File photo of Vuk Jeremic
Author:
Tanjug
The government’s official web site gives excerpts of the interview.
On the previous year:
Serbia was in a very unfavourable position in 2008. Serbia has made a precedent in the Balkans, as it fights for the preservation of its sovereignty and territorial integrity through peaceful and diplomatic means. Despite the unilaterally declared independence of Kosovo-Metohija, Serbia succeeded to preserve peace and stability in the region. I did my best to implement the government’s foreign policy and will continue that way.
In my opinion Serbia has good relations with the EU, as well as with neighbouring countries, despite the great damage these countries have caused to Serbia by recognising Kosovo-Metohija independence. The transfer of the Kosovo issue from the political to the legal arena can be considered as Serbia’s great diplomatic success.
What is the reason Serbia did not support the adoption of the resolution against human rights violation in Iran?
Human rights are the most serious issues for the international community in the 21st century. Human rights are being seriously violated on one part of Serbia’s territory, i.e. in Kosovo-Metohija. Since Serbia’s diplomatic resources are restricted, it has clearly defined its foreign policy priorities, which are the protection of the Constitution, the preservation of good neighbouring relations and the acceleration of the EU integration process. Serbia did not hamper its relations with the EU by voting against the Iran resolution.
Will Serbia support the Iran initiative concerning the prevention of new resolutions against the use of nuclear weapons?
Serbia will carefully consider other countries’ foreign policy initiatives and decide on them in accordance with its foreign policy priorities. I do not want to talk about the issue until I am informed in detail. In my opinion, the prevention of nuclear weapon should be the international community’s priority.
On negotiations regarding the status of Kosovo:
Serbia works on providing appropriate conditions for further negotiations. Serbia is strongly against the division of its territory and hopes to reach a compromise in this respect.
Is the idea of the province’s division more realistic than that of returning Kosovo within Serbia’s borders?
We rely on international law. We expect that once the International Court of Justice (ICJ) looks into the decision of unilateral declaration of the province’s independence, a process which will take around two years, the decision will be made that the Kosovo authorities violated this right. I do not expect that the recognition process will continue after the ICJ’s decision and Kosovo will not be able to join any international organisations. The Kosovo authorities may permanently remain in this semi-defined status, at which point they will be obliged to return to the negotiating table. A compromise must be found.
Which solution might that be?
This should not be prejudged. We should leave as much space as possible for finding a solution. With the ICJ’s decision it will be clear that this is necessary in order to deal with this complex institutional and security issue.
What if Kosovo becomes an IMF member before ICJ’s decision?
We are most sensitive when it comes to the IMF because of the manner in which decisions are made in international financial institutions. It is a fact that voting rights in the IMF are such that the bearers of most of these rights are countries that have already recognised the province’s independence. Despite that, we will do all we can to prevent this from occurring before the ICJ declares its opinion. There is no way Kosovo can join a significant majority of the key international organisations. After the ICJ’s decision Kosovo will be neither here nor there. That is why it will be necessary to go back to the negotiating table. Previous talks were not conceived in such a way as to give room for success. Their foreign partners told Kosovo Albanians that unless a solution was found by December 10, 2007, they will get what they want. It is obvious that Albanians were not motivated to reach a solution.
In the future, will Serbia be on the side of those who are opposed to the EU and the USA in order to achieve its foreign policy goals?
EU membership is our strategic goal and as for the international arena, our steps there will be in line with our foreign policy priorities.
Would Serbia continue receiving Russia’s support if it had not closed the sale of NIS?
Naturally, Russia would have endorsed us. The sales contract is extremely favourable for Serbia. It will enable us a long-term energy supply. NIS was probably overpriced. From the purely economic standpoint, this arrangement is one of the most favourable ones for Serbia, bearing in mind all the other privatisations we have conducted.
Why hasn’t Serbia received guarantees for constructing a gas pipe line?
The guarantees we received are as high as they get and we have no reason for doubt. The moment Russia decides to construct the pipe line, it will got through Serbia. We are entering an extremely strenuous period. The guarantees for the completion of the oil and gas arrangement are the greatest guarantees Serbia has ever been given. There is trust in our inter-state relations and if that trust is lost, there are international institutions we can turn to.