Parliamentary Assembly

Mr President, honourable members of the Parliamentary Assembly, Mr Secretary General, ladies and gentlemen, I wish to thank the President of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe, René van der Linden, for granting me the honour of addressing you as the Prime Minister of Serbia at a time when my country is holding the chairmanship of the Committee of Ministers in the Council of Europe.

Serbia took over the chairmanship of the Committee of Ministers in May and decided to focus primarily on the fundamental values of the Council of Europe: human rights, democracy and the rule of law, which are the three pillars that form the foundations of European societies. That is why the slogan of Serbia’s chairmanship – “One Europe, our Europe” – expresses our belief that all European states and all peoples wish Europe to be one and speak with a single voice in showing full respect for the three aforementioned crucial values.

In today’s address, I wish first to stress the fact that the Serbian authorities have been working assiduously and constantly above all to ensure the implementation of human rights, democracy and the rule of law. That is best borne out by the adoption of the new Serbian Constitution, which passed the test of a referendum, was approved by the will of the people and fulfilled even the most difficult requirement that over 50% of registered voters should vote in favour of its adoption. In addition, the Assembly of Serbia adopted the document unanimously, which bears witness to full democratic, political and national consensus on the new constitution in Serbia.

I am anxious to point out that the European Commission for Democracy through Law, or the Venice Commission, made explicit its opinion that the new constitution reflects the democratic ideals of the new Serbia. Sixty-three of a total of 206 articles in the constitution contain provisions specifically concerning human and minority rights and liberties. In respect of national minorities, it is particularly important to point to the provisions that ban discrimination on any grounds, and prohibit the incitement of racial and national hatred. I wish in particular to mention the articles in the constitution that prohibit violent assimilation and promote the development of the spirit of tolerance; the provisions on obligations to allow national minorities to be represented on local and provincial government bodies; as well as the provisions requiring that account be taken of the national make-up of the population among people employed by the national administration.

The constitution says that, as well as the rights granted to all the citizens of Serbia, minorities should be granted certain additional rights that fall under the heading of positive discrimination such as the right to elect national minority councils. I wish to inform you that not only the letter of the Serbian Constitution but its legal provisions and actual practices have largely surpassed that, including a grant that is provided for by the Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities. Local and provincial printed and electronic media are broadcast in minority languages. In the autonomous province of Vojvodina, for example, people belonging to the Hungarian national minority can receive tuition in their own language at about 80 primary and 30 secondary schools, as well as at several universities in Novi Sad, Subotica and Belgrade.

I should like to highlight the fact that the leaders of national minorities and the highest representatives of all religious communities in Serbia strongly supported the adoption of the new constitution. Thus in the multi-ethnic town of Novi Pazar, where Bosniacs account for a considerable majority, an exceptionally high number of citizens took part in the referendum. That attests to the character of the new constitution as well as to the trust that national minorities have today in the state of Serbia. That confidence has been built thanks to a number of specific actions undertaken by the Serbian Government to improve the overall status of national minorities and to enhance the participation of people belonging to those minorities in public affairs.

All of that, honourable members of the Parliamentary Assembly, goes to prove Serbia’s full commitment to, and participation in, the building of the three fundamental European values: human rights, democracy and the rule of law. It is precisely in the implementation of those values that Serbia sees a solution to the biggest problem in present-day Europe – the future status of the province of Kosovo-Metohia. You will be fully aware that the new negotiation process, mediated by the international troika, is under way and that direct talks took place between Belgrade and the representatives of Kosovo Albanians several days ago. It is quite natural, given that the negotiations are in progress, for us to talk openly at this august European institution, and I am convinced of the need to jointly support only a democratic and compromise solution.

I wish to reassert explicitly that Serbia is indeed committed without any reservation to a democratic solution based on the three pillars that form the foundation of Europe itself: human rights, democracy and the rule of law. Accordingly, Serbia called on the Albanian side and the international community in Europe to commit themselves to measures that do not resort to violent, unilateral solutions. We firmly believe that everyone concerned should act only in support of a negotiated, democratic settlement.

It is the Council of Europe, which rests on those fundamental values and which is duty bound to safeguard them, that can help us to find a way to reach a democratic solution. That is why, during the course of the New York talks, Serbia proceeded on the crucial issue of granting rights to the Albanian national minority in the province of Kosovo. The essence of the problem is how to settle the status of the Albanian national minority in the province both democratically and in line with international law.

Serbia’s proposal, which it presented in New York, is that Serbia is ready to grant to the Albanian national minority the status of the most privileged national minority anywhere in the world today. Such a status would be secured in the form of the substantive autonomy of the province of Kosovo within Serbia. I trust that members agree that such a proposal can only have at its core the full and free development and prosperity of Kosovan Albanians. There is no intention on the part of Belgrade to limit or in any way curtail the rights of Albanians in the province.

Like any other sovereign and internationally recognised state, Serbia cannot allow the Albanian national minority to create a state within a state and to form another Albanian state in the Balkan region. No national minority anywhere in the world has that right. I ask why only the Albanian national minority should enjoy such a right – and only in Serbia.

In New York, Serbia called on not only the international community but the Albanian side to work together on determining the most privileged national minority status, and to consider the particular rights currently exercised by national minorities in the world today, which can be used as a reliable criterion to settle the dispute. It is important for me to inform you that we are at a turning point today, where the international community must decide which of the two pathways to opt for in tackling the issue of the fortunes of the province of Kosovo and, by the same token, the fortunes of Serbia

One of the two pathways leads to a democratic solution based on the European values of respect for democracy, human rights and the rule of law. The second pathway leads to a highly risky zone and would lead to the setting of the most dangerous precedent in Europe since the end of the Second World War. The cost would be to allow a national minority grossly to violate a valid UN Security Council resolution as well as the UN Charter and the Helsinki Final Act – to form a new state on the territory of a sovereign and internationally recognised state.

It is my duty to draw your attention to the two arguments put forward in favour of the second extremely dangerous pathway. Top-ranking international officials have said that unless a solution is identified speedily, peace in the province may be jeopardised. That point was immediately echoed by Albanian terrorists, who have said that they will resort to massive violence unless Kosovo is granted independence. Such arguments would deserve no comment, if we had heard a single clear message from the international community to the effect that such threats, rather than being rewarded by granting a state, will be severely sanctioned.

The second argument for moving along the pathway of legal violence and dismembering Serbia should be considered in the context of annexe 11 of the rejected Ahtisaari plan. It was more than telling that all the Albanian representatives in New York repeated again and again that they would fully implement the Ahtisaari plan, when they were fully aware that the plan was not on the agenda. In other words, the Albanians hope that annexe 11 will be implemented, which would achieve their geostrategic, military and security interests, and that certain great powers would agree to recognise unilaterally declared independence.

Members of the Parliamentary Assembly should know that annexe 11 of the Ahtisaari plan envisages no clear civilian control over the international military presence in Kosovo, in the form of NATO forces. That would constitute yet another unheard-of precedent since the democratic world was built. We face the risk that the implementation of annexe 11 will become more important than identifying a democratic solution, which would outweigh the destiny of Kosovo, of Serbia, and even of the entire region.

The two pathways to solving the Kosovo problem that I have outlined merit us stopping to think them over. You can rest fully assured that, in keeping with the UN Charter and its own constitution, Serbia will not abandon the quest for a democratic solution, just as it resolutely rejects the thought that it could allow, for any reason and at any time, the making of a new Albanian state on its territory through legal violence and the pursuit of the policy of force by unilateral steps. I assure you that it is impossible to impose a solution on Serbia, and that any unilaterally declared independence would prove to be unsustainable. Unilaterally declared independence would only aggravate the problem, which would return us to the point where we would have to search together for a democratic and sustainable solution all over again.

Regrettably, it should also be borne in mind that there is a real threat that particular countries – even European countries – would opt for the blatant violation of the valid UN Security Council Resolution 1244, which is binding on all governments and which specifically granted Serbia’s sovereignty and territorial integrity, and would be prepared to recognise a unilateral act by Albanian separatists on the independence of the province. At the Council of Europe, we must pose the most natural question: if certain European states opt to violate Resolution 1244, what will prevent any European state tomorrow from violating yet another UN Security Council resolution if such a violation were mandated? The real question is whether all those taking decisions today have taken into account all the consequences that could arise in Europe and elsewhere in the world as a result of the use of legal violence and the blatant violation of international law and universally binding UN resolutions.

At first sight, it may appear that it is easier to cut things short, even at the cost of blatantly violating the norms and values of our present-day world. However, all the countries adopting that short-sighted approach should bear in mind that as early as tomorrow they themselves could face a similar threat. In that context, we all know – because we have learned the lessons of world and European history – that any violence and the breaking of universal rules that causes a sovereign country to be dismembered will inevitably produce grave and tragic consequences. Let us ask ourselves how many separatist-minded national minorities in today’s world are watching attentively how the issue of the Albanian national minority in Kosovo will be settled. How can one explain to them tomorrow that first-grade national minorities are allowed to form states but second-grade national minorities are not permitted to do so? Most importantly, would those minorities be prepared to reconcile themselves to that position, or would new problems arise through the formation of new states driven by conflicts and presenting a persistent threat to peace and stability?

I wish to voice my conviction that nobody should stay calm when faced with the fact that it is precisely in Europe, which is so very proud of its achievements in terms of respect for the rule of law, democracy and human rights, that certain countries are thinking of dismembering a sovereign, internationally recognised country by virtue of legal violence and by means of a unilateral solution. We have also seen a powerful non-European country assure us that we should regulate our affairs at the heart of Europe through the use of violence and in direct violation of the UN Charter and argue that such an action would not constitute a precedent but rather a regular and normal state of affairs. It is quite the other way around. Common sense is warning us that we should stick to the time-tested values and not abandon a democratic solution by any means. Europe’s experience is too vast and its commitment to persevere in the quest for a democratic solution too strong for us to dare give in to pressures and too readily engage in undermining the foundations on which the entire international order is based today.

If Serbia were to yield under such pressure and agree to take part in the making of another Albanian state on its own territory, it would take over gravest possible responsibility for all the far-reaching consequences of such an action. For who is more called upon than Serbia itself to fight for adherence to universal rules when its territorial integrity and its province of Kosovo is at stake? By consistently acting as we do, we have earned the right to call on you, as well, to stand in defence of the highest European values so that we do not allow legal violence to take precedence over a democratic solution in Kosovo, which is at the heart of Europe.

I must say also that, to this very day, nobody has told us what might be wrong with our proposal and why Kosovo should be granted independence. What are the arguments that can challenge Belgrade’s offer on the status of the most privileged national minority? Are there any arguments at all on the legal grounds for taking away 15% of Serbia’s territory in order to create the second Albanian state in the Balkans region? How come the rejected Ahtisaari proposal does not contain even a single word on a legal explanation or justification for such a solution? Lastly, how come nobody has yet thought of at least a single argument in favour of Kosovo’s independence, unless we consider as such an explanation the often-quoted expression, “This is a reality.”?

Honourable members of the Parliamentary Assembly, the only reality recognised by Serbia is the duty of all countries of the world to respect the UN Charter and to act in line with the values underpinning post-war Europe. Respect for that reality has brought peace, stability and prosperity to Europe. Rest assured that Serbia will do everything in its power to have this reality applied throughout its territory by means of a democratic solution; and rest equally assured that Serbia will never accept the reality of the policy of force or recognise any unilaterally declared independence for the province.

Serbia, honourable members of the Parliamentary Assembly, rightfully expects your support in achieving a democratically negotiated settlement for the future status of the Serbian province of Kosovo-Metohia. We remain convinced that, by defending law and justice, the UN Charter, the order of the present-day world and European democratic values, we are not thinking only of our own future, and that by doing so Serbia is not defending only its own sovereignty and dignity. Thank you for your attention.