Keepin touch

Whether you have a question, comment, suggestion or any problem in the purview of the government, send us your message and we will try to respond as soon as possible. If your problem is not in our purview, we will forward your message to the relevant institution.

The Government of the Republic of Serbia

In the service of citizens

Serbia shall protect its national interests in Kosovo-Metohija

Belgrade, 3 December 2007

Serbian Minister of Foreign Affairs Vuk Jeremic said today that destabilisation of the Balkans in 2008, as a result of one-sided declaration of Kosovo independence, which is not line with international law and would be subsequently recognised by third parties, would represent a fiasco of the international community's mission in the Balkans in the past 15 years, as well as a collective defeat of democracy in the entire region.

File photo of Vuk Jeremic

Author: Tanjug

In an interview to today's issue of Politika daily, Jeremic said that the pressure to give independence to the province is very strong, but that there are also many countries that believe that it is not impossible to find compromise.

The Serbian government's official website brings excerpts from the interview.

Apart from the US, a quick independence of Kosovo is also advocated by France, Italy, Great Britain:

– That momentum is being created for a very long time. That is not a thing of a recent couple of weeks, but of the past several years. Since it seems highly unlikely that a compromise will be found, there are more and more countries that "go with the flow" and that is something we cannot oppose in any other way but with arguments and principled, positive and democratic argumentation. That momentum can be stopped only by rules, i.e. international law which those countries can respect, or choose not to respect. We cannot influence their decisions in any other way, but with principled argumentation.

What are the basic arguments against independence that you give in talks with foreign officials?

– Since in the past months I talked with top officials of a dozen countries from various cultures and political systems, I always adjusted arguments to my collocutors. Depending on how close they are to this situation. At last week's ministerial conference of the OSCE in Madrid I said that they cannot say to one country that its opinion does not count. That was not the place to explain the history of the conflict, nor talk about progress of the negotiations, but to make it clear that that issue is of fundamental importance for my country, and for peace and stability in the entire region. In the talks with representatives of a country from the Contact Group's troika of envoys, we ask them to pay attention to minutes from Baden, Vienna, Brussels and London and see that at absolutely every meeting the Serbian side had new proposals and made more offers. However, the speech of the Pristina side was the same from the first to the last round. It is impossible to move them from their stance and I think that is because they have been encouraged all the time to just wait for December 10 and that after that they will get what they want.

What will happen after December 10?

– After December 10 comes December 11 and that is our philosophy. We don't have a choice, for us the status of Kosovo-Metohija cannot be finished on December 10. Neither before that date, nor after it shall we resign to anything which is not line with the Constitution of Serbia and international law and what is imposed on us. I expect that the report of the troika of envoys will contain a truthful analysis of the process which lasted 120 days and that it will show that Belgrade was an active party which offered various options. The Albanian side was completely unprepared for the negotiations. It would be both a moral and political defeat to reward with support such a kind of behaviour.

On the measures of the Serbian Ministry of Foreign Affairs towards countries that would recognise the possible unilateral independence:

– The Serbian government has been examining that issue for a long time, and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs will act in line with a collective decision of the government. It is still not beneficial to reveal what those measures would be, but I can say that the organs of the Republic of Serbia will do everything in their power, apart from the use of the armed forces, to prevent the enforcement of an illegitimate decision which would be a flagrant violation of the Constitution of Serbia, Resolution 1244 and all rules of international order.

Will those measures be applied gradually?

– Of course. It is not that we have only one card which we will throw on the table immediately. A sovereign state has a wide spectre of measures it can use. We will not abstain from using any of them in an adequate way to achieve the best effect. We will protect our national interests in the province and in general, and one of important interests is not to drag the country into isolation.

On the mandate of the OSCE mission in the province:

– We first of all think that every decision on the status or the way of managing the province must be brought in line with international law and confirmed in the Security Council. Of course, we want the OSCE to remain in Kosovo, although we are not fully satisfied with its work and we believe that a lot more could have been done. But this organisation must remain in the province in line with international law. That is why we offered to vote for the mission's budget in 2008, but we are not ready to support the mandate to longer than one month and that the OSCE then confirms its mandate every month. In the event that we do not remain within the international law, then we must revise our position on the international mission in the province, in accordance with new circumstances.

Does this refer to the EU mission as well, which is about to take over responsibilities from UNMIK?

– The EU mission is another thing. The presence of OSCE is defined by Resolution 1244, while that of the EU is not. Therefore, in the event that the EU takes over the role of UNMIK, our position is that such a decision must be made by the UN Security Council.