Yugoslavia, 2002

It is a great honour and

privilege for me, as the first democratically elected

President of Yugoslavia in nearly 60 years, to address

this gathering of world leaders. Against the solemn

background of yesterday's commemoration and the

challenges that confront us, I would like to share with

the General Assembly my views on developments in

South-East Europe.

Before I begin my remarks, allow me to express

my deep satisfaction at the election of Mr. Jan Kavan

to preside over the fifty-seventh session of the General

Assembly. His leadership and experience make him

uniquely qualified to guide the extremely important

work of this body.

I also wish to extend my congratulations to

Switzerland on joining the United Nations, and to

Timor-Leste on its forthcoming accession to

membership.

Nearly two years have elapsed since democracy

returned to Yugoslavia ─ two years of concerted efforts

by my country to alleviate the consequences of a

decade of civil war, build democratic institutions,

establish the rule of law, carry out market reforms and

fulfil its obligations to the international community.

After a 10-year delay, Yugoslavia has joined the large

group of other European countries in transition that are

building their future on the common values of respect

for human rights, democracy, free-market economies

and a commitment to European and Euro-Atlantic

integration.

What distinguishes my country from most other

Central and Eastern European States is that during that

same decade Yugoslavia experienced the largest armed

conflict in Europe since the Second World War. The

dissolution of the former Yugoslavia, the civil wars

waged on its soil and the subsequent NATO bombing

have left continuing effects on the well-being of the

citizens of my country and on that of the citizens of

most of South-East Europe. Yugoslavia knows only too

well that peace in the region, attained at great sacrifice,

must never be threatened again.

The efforts we have made to that end over the

past two years, and the good political relations we have

established with our neighbours, have strengthened my

hope that an inter-State armed conflict in our region is

unlikely to happen either today or in the foreseeable

future. There are still threats to lasting peace in the

world and in the region alike. Those threats come from

ideological, religious, ethnic and political extremism,

which fuel hatred and sow fear among our peoples.

Organized crime is often linked with that

extremism, and is the lifeblood of terrorism. Even

though terrorism and organized crime in South-East

Europe are rather specific in their characteristics, there

are many links to leading terrorist and criminal groups

throughout the world. I am here to reaffirm my

country's firm commitment to the struggle against this

threat. I am also confident that the United Nations is

the right place for the coordination of international

efforts to rid the world of this evil. This struggle will

not be easy but, together, the community of democratic

nations can prevail through cooperation and a unified

response to potential threats, regardless of where they

may emanate from.

In addition to the security and military measures

that we undertake, we must also be equally committed

to using other methods to eradicate the conditions that

breed terrorists. We must attack global poverty and

injustice throughout the world with the same

commitment and resolution with which we confront

terrorism. We must reach out to the generation of

young impoverished children, who are targets for

terrorist recruitment and manipulation, by providing

them with hope through education and economic

opportunity.

6

The stabilization of our region requires

continuous action not only by the States of the region

but also by the entire international community. My

country has finally undertaken a constitutional

transformation, with facilitation by the European

Union, in order to define the relations between its two

member republics, Serbia and Montenegro. This will

make our integration with the rest of Europe easier and

quicker. Our success requires the success of our

neighbours. When it comes to Bosnia and Herzegovina,

Yugoslavia is a fervent advocate of the full

implementation of the Dayton Accords. In fact, we are

a guarantor of those Accords.

As in all other cases, our goal is to open borders,

not to change them. We want to promote the flow of

people and goods, thus restoring the broken ties that

bound us to each other. I am pleased to see that this

policy has produced significant results, although I have

to say that slow economic recovery hinders our efforts,

especially in the area of refugee returns. Yugoslavia, in

cooperation with Croatia and Bosnia and Herzegovina,

will continue to do its part in establishing the trust and

cooperation between our three States that will benefit

our citizens. I am proud that Yugoslavia will host the

next summit of these States, which is scheduled to be

held in Belgrade this autumn.

I am saddened that the situation in Kosovo is far

less encouraging. Some progress has been made since

Security Council resolution 1244 (1999) was adopted,

and since the United Nations Interim Administration

Mission in Kosovo (UNMIK) arrived in the province.

With the enormous help and understanding of

Secretary-General Kofi Annan, a bright spot was

reached through the agreement with Special

Representative Hans Haekkerup on cooperation

between the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia and

UNMIK in November 2001. Unfortunately, Kosovo

remains a factor of political instability and a centre for

organized criminal networks that transit our region and

stretch from Central Asia to South America. There is

little doubt that these networks cooperate with

extremist and terrorist groups in our region and

beyond.

Another problem with Kosovo is the desperate

plight of the close to 250,000 Serbs, Montenegrins and

other non-Albanians who desire to return to their

homes but who remain displaced, mostly in central

Serbia. Unlike the case of Bosnia and Herzegovina,

less that one per cent of Kosovo's population of

internally displaced persons has returned. To make

matters worse, the fate of more than 5,000 abducted

and missing persons is yet to be uncovered. During the

last two years, Kosovo's instability twice spilled over

into neighbouring areas, first into the Presevo valley in

southern Serbia, and then into the western part of

Macedonia. Regardless of the fact that Serbs and others

participate in Kosovo's provisional institutions, this has

not led to an improvement in the security situation or

to the establishment of complete freedom of

movement. Without immediate and noticeable

improvement in those two areas, a more massive return

of internally displaced persons is unlikely. All of that,

along with the reluctance of Kosovo Albanian political

leaders to enter into dialogue with us, makes is

impossible to begin a serious discussion on the final

status of Kosovo.

Yugoslavia will continue to do its part in

establishing the conditions for a democratic and

peaceful solution to this open issue. To that end, I am

pleased that we will upgrade to the ambassadorial level

diplomatic relations with our neighbour, the Republic

of Albania. I am confident that the cooperation

between our two countries will continue and that

jointly we will be in a better position to find solutions

to outstanding problems.

Let me stress that we are fully aware of our

international commitments and that we will meet them,

not because this is demanded of us but because we

desire to establish a democratic society based on the

rule of law.

I believe that, at the conceptual level, the final

point I am going to make is the most important because

it determines everything else. The world must

understand that change has truly taken place in

Yugoslavia and that no authoritarian regime has any

chance there anymore. Sometimes there is mistrust

towards my country; this is almost unbelievable. There

is still prejudice against us, as if nothing has changed,

whereas actually a great deal has changed and

substantially. The political situation is still evolving.

There are still disagreements among the various

players. But this is perfectly normal for a transitional

period. Nothing should serve as a pretext for

continuing a policy of conditionality towards us, or for

attempts to interfere in our internal affairs. We

continue often to see how such an approach is usually

counter-productive not to mention the time it

wastes.