The official website of the Serbian government brings the whole speech of Dacic at the session of the UN Security Council dedicated to the work of UNMIK:
“Mr. President,
Distinguished Members of the Security Council,
At the beginning, I would like to thank Secretary-General Antonio Guterres and his Special Representative Zahir Tanin for their Report. The presence and activities of the United Nations Interim Administration Mission in Kosovo (UNMIK) is of crucial importance; I therefore extend to you my special gratitude for your hard work and dedication to the realization of the mandate of the Mission under UNSCR 1244 (1999).
I also want to thank Equatorial Guinea for the inclusion of this meeting in the agenda of the Security Council.
Serbia believes that it is necessary that the Security Council be open and ready to consider all questions relevant to international peace and security, according all along special attention to its prevention role and responding to situations which, in addition to being clear violations of the resolutions of this body, lead to the increase of tensions and threaten stability and security.
We do not ask for meetings for the purpose of upmanship, but to make a contribution to the stabilization of the situation in Kosovo and Metohija and to the peace in the region. Serbia is a constructive, credible and predictable partner. That’s why we initiated the agreement on the dynamic of the Security Council meetings on UNMIK which we still need and I am pleased and express my gratitude to the members of the Security Council that we have agreed on this important question in order to avoid needless debates in this body on these meetings. The most important thing is that the Security Council will go on and consider the Secretary-General Reports on UNMIK on a continual basis. Let me remind you that the Security Council continues to discuss Bosnia and Herzegovina two time a year, as well as the International Residual Mechanism for Criminal Tribunals, former ICTY, and no one is requesting that these topics be removed from the Council agenda.
I continue to believe that we should and can find a common denominator of our interests and strive to achieve it. We all want to solve the question of Kosovo and Metohija, we all want it not to be a topic on the Security Council agenda any more, we all want UNMIK to complete its mission, successfully though.
This moment is not yet near however. I pointed out many times that we are at a very delicate juncture and called on all to proceed and create conditions for us to sit and talk constructively, without preconditions and imposition of solutions. Let me recall that talks between Belgrade and Priština have entered their seventh year and that progress was made during that time, sometimes more, sometimes less. Yet, we did talk. As Prime Minister at that time, I signed the Brussels Agreement. Regrettably, that Agreement has not been fully implemented to-date, while at this moment in time the talks in Brussels there are not, and you all know why.
I know that many of you will call on both sides to refrain from unilateral acts and commit themselves to dialogue and a quest for a lasting solution. I can only tell you that Serbia has refrained from unilateral acts; we have not made them either because of the Community of Serbian Municipalities as the most important part of the Brussels Agreement, not established for five years now, or to prevent unilateral decisions like the confiscation of the property of the Trepča mine that Priština took several days ago.
The dialogue has been forestalled, distinguished Members of the Council, for one reason: the unilateral decision of the so-called Kosovo to impose taxes on goods from Serbia and BiH by one hundred percent. This act, let me recall, has been condemned by the entire international community, Priština’s staunchest allies included, that called on Priština to suspend the decision.
Distinguished Members of the Security Council,
We have entered 2019 facing major challenges and problems the solutions of which are hardly perceivable nowadays. I recall that, in addition to the decision to establish the so-called Armed Forces of Kosovo on the heels of the Security Council meeting last November, Priština rushed, instead of de-escalating tensions and investing maximum effort in promoting dialogue, to adopt misguided and senseless decisions on the imposition of taxes on Serbian goods. They were followed by numerous Greater Albania pronouncements, surely not a call to compromise, but a design to gin up instability in the region.
The one-sided decision of Priština to increase taxes on Serbian goods by as much as hundred per cent and contrary to the Central European Free Trade Agreement is, primarily, a politically motivated decision which wreaked irreversible damage and forestalled the continuation of the dialogue on normalization of relations between Belgrade and Priština. For its part, Serbia continues to firmly believe that talks are the only way for the solution of outstanding issues and refrained, even after the imposition of the taxes, from reciprocal measures and any other act that would have aggravated the situation. Once again, we demonstrated responsibility, sense and credibility.
The taxes, Mr. President, are aimed at making the situation of the Serbian community in Kosovo and Metohija even more difficult.
Despite condemnation and intense pressure by numerous international institutions, Priština soldiers on and applies the taxes it imposed more than two months ago. As it was proved that it can take and implement unilateral and destabilizing decisions and measures without consequences, that it can breach agreements and raid a territory with a majority Serbian population, Priština continues this practice unabated. Hence we are faced today not only with the absence of the Community of Serbian Municipalities, but also with continued attempts to take over northern Kosovo and Metohija, evinced by the ROSU raid of this part of the Province last November, imposition of draconian taxes on Serbian goods and the arrest of four Serbs in Kosovska Mitrovica in a brutal ROSU action and a call for ’unification’ of the northern and southern part of the town. Tantamount to a drive to intimidate the Serbs living in the northern part of the town, this is also a screen for the intended takeover of northern Kosovska Mitrovica and the expulsion of Serbs from this part of the town in the way they have been expelled from its south.
Priština continues to upturn the cart of everything in which, through dialogue and regional interlinkage, the European Union and other international actors invested considerable efforts. Are we then to expect that any agreement will be respected if basic principles of modern-day Europe are ignored?
The decision to ban a free flow of goods, capital and people due to a displeasure with a political decision is, let me point out once again, inconceivable in the twenty-first century. Priština’s contention that the act has been taken as a counter-measure to Serbia’s policy that it characterizes as ‘aggressive’ is false through and through. Rather, it has been taken as a consequence of the withdrawal by 13 countries of the recognition of the UDI of Kosovo and the failure of its attempt to become a member of INTERPOL. The explanation being provided is that it is detrimental to the dialogue. Ever since its UDI in 2008, the so-called Kosovo has lobbied for recognition, aided and abetted by some States. After all, some members of this body called on other States on our previous meetings to recognize the UDI of Kosovo. Serbia has taken no unilateral measures because of these practices. On the contrary, we entered the dialogue and talked regardless of recognitions that took place in the meantime. For those who do not know, we commenced the dialogue in 2012 and 19 countries recognized the UDI of Kosovo since. Nobody said that the recognitions were disruptive of the dialogue. Here is the example of Madagascar. In November 2017, no word was said that its recognition was harmful to the dialogue, but in December 2018 when Madagascar decided to withdraw the recognition, some Members of this Council assessed the withdrawal as very harmful indeed. I really need help to understand this sort of reasoning.
Priština bears grudges over the failure of its bid to join INTERPOL and UNESCO as well. But, here’s the thing: in 2015, prior to Priština’s request for admission to UNESCO, Serbia proposed that protection of cultural heritage be included in the agenda of the dialogue and that agreement be reached on this issue. The proposal fell on deaf ears. Just as did the one concerning INTERPOL. We tried to explain that a candidature for, and lobbying for and against admission by the sides, inevitable if an admission application was to be submitted, would not create an atmosphere conducive to dialogue. Then, irate after the failure, Priština imposed the taxes. One hundred percent. Let me remind that the so-called Kosovo keeps presenting a false data that it has been recognized by 116 countries. 74 United Nations Member States voted in favour of Priština’s admission to INTERPOL; it needed another 36 votes. And now, they blame little Serbia for this result. We call also on this occasion that all questions be solved through dialogue and we are ready to invest our best efforts to find a lasting solution.