S/PV.3174 Security Council

I should like to inform the Council that I have received a letter from the representative of Croatia in which he requests to be invited to participate in the discussion of the item on the Council's agenda. In conformity with the usual practice, I propose, with the consent of the Council, to invite that representative to participate in the discussion without the right to vote, in accordance with the relevant provisions of the Charter and rule 37 of the Council's provisional rules of procedure. There being no objection, it is so decided. At the invitation of the President, Mr. Nobilo (Croatia) took a Place at the Council table.

I have also received a request dated 19 February 1993 from Ambassador Dragon-&r Djokig to address the Council. With the consent of the Council, I would propose to invite him to address the Council in the course of the discussion of the item before it, There being no objection, it is so decided. The Security Council will now begin its consideration of the item on the agenda. The Security Council is meeting in accordance with t.he understanding reached in its prior consultations. Members of the Council have before them the further report of the Secretary-General Pursuant to Security Council resolution 743 (lgg2), which is contained in document S/25264 and Corr.1, Members of the Council also have before them document S/25306, which contains the text of a draft resolution prepared in the course of the Council's prior consultations. I should like to draw the attention of members of the Council to the following documents: S/25062 and S/25288, letters dated 5 January and 12 February 1993, respectively,. from the Permanent Representative of Croatia to the United Nations addressed to the Secretary-General; 5125193, S/25218 and S/25237, letters dated 29 January and 1 and 3 February from the Chargh d'affaires a.i. of the Permanent Mission of Yugoslavia to the United Nations, the first addressed to the Secretary-General and the others to the President of the Security Council; S/25222, letter dated 26 January 1993 from the Permanent Representatives of France, Spain and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland to the United Nations addressed to the President of the Security Council; and S/25246, letter dated 5 February 1993 from the Permanent Representative of Turkey to the United Nations addressed to the Secretary-General. The first speaker is the representative of Croatia, on whom I now call. Mr, NOBILQ (Croatia): My Government is grateful for the opportunity to express the official position of the Republic of Croatia regarding prolongations of the United Nations peace operation on its territory. I have instructions from my Government to support the Secretary-General's proposals for the provisional extension of the mandate of the United Nations Protection Force (UNPROFOR) up to 31 March 1993. This will provide enough time for substantial negotiations concerning all the aspects of the UNPROFOR operation and for full implementation of the Vance plan. I should like to refer to my letter dated 12 February 1993 (S/25283) to the Secretary-General and stress once again the basic elements on which future United Nations operations in the Republic of Croatia must be based: complete demilitarieation of the United Nations protected areas and "pink zones"; voluntary return of the refugees: control of Croatian international borders: confidence-building measures as a part of the process of reintegration of these areas into the Croatian State and its society: and protection of the rights of national minorities and other human rights. The Republic of Croatia is prepared to implement Security Council resolution 802 (1993) as a first step in the demilitarization process that will be fully established through the implementation of Security Council resolutions 762 (1992) and 769 (1992) and that will enable a comprehensive political solution to be reached under the auspices of the Conference on the Former Yugoslavia. Croatia finds that Security Council resolutions have been of crucial importance in stopping the aggression against my country. The Croatian Government iS fully confident that the future decisions of this body will give added credibility to the UNPROFOR operation and provide it with effective mechanisms so that it can attain all the goals foreseen in the Vance plan. We firmly believe that international guarantees for the implementation of Security Council resolutions are of the utmost importance in bringing peace to the Republic of Croatia, as well as to the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina,

In accordance with tlm decision taken earlier in the meeting, I now invite Ambassador Dragomir Djokig to take a place at the Council table and to make his statement. Mr. DJOKIC/: The Federal Republic of Yugoslavia has accepted the Vance plan, fully supports it and has invested efforts in its complete implementation. For its part, the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia has fulfilled all obligations undertaken under the plan, but further efforts need to be made SO that other signatories do likewise. The United Nations Protection Force (UNPROFOR) peace-keeping operation has proved to be justified, thus creating the basic prerequisites for all open questions to be resolved. The Federal Republic of Yugoslavia supports further engagement of UNPROFOR and most energetically demands that Security Council resolution 802 (1993) be fully implemented. Our position from the very beginning has been that a durable and just solution can be reached only through dialogue between the parties directly involved: mutual respect for each other's interests: cooperation: and political goodwill. We shall also continue in the future to contribute our share to the Geneva Conference, despite the unjust and one-sided sanctions imposed on us that punish one nation as a whole, which we expect to be lifted soon. I should like to recall that the Vance plan states: "Subject to the Council's agreement, the operation would remain in Yugoslavia until a negotiated settlement of the conflict was achieved." (S/23280. annex III, oara, 5) The Secretary-General was even more specific in his report of 4 February 1992, saying: "the United Nations force would not be withdrawn before an overall political solution was found to the Yugoslav crisis". (S/23513, para. 9 (a)) Those goals have not yet been attained. Negotiations on an overall settlement of the Yugoslav crisis are under way within the framework of the International Conference, and peace is conditio sine aua non for its success. Moreover, the local population in Krajina needs United Nations protection now more than ever. For those reasons, the continuing role of UNPROFOR is essential at this crucial juncture. The Federal Republic of Yugoslavia had expected UNPROFOR's mandate to be extended for a longer period of time rather than a short interim period. The basic goals of UNPROFOR's mandate are to protect the local population in the Protected areas and to create the conditions of peace and security required for the negotiation of an overall settlement of the Yugoslav crisis. The responsibility for the non-implementation of the peace plan rests primarily with the Republic of Croatia. Only recently, it launched a major military attack against the United Nations Protected areas. It has violated cease-fires on many occasions, infiltrated terrorist groups in protected areas and amassed troops on the borders of those protected areas. The aggression of the Croatian Army against the United Nations protected areas, UNPROFOR and the Serbian civilian population represents a flagrant violation of the Vance peace plan and relevant Security Council resolutions, in particular 724 (1991) and 762 (1992). That has seriously jeopardized the credibility of the United Nations and its ability to defend the population and ensure peace in the territories under its protection. Furthermore, the Republic of Croatia has totally ignored the latest Security Council resolution, 802 (1993), as well as the presidential statement of 27 January 1993 and the demands contained therein - to immediately cease all military activities and withdraw its army to the original positions. Quite to the contrary, it has continued and stepped up its aggression against the United Nations protected areas. President Tudjman has even gone so far as to publicly announce, on 31 January 1993, that Croatian troops would go ahead and capture more of the United Nations protected areas. In that regard, we should like to recall that the Security Council has undertaken to consider 11 . . . what further steps might be necessary to ensure that resolution 802 (1993) and other relevant Security Council resolutions are fully implemented." (S/PV.3165, I). 3) These developments and permanent armed provocations 'on the part of the Republic of Croatia are a serious impediment to the complete demilitarization of the protected areas and to the implementation of the peace plan. The Serbs, in those parts of the protected areas controlled by the Croatian Army, have been subjected to a systematic "ethnic cleansing" that is proportionately huge in relation to the size of the territory and the number of people it affected. In the region of Western Slavon‘ia alone, 180 villages were completely "cleansed" of Serbs, and, as a result, more than 200,000 Serbs from Croatia sought refuge in the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia. The present policy of the Republic of Croatia is undoubtedly a major obstacle to finding a peaceful and durable solution to the Yugoslav crisis. The victims of that policy are no longer only the Serbs but also the Muslims and United Nations forces. Since the outbreak of the conflict, 60,000 soldiers of the Croatian Army have been actively engaged in the war in Bosnia and Herzegovina, as has been crinfirmed b,y the United Nations Secretary-General, "the Security Council and the General Assembly. Croatia has, in effect, expanded its authority to the territory of Bosnia and Herzegovina under its occupation. (Mr. Djokd) The Republic of Croatia has openly violated the arms embargo imposed by Security Council resolution 713 (1991). Croatian territory is also being used for channeling arms to the Croats and Muslims in Bosnia and Herzegovina. That has been documented and reported by the world media, many independent observers and international organizations. The letter from the President of the' Republic of Croatia of 9 December 1992 addressed to the President of the Security Council raised very serious concerns about the intentions and willingness of the Republic of Croatia to honour the commitments it has accepted under the Vance peace plan. t In that letter, President Tudjman even proposed that the United Nations take: "efficient steps resembling those taken in the case of aggression against Kuwait and with regard to the present-day situation in Somalia" and that it: "Authorize UNPROFOR to implement its task within the scope of the Vance Plan, if necessary by use of force as well". (5124934. nara. 6) Such positions represent a clear departure from the commitments and obligations arising from the Vance peace plan. The proposals,contained in the letter are fraught with grave dangers for the situation on the ground and could jeopardize further implementation of the peace plan. The present policy pursued by Croatia is not only in contravention of the peace plan but also in defiance of the relevant Security Council resolutions. It should be recalled that President Tudjman, in his letter addressed to the Secretary-General of 6 February 1992, accepted fully and unconditionally the Secretary-General's concept and plan which defined the conditions and areas where the United Nations forces were to be deployed. Security Council resolution 740 (1992) of 7 February 1992 noted that President Tudjman's unconditional acceptance removed an obstacle to the deployment of the peace-keeping operation. The role of the Republic of Croatia has often been ignored in the deliberations within the Security Council, and its responsibility brushed aside. As a result, the Republic of Croatia has been further encouraged to persist with its policy and practice of aggression, which has been particularly evident lately. The Security Council can no longer let such a policy stand without firm response. It has an obligation to take all appropriate measures* including those envisaged by Chapter VII, to make the Republic of Croatia honour the United Nations Charter and all relevant'security Council resolutions. If the Security Council truly seeks to contribute to the peaceful resolution Of the Yugoslav crisis, it should take an impartial attitude towards all parties to the conflict. If it fails to do so, the Security Council would embolden Croatia's apparent aspirations to the military option and make a peaceful SOlUtiOn ever so distant and unattainable. The Federal Republic of Yugoslavia has declared on many occasions that it Will strictly abide by all the commitments that the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia assumed internationally. Therefore, 'it shall respect and fulfil the rights and obligations the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia 'undertook vis-a-vis the territories of Krajina that have been placed, within the framework of the United Nations peace-keeping operation, under the PrOteCtiOn of the world Organisation. Although the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia considers that UNPROFOR's mandate should have been extended for a year, we support the proposal contained in the draft resolution that, for the time being, it be extended Until 31 March 1993. We hope that the necessary conditions will be created in the meantime so that UNPROFOR'S mandate can be further extended, as envisioned by the plan, until a comprehensive and peaceful solution is reached.

It is my understanding that the Security Council is ready to proceed to the vote on the draft resolution before it, If I hear no objection, I shall take it that that is the case. There being no objection, it is so decided. Before putting the draft resolution to the vote, I shall call on those members of the Council who wish to make statements before the voting. Mr. MERIMEE (France) (interpretation from French): For the past year I the United Nations Protection Force (IJNPROFOR) has striven to keep the peace in Croatia under extremely difficult conditions. For the past six months, it has, in a hostile environment, protected the delivery of humanitarian aid in Bosnia and Herzegovina. For the past few weeks, it has been preventing the conflict from spreading to Macedonia. Thus, the tasks assigned it are immense. Regrettably, the results are not always up to the expectations of the international community. This mixed picture should not allow us to forget the exemplary manner in which the man committed to this operation have been serving. They do so every day at the risk of losing their lives. For our part, we are well aware of the dangers, since the French contingent has lost 12 members. I would therefore, at the outset, like to pay a tribute to the courage of all the Blue Helmets of UNPROFOR and to the memory of those who have fallen. These preliminary comments illustrate why the security of the forces were a priority consideration to my Government when the question of renewing the mandate of UNPROFOR arose. The tragic events of the past few weeks in Croatia have only strengthened our feeling that there is an overriding need to endow this Force with both the legal basis and the military means effectively to ensure its self-defence. We would have preferred that this be done on a lasting basis. Considering the circumstances, recognise that the six-week extension is the Council's only possible option. But even for a brief irlterim period, it was unthinkable to us that we extend the present mandate in its current form. It was in that spirit that my delegation proposed a substantive and ambitious draft resolution that places UNPROFOR within the framework of Chapter VII of the Charter and suggested a series of concrete measures aimed at ensuring greater stability in the areas where UNPROFOR is deployed. As to the reference to Chapter VII, I reiterate' once again that our idea is not to change the nature of the Force, that is, to move from peace-keeping to peacemaking. We are moved solely by considerations of preventive security. Indeed, 'this is reflected in the text of the draft resolution before us. The French delegation hopes that the Council will take this approach and d0 so unanimously. It would thus provide a striking demonstration of its solidarity with the soldiers of UNPROFOR who are implementing the its decisions in the field. At the seme time, it would send to the parties concerned a signal of its determination to,ensure respect for its decisions. Sir David HANNAY (United Kingdom): My Government has been deeply concerned at the continuation of fighting in various parts of the former Yugoslavia and in particular at the flare-up recently in Croatia. I would also like to express the 'deep distress my Government felt at the losses that the United Nations forces have sustained, and in particular those sustained by the French contingent, which have been of a very serious nature. In our view, it is absolutely essential. that we establish respect and protection for United Nations forces in the field. That, in our view, fully justifies the changes contained in this draft resolution. These, as the French Ambassador says, are designed for self-defence only and in our view are entirely justified. We strongly support also the new political remit that the Secretary-General has suggested, and that the Council has endorsed, giving to the two Co-Chairmen of the Steering Committee of the International Conference on the Former Yugoslavia. It is essential that we get full compliance with Security Council resolution 802 (1993), so far as concerns both the withdrawal of Croatian forces and the re-placing under United Nations control of the heavy weapons. We hope that the talks that Mr. Vance and Lord Owen are now undertaking will lead to progress on the implementation of the Vance plan, and within that to the definition of the status of Krajina within the Republic of Croatia - and I shall repeat that phrase, because I heard from one of the participants in this debate words that seemed to imply something different - within the Republic of Croatia. Increasingly, links between what is going on in Bosnia and Herzegovina and what is going on in Croatia are becoming evident. It is as urgent to make progress in the peace process for Bosnia and Herzegovina as .i.n implementing the Vance plan in Croatia. I feel that the next mandate renewal, which we have foreseen for the end of March, will be a crucial moment in that respect. Finally, I should say that my Government strongly supports the proposal by the Secretary-General to put the financing of all United Nations peace-keeping operations in the former Yugoslavia on a full United Nations basis of assessed contributions. In our view, peace-keeping is a resporisibility of the whol.e international community, and it should be financed by the whole membership of the United Nations.' Mr. YGEE BARNUEVCI (Spain) (interpretation from Spanish): Since this is my delegation's first Council statement this month, I should like to begin by congratulating you, Sir, on the courteous and effective manner in which YOU have been conducting our debates, We wish also to express our appreciation to Ambassador Hatano of Japan for the way in which he guided the work of the Council in January, We,wish also to thank the Secretary-General for his excellent report (S/25264), which in a clear, balanced and realistic manner describes the difficult situation faced by the United Nations Protection Force (UNPROFOR) both in Croatia and in Bosnia and Herzegovina; the report has been prepared shortly before the expiration of UNPROFOR's mandate, as provided for in resolution 743 (1992). On the whole, my delegation shares the views the Secretary-General sets out in his report. We are fully aware of the need for a sound basis bn which to renew the mandate of UNPROFOR in Croatia and in Bosnia and Herzegovina. We therefore support the extension of UNPROFOR's mandate for an interim period ending 31 March 1993. It is our firm hope that before that date there will be aPOsitive result to the ongoing talks, led by the Co-Chairmen of the Steering Committee of the International Conference on the Former Yugoslavia, between (Sir David Hannay, United Kinadom) representatives of the Republic of Croatia and of the Serb populations living in the United Nations protected areas and in adjacent areas in Croatia. We remind the parties of their responsibilities in this regard and of the need fully to implement all provisions of the relevant Security Council resolutions, including the most recent, resolution 802 (1993). We also stress that they must cooperate fully with Mr. Vance and Lord Owen, whose tireless efforts we support without reservation, in quickly reaching an agreement on full compliance with the United Nations peace plan in Croatia. In the meantime, and in view of the recent tragic events in Croatia, my Government shares the concern of the Secretary-General and of countries whose troops are deployed in Croatia. We support the decision to take the measures necessary to ensure the safety of UNPROFOR personnel and to ensure complete respect by all parties for the Force as it carries out its mandate. The situation in Bosnia and Herzegovina is no less disturbing: this is reflected in the report of the Secretary-General. The people of that Republic are subjected to terrible hardships, now exacerbated by the unacceptable obstacles and restrictions imposed by various parties on the delivery of humanitarian assistance by the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees with the assistance of UNPROFOB. We state firmly that the relevant Security Council resolutions must be implemented with respect to UNPROFOR's mandate and operations in that Republic. The parties, and all others concerned, must at all times respect the unrestricted freedom of movement of UNPROFOR forces. The infantry bat&lion provided by Spain as a contribution to UNPROFOR efforts in Bosnia (Mr. Yaiiee Barnuevo. Spain) and Herzegovina is performing commendable work in protecting convoys carrying humanitarian assistance, and doing so in extremely difficult and dangerous conditions. My Government wants to state very clearly that the safety of UNPROFOR personnel must be fully guaranteed, and we must condemn any action or measures taken by parties to the conflict that could obstruct or endanger the delivery of humanitarian assistance, including threats to the lives of those who are attempting to help the civilian population. That has been reiterated in several Security Council statements in recent weeks. Finally, we agree with the Secretary-General's recommendation that, from the next renewal of the mandate of UPROFOR following this interim period, all UNPROFOR activities in the former Yugoslavia be financed by assessed contributions from all Member States in line with the scale of assessments established for peace-keeping operations. For all those reasons, we shall vote in favour of draft resolution S/25306.

I thank the representative of Spain for the kind words he addressed to me. Mr. CHEN Jian (China) (interpretation from Chinese): First of all, Sir, please allow me to congratulate you on your assumption of the presidency of the Security Council for February. I am confident that, with your rich experience, wisdom and talent, you will successfully guide the work of the Security Council this month. I should like to take this opportunity also to thank His Excellency Mr. Yoshio Hatano, Permanent Representative of Japan, for his outstanding performance as he guided us through the work of the Security Council last month. Almost a year has passed since the adoption of Security Council resolution 743 (L992), which establishe$d the United Nations Protection Force (UNPROFOR) in the former Yugoslavia. Tt is regrettable, however, that we have been witnessing there an escalation of the armed conflict and a sharp increase in the number of displaced persons. At the same time, humanitarian relief efforts are still being obstructed. This leads to huge losses of life and property, and to greater suEEering. We should like to express our deep concern about this situation. The Chinese delegation appreciates the further report of the Secretary-General pursuant to Security Council resolution 743 (l,992), and agrees to the extension of UNPROFOR's mandate for an interim period terminating on 31 March 1993. We hope that during this period the Co-Chairmen of the Steering Committee of the International Conference on the Former Yugoslavia will conduct full consultations with all parties concerned and will make early progress on a negotiated political solution to the issue of the former,Yugoslavia. At the same time we are much concerned at the fact that the security of UNPROFOR's personnel is under constant threat. We also understand the concerns expressed by the troop-contributing States in that regard. We therefore support the Secretary-General's taking appropriate measures, in consultation with the force-contributing States, to strengthen the security of UNPROFOR personnel. Meanwhile, we urge all the parties to the conflict to cooperate with UNPROFOR to ensure the safety of its personnel. Proceeding from the above statement and considering that the sponsor country has repeatedly stated that the purpose of invoking Chapter VII of the United Nations Charter in this draft resolution is to take measures to increase appropriately UNPROFOR's self-def.ence capability, the Chinese delegation will vote in favour of this draft resolution. Nevertheless, it must be pointed out that UNPROFOR in Croatia is a peace-keeping operation, and Chapter VII was not invoked either in resolution 743 (1992) or in subsequent resolutions relating to this matter. Nor does the current report of the . Secretary-General contain any such request. With regard to the safety of UNPROFOR personnel, the question can be settled through the expanded concept Of self-defence and rules of engagement and by taking other appropriate measures without invoking Chapter VII, We should therefore like to express our reservations on invoking Chapter VII in this draft resolution. We should like to put on record the understanding that the practice of invoking Chapter VII in this draft resolution is an exceptional case and therefore does not constitute a precedent for future United Nations peace-keeping operations. Mr, VORONTSOV (Russian Federation) (interpretation from Russian): The adoption by the Security Council of the draft resolution before it to temporarily extend the mandate of the United Nations Protection Force (UNPR~FOR) should, in the opinion of the Russian Federation, send a clear signal to all those involved in the conflict in the territory of former Yugoslavia to the effect that the United Nations is firmly opposed to any continuation of hostilities and further bloodshed, and that it favours the prompt achievement of a peace settlement. In this connection we believe that the' demand contained in the draft resolution for the rapid implementation of resolution 802 (1993) and other resolutions previously adopted by the Security Council is extremely important. It is important to recall that resolution 802 (1993) clearly states that it is essential not only that an end be put to hostilities on the part of the Croatian armed forces in the United Nations protected areas or in proximity to them but also that Croatian armed forces be withdrawn from those regions. Naturally, it is essential that the remaining provisions of the United Nations peace plan in Croatia be.observed and complied with by all. parties. It has been our constant endeavour to exert a balanced influence on all those involved in the Yugoslav crisis, in the interest of its prompt settlement. We believe that, should Croatia fail to meet the demands contained in resolution 802 (1993) and other Security Council resolutions, sanctions under Chapter VII of the United Nations Charter should also be applied to Croatia. The Russian delegation would also like to point out that an important prerequisite for maintaining United Nations forces in their place of deployment is that of ensuring their safety. It is extremely distressing that among the service personnel of the contingents of UNPROFOR, including its Russian members, there have been casualties. It is therefore very timely and appropriate that the draft resolution contains provisions intended to prevent any attempts on the lives of those who wear the blue helmet or other representatives of the United Nations responsible for carrying out an extremely noble humanitarian mission. Throughout this entire conflict in former Yugoslavia, the Russian Federation has been actively involved in efforts by the international community to achieve a peace settlement. Russia intends to do everything necessary to ensure that the current stage in the negotiations headed by the Co-Chairmen of the Geneva process, Mr. Cyrus Vance and Lord Owen, leads to a successful outcome that will enable us, as soon as possible, to determine the role of United Nations forces with respect to the conditions of such a settlement.

I shall now put to the vote the draft resolution contained in document S/25306. A vote was taken bv show of hands. In favour: Brazil, Cape Verde, China, Djibouti, France, Hungary, Japan, Morocco, New Zealand, Pakistan, Russian Federation, Spain, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, United States of America, Venezuela

There were 15 votes in favour. The draft resolution has been adopted unanimously as resolution SD7 (1993). There are no further speakers inscribed on the list. The Security Council has thus concluded the present stage of its consideration of the item on its agenda. The Security Council will remain seized of the matter. The meetina rose at 12.35 p.m.