Serbia, 2010

I stand before the Assembly

gratified and in a position to salute it for playing a very

important part in the process towards reconciliation in

my region, and for supporting the consolidation of the

new, modern Serbia. In a few days, we will proudly

celebrate the tenth anniversary of our peaceful

democratic revolution.

In a world confronted by so many threats, the

United Nations must constantly reaffirm its original

purpose and adapt to new challenges. The United

Nations has confronted, through its many agencies, the

scourges of discrimination, disease, hunger, poverty

and environmental degradation. In other words, the

United Nations has built a capacity to create rules that

transcend frontiers, rules that we all respect.

One thing that we have all embraced, as Member

States of the United Nations, is the wish to find

solutions to all challenges through peaceful means,

dialogue and consensus.

I opened with a specific reference to the General

Assembly. A few weeks ago it adopted by acclamation

resolution 64/298, proposed by Serbia and sponsored

by the 27 States members of the European Union,

acknowledging the content of the advisory opinion of

the International Court of Justice (ICJ) regarding the

unilateral declaration of independence of Kosovo.

The resolution is fundamentally status-neutral

with regard to the status of Kosovo. All other

interpretations do not correspond to the truth. The

resolution welcomed the readiness of the EU to

facilitate a process of dialogue between the parties.

Serbia welcomes the resolution. We look forward to

engaging in the process that will hopefully lead to a

mutually acceptable compromise solution to the

problem of Kosovo.

We feel vindicated in our contention that the path

to dialogue lay through the natural process of

international legitimacy. The General Assembly sought

an opinion from the International Court of Justice. The

ICJ delivered an opinion. The General Assembly has

now, as a consequence, called for dialogue. Moreover,

that request comes as a consequence of a joint effort

between Serbia and the European Union.

In the light of that, we sought reaffirmation of the

validity of the international system as we know it. We

feel proud that our faith in this process has produced

results. We have always said that we are ready to

engage in dialogue. But that dialogue must be framed

by rules and accountability, and this has been achieved

through the latest vote of the General Assembly.

Many have been involved in this process, and we

are grateful for the contributions of all those who in the

debate on the draft resolution expressed understanding

for the position of Serbia. Our issue has been the first

test of the new post-Lisbon institutions of the European

Union, which we consider our natural and eventual

home. We are encouraged by the commitment and

sense of purpose of the leadership of these new

institutions.

We should be very clear. Serbia has always

maintained that the attempt to secede unilaterally is a

violation of the basic principles of the Charter, the

Helsinki Final Act and Security Council resolution

1244 (1999). A vast majority of United Nations

Member States refrained from recognizing Kosovo’s

unilateral declaration of independence. They have

continued to abide by their Charter obligations to

respect the sovereignty and territorial integrity of my

country. On behalf of the Republic of Serbia, I once

again sincerely thank those countries for their support

and solidarity.

Serbia’s position remains unchanged. The

unilaterally declared independence of Kosovo will not

be recognized by Serbia explicitly or implicitly. This is

enshrined in our Constitution. We have repeatedly said

that we seek dialogue, but within a framework of

globally acknowledged law, the law of the United

Nations. For this reason, we insisted on the process of

10-55103 10

seeking the opinion of the International Court of

Justice and the subsequent General Assembly

resolution related to the Court’s opinion.

Let me be very clear as to what the Court did and

did not say. Its advisory opinion reaffirmed that

Kosovo remains under the interim administration of the

United Nations, and that Security Council resolution

1244 (1999) and the United Nations Constitutional

Framework for Provisional Self-Government in

Kosovo stay in force and continue to apply. That means

that this part of our territory remains subject to an

international regime mandated by the Security Council.

The centrality and leading role of the Security

Council in determining the comprehensive settlement

of the Kosovo issue remains paramount, and will

provide legitimacy to the result. The Court also did not

endorse the view that Kosovo’s unilateral declaration

of independence was sui generis — a unique case. Nor

did it endorse any avowed right to self-determination

for the province’s ethnic Albanians.

The Court chose to examine the language of

Kosovo’s unilateral declaration of independence, and

held the view that the text of the declaration itself did

not contain anything that violates international law.

The Court, thus, did not approve the province’s right to

secession from Serbia, nor did it support the claim that

Kosovo is a sovereign State.

The Court’s opinion is clear: the unilateral

declaration of independence was only “an attempt to

determine finally the status of Kosovo” (A/64/881,

advisory opinion, para. 114). The General Assembly

resolution relating to the Court’s opinion

acknowledged this content of the Court’s advisory

opinion. It is within this framework that we are ready

to follow the Assembly’s resolution and to engage in a

dialogue.

We are now ready to talk, and we will do so in

good faith. Therefore, Serbia asks all Member States to

engage fully in the spirit of their vote in the Assembly,

in which they called for a dialogue to be facilitated by

the European Union.

A dialogue requires trust. Soon the two parties

will be talking to each other for the first time in many

years. We must be patient and seek out those issues

which allow confidence to be built on each side. There

will be many issues to discuss, and some of them will

be complicated.

All Member States can contribute to an

atmosphere that creates trust. We are entering a phase

in which creative solutions require political

imagination, respect for our own democratic

institutions and great skill. I trust that it can be a phase

in which all parties leave behind them anachronistic

analyses and diplomatic ambushes. We must be able to

build confidence to have trust.

Serbia believes that the continued pursuit of

recognition is futile and counter-productive to the spirit

in which we now enter this phase. All those who

wanted to make their point have made it, and we still

do not have a clear settlement. I want to underline that

it is of critical importance for Member States that have

not recognized Kosovo’s unilateral declaration of

independence to stay the course on non-recognition

throughout the dialogue process. That will be a

significant contribution to ensuring that unilateral

attempts to impose outcomes of ethnic and territorial

disputes are not legitimized, thereby preventing

Kosovo’s unilateral declaration of independence from

becoming a dangerous and destabilizing precedent.

Until now, statehood has never been attained

without the consent of the parent State. A durable

settlement on an issue of such magnitude and

sensitivity has never been the product of compulsion; it

always necessitates consent.

It would be equally harmful if there were

attempts to alter realities on the ground while

discussions get under way. Any attempt to change these

realities through the use of force would bring an

immediate end to the process of dialogue.

I address the Assembly today as a leader who

believes that the future lies in seeking reconciliation.

Our National Assembly adopted a historic Declaration

on Srebrenica: a crime was condemned and an apology

was extended. There is little precedent for such an

action, and I am proud, in that it demonstrates the

maturity of the democracy of Serbia.

I hope that more such gestures throughout the

region will help us create a new region in which our

shared history will unite us morally rather than divide

us politically. For this, surely, is the foundation upon

which the future will be built.

My guiding light is the history of the European

Union. It should be for the entire region of South-East

Europe. The European Union has been a story of

11 10-55103

reconstruction and reconciliation. That story is not

over. The Union faces its own challenges, and we in

our region must assume the responsibility of emulating

it. We must absorb the values and culture of today’s

Europe in order that the Union absorbs us.

This is a delicate exercise, in which expectations

must be carefully nurtured. The EU is evolving. But so

is our region. In this dynamic, we have to assume that

the European Union will remain true to its word that

the inhabitants of the region now referred to as the

Western Balkans will all become citizens of the

European Union. It would be a geographical, historical

and cultural aberration if this were not so. However, as

the region goes through its own changes, it is

particularly sensitive to the signals that it receives from

the European Union. We hope that as the new

institutions of the Union take shape, we will have an

increasingly clear communication from and with the

EU.

It is also true that our region is changing. To a

very large extent, it is changing to the good. We should

recognize the many new levels of cooperation that

exist in our region. The Western Balkans — which has

been affected by the financial crisis — is a story of

many small and larger incremental successes. In fact,

relations have never been better. But the region must

also acknowledge that as it develops its successes can

generate new challenges.

There is one area, therefore, on which I wish to

speak with a clarity that may be deemed undiplomatic.

Organized crime is now a global industry. It is the dark

side of globalization. It attaches itself to weak

societies. It attaches itself to political and religious

extremists. It attempts to buy and subvert democracies.

Like water, it spreads to where it finds least resistance.

It is global and globalized in its interconnections.

Organized crime, I want to state emphatically, is

in the Western Balkans. I consider it to be the greatest

single challenge to my country and to the whole

region. It always has been present, and it was given

solid foundations because of the wars in our region.

But I fear that it is developing capabilities — acquired

from the globalization of crime and access to

technology — at a much faster pace. The criminals

concerned are bringing drugs, guns, human trafficking

and corruption into our societies. In doing so, they are

using our region to spread into Europe. I fear that we

are in a race against time in our region. The stark

choice is that South-Eastern Europe will become either

a valuable bridge between Europe and vital areas to the

East or it will become the beachhead of organized

crime trying to reach Europe.

We have a common responsibility as leaders in

our region to eliminate this scourge on our societies,

and Serbia will spare no effort in our quest to eradicate

this threat. It is our responsibility to all our neighbours.

For this reason there has been a growing number of

meetings and consultations between us in the region on

this matter.

But today I want to say that this issue cannot be

addressed tactically and occasionally. It is a strategic

issue that affects all of Europe. I am therefore asking

that we all become alert to the next generation of

threat.

In our region, we have a responsibility to create a

strategic alliance against organized crime. We hope

that all Western Balkan States will make fighting it a

priority. We owe this to our citizens, we owe it to our

neighbours in the European Union, and we owe it to

the next generation.

Serbia has historically been part of global

movements. That is why we are totally engaged in

achieving membership of the European Union. That is

why we support the United Nations system. It is also

why we are now moving to reactivate the many

relationships that we built historically, as part of the

Non-Aligned Movement (NAM).

My country is the largest successor to a founding

member of the Movement. Serbia’s capital, Belgrade,

was the site of the First NAM Summit in 1961. 1 am

proud that one of the capstone events marking the

Movement’s fiftieth anniversary will be celebrated in

Belgrade next September.

As part of our commitment to the Millennium

Development Goals, we are strengthening many of our

engagements and commitments worldwide through the

Movement. We shall contribute to those countries that

would welcome assistance, and we look to an

intensification of cooperation. I hope that this is a clear

signal that my Government believes in an active global

engagement that will contribute to both global

solidarity and the achievement of the Millennium

Development Goals.