FEDERAL REPUBLIC OF YUGOSLAVIA
FEDERAL MINISTRY FOR FOREIGN AFFAIRS
YUGOSLAV DAILY SURVEY
BELGRADE, 24 March 2000 No. 2969
S P E C I A L I S S U E
ADDRESS OF FOREIGN MINISTER ZIVADIN JOVANOVIC
AT THE INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE "CONSEQUENCES OF
THE NATO AGGRESSION AGAINST F.R. YUGOSLAVIA"
(Belgrade, 24 March 2000.)
Dear friends,
Distinguished guests,
It is my great pleasure and honor to greet you and wish all participants
of today's meeting a fruitful exchange of views and enjoyable stay in
Yugoslavia.
Today, exactly a year ago, the eyes of the world public were on the
Federal Republic of Yugoslavia because the NATO military machine
spearheaded by the United States, launched a brutal aggression against
the
FR of Yugoslavia, an independent and sovereign country, a founding
member
of the United Nations and of other international organizations.
The aggression was perpetrated because Yugoslavia, as a sovereign
country,
with deep freedom-loving roots, did not want to accept the disgraceful
diktat of Rambouillet and Paris based on the deception of an alleged
violation of human rights. Yugoslavia rejected the diktat which demanded
the capitulation and occupation of the entire country.
If the eyes of the world were on Yugoslavia a year ago because of the
outset of aggression looking with apprehension and uncertainty as to
whether this country and its people will succeed in defending freedom,
whether David will overpower the Goliath of the post-industrialist era,
than there is no longer such a dilemma. Yugoslavia succeeded in
defending
dignity, it confirmed its freedom-loving traditions and gave hope to
others
that there is no force which can defeat a nation which is united and
determined to defend its own at any cost.
We believe that today, a year later, the eyes of the world public are
again on Belgrade and on this meeting, but now in recognition of courage
and support for rebuilding what was destroyed, for building new and
modern.
Many eyes are precisely on this high meeting in which the most famous
creators from all parts of the world take part, those who represent the
conscious of mankind and its noblest humanistic values. The people in
this
hall in the heart of freedom-loving Belgrade expect fresh encouragement
and
an inspiration for a better future.
Distinguished guests,
How come that it was the FR of Yugoslavia that was chosen to be the
proving ground for testing the model of the "New World Order"? First, in
the analysis of the strategists of the New World Order, Yugoslavia is
treated as a "real problem", as a physical obstacle standing in the way
of
achievement of the goal of expansion into Eastern Europe and of
mastering
natural resources and sources of energy in the rich regions of the
Middle
East, the Caucasus and Central Asia which is a key to Europe and
Euroasia
and an access to Russia and China from the West. Second, if it is true
that
during the period of the bloc division of the world Yugoslavia was seen
as
a buffer zone and that it valorized its geostrategic importance on that
basis, then it is also true that today, at a time of integration
processes
Yugoslavia with its known geostrategic advantages is becoming a bridge
linking north and south, eastern and western Europe. Third, Yugoslavia
was
chosen as a target of aggression, because by "bringing to its knees" of
countries which on a world scale symbolize freedom and independence it
was
meant to intimidate all other countries and peoples and to discourage
their
opposition to hegemony and imperialism. NATO and the US administration
mind
even the very existence of Yugoslavia and what it stands for today - a
multiethnic, multicultural State, which is, despite the pressures and
sanctions and despite a million refugees, developing faster and more
comprehensively than its neighbors which, at least in words, enjoy every
assistance and support of the rich NATO members, the United States in
particular.
The NATO aggression against the FR of Yugoslavia was a culmination of
the
American aspirations to establish, after the fall of the Berlin Wall, a
new
unipolar world order in which the United States will be the pivot and
the
NATO alliance its chief instrument. In conditions when NATO has lost its
global adversary and any national justification for its existence, the
aggression should have assigned a new role for NATO and confirmed the
global supremacy of the United States. It was an arrogant demonstration
of
the fact that the new masters of the world are making their own rules
and
taking into their own hands the role of the judge, the jury and
executioner.
Ladies and Gentlemen,
Distinguished guests,
The consequences of the NATO aggression may be viewed at several levels.
The first level is Yugoslavia as a direct victim of crimes and
destruction.
The second is a regional one as part of South Eastern Europe. The third
is
a European one, the fourth global or the world level.
Although they are all mutually closely related, it is difficult to
analyze
them in isolation. However, for this occasion the basic facts should be
recalled about the consequences at each individual level.
NATO has caused a humanitarian, economic and environmental disaster in
Yugoslavia by using the most destructive means, including cluster bombs,
depleted uranium ammunition, carbon fiber bombs. Leaders of NATO
countries,
the US administration in the first place, are responsible for the
killing
of several thousand inhabitants of Yugoslavia, including women,
children,
babies, refugees, travelers on the busses and international passenger
trains, for the destruction of hospitals, schools, the water supply
system,
the power system, heating of larger cities, residential areas, bridges,
railways and roads. The damage caused by war is estimated at more than
US$
100 billion. Such losses and civilian destruction cynically explained by
the NATO propaganda as "collateral damage" were the core of the NATO
strategy, especially after promises made in public that Serbia will be
brought to its knees within 3 or 7 days at the latest, proved to be at
least narrow-minded arrogance. By systematically bombing civilian
targets
and causing a massive loss of human life, NATO targeted the people and
its
morale, to which it obviously paid very little attention in its
calculations. In particular, they underestimated the determination,
patriotic feelings and unity of the people and leadership of the
country.
At the regional level, the aggression drastically halted and set back
the
processes of normalization, the development of good-neighborly relations
and promotion of both bilateral and multilateral cooperation in South
Eastern Europe, whose prospects were opened up by the signing of the
Dayton/Paris Peace Agreement in 1995, by the Royaumont initiative and
the
Crete Summit in 1997. By combining the dirtiest methods of pressure and
promises, the US administration drew Yugoslavia's neighbors to take part
in
one way or another in the aggression. Through the policy of divide and
rule
and by encouraging even territorial claims of some neighbors against
Yugoslavia, the US administration not only undermined the important
results
of the regional cooperation and all known regional initiatives, but
attempted to sow as much division and as much mistrust in the region as
possible by involving the neighboring countries in the criminal
aggression.
In this way, it clearly revealed that its real purpose was longer term
destabilization of the region aimed at justifying the movement of its
troops from Central to South Eastern Europe and Eastern Europe through
the
establishment and interconnection of the new chain of its military
bases.
What the pro-American governments in neighboring countries did not or
dared
not understand was very well understood by the broadest public in these
countries namely that the goal of the American policy was total
domination
and colonialization of the peoples and countries of South Eastern
Europe,
exploitation of their human and economic resources, provision of a
bridge
head to the Caspian region, Central Asia and western borders of Russia
and
China.
The model of an alliance between NATO and the separatist and terrorist
organization such as the so called "KLA" - in which the roles were so
assigned that the criminal, mafia and terrorist gangs acted as the foot
soldiers to NATO and conversely in which NATO served as an air support
to
the terrorists - is very important for understanding not only regional
but
also less European and global consequences of the aggression. It remains
for military analysts to study such pearls of NATO strategists as
provision
of protection to terrorist gangs by a squadron of B-52 strategic bombers
in
their attempts to infiltrate from Albania into Serbia in the regions of
Mt.
Pa{trik and Ko{are. This alliance was created even during the so called
Rambouillet and Paris talks, at Thaci-Clark meetings and even much
earlier
at the meetings of US representatives with the seasoned terrorists and
criminals at Junik, Davos and London. These are only the most drastic
forms
of abuse of separatism and terrorism which are incidentally resorted to
by
US intelligence and administration in one way or the other, ranging from
South Eastern Asia, Tibet, Kashmir, Afghanistan, Chechnya, Dagestan,
Kosovo
and Metohija to Gibraltar and from the North Sea to the Cape of Good
Hope.
To force on Europe attrition, to slow down the process of its
integration
and access of the developed West and to resources of rich Russia is the
strategic goal of the US administration in order to preserve its
economic
and technological domination over the whole world. That goal was
reflected
even during the work of the so called Contact Group which served the
United
States gradually to draw Europe into the preparations for and later on
the
perpetration of the aggression itself. This was testified to by the
destruction of transport routes on Europe's corridor E-10, the bridges
over
the Danube near Novi Sad so as to prevent the use of economic lifelines,
especially important for the profitability and competitiveness of
European
products and services, for links between northern and southern parts of
the
European Union, between Europe and the Caspian Basin, between the Middle
East and Central Asia. The NATO aggression against Yugoslavia inflicted
enormous long-term damage on Europe, both economically and politically
as
well as security and culture-wise. It revealed the major weaknesses of
Europe, and a striking lack of political leaders who care about breaking
away from American blackmail and projecting their own vision of European
identity. This is borne out, for instance, by the fact that neither the
parliaments nor the governments of Italy, France, Germany, Britain or
Spain
and many other European countries respected their own constitutions in
deciding to take part in the aggression, whereas the parliaments and
governments of some of them like Italy never had the issue of
participation
in the aggression on its agenda. If these are democratic societies, than
the question arises as to who made the decisions in the first place and
who
committed these countries to rain destruction on Yugoslavia and to kill
its
citizens? Or is it not that important for the quality of democracy to
decide on the participation in aggression against a sovereign country.
Whereas it is more or less clear that the US administration made
political
decisions on the participation of European countries in the aggression
against Yugoslavia, more and more facts come to light confirming that
the
American diktat in the decisions taken within NATO itself during the
aggression was effectively accepted as a fait accompli. Clearly, such
experiences and treatment of the allies will not strengthen NATO nor
will
it open up the prospect of its development. Quite the opposite. Only
some
newly admitted members and those from Eastern Europe who lack confidence
in
their own people and look for a bulwark in their NATO masters have faith
in
NATO and vow to it.
There are signs that there is a growing awareness in Europe of an
increasing violation of European interests due to the blind following of
the US administration. It is a fact, however, that such trends of
concern
and readiness for greater attention to the European interests, if the
impression is not wrong, are more present in public opinion in Europe
than
in its administrative structures which grew accustomed to US blackmail
and
drawing very often personal benefits from it. We hope that Europe will
finally find the strength to put together its own European, rather than
the
now prevailing US agenda. We believe that this is an inevitable trend
although we harbor no illusions that it will be a fast and easy process.
Europe has not yet given a clear answer to the share of responsibilities
according to the American prescription: we destroyed by the bombs and
aircraft, so it is now up to you, the Europeans, to build what was
destroyed and to repair the consequences, if you have any use of it!
As far as the global consequences of the NATO aggression are concerned,
they are simply though understandably not sufficiently concretely
reflected
in an assessment made during the aggression itself: after the aggression
the world and world relations will in no way be the same after 24 March
1999. The NATO alliance called its game by the aggression - instead of
the
criterion of equality, the criterion of hierarchy is forced upon the
world.
Forces above the law, above the principles and the UN Charter
consequently,
NATO is above the UN Security Council and the United States above NATO
and
Europe.
The architects of such a strategy gave a special place to the right to a
so-called "humanitarian intervention". By establishing a monopoly over
judging where and how human rights are violated, the US administration
opens the door wide for gross interference in the internal affairs of
other
countries even for military intervention using its monopoly of the most
influential global media. Thus, the US administration has developed a
technology of indoctrinating the American and world public in order to
justify by its care for human rights and the lofty democratic ideals
interference in internal affairs, arbitrary proclamation of certain
areas
in the world the "zones of US vital interest" and preparations for armed
aggression by covering up its true hegemonistic and colonialist goals
such
as control over energy sources, strategic resources, large markets and
important geopolitical regions. It goes without saying that the
arrogance
of the proponents of this policy leaves no scope for asking questions
about
the massive violation of basic human rights in the United States itself
and
the world at large through an arbitrary imposition of US sanctions which
have at this very moment been in place for 87 countries or for 42 per
cent
of the population on this planet. An accompanying lever of this
hegemonistic strategy is the doctrine of limited sovereignty which is
attempted to be imposed, above all on the non-aligned and developing
countries.
The proponents of this doctrine do not mind seeing and reacting by
threats
even to the non-existent and imagined interference in US internal
affairs,
demanding absolute respect for its hyper-sovereignty. At the same time,
the
sovereignty of other countries has no worth to them. They adopt a racist
attitude towards developing countries, maintaining that they are
conservative and that they do not understand that limitation of their
sovereignty is in the interest of their modern democratic development.
The fact is that the global messages and dangers of the NATO aggression
against Yugoslavia are understood well in the world. An overwhelming
majority of the Member States of the World organization strongly rejects
the concept of interventionism, the doctrine of limited sovereignty and
the
American pretension to act as the world policeman. This was clearly
demonstrated on numerous occasions so far, including at the 54th session
of
the UN General Assembly.
By its successful defense from the aggression, Yugoslavia has made a
historic contribution to the protection of the rights and principles of
international relations in confrontation with the brute force. It has
thus,
at the same time, restored confidence in the lasting values of the UN
Charter and in the sustainability of the system of international
relations
based on the equality, sovereignty, territorial integrity and
non-interference in the internal affairs of sovereign States. What
seemed
impossible or highly unlikely before the NATO aggression, Yugoslavia
proved
not only possible but a must: it resolutely resisted the most powerful
military machine and the strategy of bringing other peoples into
submission, and it succeeded in defending its freedom, dignity and
independence.
Distinguished guests,
All hopes that the Cold War era will be followed by the democratization
of
international relations and that we shall enter a period of a stable and
durable peace, have been betrayed. Unfortunately, we are witness to the
opposite processes of a radical revision of the system of international
relations established after the Second World War of a conscious and
intentional violation of the fundamental principles enshrined in the
Charter of the United Nations and attempts at imposing the New World
Order
and "globalization" of international relations. This trend is followed
by
attempts at sociological and cultural globalization, that is of basing
the
whole world on the same type of a society, namely on liberal democratic
capitalism of the West through a kind of "liberal imperialism" and a new
totalitarianism. The stories of a free trade, free circulation of goods
and
capital is only a cover for the imposition of a global economic order in
which to ensure complete control over markets, most important
geostrategic
regions, raw materials and resources. The bottom line is to ensure the
right to prosperity and riches for an exclusive group of countries and
to
condemn the rest of them to the role of colonies, vassals and permanent
impoverishment.
The policy pursued by the US administration and by NATO Member States,
based on its economic and military power and on control of the money
flows,
is a dangerous one because it leads to the rich getting richer and the
poor
getting poorer. There is a conscious effort to disrupt the entire system
of
international relations, to produce destabilization and fragmentation of
independent countries. The United Nations and its Security Council have
been further marginalized while senior US representatives openly issue
threats that they will finance the United Nations only if it works in
its,
that is, US interest. We have come to the situation where delegations of
the Security Council negotiate with lower-rank US officials only because
they are threatening to tighten the screws on the finances of the UN.
The chief protagonist of the new world unipolar order is the Anglo-Saxon
axis. It is not accidental at all that the United Kingdom appears to be
the
most ardent executor of the US policy and a country which is always
ready
to block any more independent action of the EU and to prevent it from
acting as an independent political factor. It is not an exaggeration to
say
that basically one of the main activities of the Anglo-Saxon axis is
directed precisely against the idea of unification of Europe which along
with China, Russia and India could be a serious counter-weight and a
factor
of curbing the uncontrolled power of the new world supreme power.
In this so called "New World Order", through permanent destabilization
and
civil wars as well as through creation and management and regional
crises,
encouragement of separatism and terrorism, force as the only criterion
in
international relations is being promoted and excuses are being found
for
domination and rule over less developed and smaller States and peoples.
The
aggressive policy of the United States is particularly focused on the
ethnically mixed communities and countries through an undisguised
encouragement of separatism, religious and ethnic exclusiveness and
production of terrorists, through arbitrary interpretation and abuse of
such categories as human and minority rights. Organized campaigns of
"public lies" and creation of realities by the use of the enormous newly
created power of the world media is in the function of domination of the
world. The tendum of world power centers and the world media has created
a
"virtual reality" which is then presented as the final truth all over
the
world. As part of regular preparations for the conduct of an aggressive
policy towards a particular region is also a systematic demonization of
the
whole nations and individual cultures. The example of the FR of
Yugoslavia
is the best illustration of it, since in the last ten years a nation
which
has made an enormous contribution to the struggle against Fascism and
for
the freedom of Europe and the world has been portrayed in the most
influential world media as an uncivilized criminal nation whose victims
are
unworthy of sympathy.
Distinguished guests,
It should be recalled that until the spring of 1998 the situation in the
southern Serbian Province of Kosovo and Metohija was calm irrespective
of
the problems which existed as a result of the boycott of the State
institutions by a part of the Albanian separatists. The separatist
movement
was not caused by any repression or violation of human or minority
rights
of the Albanian ethnic minority, but primarily by constant outside
encouragement with a view to weakening opposition to the spread of
hegemony
and the new NATO strategy. By separating Kosovo and Metohija from the
Republic of Serbia as its integral part and the creation of the so
called
"Greater Albania" from parts of Serbia, Montenegro, Macedonia and
Greece,
NATO aims to reshape international borders and cause longer term
destabilization of the entire South Eastern Europe and thus justify its
movement from Central Europe and the expansion to the East.
It is indicative that parallel with prospects for improved relations
between Yugoslavia and Albania following the Crete meeting between
President Milosevic and Prime Minister Nano and later for the solution
of
an important segment of outstanding issues in Kosovo and Metohija that
is
an understanding on the implementation of the Education agreement that
would provide an opportunity for the resolution of other open issues as
well - there emerged all of a sudden in early spring 1998 the so called
"Kosovo Liberation Army". Through intimidation and by employing other
proven methods of terrorists, the so called "KLA" took all the
population
of Kosovo and Metohija practically hostage and rendered more difficult
political settlement of unresolved issues and afforded an excuse for
internationalization and an interference of the so called "international
community".
Equipped and funded by the secret service of Albania, the US, Germany
and
the United Kingdom, with the great assistance of the international narco
mafia and Islamic terrorists and extremists, the so called "KLA" killed
several hundred citizens and committed scores of terrorist attacks
during
the course of 1998 and 1999.
"KLA" terrorism was an excuse to step up pressure on Serbia and the FR
of
Yugoslavia, which accepted even the deployment of OSCE monitors in
Kosovo
and Metohija and the opening of negotiations with the participation of
foreign mediators concerning a substantial future autonomy for the
Province, all in good faith and the hope that it would be possible to
find
a just and durable solution to all open issues. Regrettably, very soon
it
turned out that some western countries above all the United States,
regardless of the fact that immediately prior to that it publicly
declared
the so called "KLA" as a terrorist organization, directly stood behind
the
terrorists and bandits and that their real goal was not to arrive at any
just and acceptable political solution but to occupy Kosovo and Metohija
militarily and to fragment the FR of Yugoslavia further.
Parallel with these activities directed towards the "KLA", the US and
its
allies continued to exercise ever more blunt pressure and threats
against
the FR of Yugoslavia, offering more and more unacceptable frameworks for
a
political settlement of issues in Kosovo and Metohija culminating in the
shameful and unprecedented ultimatum at Rambouillet, calculating in
advance
that it would not be accepted and being so designed as to make it
unacceptable to any country.
The so-called "negotiations" in Rambouillet and Paris in fact never took
place. The US did not allow any direct talks between the delegations
which
never met and talked. The draft agreement was kept by the US delegation
as
top secret and was not known even to the international mediators or the
other delegations of Contact Group countries which were supposed to
mediate
in the negotiations. The very draft document was badly disguised prelude
in
the legalization of secession of Kosovo and Metohija with simultaneous
provision of a massive military presence and occupation of all territory
of
the FR of Yugoslavia by the NATO forces. This was actually a tactic of
buying time in order to prepare the public for the aggression on which
decisions were made even before the simulation of talks in Rambouillet
and
Paris.
Upon rejection of the ultimatum, there followed NATO's military
aggression
which was presented to the public as preventing a "humanitarian crisis"
in
Kosovo and Metohija.
Dear friends,
In its barbarian aggression, NATO has committed serious crimes against
humanity, violated virtually all rules of international law: from the UN
Charter banning a war of aggression and the use of force without the
authorization of the Security Council to all more important
international
conventions. The total war imposed on the FR of Yugoslavia and
calculated
to destroy completely its economic potential, to cause the mass killing
of
its population and genocide, is amoral and illegal by all standards -
according to international law, according to the founding act of NATO as
a
"defensive organization" and according to the constitutions of the NATO
Member States themselves. True, the NATO aggression, by its barbarity
and
massacre of civilians is more horrible, in many ways than the crimes of
W.W.II. NATO member States have committed serious international crimes:
crimes against peace through aggression and unauthorized use of armed
force; crimes against humanity, a crime of genocide and war crimes
through
the use of prohibited means such as cluster and depleted uranium
munitions,
chemical weapons and massive killing of civilians. The FR of Yugoslavia
has
instituted proceedings before the International Court of Justice, for
determination of the responsibility of States participating in the
aggression as well as before the national courts of the aggressor States
for determination of responsibility of individuals and governments of
these
States for violation of the constitutional and criminal law of these
very
States. In the States taking part in the aggression people's courts
consisting of individuals and non-governmental organizations have been
spontaneously set up to condemn morally individuals bearing the greatest
responsibility for these crimes.
Ladies and Gentlemen,
The heroic defense and resistance of Yugoslavia to the aggression was a
serious moral and political defeat for the aggressor which was prevented
in
its intention to impose its own will as a fait accmpli and to prove its
power in the world. Once again, Yugoslavia has demonstrated that no
power,
however technologically superior in weapons, is capable of defeating the
numbers and the equipment of a people determined and united to defend
its
freedom. NATO has achieved none of its military and political goals and
the
doctrine of the "right to a humanitarian intervention", which was to be
triumphantly inaugurated at the current session of the UN General
Assembly
after the aggression on the FR of Yugoslavia, was condemned in general
terms by the Member States of the World organization. Instead of
contributing to the prestige of NATO and of scaring the world of the
enormous military and political machine, the aggression has had an
opposite
effect. It encouraged the countries true to their freedom and policy of
independence to join their efforts in fighting more effectively this
hegemonistic neo-imperialist and neo-colonialist policy.
Yugoslavia has succeeded in returning the resolution of the Kosovo
problem
to the framework of the United Nations, insisting that the UN only has
the
mandate to maintain international peace and security. By the Belgrade
peace
document, the Military-Technical Agreement of Kumanovo and ultimately
its
resolution 1244 (1999), the UN Security Council temporarily took
responsibility for the security situation in Kosovo and Metohija. At the
same time, the Security Council reaffirmed guarantees of the sovereignty
and territorial integrity of the FR of Yugoslavia, a political solution
on
the basis of equality of citizens and all ethnic communities within the
framework of an autonomy. The international community has established
its
presence in the province through the UNMIK and KFOR missions entrusted
with
a task of ensuring the security of the population. It is clear that a
political settlement for Kosovo and Metohija must be based on an
autonomy
within the Republic of Serbia guaranteeing the equality of all citizens,
and ethnic communities in the southern Serbian province.
Regretfully, the situation in the Province is characterized by the daily
terror of the so called "KLA", killings, an ethnic cleansing of Serbs,
Roma, Muslims, Goranci and non-Albanians in general as well as by total
lawlessness. The Province has thus been turned into a center of
terrorism
and organized international crime in Europe. This clearly shows that the
missions mandated by the United Nations have not fulfilled their basic
task
of guaranteeing a safe environment, public order and peace and return of
refugees and displaced persons almost nine months from their deployment.
The terrorist "KLA", instead of being disarmed and disbanded, has been
renamed into the so-called "Kosovo Protection Corps", with which
international representatives closely cooperate. These decisions, which
are
in direct violation of UN Security Council resolution 1244 (1999), are a
clear indication of open links between the leadership of the UN civil
mission and KFOR on the one hand, and terrorists and separatists on the
other.
The consequence of such an attitude of international civil and security
presences is the exodus of about 350,000 non-Albanians, close to 5,000
terrorist attacks made since 12 June 1999, of which more than 4,000
against
the non-Albanian population. Since the deployment of international
representatives, over 933 persons (more than 800 Serbs and Montenegrins)
have been killed, over 800 have been kidnapped and more than 50,000
homes
have been destroyed or burned down, 85 Christian churches and
monasteries
as well as cultural monuments have been destroyed.
More than 200,000 foreign nationals are currently illegally present in
Kosovo and Metohija. The terrorists from Albania walk the length and
breath
of Kosovo and Metohija. Islamic extremists arrive from various parts of
the
world and the whole province is in the hands of mafia clans and
terrorists.
The government of the FR of Yugoslavia has addressed more than 50
communications to the Security Council drawing attention to the
deterioration of the general situation in Kosovo and Metohija and
calling
for the taking of appropriate measures, including determination of the
responsibility for the continued genocide of the Serbian and
non-Albanian
population in Kosovo and Metohija perpetrated under the auspices of the
UN.
All this is confirmation that the aggression against the FR of
Yugoslavia
continues by other means - through sanctions and attempts at wearing out
and exhausting the Yugoslav economy and halting the economic development
of
the FR of Yugoslavia through subversive activity and attempted
destabilization of Serbia and the FRY, through fresh military threats,
all
the way to the media aggression and deliberate sabotage and violation of
the UN Security Council resolution on Kosovo and Metohija.
Ladies and Gentlemen,
Clearly, Yugoslavia as the victim of a brutal aggression, cannot nor has
it the right to forget the crimes for which the leaders of the US
administration and NATO are responsible. No one can forget nor has he
the
right to forget the responsibility of those who have in any way
participated in the preparation or the perpetration of aggression.
Thousands of innocent human losses, including women, elderly people,
children, even babies on the maternity wards make us bound not to
forget.
We insist on the identification of every responsibility of the
aggressors
for the crimes against peace and humanity as well as on the compensation
for the damage caused by war, in respect of which the government of the
FR
of Yugoslavia submitted a Memorial to the International Court of Justice
in
the Hague. Just as we heroically defended our freedom and dignity, we
say
to the aggressors' forces that we will be equally successful in
defending
ourselves from all forms of an extended aggression through sanctions,
interference in the internal affairs, encouragement of separatism and
destabilization and systematic violation of the decisions of the
Security
Council concerning the Serbian province of Kosovo and Metohija. We
continue
equally united and efficiently with our reconstruction and economic
development that you will, we hope, have the opportunity to see
firsthand
at least partly.
Ladies and Gentlemen,
Distinguished guests,
Yugoslavia has a long tradition of openness for equitable cooperation
with
respect for the common interests of all our partners and
non-interference
in the internal affairs. With such a policy it has been and remains to
be
an indispensable constructive factor of peace, stability and cooperation
in
the Balkans, in Europe and the world.
Allow me to say a few words now about the priorities of Yugoslavia's
policy.
The foremost priority is the protection of the sovereignty and
territorial
integrity of Yugoslavia, i.e. prevention of any separatism and
terrorism,
removal of all threats, pressure and outside interference.
Second, ensuring conditions for the reconstruction and rebuilding of the
country, encouragement of the participation of foreign partners.
Third, strengthening of the reputation and international position of
Yugoslavia on the international scene by developing cooperation on an
equal
basis and friendly relations with all countries respecting Yugoslavia as
an
equal partner.
Fourth, normalization of its membership status in international,
political, economic and other organizations and the lifting of
sanctions.
In our neighborhood and in South Eastern Europe, we continue to pursue
an
active, open and principled policy of normalization of relations with
the
former Yugoslav republics, development of good-neighborliness with all
our
neighbors while respecting the principle of sovereignty and territorial
integrity as well as respect for mutual interests and non-interference
in
the internal affairs.
This implies that all countries of the region should respect the rights
of
ethnic minorities in accordance with the European standards, notably the
right to use one's own language, to education in one's native language,
to
foster one's own cultural heritage on a national identity and customs.
We are in favor of strengthening in economic integration processes
dismantling all customs, administrative and other barriers to free
movement
of people, capital, goods, services, scientific, cultural and other
values,
including the creation of free trade areas.
The development of a multilateral regional cooperation with an equal
participation of all countries and respect for the original interests of
peoples and States of the region is our major commitment. The more so
since
the process of this cooperation was inaugurated in Belgrade in 1988 at
the
First Conference of Foreign Ministers of the Balkan countries.
Ladies and Gentlemen,
The people of Yugoslavia aspires for peace and cooperation with its
neighbors, wishing a developed and upright Balkans, which will not serve
as
a testing ground for inhuman experiments of the architects of the New
World
Order, desirous of a Europe and a world where common sense and
understanding among people and nations will prevail. We are aware of all
the dangers and challenges on that road just as we are aware of the fact
that this was not going to be an easy struggle. In our efforts for a
better
and happier future of all the world, all the people and all nations, we
are
ready to cooperate with all those who care about equality, peace and
understanding among people. We are convinced that a large majority of
mankind shares our goals and convictions.
Therefore, if it is true that the NATO aggression has had global
hegemonistic aims, then it is equally true that the defense of
Yugoslavia
from that aggression has had global freedom values.
Thank you.
--------- COORDINAMENTO ROMANO PER LA JUGOSLAVIA -----------
RIMSKI SAVEZ ZA JUGOSLAVIJU
e-mail: crj@... - URL: http://marx2001.org/crj
http://www.egroups.com/group/crj-mailinglist/
------------------------------------------------------------
FEDERAL MINISTRY FOR FOREIGN AFFAIRS
YUGOSLAV DAILY SURVEY
BELGRADE, 24 March 2000 No. 2969
S P E C I A L I S S U E
ADDRESS OF FOREIGN MINISTER ZIVADIN JOVANOVIC
AT THE INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE "CONSEQUENCES OF
THE NATO AGGRESSION AGAINST F.R. YUGOSLAVIA"
(Belgrade, 24 March 2000.)
Dear friends,
Distinguished guests,
It is my great pleasure and honor to greet you and wish all participants
of today's meeting a fruitful exchange of views and enjoyable stay in
Yugoslavia.
Today, exactly a year ago, the eyes of the world public were on the
Federal Republic of Yugoslavia because the NATO military machine
spearheaded by the United States, launched a brutal aggression against
the
FR of Yugoslavia, an independent and sovereign country, a founding
member
of the United Nations and of other international organizations.
The aggression was perpetrated because Yugoslavia, as a sovereign
country,
with deep freedom-loving roots, did not want to accept the disgraceful
diktat of Rambouillet and Paris based on the deception of an alleged
violation of human rights. Yugoslavia rejected the diktat which demanded
the capitulation and occupation of the entire country.
If the eyes of the world were on Yugoslavia a year ago because of the
outset of aggression looking with apprehension and uncertainty as to
whether this country and its people will succeed in defending freedom,
whether David will overpower the Goliath of the post-industrialist era,
than there is no longer such a dilemma. Yugoslavia succeeded in
defending
dignity, it confirmed its freedom-loving traditions and gave hope to
others
that there is no force which can defeat a nation which is united and
determined to defend its own at any cost.
We believe that today, a year later, the eyes of the world public are
again on Belgrade and on this meeting, but now in recognition of courage
and support for rebuilding what was destroyed, for building new and
modern.
Many eyes are precisely on this high meeting in which the most famous
creators from all parts of the world take part, those who represent the
conscious of mankind and its noblest humanistic values. The people in
this
hall in the heart of freedom-loving Belgrade expect fresh encouragement
and
an inspiration for a better future.
Distinguished guests,
How come that it was the FR of Yugoslavia that was chosen to be the
proving ground for testing the model of the "New World Order"? First, in
the analysis of the strategists of the New World Order, Yugoslavia is
treated as a "real problem", as a physical obstacle standing in the way
of
achievement of the goal of expansion into Eastern Europe and of
mastering
natural resources and sources of energy in the rich regions of the
Middle
East, the Caucasus and Central Asia which is a key to Europe and
Euroasia
and an access to Russia and China from the West. Second, if it is true
that
during the period of the bloc division of the world Yugoslavia was seen
as
a buffer zone and that it valorized its geostrategic importance on that
basis, then it is also true that today, at a time of integration
processes
Yugoslavia with its known geostrategic advantages is becoming a bridge
linking north and south, eastern and western Europe. Third, Yugoslavia
was
chosen as a target of aggression, because by "bringing to its knees" of
countries which on a world scale symbolize freedom and independence it
was
meant to intimidate all other countries and peoples and to discourage
their
opposition to hegemony and imperialism. NATO and the US administration
mind
even the very existence of Yugoslavia and what it stands for today - a
multiethnic, multicultural State, which is, despite the pressures and
sanctions and despite a million refugees, developing faster and more
comprehensively than its neighbors which, at least in words, enjoy every
assistance and support of the rich NATO members, the United States in
particular.
The NATO aggression against the FR of Yugoslavia was a culmination of
the
American aspirations to establish, after the fall of the Berlin Wall, a
new
unipolar world order in which the United States will be the pivot and
the
NATO alliance its chief instrument. In conditions when NATO has lost its
global adversary and any national justification for its existence, the
aggression should have assigned a new role for NATO and confirmed the
global supremacy of the United States. It was an arrogant demonstration
of
the fact that the new masters of the world are making their own rules
and
taking into their own hands the role of the judge, the jury and
executioner.
Ladies and Gentlemen,
Distinguished guests,
The consequences of the NATO aggression may be viewed at several levels.
The first level is Yugoslavia as a direct victim of crimes and
destruction.
The second is a regional one as part of South Eastern Europe. The third
is
a European one, the fourth global or the world level.
Although they are all mutually closely related, it is difficult to
analyze
them in isolation. However, for this occasion the basic facts should be
recalled about the consequences at each individual level.
NATO has caused a humanitarian, economic and environmental disaster in
Yugoslavia by using the most destructive means, including cluster bombs,
depleted uranium ammunition, carbon fiber bombs. Leaders of NATO
countries,
the US administration in the first place, are responsible for the
killing
of several thousand inhabitants of Yugoslavia, including women,
children,
babies, refugees, travelers on the busses and international passenger
trains, for the destruction of hospitals, schools, the water supply
system,
the power system, heating of larger cities, residential areas, bridges,
railways and roads. The damage caused by war is estimated at more than
US$
100 billion. Such losses and civilian destruction cynically explained by
the NATO propaganda as "collateral damage" were the core of the NATO
strategy, especially after promises made in public that Serbia will be
brought to its knees within 3 or 7 days at the latest, proved to be at
least narrow-minded arrogance. By systematically bombing civilian
targets
and causing a massive loss of human life, NATO targeted the people and
its
morale, to which it obviously paid very little attention in its
calculations. In particular, they underestimated the determination,
patriotic feelings and unity of the people and leadership of the
country.
At the regional level, the aggression drastically halted and set back
the
processes of normalization, the development of good-neighborly relations
and promotion of both bilateral and multilateral cooperation in South
Eastern Europe, whose prospects were opened up by the signing of the
Dayton/Paris Peace Agreement in 1995, by the Royaumont initiative and
the
Crete Summit in 1997. By combining the dirtiest methods of pressure and
promises, the US administration drew Yugoslavia's neighbors to take part
in
one way or another in the aggression. Through the policy of divide and
rule
and by encouraging even territorial claims of some neighbors against
Yugoslavia, the US administration not only undermined the important
results
of the regional cooperation and all known regional initiatives, but
attempted to sow as much division and as much mistrust in the region as
possible by involving the neighboring countries in the criminal
aggression.
In this way, it clearly revealed that its real purpose was longer term
destabilization of the region aimed at justifying the movement of its
troops from Central to South Eastern Europe and Eastern Europe through
the
establishment and interconnection of the new chain of its military
bases.
What the pro-American governments in neighboring countries did not or
dared
not understand was very well understood by the broadest public in these
countries namely that the goal of the American policy was total
domination
and colonialization of the peoples and countries of South Eastern
Europe,
exploitation of their human and economic resources, provision of a
bridge
head to the Caspian region, Central Asia and western borders of Russia
and
China.
The model of an alliance between NATO and the separatist and terrorist
organization such as the so called "KLA" - in which the roles were so
assigned that the criminal, mafia and terrorist gangs acted as the foot
soldiers to NATO and conversely in which NATO served as an air support
to
the terrorists - is very important for understanding not only regional
but
also less European and global consequences of the aggression. It remains
for military analysts to study such pearls of NATO strategists as
provision
of protection to terrorist gangs by a squadron of B-52 strategic bombers
in
their attempts to infiltrate from Albania into Serbia in the regions of
Mt.
Pa{trik and Ko{are. This alliance was created even during the so called
Rambouillet and Paris talks, at Thaci-Clark meetings and even much
earlier
at the meetings of US representatives with the seasoned terrorists and
criminals at Junik, Davos and London. These are only the most drastic
forms
of abuse of separatism and terrorism which are incidentally resorted to
by
US intelligence and administration in one way or the other, ranging from
South Eastern Asia, Tibet, Kashmir, Afghanistan, Chechnya, Dagestan,
Kosovo
and Metohija to Gibraltar and from the North Sea to the Cape of Good
Hope.
To force on Europe attrition, to slow down the process of its
integration
and access of the developed West and to resources of rich Russia is the
strategic goal of the US administration in order to preserve its
economic
and technological domination over the whole world. That goal was
reflected
even during the work of the so called Contact Group which served the
United
States gradually to draw Europe into the preparations for and later on
the
perpetration of the aggression itself. This was testified to by the
destruction of transport routes on Europe's corridor E-10, the bridges
over
the Danube near Novi Sad so as to prevent the use of economic lifelines,
especially important for the profitability and competitiveness of
European
products and services, for links between northern and southern parts of
the
European Union, between Europe and the Caspian Basin, between the Middle
East and Central Asia. The NATO aggression against Yugoslavia inflicted
enormous long-term damage on Europe, both economically and politically
as
well as security and culture-wise. It revealed the major weaknesses of
Europe, and a striking lack of political leaders who care about breaking
away from American blackmail and projecting their own vision of European
identity. This is borne out, for instance, by the fact that neither the
parliaments nor the governments of Italy, France, Germany, Britain or
Spain
and many other European countries respected their own constitutions in
deciding to take part in the aggression, whereas the parliaments and
governments of some of them like Italy never had the issue of
participation
in the aggression on its agenda. If these are democratic societies, than
the question arises as to who made the decisions in the first place and
who
committed these countries to rain destruction on Yugoslavia and to kill
its
citizens? Or is it not that important for the quality of democracy to
decide on the participation in aggression against a sovereign country.
Whereas it is more or less clear that the US administration made
political
decisions on the participation of European countries in the aggression
against Yugoslavia, more and more facts come to light confirming that
the
American diktat in the decisions taken within NATO itself during the
aggression was effectively accepted as a fait accompli. Clearly, such
experiences and treatment of the allies will not strengthen NATO nor
will
it open up the prospect of its development. Quite the opposite. Only
some
newly admitted members and those from Eastern Europe who lack confidence
in
their own people and look for a bulwark in their NATO masters have faith
in
NATO and vow to it.
There are signs that there is a growing awareness in Europe of an
increasing violation of European interests due to the blind following of
the US administration. It is a fact, however, that such trends of
concern
and readiness for greater attention to the European interests, if the
impression is not wrong, are more present in public opinion in Europe
than
in its administrative structures which grew accustomed to US blackmail
and
drawing very often personal benefits from it. We hope that Europe will
finally find the strength to put together its own European, rather than
the
now prevailing US agenda. We believe that this is an inevitable trend
although we harbor no illusions that it will be a fast and easy process.
Europe has not yet given a clear answer to the share of responsibilities
according to the American prescription: we destroyed by the bombs and
aircraft, so it is now up to you, the Europeans, to build what was
destroyed and to repair the consequences, if you have any use of it!
As far as the global consequences of the NATO aggression are concerned,
they are simply though understandably not sufficiently concretely
reflected
in an assessment made during the aggression itself: after the aggression
the world and world relations will in no way be the same after 24 March
1999. The NATO alliance called its game by the aggression - instead of
the
criterion of equality, the criterion of hierarchy is forced upon the
world.
Forces above the law, above the principles and the UN Charter
consequently,
NATO is above the UN Security Council and the United States above NATO
and
Europe.
The architects of such a strategy gave a special place to the right to a
so-called "humanitarian intervention". By establishing a monopoly over
judging where and how human rights are violated, the US administration
opens the door wide for gross interference in the internal affairs of
other
countries even for military intervention using its monopoly of the most
influential global media. Thus, the US administration has developed a
technology of indoctrinating the American and world public in order to
justify by its care for human rights and the lofty democratic ideals
interference in internal affairs, arbitrary proclamation of certain
areas
in the world the "zones of US vital interest" and preparations for armed
aggression by covering up its true hegemonistic and colonialist goals
such
as control over energy sources, strategic resources, large markets and
important geopolitical regions. It goes without saying that the
arrogance
of the proponents of this policy leaves no scope for asking questions
about
the massive violation of basic human rights in the United States itself
and
the world at large through an arbitrary imposition of US sanctions which
have at this very moment been in place for 87 countries or for 42 per
cent
of the population on this planet. An accompanying lever of this
hegemonistic strategy is the doctrine of limited sovereignty which is
attempted to be imposed, above all on the non-aligned and developing
countries.
The proponents of this doctrine do not mind seeing and reacting by
threats
even to the non-existent and imagined interference in US internal
affairs,
demanding absolute respect for its hyper-sovereignty. At the same time,
the
sovereignty of other countries has no worth to them. They adopt a racist
attitude towards developing countries, maintaining that they are
conservative and that they do not understand that limitation of their
sovereignty is in the interest of their modern democratic development.
The fact is that the global messages and dangers of the NATO aggression
against Yugoslavia are understood well in the world. An overwhelming
majority of the Member States of the World organization strongly rejects
the concept of interventionism, the doctrine of limited sovereignty and
the
American pretension to act as the world policeman. This was clearly
demonstrated on numerous occasions so far, including at the 54th session
of
the UN General Assembly.
By its successful defense from the aggression, Yugoslavia has made a
historic contribution to the protection of the rights and principles of
international relations in confrontation with the brute force. It has
thus,
at the same time, restored confidence in the lasting values of the UN
Charter and in the sustainability of the system of international
relations
based on the equality, sovereignty, territorial integrity and
non-interference in the internal affairs of sovereign States. What
seemed
impossible or highly unlikely before the NATO aggression, Yugoslavia
proved
not only possible but a must: it resolutely resisted the most powerful
military machine and the strategy of bringing other peoples into
submission, and it succeeded in defending its freedom, dignity and
independence.
Distinguished guests,
All hopes that the Cold War era will be followed by the democratization
of
international relations and that we shall enter a period of a stable and
durable peace, have been betrayed. Unfortunately, we are witness to the
opposite processes of a radical revision of the system of international
relations established after the Second World War of a conscious and
intentional violation of the fundamental principles enshrined in the
Charter of the United Nations and attempts at imposing the New World
Order
and "globalization" of international relations. This trend is followed
by
attempts at sociological and cultural globalization, that is of basing
the
whole world on the same type of a society, namely on liberal democratic
capitalism of the West through a kind of "liberal imperialism" and a new
totalitarianism. The stories of a free trade, free circulation of goods
and
capital is only a cover for the imposition of a global economic order in
which to ensure complete control over markets, most important
geostrategic
regions, raw materials and resources. The bottom line is to ensure the
right to prosperity and riches for an exclusive group of countries and
to
condemn the rest of them to the role of colonies, vassals and permanent
impoverishment.
The policy pursued by the US administration and by NATO Member States,
based on its economic and military power and on control of the money
flows,
is a dangerous one because it leads to the rich getting richer and the
poor
getting poorer. There is a conscious effort to disrupt the entire system
of
international relations, to produce destabilization and fragmentation of
independent countries. The United Nations and its Security Council have
been further marginalized while senior US representatives openly issue
threats that they will finance the United Nations only if it works in
its,
that is, US interest. We have come to the situation where delegations of
the Security Council negotiate with lower-rank US officials only because
they are threatening to tighten the screws on the finances of the UN.
The chief protagonist of the new world unipolar order is the Anglo-Saxon
axis. It is not accidental at all that the United Kingdom appears to be
the
most ardent executor of the US policy and a country which is always
ready
to block any more independent action of the EU and to prevent it from
acting as an independent political factor. It is not an exaggeration to
say
that basically one of the main activities of the Anglo-Saxon axis is
directed precisely against the idea of unification of Europe which along
with China, Russia and India could be a serious counter-weight and a
factor
of curbing the uncontrolled power of the new world supreme power.
In this so called "New World Order", through permanent destabilization
and
civil wars as well as through creation and management and regional
crises,
encouragement of separatism and terrorism, force as the only criterion
in
international relations is being promoted and excuses are being found
for
domination and rule over less developed and smaller States and peoples.
The
aggressive policy of the United States is particularly focused on the
ethnically mixed communities and countries through an undisguised
encouragement of separatism, religious and ethnic exclusiveness and
production of terrorists, through arbitrary interpretation and abuse of
such categories as human and minority rights. Organized campaigns of
"public lies" and creation of realities by the use of the enormous newly
created power of the world media is in the function of domination of the
world. The tendum of world power centers and the world media has created
a
"virtual reality" which is then presented as the final truth all over
the
world. As part of regular preparations for the conduct of an aggressive
policy towards a particular region is also a systematic demonization of
the
whole nations and individual cultures. The example of the FR of
Yugoslavia
is the best illustration of it, since in the last ten years a nation
which
has made an enormous contribution to the struggle against Fascism and
for
the freedom of Europe and the world has been portrayed in the most
influential world media as an uncivilized criminal nation whose victims
are
unworthy of sympathy.
Distinguished guests,
It should be recalled that until the spring of 1998 the situation in the
southern Serbian Province of Kosovo and Metohija was calm irrespective
of
the problems which existed as a result of the boycott of the State
institutions by a part of the Albanian separatists. The separatist
movement
was not caused by any repression or violation of human or minority
rights
of the Albanian ethnic minority, but primarily by constant outside
encouragement with a view to weakening opposition to the spread of
hegemony
and the new NATO strategy. By separating Kosovo and Metohija from the
Republic of Serbia as its integral part and the creation of the so
called
"Greater Albania" from parts of Serbia, Montenegro, Macedonia and
Greece,
NATO aims to reshape international borders and cause longer term
destabilization of the entire South Eastern Europe and thus justify its
movement from Central Europe and the expansion to the East.
It is indicative that parallel with prospects for improved relations
between Yugoslavia and Albania following the Crete meeting between
President Milosevic and Prime Minister Nano and later for the solution
of
an important segment of outstanding issues in Kosovo and Metohija that
is
an understanding on the implementation of the Education agreement that
would provide an opportunity for the resolution of other open issues as
well - there emerged all of a sudden in early spring 1998 the so called
"Kosovo Liberation Army". Through intimidation and by employing other
proven methods of terrorists, the so called "KLA" took all the
population
of Kosovo and Metohija practically hostage and rendered more difficult
political settlement of unresolved issues and afforded an excuse for
internationalization and an interference of the so called "international
community".
Equipped and funded by the secret service of Albania, the US, Germany
and
the United Kingdom, with the great assistance of the international narco
mafia and Islamic terrorists and extremists, the so called "KLA" killed
several hundred citizens and committed scores of terrorist attacks
during
the course of 1998 and 1999.
"KLA" terrorism was an excuse to step up pressure on Serbia and the FR
of
Yugoslavia, which accepted even the deployment of OSCE monitors in
Kosovo
and Metohija and the opening of negotiations with the participation of
foreign mediators concerning a substantial future autonomy for the
Province, all in good faith and the hope that it would be possible to
find
a just and durable solution to all open issues. Regrettably, very soon
it
turned out that some western countries above all the United States,
regardless of the fact that immediately prior to that it publicly
declared
the so called "KLA" as a terrorist organization, directly stood behind
the
terrorists and bandits and that their real goal was not to arrive at any
just and acceptable political solution but to occupy Kosovo and Metohija
militarily and to fragment the FR of Yugoslavia further.
Parallel with these activities directed towards the "KLA", the US and
its
allies continued to exercise ever more blunt pressure and threats
against
the FR of Yugoslavia, offering more and more unacceptable frameworks for
a
political settlement of issues in Kosovo and Metohija culminating in the
shameful and unprecedented ultimatum at Rambouillet, calculating in
advance
that it would not be accepted and being so designed as to make it
unacceptable to any country.
The so-called "negotiations" in Rambouillet and Paris in fact never took
place. The US did not allow any direct talks between the delegations
which
never met and talked. The draft agreement was kept by the US delegation
as
top secret and was not known even to the international mediators or the
other delegations of Contact Group countries which were supposed to
mediate
in the negotiations. The very draft document was badly disguised prelude
in
the legalization of secession of Kosovo and Metohija with simultaneous
provision of a massive military presence and occupation of all territory
of
the FR of Yugoslavia by the NATO forces. This was actually a tactic of
buying time in order to prepare the public for the aggression on which
decisions were made even before the simulation of talks in Rambouillet
and
Paris.
Upon rejection of the ultimatum, there followed NATO's military
aggression
which was presented to the public as preventing a "humanitarian crisis"
in
Kosovo and Metohija.
Dear friends,
In its barbarian aggression, NATO has committed serious crimes against
humanity, violated virtually all rules of international law: from the UN
Charter banning a war of aggression and the use of force without the
authorization of the Security Council to all more important
international
conventions. The total war imposed on the FR of Yugoslavia and
calculated
to destroy completely its economic potential, to cause the mass killing
of
its population and genocide, is amoral and illegal by all standards -
according to international law, according to the founding act of NATO as
a
"defensive organization" and according to the constitutions of the NATO
Member States themselves. True, the NATO aggression, by its barbarity
and
massacre of civilians is more horrible, in many ways than the crimes of
W.W.II. NATO member States have committed serious international crimes:
crimes against peace through aggression and unauthorized use of armed
force; crimes against humanity, a crime of genocide and war crimes
through
the use of prohibited means such as cluster and depleted uranium
munitions,
chemical weapons and massive killing of civilians. The FR of Yugoslavia
has
instituted proceedings before the International Court of Justice, for
determination of the responsibility of States participating in the
aggression as well as before the national courts of the aggressor States
for determination of responsibility of individuals and governments of
these
States for violation of the constitutional and criminal law of these
very
States. In the States taking part in the aggression people's courts
consisting of individuals and non-governmental organizations have been
spontaneously set up to condemn morally individuals bearing the greatest
responsibility for these crimes.
Ladies and Gentlemen,
The heroic defense and resistance of Yugoslavia to the aggression was a
serious moral and political defeat for the aggressor which was prevented
in
its intention to impose its own will as a fait accmpli and to prove its
power in the world. Once again, Yugoslavia has demonstrated that no
power,
however technologically superior in weapons, is capable of defeating the
numbers and the equipment of a people determined and united to defend
its
freedom. NATO has achieved none of its military and political goals and
the
doctrine of the "right to a humanitarian intervention", which was to be
triumphantly inaugurated at the current session of the UN General
Assembly
after the aggression on the FR of Yugoslavia, was condemned in general
terms by the Member States of the World organization. Instead of
contributing to the prestige of NATO and of scaring the world of the
enormous military and political machine, the aggression has had an
opposite
effect. It encouraged the countries true to their freedom and policy of
independence to join their efforts in fighting more effectively this
hegemonistic neo-imperialist and neo-colonialist policy.
Yugoslavia has succeeded in returning the resolution of the Kosovo
problem
to the framework of the United Nations, insisting that the UN only has
the
mandate to maintain international peace and security. By the Belgrade
peace
document, the Military-Technical Agreement of Kumanovo and ultimately
its
resolution 1244 (1999), the UN Security Council temporarily took
responsibility for the security situation in Kosovo and Metohija. At the
same time, the Security Council reaffirmed guarantees of the sovereignty
and territorial integrity of the FR of Yugoslavia, a political solution
on
the basis of equality of citizens and all ethnic communities within the
framework of an autonomy. The international community has established
its
presence in the province through the UNMIK and KFOR missions entrusted
with
a task of ensuring the security of the population. It is clear that a
political settlement for Kosovo and Metohija must be based on an
autonomy
within the Republic of Serbia guaranteeing the equality of all citizens,
and ethnic communities in the southern Serbian province.
Regretfully, the situation in the Province is characterized by the daily
terror of the so called "KLA", killings, an ethnic cleansing of Serbs,
Roma, Muslims, Goranci and non-Albanians in general as well as by total
lawlessness. The Province has thus been turned into a center of
terrorism
and organized international crime in Europe. This clearly shows that the
missions mandated by the United Nations have not fulfilled their basic
task
of guaranteeing a safe environment, public order and peace and return of
refugees and displaced persons almost nine months from their deployment.
The terrorist "KLA", instead of being disarmed and disbanded, has been
renamed into the so-called "Kosovo Protection Corps", with which
international representatives closely cooperate. These decisions, which
are
in direct violation of UN Security Council resolution 1244 (1999), are a
clear indication of open links between the leadership of the UN civil
mission and KFOR on the one hand, and terrorists and separatists on the
other.
The consequence of such an attitude of international civil and security
presences is the exodus of about 350,000 non-Albanians, close to 5,000
terrorist attacks made since 12 June 1999, of which more than 4,000
against
the non-Albanian population. Since the deployment of international
representatives, over 933 persons (more than 800 Serbs and Montenegrins)
have been killed, over 800 have been kidnapped and more than 50,000
homes
have been destroyed or burned down, 85 Christian churches and
monasteries
as well as cultural monuments have been destroyed.
More than 200,000 foreign nationals are currently illegally present in
Kosovo and Metohija. The terrorists from Albania walk the length and
breath
of Kosovo and Metohija. Islamic extremists arrive from various parts of
the
world and the whole province is in the hands of mafia clans and
terrorists.
The government of the FR of Yugoslavia has addressed more than 50
communications to the Security Council drawing attention to the
deterioration of the general situation in Kosovo and Metohija and
calling
for the taking of appropriate measures, including determination of the
responsibility for the continued genocide of the Serbian and
non-Albanian
population in Kosovo and Metohija perpetrated under the auspices of the
UN.
All this is confirmation that the aggression against the FR of
Yugoslavia
continues by other means - through sanctions and attempts at wearing out
and exhausting the Yugoslav economy and halting the economic development
of
the FR of Yugoslavia through subversive activity and attempted
destabilization of Serbia and the FRY, through fresh military threats,
all
the way to the media aggression and deliberate sabotage and violation of
the UN Security Council resolution on Kosovo and Metohija.
Ladies and Gentlemen,
Clearly, Yugoslavia as the victim of a brutal aggression, cannot nor has
it the right to forget the crimes for which the leaders of the US
administration and NATO are responsible. No one can forget nor has he
the
right to forget the responsibility of those who have in any way
participated in the preparation or the perpetration of aggression.
Thousands of innocent human losses, including women, elderly people,
children, even babies on the maternity wards make us bound not to
forget.
We insist on the identification of every responsibility of the
aggressors
for the crimes against peace and humanity as well as on the compensation
for the damage caused by war, in respect of which the government of the
FR
of Yugoslavia submitted a Memorial to the International Court of Justice
in
the Hague. Just as we heroically defended our freedom and dignity, we
say
to the aggressors' forces that we will be equally successful in
defending
ourselves from all forms of an extended aggression through sanctions,
interference in the internal affairs, encouragement of separatism and
destabilization and systematic violation of the decisions of the
Security
Council concerning the Serbian province of Kosovo and Metohija. We
continue
equally united and efficiently with our reconstruction and economic
development that you will, we hope, have the opportunity to see
firsthand
at least partly.
Ladies and Gentlemen,
Distinguished guests,
Yugoslavia has a long tradition of openness for equitable cooperation
with
respect for the common interests of all our partners and
non-interference
in the internal affairs. With such a policy it has been and remains to
be
an indispensable constructive factor of peace, stability and cooperation
in
the Balkans, in Europe and the world.
Allow me to say a few words now about the priorities of Yugoslavia's
policy.
The foremost priority is the protection of the sovereignty and
territorial
integrity of Yugoslavia, i.e. prevention of any separatism and
terrorism,
removal of all threats, pressure and outside interference.
Second, ensuring conditions for the reconstruction and rebuilding of the
country, encouragement of the participation of foreign partners.
Third, strengthening of the reputation and international position of
Yugoslavia on the international scene by developing cooperation on an
equal
basis and friendly relations with all countries respecting Yugoslavia as
an
equal partner.
Fourth, normalization of its membership status in international,
political, economic and other organizations and the lifting of
sanctions.
In our neighborhood and in South Eastern Europe, we continue to pursue
an
active, open and principled policy of normalization of relations with
the
former Yugoslav republics, development of good-neighborliness with all
our
neighbors while respecting the principle of sovereignty and territorial
integrity as well as respect for mutual interests and non-interference
in
the internal affairs.
This implies that all countries of the region should respect the rights
of
ethnic minorities in accordance with the European standards, notably the
right to use one's own language, to education in one's native language,
to
foster one's own cultural heritage on a national identity and customs.
We are in favor of strengthening in economic integration processes
dismantling all customs, administrative and other barriers to free
movement
of people, capital, goods, services, scientific, cultural and other
values,
including the creation of free trade areas.
The development of a multilateral regional cooperation with an equal
participation of all countries and respect for the original interests of
peoples and States of the region is our major commitment. The more so
since
the process of this cooperation was inaugurated in Belgrade in 1988 at
the
First Conference of Foreign Ministers of the Balkan countries.
Ladies and Gentlemen,
The people of Yugoslavia aspires for peace and cooperation with its
neighbors, wishing a developed and upright Balkans, which will not serve
as
a testing ground for inhuman experiments of the architects of the New
World
Order, desirous of a Europe and a world where common sense and
understanding among people and nations will prevail. We are aware of all
the dangers and challenges on that road just as we are aware of the fact
that this was not going to be an easy struggle. In our efforts for a
better
and happier future of all the world, all the people and all nations, we
are
ready to cooperate with all those who care about equality, peace and
understanding among people. We are convinced that a large majority of
mankind shares our goals and convictions.
Therefore, if it is true that the NATO aggression has had global
hegemonistic aims, then it is equally true that the defense of
Yugoslavia
from that aggression has had global freedom values.
Thank you.
--------- COORDINAMENTO ROMANO PER LA JUGOSLAVIA -----------
RIMSKI SAVEZ ZA JUGOSLAVIJU
e-mail: crj@... - URL: http://marx2001.org/crj
http://www.egroups.com/group/crj-mailinglist/
------------------------------------------------------------