as   well  as   by  public   and  legally   binding
renouncement  of  territorial  gains  achieved  through  illegal  change  of
international borders  by the use  of force.   It must also  be preceded  by
cessation of any further military activities  and armed violence against the
neighbour States.
  46.  FRY (Serbia/Montenegro) is persistently  refusing to commit itself to
such  recognition,   although  demanded  to  do   so  by  Security   Council
resolutions,  EU  and the  positions  taken  by the  G7+1  (group  of  major
industrialized  countries  plus the  Russian  Federation)  and  the  Contact
Group.  The present attitude of the socalled  FRY towards the sovereign  and
internationally  recognized neighbouring  States indicates  that it  is  not
really prepared for a peaceful settlement  or for renouncing the territorial
conquests achieved  through open  aggression against Croatia and  Bosnia and
Herzegovina  and for the establishment of a new regional order in accordance
with international law.

47.       The   existing    international   sanctions    imposed   on    FRY
(Serbia/Montenegro) as a  crucial agent in regulating the regional relations
and virtually the only means of international pressure must remain in  force
and be  tightened.  Any  alleviation of the sanctions  must be unequivocally
accompanied by  actual cessation of the  aggressive actions  by Belgrade and
clear evidence  of its  firm commitment  to the  implementation of  peaceful
solutions as an irreversible process.

48.   Since the emergence of the political crisis and the outbreak of war in
South-East Europe Croatia has been consistently  engaged in efforts to  find
a political  solution to all  the causes  and consequences of  the conflicts
with the  assistance  and mediation  of  the  international community.    In
adhering to  such principles Croatia  has accepted the  internationalization
of the problem and the presence of international representatives,  including
the  presence of  the United  Nations  Protection  Force (UNPROFOR)  and the
United  Nations  Confidence  Restoration  Operation  (UNCRO)  on  its  soil,
convinced that consistent, efficient and determined implementation of  their
mandates may lead to the desired progress towards peace.

49.   At the same time,  Croatia has been  cooperative in the  international
community's peace  endeavours to the maximum  extent and  has been proposing
peace initiatives of its own.

50.  With its democratic Constitution and the special  Constitutional Law on
Human Rights and the Rights of Ethnic Communities or Minorities Croatia  has
already laid  down a constitutional framework  for a lasting solution to the
conflict and the safe existence of the Serbian  minority in Croatia.   These
constitutional  solutions  were a  precondition for  the recognition  of the
Republic of Croatia by EC.

51.   Thus the  members of  the Serbian ethnic community  are guaranteed not
only individual  human and  ethnic rights  and cultural  autonomy, but  also
local selfgovernment  in the areas  where the Serbian population constituted
a majority  before  the  war,  i.e. in  the  districts  of Knin  and  Glina.
Further, the Peace Initiative by the  Croatian President Dr. Franjo  Tudjman
of 1 November 1993  on the peaceful reintegration  of the occupied  areas of
Croatia envisages  a  strong commitment  of  the  Croatian State  to  urgent
reconstruction  and   development  of   these  areas,   combined  with   the
realization of all social, educational,  selfgovernment and other  rights of
the population living there.

52.   It was  along these lines  that Croatia negotiated  in good faith  and
signed the  Cease-fire Agreement plus  several economic agreements  (opening
of traffic  routes, oil pipeline, etc.),  striving to  normalize the overall
situation  in  the  country  and  to  create  conditions  for  talks  on the
political  aspects  of   peaceful  reintegration  of  the  occupied   areas.
However, the present  self-proclaimed leadership of the Croatian Serbs broke
all signed  economic agreement by closing the motorway and the oil pipeline.

They   also  broke  the   Cease-fire  Agreement  by  continuing  with  their
provocations  and attacks on the free  parts of Croatia and on  parts of the
territory of Bosnia and Herzegovina.

53.  At the same time, FRY (Serbia/Montenegro), i.e. the Yugoslav Army,  has
continued  with   a  direct  military   intervention  and  infiltration   of
personnel,  troops  and equipment  in  the  occupied  Croatian  territories.
Meanwhile, FRY (Serbia/Montenegro) have set up  a new military command  over
the renegade forces of the Croatian Serbs, who are on FRY's payroll.

54.  The responsibility  for the absence of any progress towards a  peaceful
settlement lies with  the rebel Serbs  in Croatia,  as well  as the  Bosnian
Serbs  when  it  comes  to  the  conflict in  Bosnia  and  Herzegovina.   At
Belgrade's  instigation  and  with  its  support,  including  military,  the
Croatian  Serbs persevere in  their policy  of no  conciliation by adamantly
refusing  to negotiate the  peaceful reintegration  of the occupied Croatian
territories in  defiance of  all the  relevant resolutions  of the  Security
Council and  General Assembly  resolution 49/43, whereas  the Bosnian  Serbs
reject the peace plan for  Bosnia and Herzegovina of the Contact Group.  Due
to such an attitude towards the peace process and  the complete inefficiency
and  inconsistency of  the  international  peace  mediators and  the  United
Nations  peace-keeping  forces  in  the  field,  the   current  conflict  is
deteriorating and the prospects for its  de-escalation have weakened and the
chances of opening the way to a lasting political solution have diminished.

55.   A  peaceful solution  to  the present  acute and  extremely  dangerous
crisis one that would end up  in a stable regional order, equality of States
and good neighbourliness  in the region -  requires the active engagement of
the most responsible  international forums, especially the Security  Council
and United Nations  Secretary-General.  An important  role in it  belongs to
EU, OSCE, the Council  of Europe and  NATO.  Important chances for  concrete
and creative  engagement could  be offered  by the  Economic Commission  for
Europe of the United Nations.

56.   Croatia expects  the United  Nations Secretary-General  to consult and
take  into account the  ideas of  these important  regional institutions and
organizations  before submitting  his report on the  situation and prospects
of  transforming   the  Balkans  into  a   zone  of   peace,  stability  and
cooperation.


THE FORMER YUGOSLAV REPUBLIC OF MACEDONIA

[Original: English]

[20 June 1995]    

57.  The present situation in the Balkans  is characterized by the existence
of many  open  issues, conflicts  and  opposed  interests among  the  Balkan
States, inherited  from the  past and  not resolved up  to this day.   There
have always been  initiatives for development of good-neighbourly  relations
and  cooperation,  as well  as  for  development  of  multilateral forms  of
cooperation in  the Balkans.  In certain periods the  promotion of relations
among the  Balkan States  by peaceful means  was dominant.   However,  there
have been  periods when  force was  used for  resolving the problems  or the
disputes.

58.   The history  of the  Balkans is  more a  history of  conflicts than  a
history of cooperation.   Everything possible should be done to prevent  the
repetition of such a destiny in the future.   This is possible.   It depends
on the political will  and the readiness  of the Balkan States and  nations,
and  on  European  and  world  factors,   to  direct  developments  in  that
direction.

59.   The geopolitical  position of the  Balkans has  always been  extremely
important  strategically to  the non-Balkan  Powers.   The  Balkans' natural

resources,  potential and other  capacities have  always been  the cause for
their constant interest in  the region.  This  is why the  situation in  the
Balkans has always influenced the nature of European  and world politics, as
well as the foreign policy of the European  and world Powers.  The two world
wars lasted  the longest in the  Balkans.  Illustrative is  the fact of  the
long-lasting war in Bosnia and Herzegovina and in Croatia.

60.   All Balkan States  are burdened with the past  and with their history.
Some forces  and  certain circles,  which  are  not without  influence,  are
promoting aspirations outside of  their State.  The myth and the tendency to
create socalled  "greater States" is also present.  This makes the relations
among Balkan States very  sensitive.  It also increases the mistrust between
them.   However, officially  and publicly  all Balkan  States have  declared
themselves in favour of the development of good-neighbourly relations.

61.   After the  First and  Second World  Wars, there  were initiatives  for
multilateral inter-Balkan cooperation.   There were  proposals for  a Balkan
Federation,   Balkan  treaties,   Balkan  non-nuclear  arms   zones,  Balkan
alliances in different areas and  so on.   There are proposals of this  kind
today, too,  after the  cold war.  It  is important to note  that all Balkan
States  have been  initiators of  certain proposals.   A  certain number  of
these  initiatives,  for  instance   in  the  fields   of  sport,   culture,
humanitarian assistance  and traffic, have  been successful.   Difficulties,
however,  have always arisen  with the  initiatives in  the political field.
The  main reason for  this, especially  after the Second World  War, was the
division  of  the  Balkan  States  on  the  basis  of  their  political  and
ideological  position and  their  membership in  different  military  blocs.
That  results in  the  political  field were  limited  was also  due to  the
different  positions  of  the  Balkan  States   on  the  issue  of  national
minorities,  as   well  as  to   their  unwillingness   to  abandon  certain
aspirations, dogmas  and double  standards, and  to accept  reality and  the
accepted  international standards  and behaviour  in the  relations  between
States.

62.  In such  a situation the  question whether  the Balkan region could  be
transformed from  a conflict  zone or,  as it  is sometimes  referred to,  a
"powder keg", into a  zone of peace and cooperation,  an integral part of an
integrated Europe, has to  be asked.  The Government of the former  Yugoslav
Republic  of  Macedonia  considers  this   to  be  possible,  realistic  and
indispensable.  This can be  most speedily achieved by  strict observance of
the provisions of the Charter of the United Nations and of General  Assembly
resolution 48/84 B by all Balkan and non-Balkan  States and factors, and  by
taking  and implementing decisive  measures and  activities with  the aim of
integrating all Balkan States into the  European democratic processes and of
preventing the use of  force and other  means contrary to international  law
in  the resolution of  the outstanding  issues.  In that  the most important
rule  should be the  respect of  the accepted  norms governing international
relations  and  the  observance  of  the  territorial  integrity,   national
sovereignty and political independence of all Balkan States.

63.   In the development of  good-neighbourly relations  among Balkan States
an  important  contribution can  be  made  not  only  by  the Balkan  States
themselves, but also by the non-Balkan  States, especially those which  have
already  developed  important  cooperation  with  the  former.     Important
contribution can also be made by  the United Nations Secretary-General,  the
General  Assembly, the  Security Council,  the Economic  and Social Council,
the United Nations Economic Commission  for Europe, the specialized agencies
and  others.     The  contribution   by  the   European  organizations   and
institutions, both governmental and non-governmental, and especially by  the
OSCE, the  Council of Europe, and the  European Union could also be of great
significance.

64.  The implementation of the objectives set  forth in the resolution 48/84
B  requires  the  preparation  of  a  separate  programme  of  measures  and
activities for the  development of good-neighbourly  relations in the region
aimed  at creation of  a stable  zone of  peace and cooperation  by the year

2000.   This is  the basic  request of  the resolution.   The most competent
authority  of  the  United  Nations  to  prepare  such  a  programme is  the
Secretary-General,  in  close  cooperation  with  OSCE  and  the  Council of
Europe.  The General Assembly could adopt this programme at its  fifty-first
or fifty-second session.

65.   There are  many materials  (reports, studies)  on the Balkans  done by
governmental  and non-governmental  organizations as  well as  by  competent
authors (Balkanologists).   Different ideas for the destiny and  the past of
the Balkan region, the  Balkan States and the Balkan nations are  considered
in them.  But  there is little on  the vision  of the future development  of
the  Balkans, its  integration  in  the processes  of development  of  a new
Europe, in the Europeanization of the  Balkans in the sense  of implementing
the  positive modern achievements  in cooperation  among States,  and in the
current integration processes; these should also be the main concern of  the
proposed programme.

66.   In  order  for  a credible  programme  to  be prepared,  it  would  be
necessary for  the Secretary-General  to prepare  a separate  report on  the
Balkans, on  the  basis of  the  existing  documentation and  on  additional
research,  undertaken as  part of  the  preparation of  that report.    This
report/study  could  be  the  basis  for  the  preparation  of  the proposed
programme, which  should be  called "Agenda  on the  Europeanization of  the
Balkans".   This  report could  give an  overview  of  the situation  in the
Balkans.  Special attention  should be paid to the outstanding issues and to
the  ways they could  be resolved, to the prospects  for the Balkans and its
Europeanization.  In view of the  fact that the nature, quality and scope of
the relations between the  Balkan States differ, it would be useful, as part
of  the  report,  to  prepare  and  propose  "a  model for  modern  European
goodneighbourly  relations  among the  Balkan  States".   All  Balkan States
would like to be admitted to the European Union as soon as possible  (Greece
is a  member) and therefore  it would  be advisable to prepare  this part of
the Report in close cooperation with the European  Union and with the United
Nations Economic Commission for Europe (ECE).

67.  It  would be  useful if the  report and  the agenda  of the  Secretary-
General,  before being considered and adopted/noted by the General Assembly,
could be  discussed and  verified by  an ad  hoc forum  (symposium or  round
table) organized by the Secretary-General and  by a Balkan State  interested
in hosting such a meeting.   Renowned experts on Balkan issues could also be
invited to take part  as independent experts.  The Government of the  former
Yugoslav  Republic  of  Macedonia  is  prepared,  in  cooperation  with  the
Secretary-General, to organize such a meeting in 1996 or 1997.

68.  The proposed agenda for the Europeanization  of the Balkans could  also
refer to  current Balkan  topics.   It  could be  an important  contribution
towards  resolving  the  consequences  of  the  present  war  in  Bosnia and
Herzegovina  and   in  Croatia,   especially  by   securing  the   necessary
international  support  for the  reconstruction  and  development  of  these
States after  the war.  It  is well known that  all Balkan  States and other
neighbouring States have sustained huge material  damages and losses due  to
the war,  as well  as to  the consequences  of the United  Nations sanctions
against  FR  Yugoslavia   (Serbia  and  Montenegro).     The   necessity  of
international action  for the reconstruction of  the Balkans  after the wars
in Bosnia and Herzegovina  and Croatia, after the  end of the present Balkan
crisis, is obvious.

69.   The proposed  agenda could  also be useful to  normalize the relations
between  the  Republic   of  Slovenia,  the  former  Yugoslav  Republic   of
Macedonia,  the  Republic  of  Croatia  and   the  Republic  of  Bosnia  and
Herzegovina,  and the FR  Yugoslavia (Serbia  and Montenegro).  Furthermore,
this agenda  could also  be  of  use in  resolving the  current  outstanding
issues between Albania and the FR  Yugoslavia (Serbia and Montenegro),  then
between Turkey and Greece, between Albania  and Greece, between Romania  and
Hungary, between  the former Yugoslav Republic  of Macedonia  and Greece, as
well  as  for the  elimination  of  the  existing  impediments and  barriers

between Balkan States.

70.  Special  attention could be paid in the proposed agenda to the position
and the role of  the national minorities,  which are numerous in the  Balkan
region  and  have different  status.   Minority issues  in the  Balkans have
always been the causes of conflict.

71.    The bilateral  relations between  the  Balkan  States in  all spheres
legislative, economic, cultural,  sport - and cooperation between  different
social and interest associations should also be referred to in the  proposed
Agenda.  It would  be useful if the basic  data/facts concerning each of the
Balkan States were noted.   Another useful matter  that should be emphasized
in the  agenda is  the necessary  activities that  the Balkan  States should
undertake  in  the  process of  their  Europeanization  (membership  in  the
European   institutions,  adoption   and  implementation   of  the  European
standards  in  all  spheres,  in  the   development  of  democracy,  in  the
observance of  human rights,  etc).  It  is very important  that the  agenda
should  be a  means for  speeding up  the  process  of including  the Balkan
States in European integration.   It should be in the interest of all Balkan
States and they all should benefit  from it.  In this way the agenda will be
a  very important  contribution towards  strengthening Balkan  and  European
security.

72.  It is expected that  the Secretary-General's report on resolution 48/84
B will cover essential  issues and that it will  be action oriented.   There
is hope that  it could open up new prospects for the Balkan  States and that
it  will help in the realization of their aspirations for speedy integration
into  the European structures.  It  will be also a good  opportunity for the
Secretary-General to give an  overview of a number of current issues in  the
Balkans.   It  would be  useful if  the  Secretary-General could  inform the
General Assembly about the current numerous  activities being carried out in
the  Balkans by  the United  Nations,  the  specialized agencies,  OSCE, the
Council of Europe and other competent international organizations.

73.   The Balkans  have been  the centre  of interest  of the  international
community for several years.   The United Nations  is present in  the region
with  its peacekeeping  forces, then with humanitarian  assistance and other
activities.    The  European  countries  are  also present,  especially  the
members  of the  European Union.   Present  also  are  the United  States of
America, the Russian Federation and others.   However, the expected  results
in terms  of  ending the  war,  helping  the  transition and  resolving  the
outstanding issues  and the  Europeanization of  the Balkan  States are  not
satisfactory.   One of  the main  reasons for the failure  is the palliative
attitude towards  the  difficult  situation  in  the  Balkans  and  marginal
attention dedicated  to preventive actions and  to the  development of good-
neighbourly relations based  on mutual respect  and equality.   It is  clear
that the  Balkan States  must observe  and practice  tolerance  and live  in
peace as good neighbours.  There is  hope that this activity of  the General
Assembly, based  on its resolution 48/84  B, in  which the Secretary-General
could play an important  role, will be of essential help to the  development
of good-neighbourly relations in the region.

74.   The  former Yugoslav  Republic of  Macedonia, from  the start  of  its
independence,   has  committed   itself   to  the   development   of   good-
neighbourliness   and  to  follow  the  principle  of  equidistance  in  its
relations with its neighbours and the  European standards in the development
of democracy,  the rule of  law, a market  economy, the  observance of human
rights,  including  those  of national  minorities,  and  so  on.    It also
committed  itself   to  follow  strictly   the  principles  of   territorial
integrity, political independence and the resolution  of problems by way  of
peaceful means and  dialogue on  the basis of  equality, mutual respect  and
non-interference in the internal matters  of other States.  It will continue
to pursue this policy in the future.

 75.   The  development of  the  former Yugoslav  Republic of  Macedonia  is
closely linked  to  the situation  in the  Balkans due  to its  geographical

position.  The former  Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia expects a lot from the
resolution of the  present situation, however  difficult and  in a state  of
crisis it  is, and from  the necessary reconstruction  of the  Balkans after
the wars  and the crisis  and particularly from  the Europeanization of  the
Balkans.   Good-neighbourliness has  no alternative and  could greatly  help
this  endeavour,  which was  the  initial  reason  why  the former  Yugoslav
Republic  of Macedonia  has committed  itself  to  the development  of good-
neighbourly  relations among Balkan  States and  why it  proposed resolution
48/84  B,  adopted at  the  forty-eighth  session  of  the General  Assembly
without a vote.


/...  A/50/412
  English
  Page

A/50/412
English
Page

TURKEY

[Original:  English]

[31 May 1995]      

76.  In order to establish friendly relations  with countries of the  region
and to  contribute to  peace and  cooperation, Turkey  has signed  bilateral
agreements with  other Balkan countries  on issues of  good-neighbourliness,
cooperation and security.

77.  In addition,  owing to the importance it attributes to confidence-  and
security-building measures in the Balkans, Turkey  has played a leading role
for  the   realization  of   bilateral  confidence-  and   security-building
measures.    Given  the  principle  of  indivisibility  of  security,  these
measures have a positive impact on confidence and  security not only in  the
region, but also in  the OSCE. The "1990  Sofia Document" on confidence- and
security-building measures between  Turkey and  Bulgaria was the first  step
taken in this direction.  The "1990 Sofia  Document" was later expanded  and
is still in  effect as the  "1992 Edirne Document".   On the  other hand,  a
similar  agreement,  the  "1995  Tirana  Document",  was  concluded  between
Albania  and Turkey  on 6  February 1995.   Efforts  are under way  to adopt
similar mechanisms with other Balkan countries.

78.   All of  the above-mentioned  documents have  been prepared within  the
framework of  the OSCE and on the basis of adjusting  the Vienna Document on
confidence-   and   security-building  measures   to   regional   needs  and
considerations.

79.   Adoption  of bilateral  measures between  Turkey and Bulgaria  for the
first time  in 1990 has been  a model for  other OSCE  countries.  Following
the  Sofia  Document,  similar   documents  were  adopted  by  other  Balkan
countries.   On  the other  hand, during  the deliberations  for  the Vienna
Document, upon  various suggestions inspired by  the process initiated  with
measures  established between  Bulgaria and  Turkey, the issue  of bilateral
CBMs was referred to in the Vienna Document.   Therefore, article 136 of the
Document  encourages  the   OSCE  countries  to  develop  transparency   and
confidence-building on a bilateral, multilateral or regional basis.


UNITED KINGDOM OF GREAT BRITAIN AND NORTHERN IRELAND

[Original:  English]

[22 August 1995]   

80.   The British  Government welcomes  the initiative  contained in General
Assembly  resolution 48/84  B to  seek the  views of  member States  on  the
development  of good-neighbourly  relations  in  the  Balkan region  and  on
measures and preventive  activities aimed at the  creation of a stable  zone
of peace and cooperation in the region by the year 2000.

81.   The Balkan region  has a long  and tragic  history of  instability and
conflict.    The  international  community  must   find  effective  ways  of
promoting  cooperation in  the Balkans  to ensure  that the  people  of this
troubled region can look forward to a peaceful and more prosperous future.

82.  The British  Government believes that any  effort to promote  peace and
cooperation in the Balkans  can only be  effective when the conflict in  the
region has been resolved.

83.   The British Government  notes that the International Conference on the
Former  Yugoslavia has commissioned  a report  on regional  stability in the
Balkans and hopes to draw on this report where necessary.

84.    Before   then  there  are  confidence-building  measures  that  might
contribute to  regional stability.  They  include mutual  recognition by the
republics of the former Yugoslavia.   Mutual recognition would help  provide
a stable  base for  resolution  of the  conflict and  subsequent efforts  to
promote  regional  cooperation.   The  British  Government  again urges  all
republics of the former Yugoslavia to recognize each other.


YUGOSLAVIA

[Original:  English]

[5 June 1995]      

85.   Ever since  the end  of the Second  World War,  Yugoslavia has been  a
factor in the peace, stability and equitable cooperation in the Balkans.

86.  At the  initiative of Yugoslavia, a meeting of the Ministers of Foreign
Affairs of the Balkan countries was held at Belgrade in February 1988  which
laid down the foundations for the  process of multilateral cooperation among
the  countries  of  the  region  and   opened  up  perspectives  for  better
understanding  and cooperation  in  the political,  economic,  cultural  and
humanitarian fields.  At the meeting,  the high-level representatives of the
Balkan countries paved  the way for the  development of cooperation and  the
promotion  of relations  in the  region.   At more  than 100  meetings  held
between 1988 and  1991, the countries established an extensive  multilateral
political  dialogue  at various  levels on  crucial  issues of  intra-Balkan
relations and regional cooperation.
  87.   The contribution of  the Federal Republic  of Yugoslavia to  various
forms of cooperation among  the countries of the  Danube basin has been very
great  indeed. This  has been  evident in  its continuous efforts  to ensure
free navigation  on the  Danube, connect  the Rhine-Main-Danube system  with
the Yugoslav Dunav-Tisa-Dunav system; link the  European seas via its inland
waterways  and modernize and facilitate  the use of Danubian  ports which it
sees as full of potential for economic progress and integration.

88.   An  example  of  long-term bilateral  cooperation  in the  Balkans  is
Yugoslavia's  cooperation with Romania  in the  field of  the production and
exploitation of  electrical energy, crowned  with the  construction of  Iron
Gates I and II  hydroelectric power plants on the Danube and very  developed
cooperation between the electric energy systems of the two countries.

89.  On  the basis of an agreement  between Yugoslavia and Albania, part  of
the Yugoslav territory was used for  the construction on Albanian  territory
of the  Fierza hydroelectric power  plant which  solved the  problem of  the
production  and supply  of electrical  power  in  Albania.   Yugoslavia also
initiated  cooperation  between  the  electric  energy  systems  of  the two

countries  and  subsidized the  construction and  subsequent operation  of a
section of the Podgorica-Bozaj railway line,  used primarily for transit  of
Albanian exports to European markets.

90.  However, even in  the conditions of sanctions, blockade and war in  its
neighbourhood, the  FR of Yugoslavia continues  to work  with equal resolve,
both bilaterally and multilaterally, on the  prevention of the escalation of
the  crisis,  the  maintenance  of  stability  and  cooperation  and  on the
promotion  of  dialogue  and  confidence  in   the  Balkans.    The  partial
suspension of the sanctions  gave an impetus to the activities of the Balkan
countries to that end, however symbolic they may be.

91.   In this  period the  FR of  Yugoslavia renewed its  political dialogue
with almost all of its traditional neighbours.  On several occasions the  FR
of Yugoslavia  expressed  its readiness  for  dialogue  and the  renewal  of
cooperation  to Albania on  the basis  of equality, good-neighbourliness and
non-interference. Ties and cooperation in the  fields of culture, education,
transport  and  sport  have intensified.    Direct  contacts  with  economic
associations  and   other  factors   of  economic   development  have   been
established;   inter-State   legal   instruments  have   been   prepared  in
preparation  for  the  restoration  of  cooperation  after  the  lifting  of
sanctions.

92.   The outbreak  and escalation  of the Yugoslav crisis  put a sudden and
violent end  to  the positive  trends  in  regional political  and  economic
developments.  Finding a just  and lasting  solution to  the consequences of
the Yugoslav crisis is therefore the  first precondition for the restoration
and  acceleration of the positive processes of cooperation, interlinkage and
integration.

93.   The civil  war in  some former Yugoslav  republics has  been used  for
piling up arms in this sensitive part of  the Balkans.  Arms have  been, and
continue to  be, piled  up in violation  of United Nations  Security Council
arms  embargo resolution 713  (1991).   These violations  threaten the peace
process, the  United Nations role in  that process and  the security of  its
peace-keeping forces.   Unfortunately, there has  been no adequate  reaction
to these violations from the Security Council.

94.    The FR  of Yugoslavia  fully supports  the peace  role of  the United
Nations in  the settlement  of the  Yugoslav  crisis.   In the  quest for  a
solution  to  the  crisis  in  former  Bosnia  and  Herzegovina,  the  FR of
Yugoslavia  supported all  peace plans:   the  Coutilhero plan  of  19 March
1992, the Vance-Owen  plan of 2 January  1993, the Owen-Stoltenberg plan  of
30 July 1993, the plan  of action of the European Union of 22 November  1993
and the  latest peace plan of the Contact  Group of 5 July  1994.  The FR of
Yugoslavia also  cooperated in  drafting, and  accepted, the  Vance plan  in
November 1991,  aimed at settling the  problems between  Knin-Zagreb, and it
continues to consider the plan a valid basis  for negotiations on reaching a
final political solution.

95.   In  the process  of normalization  of  the  relations which  has begun
between the FR of  Yugoslavia and the Republic of Croatia, the two countries
opened, on  the  basis  of  reciprocity,  their  representative  offices  in
Belgrade and Zagreb. The dialogue on  political and humanitarian issues  has
been launched between the representatives of the two Governments.

96.    Despite its  great  economic  and  political difficulties  the  FR of
Yugoslavia continues  to invest its  maximum efforts in  the process  of the
peaceful settlement of the crisis.  Therefore, it rightly expects all  other
factors to associate themselves with the following important assumptions:

  (a)  Equal treatment of all parties to the conflict;

  (b)    Compliance with  the United  Nations Security  Council resolutions,
particularly the resolutions on  the arms embargo, the status of the  United
Nations Protection Areas and the mandate of the peace-keeping forces;

  (c)   No  military option and  no use of force  or threat of  force by all
factors in the crisis;

  (d)  Lifting of all sanctions imposed on the FR of Yugoslavia;

  (e)   Acceptance  of  the  Contact  Group  plan  as  a  basis  for  direct
negotiations among  the parties  to  the  conflict on  the solution  to  the
crisis  in former Bosnia  and Herzegovina under  the auspices  of the United
Nations and the Contact Group;

  (f)   Continuation  of direct  step-by-step negotiations  between Knin and
Zagreb  on the basis of the Vance plan, without  prejudice to the outcome of
the final political solution;

  (g)  Withdrawal of Croatian military forces from all territories taken  by
force,  in compliance  with the cease-fire  agreement of 29  March 1994, and
respect for the role of the United Nations peace-keeping forces;

  (h)    Full reintegration  of  the  FR  of  Yugoslavia  into European  and
international  forums,  primarily  OSCE  and  the  United  Nations   General
Assembly.  The FR  of Yugoslavia  has every  right to  be reintegrated  into
these forums, not only because it is a founding and  an active member in the
50-year-long  activity of the  Organization, but  also because it  is one of
the most  active actors in  the quest for  a peaceful  political solution to
the  Yugoslav  crisis  and  an  important  factor  in  the  future  peaceful
development in the Balkans and South-East Europe.

97.  The solution  to the crisis on  this basis will  create conditions  for
full normalization  of relations  between the  FR of  Yugoslavia and  former
Yugoslav republics.   The FR of Yugoslavia has  never been nor  is it today,
opposed to  the recognition of the seceded Yugoslav republics.   However, it
is necessary first  to solve the basic  political problems brought about  by
their unilateral  and forcible secession in order not to repeat the mistakes
made by the premature  recognition of the seceded  republics by the European
Union  and other  countries.  This  implies that  the  right of  the  FR  of
Yugoslavia to  continue the  international personality  of the  SFRY is  not
questioned.

98.   The sanctions  imposed on the FR of  Yugoslavia are the basic limiting
factor for  the peace process, economic  development and  cooperation in the
Balkans.  Their further  implementation serves  to  postpone the  advent  of
peace and  stabilization.   The destructive  economic, social, cultural  and
other  consequences  of  the  sanctions  severely  affect  all  neighbouring
countries including the countries of South and South-East Europe.

99.  The sanctions have interrupted  the positive trends in  the development
of multilateral and bilateral cooperation in  the Balkans and the  processes
of integration of the  Balkans with other parts  of Europe.   In particular,
they  halted  the  democratic  transition  and  development  of  the  market
economies in a number of countries.

100.   The overall  damage caused to the FR  of Yugoslavia and the countries
of South  and South-East  Europe since  the establishment  of the  sanctions
against the  FR of  Yugoslavia in May  1992 has  amounted to  about US$  200
billion and  two  thirds  of that  damage has  been suffered  by  the FR  of
Yugoslavia alone.

101.   The damage  caused by  the sanctions deepens and  widens the economic
gap between  the  Balkans and  Europe,  heightens  social tensions  in  each
country and  threatens to destabilize the  Balkans and  South-East Europe in
the  long run.  Aware  of  this fact,  Balkan and  other countries  have now
launched several initiatives to have them  lifted altogether.  An increasing
number of the  States Members  of the  United Nations  have publicly  stated
that the  sanctions  are  contrary to  the  peace  efforts,  that  they  are
inhuman, unacceptable and untenable as a method.

102.   At the 53rd regular  meeting of the  Danube Commission at Budapest in
April 1995,  all the participating States  agreed on a  common initiative to
liberalize the sanctions and simplify transit  on the Danube.   Furthermore,
the meeting initiated, and the United Nations  Security Council subsequently
adopted,  the (technical) resolution  on the use of  locks and navigation by
Yugoslav vessels on the Danube.

103.  At the  Ministerial Meeting of the Black Sea Cooperation Countries  in
Athens on 14 April 1995, a joint appeal  concerning the great damage  caused
by the sanctions was addressed to  the United Nations Secretary-General  and
the United Nations  Security Council,  signed by Bulgaria, Greece,  Romania,
the Republic of Moldova and Ukraine.

104.  The FR  of Yugoslavia expects that this and other similar  initiatives
will  be understood  and  supported, first  of  all by  the  United  Nations
Security  Council.   By  his  letter of  14  November 1994,  Yugoslav  Prime
Minister  Radoje Kontic informed  the Security  Council that  Yugoslavia had
fulfilled all the conditions set in  Security Council resolutions 752 (1992)
and 757 (1992). It is therefore necessary  that the Security Council commits
itself more resolutely  to lifting the  sanctions and thus  provide for  the
renewal  of  all  positive  processes  in  the  region  and  facilitate  the
accomplishment  of the goal  proclaimed at  the forty-eighth  session of the
General Assembly  concerning the transformation of  the Balkans  into a zone
of peace, stability and cooperation by the year 2000.

105.  At  the same time, the FR of Yugoslavia expects the  United Nations to
assume  its  share  of  responsibility  under  the  programmes  of  economic
restoration  of the  Balkans and  the  establishment  of the  conditions for
strengthening the integration processes among the Balkan countries.

106.  This is  also the point of departure for all proposals and ideas aimed
at  transforming   the  Balkans  into  a   zone  of   peace,  stability  and
cooperation:  the Balkans  is an important integral  part of Europe  and its
stability and rapid  development would contribute to stability,  development
and  positive  processes in  Europe as  a  whole.   There  can be  no peace,
stability  and   cooperation  in   Europe  without   stability,  peace   and
cooperation in the Balkans.

107.   Finding  a peaceful and just  solution to the Yugoslav  crisis is the
crucial prerequisite for the re-establishment of  the balance in the Balkans
and,  by the  same  token, for  its transformation  into  a zone  of  peace,
stability  and cooperation, and for  the full integration of  the Balkans in
Europe as a natural  factor of "the new  European architecture".  The crisis
can  be  solved  and  stability  and   balance  restored  only  through  the
principled approach  of  the major  European  and  world factors  and  their
unbiased  attitude  and absolute  refraining  from  any  use of  force.   An
impartial  role of  the  United Nations  is  of  utmost  importance for  the
progress of  the peace process  and the maintenance  of the  prestige of the
Organization.

108.  As the State continuing the personality of  the SFR of Yugoslavia, the
Federal Republic of  Yugoslavia has maintained and  confirmed as one  of its
priorities  the  orientation  towards the  development  of  good-neighbourly
relations and  all-round cooperation with all  countries in  the Balkans and
beyond.    Mutual respect,  establishment of  confidence and  development of
cooperation on the basis  of sovereign equality and  mutual interests is the
right way to strengthen peace and stability in  the Balkans, along the lines
of its full integration into European processes.

109.  The  FR of Yugoslavia has always  been, and remains,  open for all the
activities and the initiatives of its  Balkan partners aimed at  development
of cooperation and mutual ties,  as well as at  strengthening confidence and
stability.    The  FR  of  Yugoslavia  will  continue  to  render  its  full
contribution  to such joint  efforts, aware  of its  role, possibilities and
geo-strategic position.

110.  The  FR of Yugoslavia  declared in  its Constitution of 27  April 1992
its commitment  to the  goals and principles  of the Charter  of the  United
Nations,  the Helsinki  Final Act  and the  Charter  of  Paris of  the CSCE,
underlining in  particular that  it has  no territorial  claims against  its
neighbours.  Yugoslavia's  orientation   and  practice  are  based  on   the
assessment that  respect for  the independence and territorial  integrity of
every country in the  region is in  the interest of each individual  country
and in  the interest of the  region as a whole.   On  this basis, Yugoslavia
will work on the establishment of  relations of confidence and understanding
with its neighbours, guided by the principles of good-neighbourliness.

111.  As a multi-ethnic,  multi-cultural and multi-confessional country, the
FR  of  Yugoslavia  guarantees  by  its  Constitution  to  all  its citizens
equality,  rights  and  freedoms,  irrespective  of  their  nationality   or
religion.   The provisions  of the  Yugoslav Constitution  providing for the
possibility for the former  Yugoslav republics wishing to do so, to join the
FR of Yugoslavia bear out the readiness of  the FR of Yugoslavia to  develop
its future relations with its neighbours on that basis.

112.  The FR of Yugoslavia  is defined in its Constitution as a State of all
its  citizens.    Accordingly,  it  attaches  exceptional  attention  to the
exercise of the rights  of the more  than 20 national minorities and  ethnic
groups  living   as  equal  citizens  in   its  territory.     The  Yugoslav
Constitution and  laws guarantee  special minority  rights in  the field  of
education,  the use  of the  mother  tongue,  information, culture,  etc. in
accordance with European and world standards.  Under the Copenhagen Document
of the OSCE  this implies also  the obligation  of the  members of  national
minorities, as Yugoslav citizens, to be loyal to the FR of Yugoslavia.

113.  According to the principles of international  law and the documents of
the United Nations and the OSCE, the right to  self-determination belongs to
constituent peoples and not to national minorities or territories.

114.  After the  imposition of the sanctions  of the United Nations Security
Council  on the  FR of  Yugoslavia, the  basic rights  of all  its  citizens
irrespective of  their  national origin,  have  been  threatened.   In  such
conditions, the FR of  Yugoslavia is making  every effort to reduce as  much
as  possible the consequences of  the sanctions for the exercise of minority
rights.

115.  The  FR of Yugoslavia rightly expects that the exercise  of the rights
of the members of the Serbian and Montenegrin national  minorities living in
other Balkan States will be adequately protected and respected. 

116.   A more rapid  social and economic  development based  on the natural,
market and geo-political specificities of the  region, the overcoming of the
economic gap  dividing the  North and West  of Europe from  the rest of  the
continent and  the  neutralization of  the  economic  losses caused  by  the
sanctions are important prerequisites for long-term stability, security  and
an integral development of the Balkans and the whole of South-East Europe.  
  All these  call for  the immediate preparation of  comprehensive financial
plans whose  implementation should  include, first  and foremost,  the World
Bank and the International Monetary Fund, as well as  the European financial
institutions and private capital.  In this context priority should be  given
to   the  implementation  of   the  regional   projects  in   the  field  of
infrastructure, transport, energy,  the environment and  tourism, as well as
to labour-intensive projects in the economy, including services.

117.  As  all Balkan countries are  determined to join European  integration
in the  future, an important step in that direction could be the creation of
conditions for the establishment of regional  free-trade zones or a  customs
union.  With the establishment of a community of countries with a free  flow
of goods, capital and labour, the  Balkan economies would greatly facilitate
their accelerated access to  the developed part of the European market.  The
FR of  Yugoslavia fully supports this  idea and considers  that it would  be
useful  to  begin  concrete talks  on  the multilateral  level  in order  to

realize this  idea, as it is  in the interest of  all Balkan  factors and of
Europe.

118.   In order  to make full use  of the advantages of  this region for the
transit  of  goods, services  and  passengers,  it  is  necessary to  devote
greater  attention   to  this  matter  and   to  provide   capital  for  the
modernization of railroads, roads,  ports, airports, PTT networks and energy
transmission systems.  Because of its  geographic position bridging parts of
Europe, particularly  in the  north to  south and  north-west to  south-east
directions,  it is natural  that the  FR of Yugoslavia is  interested in the
modernization  of  communications.    To  that  end,  it  has  prepared,  in
cooperation with the neighbouring countries,  a number of  specific projects
which are ready for implementation.

119.   The  energy resources  of the  Balkans  are  limited, which  makes it
incumbent on the countries  of the region  to cooperate in the rational  use
and  exploitation of  all  types of  energy and  energy  resources.   It  is
therefore  most natural that the  priority areas of  cooperation are the use
of  electrical  energy   and  the  exploitation  of   gas  and  oil.     The
interconnection and  promotion  of  the joint  operation of  the  electrical
energy  systems of  the Balkan  countries,  the  connection of  gas pipeline
systems on a long-term  basis, as well  as the  transit of natural gas  from
third countries, are the  strategic priorities of  the region and can  serve
as the basis for the development of each individual country.

120.    Cooperation in  the  field  of the  environment  is  of  existential
importance  for all  the countries  in the  region.    The FR  of Yugoslavia
considers  that, through various  forms of cooperation, the Balkan countries
should establish  the  Balkan  Environment Programme  (BEP), as  a  regional
variant of UNEP.

121.    Particularly  dangerous  is  the  trend  towards  the  relocation of
outdated technologies  and depositing of hazardous poisonous wastes from the
developed part of Europe  in the Balkans, particularly  in some of its least
developed  countries.     In   view  of   the  ongoing   trends  and   great
interdependence, it is an  illusion to believe that  any part of  Europe can
protect  itself  effectively or  accomplish  any  economic interest  by  the
transfer  of outdated  technologies, poisonous  products or  wastes to other
parts  of the continent and even to other parts of the world.  Environmental
protection  of the Balkans merits  greater attention not  only because it is
in the  interest of  the people  of the  Balkans but  because it  is in  the
interest of all the people of Europe.

122.  "The  Balkans to the Balkan peoples"  implies the mobilization of  all
human and natural resources to serve the purpose  of prosperity and a richer
life  of all  Balkan peoples.    This  implies the  strengthening of  mutual
confidence, the settlement  of all controversial  issues by negotiations and
the  intensification  of  bilateral  and  multilateral  cooperation  in  the
Balkans.   The Balkans,  as an  integral part of  Europe, is  fully open  to
cooperation and  the establishment of ties,  as well as  to respect for  the
interdependence  of economic,  political, cultural  and security  interests,
since the  political, economic and security  architecture of  Europe and the
Balkans constitute a natural whole.


-----


 

This document has been posted online by the United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs (DESA). Reproduction and dissemination of the document - in electronic and/or printed format - is encouraged, provided acknowledgement is made of the role of the United Nations in making it available.

Date last posted: 18 December 1999 16:30:10
Comments and suggestions: esa@un.org