S/PV.3522 Security Council

I should like to inform the Council that I have received a letter from the representative of Bosnia and Herzegovina 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.

I have also received a request dated 21 April 1995 from Ambassador Dragomir Djokic 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 its agenda. The Security Council is meeting in accordance with the understanding reached in its prior consultations. Members of the Council have before them document S/1995/302, which contains the text of a letter dated 13 April 1995 from the Secretary-General addressed to the President of the Security Council, transmitting the report of the Co-Chairmen of the Steering Committee of the International Conference on the Former Yugoslavia. Members of the Council also have before them document S/1995/319, which contains the text of a draft resolution submitted by the Czech Republic, France, I should like to draw the attention of the members of the Council to the following other documents: S/1995/301, letter dated 13 April 1995 from the Permanent Representative of Croatia to the United Nations addressed to the President of the Security Council; and S/1995/309, letter dated 15 April 1995 from the Permanent Representative of Bosnia and Herzegovina to the United Nations addressed to the President of the Security Council. In accordance with the decision taken earlier in the meeting, I now invite Ambassador Dragomir Djokic to take a place at the Council table and to make his statement. Mr. Djokic: At the outset, let me express on behalf of my Government profound condolences to the United States on the occasion of the tragic event that occurred in Oklahoma City, in which innocent citizens were victims of an outrageous terrorist act. The Security Council is about to reach a decision on the further extension of the partial and very limited suspension of sanctions against the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia. Despite consistently positive reports by the Co-Chairmen of the International Conference on the Former Yugoslavia (ICFY) and the ICFY Mission that Yugoslavia is adhering to the unilateral commitment to close its border with the Bosnian Serbs, and despite the well-known fact that it has absolutely and completely fulfilled all the provisions of the relevant Security Council resolutions by which the sanctions were introduced, we note with regret that once again the Security Council cannot muster the political will to make a bolder decision and lift the sanctions against Yugoslavia altogether. This negative stand is indeed highly unfortunate, because by opting to lift the sanctions against the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia the Council would be making a very significant breakthrough towards peace in the Balkans. The war-option mentality and ideology of extremists in Bosnia and Herzegovina, Croatia and the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia would be seriously undermined. Most important, the Bosnian Serbs would be finally convinced that their recalcitrant approach has definitely been superseded and that they must accept the continuation of negotiations on the basis of the Contact Group as a starting point. At a meeting in Athens on 15 April, five countries of the Black Sea group adopted a declaration (S/1995/313, annex) in which they stated that the implementation of the sanctions could have a considerable ... negative impact on the overall political, economic, security and social situation in the region as a whole and called upon the Contact Group to continue efforts towards achieving a peaceful, just and lasting political solution to the crisis in parallel with the suspension and lifting of the sanctions. A similar appeal was adopted by the members of the Danube Commission in Budapest. The recent non-paper on the humanitarian impact of the sanctions which was circulated by the five permanent members of the Security Council focused on the need to improve the effectiveness of the Sanctions Committees in expediting humanitarian implications as much as possible. We have taken particular note of the proposal that it should be allowed to supply clearly defined categories of medical supplies and foodstuffs even without the notification of the relevant Sanctions Committees. However, despite this non-paper and the clear call in Security Council resolution 943 (1994) on the Sanctions Committee concerning Yugoslavia to adopt appropriately streamlined procedures for consideration of applications concerning legitimate humanitarian assistance, the Committee has not meaningfully resorted to doing so, and the sanctions continue to be applied in a very strict manner. In addition, the Council has opted to ignore the request of the Government of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia for a one-shot export of $70 million worth of The new conditions being set by some members of the Contact Group, especially the calls for the recognition by the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia of Bosnia and Herzegovina and the Republic of Croatia as a prerequisite for the further suspension of sanctions not only lack any basis in the Security Council resolutions by which the sanctions were introduced, but also represent a false and counterproductive form of pressure. The Federal Republic of Yugoslavia is not prepared to make the same grave mistake committed by the international community and recognize the separatist republics before the fundamental problems have been resolved between the peoples living in them. These calls for premature recognition are a classic example of putting the cart before the horse. Even if recognition were granted, none of the problems of Bosnia and Herzegovina would be resolved. The civil war would continue. It would even gain in intensity as the Muslim Government forces could well interpret the recognition as giving carte blanche for continuing hostilities and intensifying their drive to impose their will to create a unitary State under Muslim domination, which is unacceptable to other peoples of Bosnia and Herzegovina and is the main cause of the civil war. In spite of very clear-cut reports by the ICFY Mission that the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia is fully cooperating with the mission personnel and doing everything it possibly can to fulfil its commitment to keeping the border closed except for humanitarian foodstuffs, medical supplies and clothing, it is constantly being subjected to provocations and absurd allegations that it is supplying the Bosnian Serbs with military materiel. Preposterous reports on massive helicopter flights from Bosnia and Herzegovina to the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia are circulated despite the fact that they have never been verified by the ICFY Mission on the ground. The aim of such unprincipled provocations is to undermine the constructive and peace-oriented policy that the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia is following and is basically geared towards the continuation of the conflict in Bosnia and Herzegovina. The decision by the Government of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia to cut political and economic links with the Bosnian Serb leadership was completely unilateral. It is being pursued as a form of pressure on Pale to convince it to accept the Contact Group plan as a basis for negotiations on the final settlement. Yugoslavia accepted the ICFY Mission as a way of facilitating its unilateral decision. If, however, further pressure and new unprincipled and totally meaningless conditions are brought to bear on the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, it must be very clear that the Yugoslav Government will have to respond to great internal pressure and reject all forms of blackmail and coercion and call into question the activities of the ICFY Mission as a whole on Yugoslav soil. The responsibility for all negative consequences on the peace process in the territory of the former Yugoslavia that might ensue would rest solely with those members of the Security Council that, by their absurd demands on the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, give obvious proof that they do not seek an urgent and comprehensive political solution and the restoration of peace. Instead, they abuse the Security Council to pursue their own political interests. Fully convinced that a peaceful settlement of the conflict in the former Yugoslavia can be achieved only by political means and negotiations conducted by equal partners, the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia stands ready to do all it can to facilitate the peace process. It is not prepared, however, to accept provocations and unprincipled demands, conditions or blackmail which are contrary to the Charter of the United Nations and international legal norms. Such attempts by some Powers it has always rejected, and I wish to assure the Security Council that this time again Yugoslavia will do the same thing, most resolutely.

The next speaker is the representative of Bosnia and Herzegovina. I now call on him.

Let me welcome you, Sir, to the Council on this most notable occasion. It is a pleasure to have you in our midst today. I would also extend my sincere appreciation to His Excellency Ambassador Li Zhaoxing and the entire Chinese delegation for their efforts during the month of March. Although frequently the subject of debate within the Council, unfortunately Bosnia and Herzegovina has not had the opportunity to be frequently thankful for the results of those debates. The lack of decisive measures and the continuation of the war and “ethnic cleansing” against our citizens and our Republic indicate amply that it is not that we do not know how to be appreciative, but ultimately that the bottom line has left us with little to be appreciative about except the humanitarian assistance and good wishes of the international community and our own determination and sacrifices for survival. It does indeed give us satisfaction today to thank the Council for its efforts to tighten the effectiveness of the border-sealing regime and, in particular, to thank those Member States that have striven for this objective and that have been diligent and credible in alerting us to the violations and flaws in the system. Without the efforts of those States, the Council today probably would be engaged in an exercise of fatalism and of legitimizing fictions. To be sure, we still have a long way to go before we can ascertain, much less herald, that the new border- sealing and monitoring system is effective. And we certainly cannot be satisfied that the Belgrade regime continues to refuse to recognize its neighbours, including the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina; that this regime has failed to cease its ideological and material support for an ethnically homogeneous and dictatorial “Greater Serbia”; and that this regime therefore still reneges on making a sincere commitment for peace. The leadership of the Belgrade regime — or more accurately, the one dictatorial leader — maintains the duplicitous confidence that he is the grand matador, who on the one hand, feints — projects to the world the cape of his innocence and disarmed ambitions — while on the other hand keeping his sword discreetly hidden behind the cape. One would be almost tempted to exclaim a cynical National sovereignty and territorial integrity, regional stability, international peace and security and, most important, human life — Bosnian, Croatian, Serb, French, British, Pakistani, Malaysian, Bangladeshi, Dutch and many others — are very much at stake, as we have all come to learn painfully over the last three years. With this well-based and healthy skepticism we therefore welcome today’s draft resolution as clearly trumpeting “no more business as usual”: no more illusion and concealing. The new mechanisms and reporting systems should all help us advance towards the desired result. In addition, we must emphasize the essential ingredient in the hoped-for success for this refurbished system: Member States must provide — and I emphasize “must provide” — all the necessary resources for this new system to be effective. We have all too painfully learned that preventive measures faithfully undertaken are much more effective, efficient and ultimately economical than corrective steps taken after the damage is done. If the international community and certain world Powers are sincerely of the view that new weapons and strategic material add fuel to the fire in Bosnia and Herzegovina, then they must first, and strictly, apply this policy — for practical, psychological, moral and legal reasons — to the arsonists, those that originally set the fire, including the aggressor across the border. The Secretary General, the Co-Chairmen and other members of the International Conference on the Former Yugoslavia (ICFY) Mission, the members of the Security Council and others must be vigilant in ensuring that the Mission is effective and that the resources are adequate, in providing independent evidence of violations, and in making other necessary adjustments, including the potential deployment of more experts and troops, along the border. We must sadly state that the so-called certifications from the Co-Chairmen of the ICFY Steering Committee, along with their reports, sanitized or not, did not fill us with confidence when compared to the mountain of independent evidence to the contrary. We request that the Security Council, the Secretariat and the ICFY Mission take note that, after all, this monitoring Mission is along the border of the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina. In this context, we welcome the overdue provision contained in paragraph 16 of draft resolution S/1995/319, We should also take note that the provision relating to the current easing of sanctions with respect to the FRY — that is, Serbia and Montenegro — is scheduled to expire by 5 July this year. This is a most appropriate expression of the Security Council’s intention not to be dictated to by the deserving object of its sanctions and not to provide it with an alibi for its continuing culpability. Also, this time-frame is long enough to test the efficacy both of the border closure and monitoring mechanisms and of the Belgrade regime’s sincerity. It is up to Mr. Milosevic now. Of course, the search for peace in the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina is a multi-variable equation. Certainly, the sealing of the border is a critical step. Also, abandonment by the Belgrade regime of its perverse and illegal ambitions is a prerequisite. A commitment to peace is not consistent with evading recognition of one’s neighbours’ territorial integrity and sovereignty and with the persistent resort by Milosevic to this matador diplomacy. The cape of deceit and double-talk must be set aside and the dagger must be sheathed once and for all. And, of course, we must be very frank about this: Mr. Milosevic does not cut such a capable and elegant figure as a matador except to some international political leaderships that have become only too willing to play the role of the bull. As we have stated, the search for peace in our Republic is a multi-variable equation, and while we seem to be coming up to the mark on one variable, we are unfortunately falling away from another: the alarming acceleration of the erosion of the mandate of the United Nations Protection Force (UNPROFOR), and specifically of the political will to see that mandate implemented. When UNPROFOR’s mandate was renewed three weeks ago, we hoped that the process of erosion had been stemmed or even reversed. Obviously, that was not the case. We still await, with a ray of positive anticipation, the Secretary-General’s report with respect to the concerns expressed in our letter of 29 March 1995 (S/1995/245) and cited in resolution 982 (1995). But how is the Secretary-General to respond constructively to our The Serbians go into a United Nations weapons- collection point in an occupied suburb of Sarajevo and, with UNPROFOR soldiers standing by, they fire mortars into the civilian areas of Sarajevo. The response from the United Nations and the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) to such outrageous and murderous action is supposed to be air strikes. Instead, the United Nations soldiers on the scene are relegated, degraded, to the role of witnesses to potential murder. Now the Serbians control the skies, the same skies that have been declared subject to a United Nations/NATO- enforced “no-fly-zone”. Not only are United Nations/NATO air-to-ground support and air strike missions curtailed, not only are UNPROFOR planes fired upon regularly, but now the Serbians are actually dictating to the United Nations who can fly in United Nations planes. As of today, it seems that even members of the Contact Group are no longer welcome to fly in them. Bosnians are not allowed; American and other diplomats are removed from flights; and even United Nations civilian officials are denied the right to land at Sarajevo, as their planes face the threat of being shot at, and actually are shot at. The United Nations and NATO have gone from losing control of the skies to becoming the victims of nothing less than air terrorism. Let me just briefly quote from a New York Times Service article of 20 April 1995, under the headline “Test in Bosnia: Limits of UN Humiliation”, which stated: “The airlift to Sarajevo lies at the heart of the UN mission here — it provides more than 80 percent of the aid to the city. But it is obvious by now that the airlift has also come to demonstrate how the world’s collective authority is vulnerable in Sarajevo to the whim of a Serb who is, in the end, a member of a rebel army holding 70 percent of a State recognized by the United Nations.” (International Herald Tribune, 20 April 1995, p. 5) Some speak of the necessity for the United Nations to be impartial, and others have pressed this argument to its limits to profess neutrality. I say to members of the Security Council “Excellencies, that is your interpretation. But do you realize that the United Nations, your authority, the dignity of your countries and, most critically, your men and women, and not just the Bosnians, are under the direct assault of these Serbians? War is being waged upon you I should like here to address my dear colleague and friend Ambassador Mérimée, the Permanent Representative of the French Republic. When I watched the television scenes of the young French corporal, Eric Hardouin, fatally wounded while helping erect an anti- sniper barricade in front of the Holiday Inn in Sarajevo, I was shocked and revolted and, ultimately, frozen in a combination of fear and anger. Once again I extend my deepest condolences to the families concerned and to the French Government and people over the death of two young Frenchmen. Similarly, though, with their death another part of Sarajevo has also died. The city they were hoping to protect is our city, my city. The people they were looking to defend are our citizens — actually, members of my family, my friends, the future of our country. The Holiday Inn entrance in front of which this one brave corporal was setting up the barricade is the entrance that I use when I am in Sarajevo and staying at that hotel. I say to you, Mr. Ambassador, “Forensic evidence may be inconclusive, politicians may speculate and some may even slander, but when the Serbians shoot at you, they also shoot at us. When they kill one of your courageous young men, we also feel as if they have murdered one of us. Do not mistake our political differences as insensitivity to your sacrifices. Do not mistake our stoic faces for indifference. It is just, Mr. Ambassador, and all Council members with young men and women in Bosnia and Herzegovina, that after three years we have all become traumatized and numb. We are all under attack, Blue Helmets or not.” We have accepted the Contact Group peace plan, with all its painful imperfections and injustices. The Karadzic Serbs continue to believe that they can successfully resist, and even bully the Security Council into abandoning the Contact Group plan in favour of the reality, the status quo of their conquest and “ethnic cleansing”. Unfortunately, the Council sometimes gives them hope, when in its resolutions and statements it calls on the one hand for peace negotiations and cease-fires, but on the other hesitating to offend them, does not recognize our Government’s commitment to the plan and, once again, does not demand their acceptance. Of course, the most critical variable in this equation for peace is the Serbian acceptance and implementation of this plan. However, until this comes about, the one variable that we must maximize, or at least prevent from being marginalized, is the commitment to, and capacity and execution of, the United Nations mandate in our Republic and, indeed, in the Republic of Croatia and elsewhere. This will both serve to save lives and to maximize the positive pressure upon the Karadzic Serbs to accept peace. There are also other variables in the search for peace in our country. We will continue to use all our capacity, including the right and means to defend our population, territorial integrity and sovereignty. We will use these variables responsibly, and we here reassert our unabridgable right to obtain the means to defend ourselves. Our common search for peace, though, is most definitely made more fruitful and less dangerous and counter-productive to the extent that the United Nations in the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina and in the region as a whole is more committed to, and better capable of, executing its mandate. I trust also that some bright soul will not, purposely or otherwise, undermine the real objective by constantly redefining the mandate so that expectations are always lowered. Instead, the execution and implementation of the mandate must be brought up to the proper and intended level. The sum of the equation that we must derive in order to secure peace, unfortunately, is not variable, and therefore we cannot cheat — I emphasize that we cannot cheat — in the very demanding task required of us to reach our solution. Once again, though, I should like to take the opportunity to thank the Council for the small but significant step it has taken today. Finally, allow me to take a moment to address my most dear colleague, Ambassador Madeleine Albright, on behalf of our people and Republic. Most Bosnians did not know where Oklahoma was before the attack on that city and its people. Actually, I did, One of the emergency workers immediately on the scene of the explosion, filmed on CNN, was Mr. Larry Jones, from Feed the Children, an organization also active in Bosnia and Herzegovina. Now, he was helping his immediate neighbours, after having helped Bosnians in the past. I note his comment on the day of the explosion. He said “I haven’t seen anything like this since I left Sarajevo.” The people in Sarajevo are in no position to offer any real material help, but we do offer our most sincere condolences and desire for recovery to the families and all the people of Oklahoma City. Those who carried out this crime must suffer the damnation of this world and the next.

I thank the representative of Bosnia and Herzegovina for his kind words. It is my understanding that the Council is ready to proceed to the vote on the draft resolution before it. If I hear no objection, I shall put the draft resolution to the vote. There being no objection, it is so decided. I shall first call on those members of the Council who wish to make statements before the voting.

First of all, I wish to express my delegation’s pleasure at seeing you, Sir, in your capacity as First Deputy Foreign Minister of the Czech Republic, presiding over this meeting. The members of the Security Council have received a report from the Co-Chairmen of the Steering Committee of the International Conference on the Former Yugoslavia concerning the degree of compliance by the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (Serbia and Montenegro) with its commitment to close its border with the areas of Bosnia and Herzegovina under the control of Bosnian Serb forces. Certification of this fact is the necessary first condition for this Council to consider continuing the The report of the Co-Chairmen of the Steering Committee also mentions certain difficulties in verifying the closure of that border. However, we take the view that it emerges clearly from the report that compliance by the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (Serbia and Montenegro) with its commitments is, generally speaking, the rule, while possible infringements — in no way exclusive to one party — are in any event only exceptions. We believe that such exceptions should be carefully assessed in the context of endeavours to extend the cease- fire and to set the peace process on the right track, as well as in the light of the regrettable increase in tension in the former Yugoslavia in recent days, which is causing our delegation the most serious concern. Any sanctions regime must necessarily be progressive, rational and in proportion to the behaviour it is intended to discourage. If we in the Council, having witnessed the efforts of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (Serbia and Montenegro) to meet its commitments, failed to react in accordance with these criteria, we would run the risk of using the powers conferred on us by the Charter without taking properly into account the purposes for which they were granted. For these reasons, the Argentine Republic is in favour of continuing the suspension of the sanctions on the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (Serbia and Montenegro) until the expiry of the time period set in resolution 970 (1995). In this respect, and in a spirit of broad cooperation, it will join the consensus in the Council on the adoption of the draft resolution now before us. However, we also feel bound to express our particular viewpoint respecting some of the provisions of this draft. Operative paragraph 1 sets a specific date limiting the validity of the resolution. The delegation of Argentina interprets that date not as being necessarily some kind of curtailment ex profeso of the deadline set by resolution 970 (1995), but, rather, as establishing a new and more clear-cut operational policy. Indeed, it would not be particularly meaningful to interpret it as a setting of a shorter deadline for the suspension of sanctions, when it is acknowledged that there have been no substantive changes, negative or positive, in the de facto circumstances, whether political or technical, warranting that suspension. We repeat that we see no particular reasons, other than technical, in the report for We would like to express our thanks to the sponsors of the draft for the change that they made to operative paragraph 12, dividing it into two parts to become the present operative paragraphs 11 and 12; this was to some extent in response to views expressed by our delegation. We also wish to recall that the agreement on sanctions procedures presupposes negotiations between all the members of the Committee concerned respecting technical aspects of the regime. In that context, if there is a continuation of the existing situation, which is marked by what has shown to be a practice followed by some of linking procedural aspects with others that strictly speaking are outside the Committee’s mandate, it will be difficult to free the Committee from the impasse that has existed for some time now with respect to these procedures. The Argentine delegation also wishes to place on record its interpretation of operative paragraph 2 of the draft resolution. It is our understanding that the authorization granted to the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (Serbia and Montenegro) to operate commercial flights necessarily means its being able to obtain the quantities of fuel, lubricants, equipment and spare parts required to allow those flights to take place safely and in reasonable conditions. That is the only way to interpret the first part of the provision. Lastly, we wish to express our most sincere hope that the draft resolution will provide an incentive to the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (Serbia and Montenegro) to continue to meet its commitments, and, indeed, to increase its level of compliance with measures that, in the view of the Council, are absolutely vital to the continuance of efforts to restore peace to the region.

I thank the representative of Argentina for his kind words.

At the outset, my delegation would like to say that it is pleased to see you, Sir, the First Deputy Foreign Minister of the Czech Republic, presiding over this meeting of the Security Council. The Indonesian delegation would like to express its sincere and heartfelt condolences to the people and Government of the United States over the death of scores of innocent civilians in Oklahoma City earlier this week. At the time of the adoption of resolution 970 (1995), my delegation expressed its serious reservations regarding the extension of the easing of sanctions against the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia. However, the Indonesian delegation stated then that, since resolution 943 (1994) had already initiated the process of relaxing sanctions, we emphasized the need for scrupulous fulfilment by the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia of the commitments it had undertaken to close its border with the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina. Over the past 100 days, my delegation has carefully examined the periodic reports of the Co-Chairmen of the Steering Committee of the International Conference on the Former Yugoslavia (ICFY). It notes the consistent assessment by the Mission Coordinator that the authorities of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia continue to provide satisfactory cooperation with the ICFY Mission and that the Mission continues to enjoy full freedom of movement within the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (Serbia and Montenegro). Equally, however, my delegation cannot be impervious to the constant flow of information that indicates that a more effective closure of the border has yet to be achieved. Few items of news have attracted as much attention as the reports of helicopter flights in contravention of the border closure. These incidents are reflected in the recent reports of the ICFY Co-Chairmen. Our delegation has also learned of reports of circumvention of the border closure in the form of the transhipment of goods from the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia through the Republic of Croatia to the areas of the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina under the control of the so-called Bosnian Serb forces. The Indonesian delegation is of the view that the draft resolution before us maintains a correct balance between recognition of the evaluations contained in the reports of the Co-Chairmen of the ICFY relating to the cooperation by the authorities of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (Serbia and Montenegro) and the continuing imperfections in the border closure. The draft resolution is not one directed against those who are genuinely concerned to ensure the border closure: The Indonesian delegation must emphasize once again, however, that the international community expects a most rigorous implementation by the authorities of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia of the commitments they have undertaken. Nor can we be oblivious to the fact that recognition of the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina by the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia has yet to occur. Such an act would contribute immeasurably towards the creation of an environment that would be favourable to a lasting and comprehensive peace in the region. The draft resolution before us contains a number of important elements based on the experience of the past 100 days; some of these, we hasten to add, are reaffirmations of previous commitments intended to ensure a more effective implementation of the border closure. We attach great importance, for example, to the provision addressing the possible diversion of goods — except foodstuffs, medical supplies and clothing for essential humanitarian needs — from the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia through the Republic of Croatia to the areas of the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina under the control of the so-called Bosnian Serb forces. We also deem it important that the draft resolution provides for a thorough investigation of alleged breaches of the border closure, including those relating to aerial violations, and stresses the importance of prosecuting persons suspected of violating the border closure. My delegation is also heartened by the recognition in the draft resolution of the need to provide the ICFY Mission with the capacity to discharge its tasks effectively. The financial difficulties facing the Mission have rightly seized our attention. This problem must be addressed immediately lest it seriously impair the ability of the Mission to certify the border closure credibly. Further, my delegation would like to emphasize that the draft resolution before us today provides that the Co-Chairmen of the ICFY should make use not only of information made available to them from the Mission, but also from all other available sources that are deemed relevant. This, in our view, is an important aspect of the At this juncture, it would be remiss of me if I failed to pay tribute to the members of the Mission for their tireless efforts in fulfilling their important duties under difficult physical and operational constraints. The conflict in Bosnia and Herzegovina has lasted for far too long. Resolutions have been passed and statements issued by this body, yet death and destruction continue to be inflicted on the people of Bosnia and Herzegovina. A lasting settlement can be achieved only if all the parties concerned share a true commitment to peace. The draft resolution before us represents a means to encourage the Bosnian Serbs to accept the Contact Group peace plan and all the relevant resolutions of the United Nations Security Council and General Assembly. It must therefore be energetically implemented, as befits measures imposed under Chapter VII of the Charter. In light of these considerations, my delegation will support the adoption of the draft resolution.

My delegation would like first of all to welcome into our midst the First Deputy Foreign Minister of the Czech Republic, His Excellency Mr. Alexander Vondra. We also wish to express our most sincere condolences to the Government of the United States of America and to the families of those who lost their lives in the tragic explosion in Oklahoma City. Nigeria had the opportunity during the informal consultations of the Security Council of expressing its thanks to the Co-Chairmen of the Steering Committee of the International Conference on the Former Yugoslavia for their latest report concerning the operations of the International Conference’s Mission to the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (Serbia and Montenegro). It is the view of my delegation that the work of the Co-Chairmen and their staff remains crucial in the international effort to mediate peace in the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina. It was a bold and courageous decision when, on 14 August 1994, the Government of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (Serbia and Montenegro) — against the backdrop of our disappointment at the failure of the Bosnian Serb party to agree to the Contact Group peace plan for Bosnia and Herzegovina — decided, inter alia, to sever political and economic relations with the Bosnian Serb party and close the border of the Federal Republic of This positive step by the Government of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia was duly reciprocated by the Security Council in its adoption of resolution 943 (1994), under which existing sanctions against the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia were partially lifted. It is therefore important for the Secretary-General and the Co-Chairmen of the International Conference on the Former Yugoslavia to continue to monitor closely the full implementation of Belgrade’s commitment to close the border as a quid pro quo for the partial suspension of the sanctions. The present porousness of the border must be corrected, and corrected faithfully. What is of special concern to my delegation today is that, in spite of the border closure, the continuing positive contributions of the International Conference on the Former Yugoslavia and the Government of Bosnia and Herzegovina’s acceptance of the Contact Group peace plan, the peace process in the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina is still at an impasse. It is my delegation’s considered view that, in the overall context of the search for peace in Bosnia and Herzegovina, the present draft resolution makes a contribution for at least two reasons. Firstly, it rightly underscores the need to strengthen the existing border-closure regime and the need for a more assiduous investigation of reported violations, such as the helicopter flights that may have crossed the border between the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (Serbia and Montenegro) and the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina. Secondly — and related to the previous point — the draft resolution recognizes that the continuation of the border-closure regime constitutes an invaluable pressure point on the Bosnian Serb party and accordingly extends the suspension of sanctions on Belgrade, albeit for a reduced period. The Nigerian delegation believes that the matters relating to the border closure are only one part of the problems stifling progress in resolving the Bosnian conflict. There is no doubt that the Contact Group countries themselves have a unique role to play, as members of the Security Council, the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, the European Union or, in some cases, all three. As in my subregion, where the apparent lack of unity of interests and positions of member States has not augured well for the peace process in Liberia, so too in Bosnia and Herzegovina the diversity of interests and perspectives of countries in the subregion with the necessary leverage has not helped matters at all.

I thank the representative of Nigeria for his kind words addressed to me.

We join those who spoke before us in conveying our heartfelt condolences to the Government and the people of the United States following the tragedy in Oklahoma at the hands of terrorists. The delegation of Botswana wishes to thank the Co-Chairmen of the Steering Committee of the International Conference on the Former Yugoslavia (ICFY) for their report (S/1995/302), which we read with keen interest. It is gratifying to note that the authorities of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (Serbia and Montenegro) have continued to honour their commitment to seal the international border between the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (Serbia and Montenegro) and areas of Bosnia and Herzegovina under the control of Bosnian Serb forces. There have been no discoveries of weapons or ammunition crossing the border since the Mission began its work back in 1994, although sizeable amounts of other contraband have been confiscated. This is an indication that some contraband, including weapons, must have crossed the border unnoticed. If it could be determined with absolute certainty that there had been no weapons or ammunition transshipments across the border, this would indeed be a most gratifying piece of information, because the primary purpose of the border closure was to prevent war materials from reaching the Serb forces in Bosnia. It is common knowledge, however, that it is not an easy task to seal a border between two countries totally, even at the best of times. There is no denying that weapons and ammunition must be reaching Bosnian Serbs through the porous border. We will never know, of course, the extent to which transshipments of weapons have been carried out. It is, however, impossible to doubt that weapons are reaching the territory of Bosnia under the control of Serb forces undetected: the unexplained and seemingly inexplicable cross-border helicopter movements, My delegation supports the extension of the partial suspension because any decision to the contrary would mean an end to what has been achieved so far to stop the transshipment of military contraband. In the meantime, the international community should continue to make a determined effort to pressure Belgrade to isolate the Bosnian Serb forces completely until they realize that acceptance of the Contact Group plan is their only hope for a solution to the conflict. There is no doubt that the authorities of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia can play a crucial role in this endeavour if they so wish, and it is our earnest hope that President Milosevic will do everything possible to make the border closure more effective. Just as the border closure between the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (Serbia and Montenegro) and areas of Bosnia and Herzegovina under the control of Bosnian Serb forces is a critical factor in the efforts to bring the war in Bosnia to an end, so is the general arms embargo. It is shocking to learn that weapons of war are being shipped into this cauldron of conflict by some Members of the United Nations, in violation of Security Council resolution 713 (1991). It is most disheartening that those who have the capacity to stop this flow of arms have decided to watch passively as Security Council resolutions are flouted with total abandon. We cannot expect to make any headway at the negotiating table when the parties to that violent, deep-rooted and complex conflict are being armed to the teeth. Fuelling the fires of war in the former Yugoslavia with new arms is simply bad business. It puts the lives of the Blue Helmets on the ground at risk, and we do not believe that this is in anybody’s interest. The crisis in the former Yugoslavia threatens to create a perception of the Security Council as an ineffective machine good for the production of resolutions and nothing more. It accounted for 23 Council resolutions in 1992, 25 in 1993, 12 in 1994 and 5 in the first four months of 1995 alone. By the time the gavel falls for the adjournment of this meeting, the Council will have added yet another resolution to this already long list. Countless presidential statements have also been issued, yet there is not the slightest sign that there will be a settlement soon.

At the outset, allow me, on behalf of the Government of Oman, to welcome you, Sir, to the Council. We are particularly pleased to see you presiding over this formal meeting of the Security Council, and we express our appreciation to your country for the very able manner in which its delegation has steered the work of the Security Council so far this month under its able Ambassador, Mr. Kovanda. On a sad note, I should like to extend, through you, Mr. President, our heartfelt condolences to the representative of the United States of America on the death of innocent people caused by a tragic, horrific crime in Oklahoma City. While members of the Security Council welcome the decision taken by the Belgrade authorities and consider it a preliminary step in the right direction that will pave the way for a new relationship between the international community and that country, on the other hand they stressed, during the Council’s deliberations preceding the adoption of resolution 943 (1994), the need for the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia to take further practical steps to implement fully all relevant Security Council resolutions aimed at easing the sanctions against the Bosnian Serbs. These steps include the following: first, recognition of the independence, territorial integrity and sovereignty of the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina and States in the region; secondly, an end to all military and political practices of aggression that might place any doubt on the legitimacy of the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina and endanger its peace and territorial integrity; thirdly, mutual recognition of the international borders of all States in the region; fourthly, the promotion of peaceful coexistence between all the States and peoples of the region in accordance with the principles and purposes of the United Nations Charter; and, fifthly, cooperation with the United Nations and the International Tribunal for the prosecution of persons responsible for serious violations of international humanitarian law committed in the territory of the Former Yugoslavia. After a thorough examination of the reports of the Co-Chairmen of the Steering Committee of the International Conference on the Former Yugoslavia, we would like to commend the work done and the efforts exerted in this regard, and we look forward to the day when the Council receives a satisfactory report from the Co-Chairmen of the Steering Committee that will state right up front that the authorities in the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia are cooperating fully with the Mission towards an effective and sound implementation of the border closure. This, in my Government’s view, will help the Security Council to take another look at the comprehensive regime of sanctions imposed on that country, with a view to having an indefinite suspension of these sanctions. In conclusion, and based on our understanding of the matter at hand, my delegation, once again, will vote in favour of a draft resolution on the suspension of the sanctions, and hopes to see in the coming days more positive steps taken by the Government of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (Serbia and Montenegro).

I thank the representative of Oman for the kind words he addressed to my delegation.

My delegation wishes to welcome His Excellency Mr. Alexandr Vondra, a First Deputy Foreign Minister of the Czech Republic in his capacity of President of the Security Council today. We wish also again to extend our condolences to the people and Government of the United States on the loss of so may lives caused by the deplorable, criminal attack that took place in Oklahoma City two days ago. My delegation knows from its own experience how difficult a task it is to close a border completely, especially in an area of conflict and war. During the Central American crisis in the nineteen eighties the international community required something similar of Honduras. In many cases it was physically impossible for us to do what we were asked to do, and we thereby were the object of international condemnation or censure. For this reason, we understand today the situation in the former Yugoslavia and, having studied the periodic reports of the Co-Chairmen of the Steering Committee of the International Conference on the Former Yugoslavia, transmitted through the Secretary-General of the United Nations, we support the temporary suspension of the sanctions against that country and we urge it to continue to cooperate towards securing an indefinite suspension of the sanctions. The report has been prepared by a mission of responsible and qualified persons from more than 18 nations, and we therefore have no doubt that it has been impartial in submitting the report. My delegation wishes to reiterate the ideas presented by the Secretary-General in regard to sanctions regimes in his "Supplement to An Agenda for Peace", which was endorsed in a recent statement by the Council. I would venture to recall, as I have done on previous occasions, that the purpose of sanctions is to modify the conduct of the party or parties to a conflict which is threatening international peace and security, and not to punish or exact any other kind of reprisals. All this must be seen in the context of Article 41 of the Charter of the United Nations. With the aim in mind of taking firm and lasting steps towards bringing peace to the Balkans, the Council recently adopted three distinct resolutions relating to three peace- keeping operations: in Croatia, in Bosnia and Herzegovina, and in Macedonia. We hope that the draft resolution that Finally, I wish to call attention to the letter (S/1995/313) addressed to the Secretary-General, and hence to the Security Council, by the Permanent Representative of Greece to the United Nations, concerning the impact of the sanctions on countries such as Bulgaria, Greece, the Republic of Moldova, Romania and Ukraine. The Foreign Ministers of those countries, meeting in Athens, decided to initiate action in the Security Council as a result of the economic problems caused by the sanctions regime imposed on the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia. My delegation takes the view that this matter should be given consideration as soon as possible. As on other occasions, my delegation wishes to acknowledge the positive attitude of the authorities of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, and urges them to continue to cooperate with a view to achieving a just and lasting peace in the former Yugoslavia, for well-being and peace for its neighbours will also mean well-being and peace for the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia. For that reason we support the draft resolution on which the Council will soon take action.

I thank the representative of Honduras for the kind words he addressed to me.

It gives me sincere pleasure to welcome you, Sir, First Deputy Foreign Minister of the Czech Republic, as President of today's meeting of the Security Council. The Russian delegation wishes also to convey its profound condolences to the United States on the tragic loss in Oklahoma City of the lives of Americans, including children, who fell victim to a horrific terrorist act. This senselessly cruel and barbarous crime demonstrates yet again the need for the most resolute joint efforts by the international community to suppress the threat posed by extremism and terrorism, which has become global in scale. Russia will be unable to support the draft resolution before the Council, because, in our view, it is not consistent with the principle of positive and negative incentives previously agreed in the Contact Group and in the Security Council; according to the principle, those that I would, in that connection, recall the background to this issue. In August last year, the Government of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia of its own free will decided to close its border with Bosnia and Herzegovina to all except humanitarian goods. The Government of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia then requested the International Conference on the Former Yugoslavia (ICFY) to send an international Mission to the border to assist in implementing that decision. In both instances, the Government of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia acted on its own initiative, thereby demonstrating its readiness to cooperate actively with the international community in the efforts to achieve a peaceful settlement, including through the exertion of serious pressure on the Bosnian Serb leadership to change its unconstructive position. This was a courageous and far from easy step, but despite the inevitable attendant problems the Government of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia has held firm over implementing its decision. The Security Council responded by adopting resolution 943 (1994), partially suspending restrictions on commercial flights, the ferry service between Bar and Bari and cultural and sporting exchanges. We should honestly recognize that this response was not entirely adequate or commensurate with the significance of Belgrade's closure of the border: essentially, these were symbolic measures that did not really ease the burden of economic and trade sanctions. Since that time, and as corroborated by numerous reports of the Co-Chairmen of the Steering Committee of the ICFY, including the latest report — annexed to document S/1995/302 of 13 April — the Government of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia has stuck strictly to its decision. Its cooperation with the ICFY Mission remains very good and is steadily improving as experience in working together is acquired. Problems that arise are resolved speedily and constructively. Of course, no Government can seal its borders 100 per cent, so there are isolated cases of smuggling and other situations. But the Government of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, as clearly indicated in the reports from the ICFY, is actively facilitating their resolution. Many are alarmed by the reports of cross-border helicopter flights; here, as we all know, much remains Under these circumstances, the Council would seem to have had every justification for adopting further positive stimuli, especially since it stated its resolve as early as resolution 943 (1994) to keep the situation under close review and to consider further steps to ease sanctions. As a minimum, it should long ago have made the partial suspension of sanctions indefinite, as repeatedly proposed by the Russian Federation. This time, we presented for the Council's consideration our own draft resolution, based on resolution 970 (1995); actually, our draft set out the minimum the Security Council could do to further encourage the constructive line Belgrade is taking. Unfortunately, all our proposals have gone unheeded. Instead, with each regular extension of the partial suspension of sanctions, the Security Council has been inclined to make yet more fresh demands on the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia. This trend is reflected in today's draft resolution, too, which contains many alarming innovations — this despite the views of the Co-Chairmen of the Steering Committee of the ICFY, on whose conclusions doubts are in essence being cast without any convincing grounds whatever for so doing. We reaffirm our firm support for the activities of the Co-Chairmen and of the ICFY Mission, and reject attempts to disparage them. For example, the draft resolution attempts to link the voluntary decision by the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia to close its border with Bosnia and Herzegovina to the situation on its border with Croatia. This is a serious step towards changing the mandate of the ICFY Mission, and it is being proposed without consulting Belgrade. It is beyond our understanding why it was necessary to cut back the draft resolution's duration to 75 days when a mechanism, which is still operational was agreed upon in September last year that provides for the immediate reimposition of full sanctions should the Government of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia fail to implement its decision to close the border. The new draft resolution also calls on the Government of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia to sever telecommunication links with the Bosnian Serbs. And yet the Security Council itself, in resolution 942 (1994), unequivocally excluded telecommunications from the scope of application of the sanctions. We find it difficult to grasp the logic here. All these measures not only contradict the conclusions of the Co-Chairmen, but in essence reflect yet another attempt to introduce a double standard into the work of the Council. In this instance, the Security Council is beginning to get into unwarranted micromanagement, whereas in other instances it closes its eyes to flagrant violations of its own decisions, as has long been happening with respect to the embargo on arms shipments to the republics of the former Yugoslavia. As a result, on thorough reading the draft resolution begs the following question: can it be considered a positive stimulus and if so, then why have the views of the Government of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, whose policy, in the final analysis, has made it possible to establish control over the border, not been taken into account? We have serious doubts as to whether this draft is intended to encourage those who support the Contact Group peace plan. Rather, what is involved is in principle a new approach, that may have very undesirable consequences. It may very well hand a trump card — or may even have already handed it — to those who are urging the Bosnian Serbs not to accept the peace plan, and to prosecute the war on to victory. We are in any event convinced that that approach does not enhance the Council’s options in its efforts to achieve a political settlement. The sad thing is that this is taking place right at this present critical moment, when we are all justifiably feeling profound alarm over the We would like to hope that in future the Security Council will be able to offer a more responsible political approach in its decisions guided not by the considerations of the moment, but by the interests of achieving a comprehensive, lasting and truly just settlement in the former Yugoslavia.

I thank the representative of the Russian Federation for his kind words addressed to me.

Mr. President, first of all, the Chinese delegation welcomes you as you join us to guide the meeting of the Security Council this afternoon. We believe your vitality and excellent skills and wisdom will lead us to the smooth conclusion of this afternoon’s meeting. To you and to Ambassador Kovanda, we would like to express our thanks for the contribution made to the work of the Security Council by the Czech delegation. The Chinese delegation also wishes to express its shock at the recent tragic event in Oklahoma City. We would like, through Ambassador Albright, to extend our condolences to the Government and people of the United States on the loss of life in the explosion. The report of the Co-Chairmen of the International Conference on the Former Yugoslavia (ICFY), transmitted by the Secretary-General to the Security Council, states that the Mission enjoys freedom of movement and good cooperation from the Government of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia in implementing its mandate, that the Government of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia continues to fulfil its commitment to closing its border with Bosnia and Herzegovina, and that there have been no commercial transshipments across that border. We welcome this development and believe that it should be the basis for our consideration of the draft resolution before us. We have all along advocated a peaceful settlement of the conflict in the former Yugoslavia and have been against the introduction of sanctions or mandatory measures in this connection, for facts have proved that sanctions or pressure will in no way help resolve any issue, but rather will further complicate and perpetuate it. The Federal Republic of Yugoslavia is an important factor for restoring peace and stability in the region of the Regrettably, though the draft resolution before us has further extended the provisions for easing sanctions set forth in resolution 970 (1995), it has not only shortened the period of extension but also attached more restrictive conditions to it, which is apparently a step backward from resolutions 943 (1994) and 970 (1995). Furthermore, the reasonable suggestions we made on the draft resolution were not accepted. Due to the aforementioned situation and based on our principled position on sanctions, we shall have to abstain on the draft resolution before us. The long absence of a solution to the question of the former Yugoslavia has brought tremendous suffering to the people in the region. It is also jeopardizing peace and stability in Europe and the world as a whole. We are deeply concerned over the conflict in the former Yugoslavia, and strongly urge the parties concerned to restart at an early date peaceful negotiations for a solution acceptable to all by taking into account the fundamental interests of the people there. We also deem it imperative for the countries in the region to recognize each other and coexist in amity and good-neighbourliness. This will help bring an early end to the conflict and war in the region, which will be in conformity with the long-term interests of the countries in the region and contribute to the maintenance of peace and stability in Europe, as well as in the rest of the world.

I thank the representative of China for the kind words he addressed to me. I shall now put to the vote the draft resolution contained in document S/1995/319.

There were 13 votes in favour, none against and 2 abstentions. The draft resolution has been adopted as resolution 988 (1995). I shall now call on those members of the Council who wish to make statements following the voting.

Let me say, Mr. President, on behalf of my Government, that we are delighted that you are chairing this very important meeting, and, on my own behalf, that it is a very great pleasure to see a very good personal friend in the Chair. I also would like to thank, on behalf of my Government, the members of the Council for their statements of condolence and support today, and specifically the very personal reflections of Ambassador Sacirbey. As President Clinton has said, the United States is determined that the perpetrators of the outrageous and cowardly attack in Oklahoma City shall be brought to justice. Our thoughts and prayers are with the victims and their families. Although we do not know the motives of those who committed this heinous crime, we do know that it bore the senseless, brutal and indiscriminate stamp of terrorism. Few of the countries represented here have not, at one time or another, been its victims. The tragedy should reinforce our common determination to forge a world where those who obey the law are secure and those who commit outrages against it are brought to heel. We deeply appreciate the offers of assistance from other Governments. At this time, our officials in Oklahoma believe that they do have sufficient resources. However, if a need arises, we will be in contact with the Governments concerned. On behalf of the people of the United States, I thank all members for this demonstration of concern for the victims of this crime. On behalf of us all, I urge renewed commitment to the rule of law and civility in human affairs. For the past 200 days, as now, we have supported and encouraged the excellent work of the ICFY Mission and have contributed to strengthening its capabilities. If we are to ensure that the closure of the border is as comprehensive as President Milosevic said it would be, we have no stronger instrument than a fully staffed and fully funded ICFY Mission. We therefore strongly encourage all Member States to increase their support for this important Mission. The resolution we have just adopted is designed to acknowledge progress, but even more important, it is intended to close remaining loopholes. This Council must be prepared to take steps to bolster enforcement and signal to the Serb authorities that we expect them to live up to what they claim is a shared objective — absolute closure of the border, except for those instances and items which the Council has explicitly exempted. The resolution we have just voted on is straightforward. Belgrade must close the land and air border with Bosnia and not seek to circumvent the closure of that border by illegally shipping goods through Serb-controlled parts of Croatia. The United States was prepared to block adoption of this resolution if these steps to tighten the border closure were not included. During the 75-day period leading up to 5 July we will watch closely to see if Belgrade improves compliance with its commitment to close the border. We urge the ICFY monitoring Mission, the Co-Chairmen of the ICFY Steering Committee and the Secretary-General to implement fully paragraphs 13 and 15 of this resolution. It is up to them to make sure that the Council's decisions are more than words on pieces of paper. Let me also say a word about the performance of the United Nations peace-keeping forces in these tragic conflicts in the former Yugoslavia. Members of the Security Council must keep in mind that our credibility, and that of this Organization, depends on our willingness to respond to provocations. The United Nations forces on the ground have faced continuous challenges, now perhaps more difficult than ever. My Government appreciates the sacrifices they have made and the good they do. We are also prepared to support measures that would enhance the ability of those forces to defend themselves and to carry out their mandate with greater effect. In closing, let me say that the United States insisted that a message be sent by today's action. The message is clear: when it comes to sanctions relief, this Council must remain vigilant to ensure that Belgrade is vigilant in delivering on its promises. Our few successes in Bosnia have come from our firmness and resolve, not from a willingness to give Belgrade the benefit of the doubt.

I thank the representative of the United States for the kind words she addressed to me.

The delegation of France would like to welcome you, Sir, to the Security Council. It is delighted that this meeting is taking place under your presidency. My delegation would also like to associate itself with all those who have expressed their sympathy with the United States Government over the terrible bombing that claimed so many inhabitants of Oklahoma City as its victims. Firstly, we are convinced that the mechanisms now in place to monitor the closure of the frontier between the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (Serbia and Montenegro) and the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina are, overall, achieving the objectives they were set up to achieve. In this regard, we do have confidence in the reports by the Co- Chairmen and in the work of the observer Mission, which is unfortunately restricted by a lack of material and financial means. We reaffirm that the best way of improving the Mission’s operation is by increasing the resources allocated to it and by increasing the number of observers too. At the same time, we recognize that the authorities in the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, as the latest report by the Co-Chairman states and the resolution picks up, have demonstrated that they are cooperating and have provided the necessary assistance to the activities of the observer Mission; this is essentially why my delegation wished to extend the suspension of sanctions. Secondly, a number of steps have proved useful in plugging the gaps resulting from the shortfalls we have noted in the field, the most striking examples of which are the helicopter flights — where there is an inquiry now under way — and the sidestepping of the frontier closure by passing goods for Bosnia and Herzegovina by way of Croatian territory, which is why a part of the resolution includes a strengthening of the existing measures. This strengthening, in our view, is not such as to cast doubt on the degree of cooperation being afforded by the Belgrade authorities, but does respond to the loopholes that have been shown up by experience. I should like to stress that, even if the length of the extension of the sanctions suspension has been cut back, the cutback is still small in scale. My delegation would have had no problem with going back to the period set in previous resolutions, and accepted the time-frame in the resolution in a spirit of compromise, which seemed to us to be the only way of achieving in the Council a result that we think is on the whole positive. We therefore call on the authorities of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia to accept the resolution in the same

It is a pleasure to welcome you today, Mr. Deputy Foreign Minister, to the Council and to see you in the President’s chair. I too wish to extend our condolences to the Government of the United States and to the families of those who died in the terrible explosion in Oklahoma City. Let me begin by expressing the gratitude of my Government to the members of the Mission of the International Conference on the Former Yugoslavia (ICFY). The Mission plays an essential role in monitoring the closure of the border between the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia and the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina, which closure is the subject of the resolution just adopted by our Council. We are fully aware that the Mission is working under extremely difficult conditions. My Government hopes that, in keeping with today’s resolution, Member States will provide the ICFY Mission with additional material and financial support. This is the second time that the Security Council has taken a decision to continue the limited sanctions relief originally extended to Belgrade under resolution 943 (1994). In order to do so, the Council needed to determine whether the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia was continuing to implement the closure of its border with the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina. The reports received from the Co-Chairmen of the ICFY indicate that the Belgrade authorities are continuing to cooperate with the Mission. Based on the information available to them, the Co-Chairmen conclude that the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia is continuing to meet its commitment regarding border closure. However, the reports also note a number of serious violations and presumed violations of the border regime. Indeed, the last two certifications contain an important caveat regarding helicopter flights, which are a question of particular concern to my Government. In addition, we have become increasingly concerned about circumvention of the border regime by way of Serb-controlled areas in the Republic of Croatia. Today’s resolution, while extending the suspension of certain sanctions, is designed to address these problems. The question of helicopter flights will be the subject of a thorough investigation and a report to the Finally, in light of the problems during the period just past, the duration of the suspension has been curtailed. However, the authorities in Belgrade can count on further renewals of the suspension if they comply with the provisions of the resolution. I should like to underline that Belgrade can expect additional sanctions relief if it moves beyond an effective border closure and extends its full support to the approach pursued by the Contact Group. We call on the authorities in Belgrade to accept mutual recognition of the successor states of the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia and work with the international community to bring an end to the conflict in the Republic of Croatia. As regards the leadership in Pale, we hope that it will finally recognize that it must return to the negotiating table. It must accept the Contact Group’s peace plan as a starting point. The Bosnian Serb leaders will not improve their position by procrastinating: instead, they will increase the sufferings of the Serbs of Bosnia and Herzegovina together with the sufferings of the rest of the Republic’s civilian population. Germany believes that the pressure on Pale must be maintained in order to achieve an overall settlement of the conflict in Bosnia and Herzegovina. My Government remains convinced that a peaceful settlement can be achieved. That is why we appeal, once again, to the Bosnian parties to extend without further delay the agreements on a cease-fire and a complete cessation of hostilities.

I thank the representative of Germany for his kind words addressed to me.

Allow me to begin, Sir, by addressing to you a warm welcome from my delegation and our best wishes on your assumption of the presidency of the Security Council today. I would also like to take this opportunity to thank your Government for having sent to the United Nations such a fine and able diplomat, Ambassador Karel Kovanda, who has presided so efficiently and impartially over our deliberations since the beginning of April. This resolution seems to us the logical and natural consequence of the four reports by Co-Chairmen Owen and Stoltenberg on the monitoring activity of the Mission of the International Conference on the Former Yugoslavia (ICFY) along the border between the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (Serbia and Montenegro) and the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina over the past 100 days. All four reports take note of the freedom of movement the Mission has enjoyed in Yugoslav territory, the collaboration offered by the Belgrade authorities and, above all, the fact that the Belgrade Government has continued to honour its commitment to keeping closed the border between the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (Serbia and Montenegro) and the areas of the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina currently controlled by the Bosnian Serbs. That said, we cannot ignore the reports in recent months of helicopter flights across the border. In this regard, paragraph 8 of the resolution underlines the important need for a thorough investigation of the matter and requests the cooperation of the Belgrade authorities and a report of the Secretary-General in this connection. Neither can we ignore reports that goods could have been diverted from the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (Serbia and Montenegro) to the Bosnian Serbs through the Serb-controlled areas of Croatia. This is why in paragraph 13 the Secretary-General is asked to report whether the Co-Chairmen of the ICFY have received substantiated evidence of such diversions. Furthermore, paragraph 15 provides for an end to the suspension if that should be proved to be the case. Frankly, we believe it is in the interest of the Belgrade authorities that their good faith be proved. It is equally essential that the size and operative capacity of the ICFY Mission be strengthened in order to guarantee a more effective monitoring of the border, in particular with regard to the possibility of illegal helicopter crossings. A serious commitment by the international community to reinforcing the Mission, which is performing such an important, difficult and delicate task, could thus help to remove the existing climate of doubts and suspicions. I would be remiss if I concluded without echoing in the Council the feeling of shock and horror provoked in Italy by the cowardly terrorist attack perpetrated two days ago in Oklahoma City. Through you, Mr. President, I wish to extend sincere condolences and deep sympathy to our American colleague, Ambassador Albright, and her delegation.

I thank the representative of Italy for his kind words addressed to my delegation.

My delegation would also like warmly to welcome you to the Council, Mr. President, and take the opportunity of your presence to express our appreciation of your country’s presidency of the Council in what has been a very busy month so far. The United Kingdom also expresses its shock and sympathy with the United States over the bomb outrage in Oklahoma. We echo entirely Ambassador Albright’s words about the universality of terrorism, which calls for a united condemnation and response. No one, certainly not the British Government, is happy with the state of discussions on the peace process in the former Yugoslavia. But there have been two important gains over the last year. First, there has been the establishment of the Bosnian Federation, which my Government regards as an essential building block towards an overall settlement. Secondly, the isolation of the Bosnian Serbs as a result of their refusal to accept the Contact Group plan has been confirmed, in particular by the decision of the Belgrade authorities to close their border with Bosnian Serb-held territory. Central to the international community’s response to the Belgrade authorities’ decision was the establishment of the International Conference on the Former Yugoslavia (ICFY) Mission to monitor this closure. The ICFY Co-Chairmen have reported that the border is generally closed and that cooperation with the Belgrade authorities remains good. My Government fully endorses that assessment and has the fullest confidence in the work of the Co-Chairmen and of the ICFY Mission. We are grateful for their efforts. There are two important issues that now need to be addressed without delay. The first is to ensure that border closure is really tight; in this connection, we are particularly concerned about reports of cross-border helicopter flights. The second is to reinforce the ICFY Mission so that it is able to continue carrying out its task effectively. As far as helicopter flights are concerned, my Government has made personnel available to participate in a team which will shortly begin the detailed analysis of available data and thereafter report authoritatively. We must be clear as to whether serious breaches of the border closure are occurring, over it, in the air. Such breaches would be unacceptable. As for reinforcing the ICFY Mission, it is essential that the international community provide the necessary finance, manpower and equipment. We remain concerned over the Mission’s continued financial crisis, which has necessitated a reduction in its strength. My Government wants to see a fully financed ICFY Mission with its strength increased to 250 personnel. Denying the Mission the support it needs serves only to undercut efforts to bring about a settlement in Bosnia. We hope that other Governments will join the United Kingdom in responding to the Mission’s urgent need for resources, and that they will bring forward the timing of their contributions.

I thank the representative of the United Kingdom for the kind words he addressed to my delegation. I shall now make a statement in my national capacity. First, on behalf of the Czech Republic and its Government and people, I wish to join all those who have expressed their sorrow and sympathy to Ambassador Albright and the American people in connection with the terrorist bombing in Oklahoma City. I turn now to the matter at hand. On balance, the Czech Republic views the results of the operations of the ICFY Mission in the former Yugoslavia as successful. This balance is determined by a mix of technical and political considerations. Reports of the ICFY Co-Chairmen of the last 100 days all contain one main message: the Government of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia is continuing to meet its commitment to closing the land border with Bosnia and Herzegovina. This is a major chord. In addition, though, there are worrisome undertones. Some of these have to do with the situation on the border. Borders cannot perhaps be sealed hermetically, but they should not be too porous. The phantom helicopter flights are also troubling. The rupture of telecommunications contacts with Pale that the authorities of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia had instituted was welcome, and we encourage them to resume those contacts. These and other aspects are addressed in the resolution we have just adopted. We feel the ICFY Mission is doing a terrific job, given the resources it has at hand, even if the political position of Pale has hardly shifted during the period of its operation. Keeping up the pressure on Pale and continuing to recognize Belgrade's cooperation by maintaining the regime of abated sanctions, first enacted in resolution 943 (1994), is the best way ahead. In fact, my delegation would have preferred an extension of this regime significantly beyond the 5 July deadline we have now adopted — both for technical and for financial reasons, but also because we do feel Belgrade is substantively cooperating. However, as we adopt another resolution on the situation in Bosnia and Herzegovina, let us not lose sight of the big picture. This resolution, with the continuing abatement of the sanctions, and the functioning of the ICFY Mission are only tools, instruments, in an effort to get the Bosnian Serbs, the most recalcitrant party to the conflict, to accept the Contact Group peace plan. And even this peace plan is only an instrument to bring about peace and normalcy in the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina. We will have to take many more such small, partial steps — many of which will turn out not to have any effect at all — before we attain the final objective. I now resume my function as President of the Council. There are no further names on the list of speakers. 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.