cdn.un.orgcdn.un.org/unyearbook/yun/chapter_pdf/2001YUN/2001_P1_CH5.pdf · Chapter V Political and security questions Europe and the Mediterranean In2001,therewereencouragingsignsthatanum-ber

Chapter V Political and security questions

Europe and the Mediterranean

In 2001, there were encouraging signs that a num-ber of countries in Europe and the Mediterra-nean were moving closer towards achieving theirgoal of peace and security. In the Balkans, thecontentious issue of State succession was finallysettled on 29 June, when the States successors tothe former Socialist Federal Republic of Yugosla-via (SFRY) signed the Agreement on SuccessionIssues, providing for the distribution of SFRY’srights, obligations, assets and liabilities. Follow-ing the change of Government in the Federal Re-public of Yugoslavia (FRY) in 2000, relations withCroatia improved, leading to their joint state-ment of intent to further normalize bilateral re-lations and to elaborate a protocol on the identifi-cation of borders and the delimitation on landand sea, for which they established an inter-Stateborder commission on 10 December.

The United Nations Mission in Bosnia andHerzegovina continued to pursue its MandateImplementation Plan, which was due to be com-pleted by the end of 2002. In anticipation of thePlan’s completion, the Security Council began toconsider proposals as to what form continued UNand international civilian presences in Bosniaand Herzegovina would take thereafter.

Between March and May, the United NationsInterimAdministrationMissioninKosovo,headedby the Special Representative of the Secretary-General, began laying the foundations for the in-terim period of self-government in the FRY prov-ince of Kosovo. That culminated in the SpecialRepresentative’s promulgation on 16 May of aConstitutional Framework for Provisional Self-Government, which paved the way for Kosovo-wide elections on 17 November. Formation of acoalition Government and establishment of theprovisionalself-governmentinstitutionsfollowed.

On the Secretary-General’s recommendation,the Security Council, on 10 September, termi-nated the sanctions imposed on FRY and dis-solved the committee that had been monitoringthem. With the improved situation in the groundsafety zone—the buffer zone between Kosovo andSerbia proper—the North Atlantic Treaty Or-ganization allowed the phased return of Yugoslavforces to the area.

In theformerYugoslavRepublicofMacedonia,thePresidentandthe leadersof thefourmainpol-itical parties signed a Framework Agreement on

13 August. Among its main provisions were thecessation of hostilities, the voluntary disarma-ment and disbandment of the ethnic Albanianarmedgroups,anunconditionalceasefireandthedevelopment of a decentralized Government.

In Cyprus, the leaders of the Greek and Turk-ish Cypriot communities, in a 4 December face-to-face meeting in the presence of the Secretary-General’s Personal Adviser for Cyprus, agreedto hold direct talks under the auspices of theSecretary-General’s mission of good offices. Theyfurther agreed on the conditions for such talks,which would begin on 16 January 2002.

In Georgia, however, the peace process aimedat resolving the Georgian/Abkhaz armed con-flict remained stalled. The long-awaited paperon the basic principles for the distribution ofcompetencies between Tbilisi and Sukhumi wasfinalized in mid-December. The paper, whichthe Special Representative of the Secretary-General transmitted to the parties, was to serve asthe basis for substantial negotiations towards acomprehensive settlement, including a defini-tion of the political status of Abkhazia within theState of Georgia. Adamant in its rejection of anysuggestion that Abkhazia was within the State ofGeorgia, the Abkhaz party was not prepared toreceive the paper.

Attempts to bring about a settlement in theNagorny-Karabakh region of Azerbaijan alsoproved unsuccessful. Both sides of the conflictremained entrenched in their positions: Azerbai-jan maintained that Nagorny Karabakh was anintegral part of the State of Azerbaijan, whileNagorny Karabakh’s leadership considered the re-gion a separate, independent entity, referring toit as the “Nagorno-Karabakh Republic”.

The former Yugoslavia

UN operations

The United Nations continued efforts to re-store peace and stability in the territories of theformer Yugoslavia through its peacekeeping mis-sions: the United Nations Mission in Bosnia andHerzegovina (UNMIBH), the United Nations Mis-sion of Observers in Prevlaka (UNMOP) and the

320 Political and security questions

YUN01—REPROSjUNE 10 2003

United Nations Interim Administration Missionin the FRY province of Kosovo (UNMIK). TheSecretary-General’s Special Envoys for the Bal-kans, Carl Bildt (Sweden) and Eduard Kukan(Slovakia), also continued in their functions.

The Security Council extended the mandatesof UNMIBH, which included the InternationalPolice Task Force, until 21 June 2002 and ofUNMOP until 15 January 2002.

The Secretary-General, on 1 March [S/2001/194], informed the Security Council Presidentthat he had asked his Special Envoys to continuetheir efforts until midyear, and beyond if re-quired, to promote peace and stability in the Bal-kans. The Council noted that request on 6 March[S/2001/195].

Financing of previouspeacekeeping operations

UNPF and UNPF-HQIn March [A/55/840], the Secretary-General, in

response to General Assembly resolution 54/269[YUN 2000, p. 325], submitted the financial per-formance report of the United Nations Protec-tion Force (UNPROFOR), which ended in 1999, theUnited Nations Confidence Restoration Opera-tion in Croatia (UNCRO), which ended in 1996,the United Nations Preventive Deployment Force(UNPREDEP), which ended in 1999—known col-lectively as the United Nations Peace Forces(UNPF)—and UNPF headquarters (UNPF-HQ).

Reimbursements to troop-contributing Gov-ernments for troop costs had been made in full,apart from $1,358,146 being held in accounts pay-able awaiting payment instructions from oneGovernment. Also being held in accounts pay-able were certified claims totalling $219,991,166for amounts owed for contingent-owned equip-ment and $15,022,361 for related losses. An esti-mated $29 million in additional claims for equip-ment losses was awaiting approval. Claims forgoods and services amounting to $12.8 millionwere recorded in accounts payable as at 31 De-cember 2000.

The unencumbered balance of appropriationsstood at $174,743,027 gross ($175,519,370 net); how-ever, there was no corresponding cash balance.In addition, although the operating deficitdecreased from $353,288,018 in 1999 to$305,889,451 in 2000, the shortage of cash in theUNPF special account remained a critical prob-lem, owing to the high level of unpaid assessedcontributions to UNPF, which, at 31 December2000, totalled $616,724,373. Consequently, certi-fied government claims had had to be placed inaccounts payable.

In the light of the chronic cash shortage of thecombined forces, the Secretary-General soughtthe Assembly’s agreement to the continued tem-porary suspension of financial regulations 4.3,4.4 and 5.2 (d) in respect of the remaining sur-plus of $174,743,027 gross ($175,519,370 net). TheAdvisory Committee on Administrative and Bud-getary Questions (ACABQ), in its April report[A/55/886], concurred with the Secretary-General’srecommendation.

GENERAL ASSEMBLY ACTION

On 14 June [meeting 103], the General Assembly,on the recommendation of the Fifth (Adminis-trative and Budgetary) Committee [A/55/961],adopted resolution 55/265 without vote [agendaitem 140].

Financing of the United Nations Protection Force,the United Nations Confidence Restoration

Operation in Croatia, the United NationsPreventive Deployment Force and the

United Nations Peace Forces headquartersThe General Assembly,Having considered the report of the Secretary-General

on the financing of the United Nations ProtectionForce, the United Nations Confidence Restoration Op-eration in Croatia, the United Nations Preventive De-ployment Force and the United Nations Peace Forcesheadquarters and the related report of the AdvisoryCommittee on Administrative and Budgetary Ques-tions,

Recalling Security Council resolutions 727(1992) of8 January 1992 and 740(1992) of 7 February 1992, inwhich the Council endorsed the sending of a group ofmilitary liaison officers to Yugoslavia to promote main-tenance of the ceasefire,

Recalling also Security Council resolution 743(1992)of 21 February 1992, by which the Council establishedthe United Nations Protection Force, and the subse-quent resolutions by which the Council extended andexpanded its mandate,

Recalling further Security Council resolution 981(1995) of 31 March 1995, by which the Council estab-lished the United Nations Confidence Restoration Op-eration in Croatia, to be known as UNCRO,

Recalling Security Council resolution 983(1995) of 31March 1995, by which the Council decided that theUnited Nations Protection Force within the formerYugoslav Republic of Macedonia should be known asthe United Nations Preventive Deployment Force,

Recalling also Security Council resolution 1025(1995)of 30 November 1995, in which the Council decided toterminate the mandate of the United Nations Confi-dence Restoration Operation in Croatia on 15 January1996,

Recalling further Security Council resolution 1031(1995) of 15 December 1995, in which the Council de-cided to terminate the mandate of the United NationsProtection Force on the date on which the Secretary-General reported that the transfer of authority fromthe United Nations Protection Force to the Implemen-tation Force had taken place,

Europe and the Mediterranean 321

YUN01—REPROS-cxsjUNE 19 2003

Recalling the letter dated 1 February 1996 from thePresident of the Security Council to the Secretary-General, informing him of the Council’s concurrencein principle that the United Nations Preventive Deploy-ment Force should become an independent mission,

Recalling also its resolution 46/233 of 19 March 1992on the financing of the United Nations ProtectionForce and its subsequent resolutions and decisionsthereon, the latest of which was resolution 54/269 of 15June 2000,

Reaffirming that the costs of the combined Forces areexpenses of the Organization to be borne by MemberStates in accordance with Article 17, paragraph 2, of theCharter of the United Nations,

Recalling its previous decisions regarding the factthat, in order to meet the expenditures caused by thecombined Forces, a different procedure is requiredfrom that applied to meet expenditures of the regularbudget of the United Nations,

Taking into account the fact that the economicallymore developed countries are in a position to makerelatively larger contributions and that the economi-cally less developed countries have a relatively limitedcapacity to contribute towards such operations,

Bearing in mind the special responsibilities of theStates permanent members of the Security Council, asindicated in General Assembly resolution 1874(S-IV) of27 June 1963, in the financing of such operations,

Noting with appreciation that voluntary contributionshave been made to the combined Forces by certain Gov-ernments,

Mindful of the fact that it is essential to provide thecombined Forces with the necessary financial re-sources to enable them to meet their outstanding lia-bilities,

1. Takes note of the status of contributions to thecombined Forces as at 30 April 2001, including the con-tributions outstanding in the amount of 615.8 millionUnited States dollars, representing 13 per cent of thetotal assessed contributions from the inception of theUnited Nations Protection Force to the period ending30 June 1997, notes that some 63 per cent of the Mem-ber States have paid their assessed contributions in full,and urges all other Member States concerned, in par-ticular those in arrears, to ensure payment of their out-standing assessed contributions in full;

2. Expresses its appreciation to those Member Stateswhich have paid their assessed contributions in full;

3. Expresses concern about the financial situationwith regard to peacekeeping activities, in particular asregards the reimbursements to troop contributors thatbear additional burdens owing to overdue payments byMember States of their assessments;

4. Also expresses concern at the delay experienced bythe Secretary-General in deploying and providing ade-quate resources to some recent peacekeeping missions,in particular those in Africa;

5. Emphasizes that all future and existing peace-keeping missions shall be given equal and non-discriminatory treatment in respect of financial andadministrative arrangements;

6. Also emphasizes that all peacekeeping missionsshall be provided with adequate resources for the effec-tive and efficient discharge of their respective man-dates;

7. Endorses the conclusions and recommendationscontained in the report of the Advisory Committee onAdministrative and Budgetary Questions, and requeststhe Secretary-General to ensure their full implementa-tion;

8. Decides to suspend for the immediate futurethe provisions of regulations 4.3, 4.4 and 5.2 (d) of thefinancial regulations of the United Nations in respectof the remaining surplus of 174,743,027 dollars gross(175,519,370 dollars net) in order to allow for reimburse-ments to troop contributors and in the light of the cashshortage of the combined Forces, and requests theSecretary-General to provide an updated report in oneyear;

9. Emphasizes that no peacekeeping mission shall befinanced by borrowing funds from other active peace-keeping missions;

10. Decides to include in the provisional agenda ofits fifty-sixth session the item entitled “Financing ofthe United Nations Protection Force, the UnitedNations Confidence Restoration Operation in Croatia,the United Nations Preventive Deployment Force andthe United Nations Peace Forces headquarters”.

On 24 December, the Assembly decided thatthe item on the financing of UNPROFOR, UNCRO,UNPREDEP and UNPF-HQ would remain for con-sideration during its resumed fifty-sixth (2002)session (decision 56/464) and that the FifthCommittee should continue to consider the itemat that session (decision 56/458).

UNTAES and UN Civilian Police Support GroupBy decision 55/501 of 7 September, the Gen-

eral Assembly included in the draft agenda of itsfifty-sixth session the item on financing of theUnited Nations Transitional Administration forEastern Slavonia, Baranja and Western Sirmium(UNTAES) and the Civilian Police Support Group.

On 24 December, the Assembly decided thatthe item on the financing of UNTAES and theCivilian Police Support Group would remainfor consideration during its resumed fifty-sixth(2002) session (decision 56/464) and that theFifth Committee should continue to consider theitem at that session (decision 56/458).

UNPREDEPThe General Assembly, at its resumed fifty-

fifth (2001) session, considered the Secretary-General’s September 2000 report [A/55/390] onthe final disposition of UNPREDEP’s assets [YUN2000, p. 328], seeking authority from the Assemblyfor the transfer to the Government of the formerYugoslav Republic of Macedonia (FYROM) of as-sets consisting of observation towers and non-expendable equipment within the observationposts with an inventory value of $1,705,200.

ACABQ, in its related report [A/55/870], recom-mended approval of the transfer. Noting, how-



ever, that the transfer had already been madeunder “temporary possession” arrangementspending the Assembly’s approval, ACABQ ob-served that such proposals should be submittedto it before the actual transfer, whether under“temporary possession” or otherwise. Notingalso that assets of $79,600 had been written off asunaccounted for due to the liquidation team’s in-ability to identify the names of military officialswho received some of the equipment provided tothe battalions, ACABQ trusted that, since the fieldassets control system (see p. 102) was fully opera-tional, such instances would be reduced, pointingout that, as a general rule, UN officials should bedesignated to receive, inspect and report onequipment provided to missions.

By decision 55/484 of 14 June, the Assemblytook note of the Secretary-General’s report andthe related ACABQ report, and approved thedonation of observation towers and non-expendable equipment within the observationposts to FYROM.

On 24 December, the Assembly decided thatthe item on UNPREDEP’s financing would remainfor consideration at its resumed fifty-sixth (2002)session (decision 56/464) and that the FifthCommittee should continue to consider the itemat that session (decision 56/458).

State succession issues

The High Representative for the Implementa-tion of the Peace Agreement on Bosnia and Her-zegovina [YUN 1995, p. 544] reported in July [S/2001/723] that, in accordance with his mandate, he, to-gether with the Special Negotiator, Sir ArthurWatts (United Kingdom), mediated the finalround of negotiations for the succession of theSocialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (SFRY) inVienna. That resulted in the Agreement on Suc-cession Issues, providing for the distribution ofthe rights, obligations, assets and liabilities ofSFRY, which its five successor States—Bosnia andHerzegovina, Croatia, Slovenia, FYROM and theFederal Republic of Yugoslavia (FRY)—initialledon 25 May. The High Representative reported inSeptember [S/2001/868] that the five States hadformally signed the Agreement on 29 June in Vi-enna.

The General Assembly, in resolution 56/215(see p. 327), welcomed the Agreement and its im-plementation.

Prevlaka peninsula

In 2001, the United Nations continued to ex-plore ways to advance the political process relat-ing to the dispute over the Prevlaka peninsula,

particularly through the United Nations Missionof Observers in Prevlaka (UNMOP), which moni-tored the demilitarization of the peninsula andneighbouring territories in Croatia and FRY. TheSecurity Council renewed UNMOP’s mandate un-til 15 January 2002.

As relations between the two countries im-proved and with their declarations of intent towork towards a negotiated settlement, bilateralnegotiations on Prevlaka, which had been stalledfor two years, resumed in June 2001. The leadersof the two countries also issued a joint statementon the further normalization of bilateral rela-tions, in accordance with the 1996 Agreement onNormalization of Relations between them [YUN1996, p. 340]. In November, their Foreign Ministersagreed to elaborate a protocol on the identifica-tion of borders and the delimitation on land andsea. As a follow-up, the first meeting was held on10 December, at which an inter-State border com-mission was established.

Despite the long-standing violations of theagreed security regime in the UN-controlledzones, including limitations on the free move-ment of UN military observers, the situationthere remained stable and calm. In June, Croatiadisbanded its Special Police stationed on its sideof the demilitarized zone (DMZ), replacing it witha Police Intervention Unit, and also significantlyreduced the number of its regular police there.

Bilateral negotiations

On 5 January [S/2001/13], Croatia said that theemergence of the new Government in FRY [YUN2000, p. 384] raised hopes that an overall lasting so-lution could be reached on the question of Pre-vlaka through bilateral contacts between Croatiaand FRY and its Republic of Montenegro. Croatiaexpected bilateral talks to commence as soonas possible and declared its intention to takeaccount of FRY’s security concerns and to endeav-our to resolve the issue in the spirit of good-neighbourliness. The Secretary-General’s Aprilreport on UNMOP [S/2001/350] indicated, however,that no further meetings of the negotiating teamshad taken place and the parties continued to holddivergent views on resolving the dispute.

FRY stated its belief on 3 July [S/2001/668] thatconditions existed for the two countries to arriveat a satisfactory solution through negotiations,with full respect for the interests of both sides.Regardless of their differing views, FRY contin-ued to believe that gradualism, the strengtheningof confidence and the taking of specific stepsaimed at creating conditions conducive to reach-ing a final agreement on the determination ofland, water and sea borders between FRY andCroatia were the best way to proceed.



In his July report on UNMOP [S/2001/661], theSecretary-General said that the two countries hadheld meetings on bilateral issues, including Pre-vlaka. In addition to working-level discussions,Croatian and Yugoslav officials had met in theYugoslav capital of Belgrade on 11 June and inVienna on 28 June. The United Nations did notparticipate in those meetings, during which thePrevlaka issue was broached.

On 9 July [S/2001/680], Croatia welcomed theresumption of bilateral contacts. It said that it wasencouraged by FRY’s political will to engage ac-tively in the quest for a solution to the Prevlakaissue and was ready to start negotiations on thedelimitation of the maritime border based on in-ternational law as soon as possible.

In a later report on UNMOP [S/2002/1], theSecretary-General said that Croatia and FRY con-tinued to maintain contacts. Their Foreign Min-isters met on 11 November in New York andissued a joint statement declaring their intentionto set up an inter-State commission to addressoutstanding issues concerning their commonland and sea borders and to examine further theissue of demilitarization. In separate meetingswith the Secretary-General on 14 November, theyexpressed their Governments’ commitment tocontinue working bilaterally towards a peaceful,negotiated solution to the Prevlaka dispute. TheSecretary-General assured them of UN assist-ance, should it be required.

On 28 December [S/2001/1301], FRY informedthe Security Council President that, as a follow-up to the Foreign Ministers’ November decisionto elaborate a protocol on the principle of theidentification of borders and the delimitation onland and sea, a meeting was held on 10 Decem-ber, at which an inter-State border commissionwas established.

Normalization of relations

The Presidents of Croatia, Stjepan Mesic, andof FRY, Vojislav Kostunica, issued a joint state-ment on their talks on 8 June in Verbania, Italy[A/56/116-S/2001/617], on the state of relations be-tween their countries and on the situation in thebroader region. They announced their readinessto continue to maintain periodic contacts in orderto give a fresh impetus to the region’s stabiliza-tion and reaffirmed their commitment in princi-ple to a policy of peace and resolution of all out-standing questions through negotiations.

The Presidents acknowledged that Croatia-FRYrelations should be built with a view to achievingfull normalization and be expanded in all areasof mutual interest. To that end, special emphasisshould be placed on facilitating the free move-ment of persons, commodities and ideas. Imple-

mentation of existing bilateral agreements shouldcontinue and measures undertaken to ensure theequal protection of minorities in both countries.All obstacles to the return of refugees and ex-pelled persons should be removed, and maxi-mum efforts exerted to ensure that persons miss-ing in action were accounted for.

They acknowledged that a stable and demo-cratic Bosnia and Herzegovina based on the Gen-eral Framework Agreement for Peace in Bosniaand Herzegovina [YUN 1995, p. 544] was in the last-ing interest, not only of their two countries, butalso of the region as a whole, and reaffirmed thatCroatia and FRY had no claims to any part of theterritory of Bosnia and Herzegovina.

UN Mission of Observers in Prevlaka (UNMOP)

The United Nations Mission of Observers inPrevlaka continued in 2001 to monitor the de-militarization of the disputed Prevlaka peninsulaand the neighbouring areas in Croatia and FRY,to hold periodic meetings with local authoritiesand to maintain contact with the Belgrade andZagreb authorities. It further maintained co-operation with the multinational StabilizationForce (SFOR) in Bosnia and Herzegovina (seep. 344). UNMOP’s areas of responsibility were intwo UN-designated zones: the DMZ (Yellow Zone)and the UN-controlled zone (Blue Zone). Until15 September, UNMOP, which comprised 27 mili-tary observers, had been under the command ofChief Military Observer Colonel Graeme RogerWilliams (New Zealand). He was replaced byColonel Rodolfo Sergio Mujica (Argentina), whowas appointed through an exchange of letters be-tween the Secretary-General [S/2001/872] and theSecurity Council [S/2001/873].

The Council extended UNMOP’s mandatetwice during the year, to 15 July 2001 and to 15January 2002.

Although an independent mission, UNMOPwas, for administrative and budgetary purposes,treated as part of UNMIBH. (For the financing ofUNMOP, see p. 337.)

SECURITY COUNCIL ACTION

On 12 January [meeting 4256], the Security Coun-cil, having considered the Secretary-General’sDecember2000reportonUNMOP[YUN2000,p.335],unanimously adopted resolution 1335 (2001).Thedraft [S/2001/34]waspreparedinpriorconsul-tations.

The Security Council,Recalling all its earlier relevant resolutions, includ-

ing resolutions 779(1992) of 6 October 1992, 981(1995)of 31 March 1995, 1088(1996) of 12 December 1996,1147(1998) of 13 January 1998, 1183(1998) of 15 July1998, 1222(1999) of 15 January 1999, 1252(1999) of 15



July 1999, 1285(2000) of 13 January 2000, 1305(2000)of 21 June 2000 and 1307(2000) of 13 July 2000,

Having considered the report of the Secretary-Generalof 29 December 2000 on the United Nations Mission ofObservers in Prevlaka,

Recalling the letters addressed to its President fromthe Chargé d’affaires a.i. of the Permanent Mission ofthe Federal Republic of Yugoslavia of 22 December2000 and from the Permanent Representative of Croa-tia of 5 January 2001, concerning the disputed issue ofPrevlaka,

Reaffirming once again its commitment to the indepen-dence, sovereignty and territorial integrity of theRepublic of Croatia within its internationally recog-nized borders,

Noting once again that the Joint Declaration signed atGeneva on 30 September 1992 by the Presidents of theRepublic of Croatia and the Federal Republic of Yugo-slavia, in particular articles 1 and 3 thereof, the latterreaffirming their agreement concerning the demilita-rization of the Prevlaka peninsula,

Noting with satisfaction that the overall situation inthe area of responsibility of the Mission has remainedstable and calm,

Reiterating its concern about continuing violations ofthe demilitarization regime, including limitationsplacedonthefreemovementofUnitedNationsmilitaryobservers,

Noting with satisfaction that the opening of crossingpoints between Croatia and the Federal Republic ofYugoslavia in the demilitarized zone continues to facili-tate civilian and commercial traffic in both directionswithout security incidents and continues to represent asignificant confidence-building measure in the nor-malization of relations between the two parties, andurging the parties to utilize these openings as a basis forfurther confidence-building measures to achieve thenormalization of relations between them,

Welcoming the commitment of the democratic gov-ernments of Croatia and the Federal Republic of Yugo-slavia, as expressed by the Prime Minister of the Fed-eral Government of the Federal Republic of Yugoslaviaand the Foreign Minister of Croatia, to resume as soonas possible bilateral talks on the disputed issue of Pre-vlaka pursuant to the Agreement on Normalization ofRelations between the Republic of Croatia and the Fed-eral Republic of Yugoslavia of 23 August 1996, whichwould end a long period during which no substantiveprogress was made on the issue,

Expressing its concern over the delay in putting in placea comprehensive demining programme by the parties,

Commending the role played by the Mission, and not-ing that the presence of the United Nations militaryobservers continues to be essential to maintaining con-ditions that are conducive to a negotiated settlement ofthe disputed issue of Prevlaka,

Recalling the relevant principles contained in theConvention on the Safety of the United Nations andAssociated Personnel of 9 December 1994 and thestatement of its President of 10 February 2000,

Welcoming and encouraging efforts by the UnitedNations to sensitize peacekeeping personnel in the pre-vention and control of HIV/AIDS and other communi-cable diseases in all its peacekeeping operations,

1. Authorizes the United Nations military observersto continue monitoring the demilitarization of the

Prevlaka peninsula, in accordance with resolutions779(1992) and 981(1995) and paragraphs 19 and 20 ofthe report of the Secretary-General of 13 December1995, until 15 July 2001;

2. Reiterates its call upon the parties to cease all vio-lations of the demilitarized regime in the UnitedNations designated zones, to take steps further to re-duce tension and to improve safety and security in thearea, to cooperate fully with the United Nations mili-tary observers and to ensure their safety and full andunrestricted freedom of movement;

3. Calls upon the parties to resume talks on the dis-puted issue of Prevlaka as soon as possible and encour-ages them to make use of the recommendations and op-tions to develop confidence-building measures withwhich they were provided pursuant to its request inresolution 1252(1999) with a view to, inter alia, furtherfacilitating the freedom of movement of the civilianpopulation, and requests the Secretary-General to re-port by 15 April 2001;

4. Urges once again that the parties abide by theirmutual commitments and implement fully the Agree-ment on Normalization of Relations between the Re-public of Croatia and the Federal Republic of Yugosla-via, and stresses in particular the urgent need for themto fulfil rapidly and in good faith their commitment toreach a negotiated resolution of the disputed issue ofPrevlaka in accordance with article 4 of the Agreement;

5. Requests the parties to continue to report at leastbimonthly to the Secretary-General on the status oftheir bilateral negotiations;

6. Reiterates its call upon the parties to put a compre-hensive demining programme in place in the identifiedminefields in the area of responsibility of the UnitedNations Mission of Observers in Prevlaka;

7. Requests the United Nations military observersand the multinational Stabilization Force authorized bythe Council in resolution 1088(1996) of 12 December1996 and extended by resolution 1305(2000) of 21 June2000 to cooperate fully with each other;

8. Decides to remain seized of the matter.

Reports of Secretary-General (April andJuly). The Secretary-General, in his April reporton UNMOP [S/2001/350], said that the situation inthe DMZ and the UN-controlled zone remainedstable and calm. In the latter zone, the long-standing violations of the security regime re-mained unchanged, with both parties continuingto maintain police positions on their respectivesides of the zone and manned Croatian and Mon-tenegrin checkpoints at Cape Kobila. On 21March, the Chief Military Observer, escorting avisiting representative of a Security Councilmember, was denied permission to proceedthrough the Croatian-erected checkpoint. In vio-lation of the regime forbidding entry of civiliansinto the zone, a civilian van was observed withinit on 17 March, reportedly conducting a surveyon behalf of the Croatian telecommunicationsauthorities.

No new developments were reported concern-ing the 1999 package of recommendations and



options for confidence-building [YUN 1999, p. 312]conveyed to the parties by the Secretariat. Duringrecent consultations with UNMOP, neither partyexpressed an interest in pursuing the options thatformed part of the package.

The Secretary-General said it was incumbenton the parties to resume discussions aimed atreaching a negotiated solution. In that regard,the package for confidence-building mentionedabove remained available as a way of achievingprogress, and UNMOP stood ready to assist in thedevelopment of practical arrangements to giveeffect to any agreement that the parties mightreach. He intended to explore with them ways tomove the political process forward.

In his July report [S/2001/661], the Secretary-General advised the Council that UNMOP hadbeen informed by Croatia that it was disbandingthe Special Police that helped to maintain controlof the DMZ and replacing it with a newly formedPolice Intervention Unit and regular uniformedpolice. The number of Croatian police stationedin the DMZ had since been significantly reduced.However, there was no change in the dispositionof the Montenegrin Border Police and SpecialPolice personnel stationed on the Yugoslav side.On 19 and 22 June, Croatian officials at theBrgat/Ivancia crossing point between Bosnia andHerzegovina and Croatia prevented UN vehiclescarrying administrative supplies from UNMIBHto UNMOP from transiting through Croatia.

In the UN-controlled zone, where the numberof Croatian police stationed had also been re-duced, each side currently maintained a strengthof 10 police. The agreed security regime in thezone continued to be violated by both sides per-mitting the unauthorized entry of civilians, in-cluding: police-escorted busloads of some 100sightseers from Croatia on 16 April; a vehiclebearing Croatian military licence plates on 25April; and, on 29 April, some 60 vehicles fromCroatia carrying about 120 persons protesting agovernment decision on land ownership.

The Secretary-General concluded that, whilethe parties remained committed to reaching a ne-gotiated solution on Prevlaka, he was of the viewthat more time was required for progress to bemade. Croatia’s reduction of the number of itspolice in the DMZ reflected its confidence that thearea was likely to remain calm and stable—an as-sessment that accorded with UNMOP’s. To ensurethat calm and to maintain the stability essentialfor meaningful progress towards a political settle-ment, the Secretary-General recommended thatUNMOP’s mandate be extended for a further sixmonths, to 15 January 2002.

That recommendation was supported byCroatia and FRY in letters of 9 [S/2001/680] and

3 [S/2001/668] July, respectively, to the CouncilPresident.


On 11 July [meeting 4346], the Security Councilunanimously adopted resolution 1362(2001).The draft [S/2001/681] was prepared in consulta-tions among Council members.

The Security Council,Recalling all its earlier relevant resolutions, includ-

ing resolutions 779(1992) of 6 October 1992, 981(1995)of 31 March 1995, 1088(1996) of 12 December 1996,1147(1998) of 13 January 1998, 1183(1998) of 15 July1998, 1222(1999) of 15 January 1999, 1252(1999) of 15July 1999, 1285(2000) of 13 January 2000, 1307(2000)of 13 July 2000, 1335(2001) of 12 January 2001 and1357(2001) of 21 June 2001,

Having considered the report of the Secretary-Generalof 3 July 2001 on the United Nations Mission of Ob-servers in Prevlaka,

Recalling the letters to its President from the Chargéd’affaires a.i. of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia of5 July 2001 and from the Chargé d’affaires a.i. of theRepublic of Croatia of 9 July 2001 addressed to thePresident of the Security Council concerning the dis-puted issue of Prevlaka,

Reaffirming once again its commitment to the indepen-dence, sovereignty and territorial integrity of the Re-public of Croatia within its internationally recognizedborders,

Noting once again the Joint Declaration signed atGeneva on 30 September 1992 by the Presidents of theRepublic of Croatia and the Federal Republic of Yugo-slavia, in particular articles 1 and 3, the latter reaffirm-ing their agreement concerning the demilitarization ofthe Prevlaka peninsula, and the Agreement on Nor-malization of Relations between the Republic of Croa-tia and the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia of 23 August1996,

Noting with satisfaction that the overall situation in thearea of responsibility of the Mission has remained sta-ble and calm despite continuing violations of the de-militarization regime, including limitations placed onthe free movement of United Nations military observ-ers,

Noting with satisfaction that the opening of crossingpoints between Croatia and the Federal Republic ofYugoslavia in the demilitarized zone continues to facili-tate civilian and commercial traffic in both directionswithout security incidents and continues to represent asignificant confidence-building measure in the nor-malization of relations between the two parties, andurging the parties to utilize these openings as a basis forfurther confidence-building measures to achieve thenormalization of relations between them,

Welcoming the joint statement by the Presidents of theRepublic of Croatia and the Federal Republic of Yugo-slavia issued in Verbania, Italy, on 8 June 2001 in whichthey expressed their commitment to normalize the bi-lateral relations between their countries, with a specialemphasis on facilitating the free movement of persons,commodities and ideas, and to implement bilateralagreements already signed,



Commending the role played by the Mission, and not-ing that the presence of the United Nations militaryobservers continues to be essential to maintaining con-ditions that are conducive to a negotiated settlement ofthe disputed issue of Prevlaka,

Recalling the relevant principles contained in theConvention on the Safety of the United Nations andAssociated Personnel of 9 December 1994 and thestatement by its President of 9 February 2000,


1. Authorizes the United Nations military observersto continue monitoring the demilitarization of thePrevlaka Peninsula, in accordance with resolutions779(1992) and 981(1995) and paragraphs 19 and 20of the report of the Secretary-General of 13 Decem-ber 1995, until 15 January 2002, and requests theSecretary-General to continue to report to the Councilwhere appropriate;

2. Reiterates its call upon the parties to cease all vio-lations of the demilitarized regime in the UnitedNations designated zones, to cooperate fully with theUnited Nations military observers and to ensure theirsafety and full and unrestricted freedom of movement;

3. Welcomes the resumption of talks between theGovernments of the Republic of Croatia and the Fed-eral Republic of Yugoslavia, and urges the parties tocontinue their talks with the aim of fulfilling rapidlyand in good faith their commitment to a negotiatedresolution on the disputed issue of Prevlaka in accord-ance with article 4 of the Agreement on Normalizationof Relations;

4. Encourages the parties to consider all confidence-building measures, including the options provided tothem pursuant to resolution 1252(1999), that couldhelp facilitate a solution to the disputed issue of Pre-vlaka;

5. Requests the parties to continue to report at leastbimonthly to the Secretary-General on the status oftheir bilateral negotiations;

6. Requests the United Nations military observersand the multinational Stabilization Force authorized bythe Council in resolution 1088(1996) of 12 December1996 and extended by resolution 1357(2001) of 21 June2001 to cooperate fully with each other;


Further developments. In a later report onUNMOP [S/2002/1], the Secretary-General saidthat more than 85 per cent of the recorded unau-thorized entries in the UN-controlled zone in2001 had occurred from the Croatian side. On 21September, a twin-engine jet originating fromMontenegro overflew the zone, and, on 8 No-vember, Croatian workmen employed a trench-digger to lay a communications cable in the zone.

In November, Croatia began a demining pro-gramme in a section of the northern DMZ, whichwas to continue until May 2002. There was no sys-tematic demining on the Yugoslav side.

Bosnia and Herzegovina

In 2001, the United Nations Mission in Bosniaand Herzegovina (UNMIBH) continued its effortsto bring about as complete a fulfilment as possi-ble of the provisions set forth in the 1995 GeneralFramework Agreement for Peace in Bosnia andHerzegovina and the annexes thereto (collectivelythe Peace Agreement) [YUN 1995, p. 544] by the twomulti-ethnic entities of the Republic of Bosniaand Herzegovina: the Federation of Bosnia andHerzegovina (where mainly Bosnian Muslims(Bosniacs) and Bosnian Croats resided); and Re-publika Srpska (where mostly Bosnian Serbs re-sided).

As designated by the 1995 Peace Implementa-tion Conference [ibid., p. 547] and with the SecurityCouncil’s agreement in resolution 1031(1995)[YUN 1995, p. 548], the High Representative for theImplementation of the Peace Agreement on Bos-nia and Herzegovina, under the overall manage-ment of the Peace Implementation Council andits Steering Board and in cooperation with UN-MIBH, continued to monitor, mobilize and coor-dinate the implementation activities by the par-ties of the Peace Agreement’s civilian aspects[ibid., p. 547]. The multinational Stabilization Force(SFOR), under the command of the North Atlan-tic Treaty Organization (NATO), likewise contin-ued to oversee their compliance with the Agree-ment’s military aspects, in addition to lendingsupport to UNMIBH.

Progress in the peace implementation processand related political developments in the countryduring the year (detailed in the following sections)was reported at regular intervals to the Councilby the Secretary-General and by the High Rep-resentative and SFOR through the Secretary-General.

In anticipation of the completion of UNMIBH’score mandate by the end of 2002 as scheduled,the Council, in addition to extending UNMIBHuntil July of that year, began to consider whatform a continued UN and international civilianpresence in the country would take beyond 2002.


On 21 December [meeting 91], the General As-sembly adopted resolution 56/215 [draft: A/56/L.65 & Add.1] without vote [agenda item 40].

The situation in Bosnia and HerzegovinaThe General Assembly,Recalling its resolution 55/24 of 14 November 2000

and all previously adopted resolutions, as well as allrelevant resolutions of the Security Council, regardingthe situation in Bosnia and Herzegovina,



Reaffirming its support for the independence, sover-eignty, legal continuity and territorial integrity of Bos-nia and Herzegovina, within its internationally recog-nized borders, and also reaffirming its support for theequality of the three constituent peoples and others inBosnia and Herzegovina as a united country, with twomulti-ethnic entities, according to the General Frame-work Agreement for Peace in Bosnia and Herzegovinaand the annexes thereto (collectively the “Peace Agree-ment”), signed in Paris on 14 December 1995, whichconstitute the key mechanism for the achievement of adurable and just peace in Bosnia and Herzegovina,

Noting the significant progress that has been madesince 1995 in implementing the provisions of the PeaceAgreement, strengthening the rule of law in all of Bos-nia and Herzegovina, and consolidating Bosnia andHerzegovina as a modern democratic State and civic so-ciety, fully respectful of the rule of law and committedto encouraging economic growth and promoting well-being for all its citizens,

Welcoming the commitment of the Government tospeeding up the overall process of the reconstructionand democratization of Bosnia and Herzegovina, andnoting the gradual progress that has been made in thedevelopment of efficient common institutions of Bos-nia and Herzegovina,

Noting that corruption and the lack of transparencyseriously hamper the economic development of Bosniaand Herzegovina, reiterating the need to combat allcorruption, welcoming the important contributionmade in that regard by the Customs and Fiscal Assist-ance Office, and expressing its full support for theefforts of the Council of Ministers of Bosnia and Her-zegovina and local bodies and of others that are sup-portive in that regard,

Welcoming the overall progress that has been madein supporting the return of refugees to all parts of thecountry, and reaffirming the most important principlethat all who were forced to leave should feel free andsecure to return to their homes,

Noting the importance for the future of Bosniaand Herzegovina for prosecutors to conclude success-fully their investigation of war crimes and the where-abouts of those still missing after the war in Bosniaand Herzegovina, as well as the importance of fullcooperation with the International Tribunal for theProsecution of Persons Responsible for Serious Viola-tions of International Humanitarian Law Committedin the Territory of the Former Yugoslavia since 1991, es-pecially with regard to surrendering all alreadyindicted war criminals to the Tribunal,

Welcoming the efforts of the High Representative forthe Implementation of the Peace Agreement on Bosniaand Herzegovina, reaffirming the fundamental im-portance of strengthening all aspects of the rule of law,and noting in that regard the ruling of the Constitu-tional Court of Bosnia and Herzegovina on the equal-ity of the three constituent peoples throughout the ter-ritory of Bosnia and Herzegovina and progress madeby the United Nations Mission in Bosnia and Herze-govina in ensuring a fully representative police force,free of corruption and dedicated to enforcing the lawsof the country in an impartial way,

Reaffirming the importance for the future of Bosniaand Herzegovina of its successful integration intoEurope, noting in that regard the progress made in ful-

filling the conditions for entry into the Council ofEurope, especially the adoption of the electoral law,welcoming the progress made in fulfilling conditionstowards participation in the European Union Stabiliza-tion and Association Agreement, and stressing that theStability Pact for South-Eastern Europe provides an ad-ditional contribution to the improvement of regionalcooperation,

Welcoming the significant improvement of the overallmutual cooperation among the successor States offormer Yugoslavia and the region as a whole, also wel-coming the Memorandum of Understanding on intra-regional trade liberalization signed on 27 June 2001 inBrussels, the agreement reached in Vienna regardingthe succession of former Yugoslavia and its implemen-tation, and underlining the importance of theestablishment of diplomatic relations between the Fed-eral Republic of Yugoslavia and Bosnia and Herze-govina,

Reaffirming the need to combat corruption, smug-gling, human trafficking, organized crime, and ex-tremism and other illegal activities, and noting in thatregard the establishment of the State Border Service,which is expected to be completed in 2002,

Recognizing the importance of demining and assist-ance to mine victims for the safety of citizens of Bosniaand Herzegovina, and for the return of refugees andinternally displaced persons,

Welcoming the achievements, and encouraging fur-ther efforts, in reducing military assets in line with theAgreement on Subregional Arms Control, welcomingthe finalizing of the negotiations led by the Organiza-tion for Security and Cooperation in Europe within theframework of article V of annex 1-B of the PeaceAgreement, and emphasizing the importance of thedeclaration issued by the Joint Presidency of Bosniaand Herzegovina to commence the process of the for-mal admission of Bosnia and Herzegovina to the Part-nership for Peace,

1. Notes that it is the people and the Council of Min-isters of Bosnia and Herzegovina who are ultimatelyresponsible for the future of the country, and urgesthem to work rapidly and intently on economic reform,refugee returns, joint State institution-building andfull respect for the rule of law;

2. Calls for the full and early implementation ofthe General Framework Agreement for Peace in Bosniaand Herzegovina and the annexes thereto (collectivelythe “Peace Agreement”) which is essential for stabilityand cooperation in the region and the reintegration ofBosnia and Herzegovina at all levels;

3. Welcomes the progress that has been made to-wards the implementation of the Peace Agreement bythe Government and its commitment to the full, com-prehensive and consistent implementation thereof;

4. Also welcomes the prompt action of the State andentity institutions in adopting the comprehensive planof action to prevent terrorist activities, increase securityand protect people and property in Bosnia and Herze-govina, further welcomes the active role of Bosnia andHerzegovina in global efforts against terrorism, and inthat regard calls upon Bosnia and Herzegovina to workwith the international community to establish the StateBorder Service and have it fully deployed by the end of2002, in accordance with the time frame of the UnitedNations Mission in Bosnia and Herzegovina;



5. Supports fully the efforts of the High Represen-tative for the Implementation of the Peace Agreementon Bosnia and Herzegovina, in accordance with thePeace Agreement and subsequent declarations of thePeace Implementation Council, and notes the continu-ing need for the High Representative to use fully theauthority of his office to deal with obstructionists, reaf-firming the concept of “partnership” between thenewly elected authorities of Bosnia and Herzegovinaand the international community;

6. Encourages the political leadership of Bosnia andHerzegovina to extend cooperation with the States ofSouth-Eastern Europe so as to promote and strengthenstability and confidence in the region;

7. Urges the entity parliaments and cantonal assem-blies to implement promptly and fully the provisions ofthe ruling of the Constitutional Court of Bosnia andHerzegovina on the equality of all three constituentpeoples throughout the territory of Bosnia and Herze-govina, and also urges the Constitutional Court to rulefurther on the status of those other than the three con-stituent peoples;

8. Demands that all the parties to the Peace Agree-ment fulfil their obligations towards the InternationalTribunal for theProsecution of Persons Responsible forSerious Violations of International Humanitarian LawCommitted in the Territory of the Former Yugoslaviasince 1991, and encourages the authorities of Bosniaand Herzegovina to develop, in close cooperation withthe international community, national court capacitiesto investigate and prosecute cases of war crimes;

9. Urges Member States, taking into account theorders and requests of the International Tribunal, tocooperate fully with it, in particular with regard to sur-rendering indictees, and to provide adequate financialsupport to the Tribunal;

10. Reaffirms the right of refugees and displacedpersons to return voluntarily to their homes of originin accordance with annex 7 of the Peace Agreement,encourages the acceleration of the peaceful, orderlyand phased return of refugees and displaced persons,including in areas where they would be the ethnicminority, strongly condemns all acts of intimidation,violence and killings, including those acts designed todiscourage the voluntary return of refugees and dis-placed persons, demands that such acts be investigatedand prosecuted, supporting the effective engagementof the Commission for Real Property Claims of Dis-placed Persons and Refugees, and calls upon all sidesto implement the property laws imposed on 27 October1999, in particular by evicting illegal occupants fromthe homes of returning refugees, and to ensure respectfor individual rights to return and the establishment ofthe rule of law;

11. Encourages all concerned parties to provide in-formation on all persons unaccounted for through thetracing mechanisms of the International Committee ofthe Red Cross and to cooperate fully with the Commit-tee in its efforts to determine the identities, where-abouts and fate of those persons;

12. Welcomes the efforts of international and re-gional organizations, Member States and non-governmental organizations in Bosnia and Herze-govina, including through the Board of Donors and theSlovenian International Trust Fund for Demining andMine Victims Assistance, and calls upon Member

States to continue to support mine-action activities inBosnia and Herzegovina;

13. Stresses the importance of establishing, strength-ening and expanding throughout Bosnia and Herze-govina a free and pluralistic media, and deplores anyactions that seek to intimidate or restrict the freedom ofthe media;

14. Also stresses the importance of the restorationand rebuilding of the historical and cultural heritageof Bosnia and Herzegovina in its original form;

15. Further stresses the need for a more comprehen-sive approach to implementing economic reforms, andunderlines the fact that a self-sustainable, market-oriented economy operating in a single economic space,expeditious and transparent privatization, improvedbanking and capital markets, reformed financial sys-tems, the provision of adequate social protection andthe adoption by both entities of a law on pension re-forms that meet economic standards are crucial forachieving lasting peace and stability in Bosnia andHerzegovina;

16. Supports the efforts by the High Representativeand the Commander of the multinational StabilizationForce to weaken the continued political and economicinfluence of remaining parallel structures obstructingpeace implementation;

17. Notes that the authorities of Bosnia and Herzego-vina have defined the common defence policy of Bos-nia and Herzegovina, affirming the importance for thenational development of Bosnia and Herzegovina ofcreating, on the basis of agreed principles, a joint mili-tary command and seeking to establish a military struc-ture of the appropriate size based on future projectionsand the legitimate security needs of Bosnia and Herze-govina which will contribute to regional security, andencourages them to carry out its conclusions promptly,fully and in full accordance with the Peace Agreement;

18. Commends the efforts of the international com-munity, recognizes the continued importance of itsrole, welcomes its readiness to continue and streamlineits efforts towards a self-sustainable peace, and recallsthat the responsibility for consolidating peace andsecurity lies with the authorities of Bosnia and Herze-govina;

19. Decides to include in the provisional agenda ofits fifty-seventh session the item entitled “The situationin Bosnia and Herzegovina”.

On 24 December, the Assembly decided thatthe item on the situation in Bosnia and Herze-govina would remain for consideration duringits resumed fifty-sixth (2002) session (decision56/464).

Implementation of Peace Agreement

Communications. The Croat member of theBosnia and Herzegovina Joint Presidency, AnteJelavic, by a 6 February letter [S/2001/114] to theSecretary-General and the Security CouncilPresident, protested the recent decision by theMission of the Organization for Security andCooperation in Europe (OSCE) in Bosnia andHerzegovina that revised election rules and pro-



cedures in respect of the 11 November 2000 na-tional elections [YUN 2000, p. 349], specifically themode of electing Croat representatives to theHouse of Peoples of the Federation of Bosniaand Herzegovina. He claimed the decision de-prived the Federation’s Croat constituency of theright to elect its own representatives to that legis-lative body, in clear violation of the concept ofequal power-sharing established by the 1995Peace Agreement.

That the OSCE Mission’s representative hadcharacterized the decision as “unconstitutionalbut democratic” and that the country’s Constitu-tional Court had expressed itself as not compe-tent to assess the decision’s constitutional statuspointed to the inconsistency in the interpretationof the Peace Agreement and thus to the need forits reformulation. In the circumstances, Mr. Je-lavic called on the Council to mandate a confer-ence to review the Agreement’s implementationand necessary revision.

The European Union (EU), in a 22 Februarystatement [S/2001/181], welcomed the formationon that date of the new Council of Ministers inBosnia and Herzegovina and called on it to un-dertake serious reforms to improve the country’ssocial and economic situation and work for thebenefit of all its peoples. The EU also called on allpolitical parties to respect the results of the No-vember 2000 elections [YUN 2000, p. 349], addingthat it expected no further delay either in the for-mation of governments at all other levels or inthe election of delegates to the House of Peoplesat the State and Federation levels.

In an 8 March declaration [S/2001/212], the EUcondemned recent unilateral moves by the so-called Croat National Congress of Bosnia andHerzegovina led by the Croat Democratic Union(HDZ) to place itself outside the provisions of thePeace Agreement (see p. 339). It said such effortswere in vain and detrimental to the interests ofthe Bosnian Croats and all other peoples in Bos-nia and Herzegovina. It called, in particular, onthe Bosnian Croats to work within that country’slegal institutions to defend their legitimate inter-ests.

Security Council consideration. The SecurityCouncil, on 22 March [meeting 4303], was briefed byWolfgang Petritsch (Austria), High Representa-tive for the Implementation of the Peace Agree-ment on Bosnia and Herzegovina. He said that,while the results of the November 2000 generalelections in Bosnia and Herzegovina were seen asa disappointment, the shift to more moderateparties was both real and encouraging. Thatchange had led to the formation of the country’sfirst non-nationalist Government at the Statelevel, as well as in the mainly Bosniac-Croat Fed-

eration. In the predominantly Serb entity of Re-publika Srpska, a moderate technocrat headedthe Government. The country’s new State-levelPrime Minister, Bozidar Matic, had announcedplans to implement market reforms, create jobsand get the hundreds of thousands of citizenswho remained Bosnian refugees or displacedpersons to return to their homes.

However, the High Representative was forcedto remove Ante Jelavic, in March, as a member ofthe Joint Presidency and had banned his involve-ment with any political party, including HDZ,which he had led until recently. Three of hishard-line deputies were under the same ban. Mr.Jelavic had threatened the country’s constitu-tional order and peace. In particular, his HDZparty, claiming to speak for the Bosnian Croats,had announced a plan for self-rule. HDZ was sub-sequently banned by OSCE for breaching electionrules.

A record number of refugees (more than67,000) returned home in 2000, despite criminalincidents aimed at scaring them away. In January2001, the payments bureaux, the old communistmonopoly on financial transactions, were finallyclosed down and replaced by commercial banks.The controversial law to end the cycle of pensionpayment arrears was working and the angry pro-tests had stopped. The High Representative saidthat, unfortunately, he had had to impose toomany of the positive advances in Bosnia and Her-zegovina, but he believed that, with new admini-strations in place, the country for the first timehad leaders who wanted to get on with the pro-cess of governing themselves. Both the new Stateand entity governments had ambitious plans tofurther the reforms to attract domestic and for-eign investors and to balance official budgets.

Unfortunately, the High Representative alsohad to remove Edhem Bicakcic in February, untilrecently the Federation’s Prime Minister and asenior member of the Bosniac Party of Demo-cratic Action (SDA), from his post as director ofthe power utility, Elektroprivreda. Mr. Bicakcicwas under four separate criminal investigationsfor fraud and abuse of public office. His removalsent a clear signal to officials to clean up their actsand, along with the State-level court created to ar-bitrate international trade disputes, had donemuch to bolster investor confidence.

The High Representative further reportedthat he had decided to set up constitutional com-missions in both entities to ensure that the 2000Constitutional Court decision on the so-calledconstituent peoples’ case [YUN 2000, p. 349] was putin place on an interim basis until full implemen-tation later in the year. Additionally, he had es-tablished the Independent Judicial Commission



[ibid., p. 351] to effect reforms in the courts andprosecutors’ offices across the country.


On 22 March [meeting 4304], following consulta-tions among Security Council members, thePresident made statement S/PRST/2001/11 onbehalf of the Council:

The Security Council welcomes the briefing bythe High Representative for the implementation ofthe General Framework Agreement on Peace in Bos-nia and Herzegovina and the annexes thereto (col-lectively the Peace Agreement) on the situation inBosnia and Herzegovina and commends his effortsin implementing this agreement.

The Council encourages further regional politi-cal and economic cooperation, in compliance withthe principles of the sovereignty and territorial in-tegrity and the inviolability of the borders of Bosniaand Herzegovina and the other States of the region.

The Council welcomes the new State-level andentity-level Governments formed after the generalelections of 11 November 2000 and calls on them totake active measures to make further progress on thereturn of refugees, consolidation of the State institu-tions, and economic reform. It welcomes the pro-gress on creating a State Level Defence Identity infull compliance with the relevant provisions of thePeace Agreement and encourages the Presidency ofBosnia and Herzegovina to finalize the unresolveddetails without delay.

The Council welcomes the establishment of Con-stitutional Commissions to protect the vital interestof the constituent peoples to facilitate the implemen-tation of the “Constituent Peoples decision” of theConstitutional Court of Bosnia and Herzegovina of1 July 2000 and calls upon the entity parliaments toengage in the debate about the necessary amend-ments to their respective constitutions in the light ofproposals examined by the Constitutional Commis-sions.

The Council notes the recent conclusion of theAgreement on a Special Relationship between theFederal Republic of Yugoslavia and the RepublikaSrpska and urges the High Representative to moni-tor its implementation and any amendments to it, inorder to ensure that it remains consistent with theterritorial integrity and sovereignty of Bosnia andHerzegovina as a whole and with the Peace Agree-ment.

The Council condemns recent unilateral moves bythe so-called Croat National Congress to establishCroat self-rule in open contradiction of the provi-sions of the Peace Agreement, and calls on all partiesto work within the legal institutions and constitu-tional framework of Bosnia and Herzegovina andthe entities. It expresses its support for the HighRepresentative in taking actions against personsholding public office who are found to be in viola-tion of legal commitments made under the PeaceAgreement or the terms for its implementation.

The Council welcomes the progress made on thereturn of refugees and property law implementationin the year 2000, but remains concerned at the slow

pace of refugee return, particularly in urban areas.The Council insists on the responsibility of the localauthorities to accelerate the rate of return and prop-erty law implementation.

The Council urges all political parties in Bosniaand Herzegovina and their respective leaders toengage constructively within the legal institutions ofthat country in order to implement fully the PeaceAgreement.

Civilian aspects

The civilian aspects of the 1995 Peace Agree-ment [YUN 1995, p. 544] entailed a wide range ofactivities, including humanitarian aid, infra-structure rehabilitation, establishment of politi-cal and constitutional institutions, the promotionof respect for human rights and the holding offree and fair elections. The High Representative,who chaired the Steering Board of the Peace Im-plementation Council (PIC) and other key imple-mentation bodies, was the final authority with re-gard to implementing the civilian aspects of thePeace Agreement. UNMIBH, which comprised aUN civilian office, the International Police TaskForce (IPTF) and the Mine Action Centre (MAC),reported to the Secretary-General through theSpecial Representative and Coordinator ofUnited Nations Operations in Bosnia and Herze-govina, Jacques Paul Klein (United States).

The PIC Steering Board, which met regularlyat the political-director level, held meetings on 21June, 12 September, 30 October and 6 December,during which it discussed streamlining the inter-national civilian implementation of the PeaceAgreement (see p. 337).

Reports of High Representative. During theyear, the High Representative issued progress re-ports covering the periods from 1 October 2000to 23 February 2001 [S/2001/219], 24 February to11 June [S/2001/723] and 12 June to 25 August[S/2001/868]. A later report covered activities from26 August to the end of the year [S/2002/209]. Alldescribed activities in the civilian implementa-tion of the Peace Agreement, which he had beenmandated to monitor, mobilize and coordinate.(For details, see below under specific subjects.)

UN Mission in Bosniaand Herzegovina (UNMIBH)

Report of Secretary-General (June). On7 June [S/2001/571 & Corr.1], the Secretary-General,reporting on UNMIBH activities, said that, in thearea of police reform, registration of all policepersonnel, including prison staff, court police,the State Border Service and local Interpol, hadbeen completed by May. Of the 24,007 law en-forcement personnel registered, over 9,300 hadbeen granted provisional authorization to exer-



cise police powers. The core reform programmewould be completed by late 2002, with every lawenforcement officer appropriately vetted beforereceiving final certification. A criterion for certi-fication was the regularization of the housingstatus of police personnel, which continued, with1,129 of them having done so in the precedingyear. UNMIBH had repeatedly requested theHigh Representative to raise the salaries of policeto enable them to rent private housing and to givethem priority allocation of alternative municipalaccommodation. Meanwhile, UNMIBH had beenhelping them, on a case-by-case basis, to repos-sess their own property, qualify for reconstruc-tion assistance or find other legal accommoda-tion.

UNMIBH’s police training programme wasnearing conclusion, with compulsory courses ex-pected to be completed by June/July. Specializedtraining had been concluded, while training inhandling hazardous materials and exercises ininter-entity police cooperation were ongoing. InFebruary, UNMIBH issued a new policy for moni-toring and sanctioning local police performance,comprising “performance reports”, which re-corded minor acts of inadequate performance,and “non-compliance reports”, which recordedserious lapses of duty or violations of law requir-ing disciplinary measures and placement underintensive IPTF scrutiny. Officers issued with morethan one non-compliance report were automati-cally considered for de-authorization. In Febru-ary, the Bratunac Police Chief and the ChiefCriminal Investigator were de-authorized andseveral police received non-compliance reportsafter repeated failures to respond adequately toserious crimes against returning Bosniac refu-gees and displaced persons. Six police chiefswere also de-authorized for signing a statementrenouncing the Federation’s authority followingthe 6 April mob violence in Mostar and Grudeover the change of administration at the Herze-govacka Bank, funded and controlled by Croatseparatist elements (see p. 344). Police failure tomaintain public order during the stone-layingceremonies for new mosques in Trebinje andBanja Luka in early May resulted in the removalof Trebinje’s Public Security Centre Chief andthe issuance of a non-compliance report to thetown’s Chief of Crime Investigation; five BanjaLuka police officers were suspended. UNMIBHtook the lead in establishing and training policesupport units for dealing with mob violence,which, to be effective, required vehicles and otherequipment.

Police performance had improved, but investi-gation of incidents of return-related violence re-mained lethargic and inadequate, particularly in

eastern Republika Srpska. Operational capacityand political will were too deficient to deal withviolent demonstrations, as in Mostar, Banja Lukaand Trebinje. Seriously impairing police per-formance were three endemic problems: irregu-lar payment of already inadequate wages; theconsequent inability of officers to resolve theirhousing status and unwillingness of minority of-ficers to redeploy across entity lines; and lack ofefficient and impartial judicial follow-up to po-lice work, creating a disincentive to professional-ism and allowing ethnic extremists and criminalsto remain at large. Continuing political interfer-ence aggravated those problems.

As for police restructuring, a comprehensiveIPTF co-location project called “Manage the Man-agers”, launched in February to address the insti-tutional capacity of law enforcement institutions,was under way in eight Federation cantons andwas being extended to public security centres inRepublika Srpska. Under the project, IPTF moni-tors were also being co-located with crime, legal,personnel, finance and budget departments. InFebruary, the pilot project launched in Canton 9(Sarajevo) under the UNMIBH police commis-sioner project, aimed at creating an apoliticalpolice service, had to be suspended pending revi-sions to the Law on Internal Affairs todepoliticize selection procedures. Legislativeamendments were also being prepared in threeother cantons.

On 20 March, a Bosnian Croat was designatedinterim Director of the Federation’s Ministry ofthe Interior, whom certain Bosniac political lead-ers sought to undermine and remove, along withhis deputy. No progress was made in establishinga Director of Police for Republika Srpska.

The proportion of minorities in local policeforces remained low: 5.7 per cent of a targeted 28per cent in the Federation and 2.2 per cent of atargeted 20 per cent in Republika Srpska. Repre-sentation of females of all ethnicities was also low,averaging 3 per cent in both entities. Since theinitiation of minority police officers projects in1999, the police academies had enrolled orgraduated over 830 minority cadets. The firstfour rounds of UNMIBH’s voluntary redeploy-ment programme had resulted in the transfer of54 minority officers. Thirty-four minority mem-bers had completed refresher courses for formerpolice officers; another such course was currentlyin progress.

UNMIBH’s Criminal Justice Advisory Unit, be-sides continuing its primary task of advising IPTFon criminal procedure and the criminal justiceprocess, instituted a major project whose goalwas to improve the quality of police crime reportsby using selected prosecutors to train key local



police officers. Progress was slowly being made inthe establishment of a court police service as amulti-ethnic Federation police force.

The State Border Service had made apprecia-ble progress towards becoming a viable multi-ethnic State-level law enforcement institution,expanding from 376 personnel deployed at fourborder crossings in 2000 to over 1,180 deployedacross 62 per cent of the 1,666-kilometre border.Wide deployment and full effectiveness of theservice continued to be hampered, however, by alack of financial and material resources.

Major strides were also made in fosteringcooperation among police forces in Bosnia andHerzegovina and at the regional level. In March,under the auspices of the UNMIBH-chaired Min-isterial Consultative Meeting on Police Matters(MCMPM), all domestic police organizationssigned a Cooperative Law Enforcement Arrange-ment for a Border Police Academy in Suhodol,outside Sarajevo. Through MCMPM, UNMIBHconcluded the regional Cooperative Law En-forcement Arrangement Combating Illegal Mi-gration and Organized Crime. A document for-malizing that Arrangement was signed on 14 Mayby the Bosnia and Herzegovina entities, Croatia,FRY and the State Border Service.

A campaign called “Your Police Serving You”was launched nationwide on 26 March to increasepublic awareness of the principles of democraticpolicing. Each police organization was encour-aged to develop its own public relations pro-gramme. In June, another multi-ethnic police re-cruitment campaign was launched, aimed atincreasing the percentage of female applicants topolice academies.

The Secretary-General observed that, despitethe difficult political environment, UNMIBH con-tinued to make measurable progress in imple-menting its mission. In view of the progress ithad achieved so far and of the planned comple-tion of its core tasks by December 2002, he rec-ommended that its mandate be extended for afurther 12-month period, to June 2002.


On 15 [meeting 4330] and 21 [meeting 4333] June,the Security Council met to consider theSecretary-General’s report on UNMIBH. On 21June, the Council unanimously adopted resolu-tion 1357(2001). The draft [S/2001/610] was pre-pared in consultations among Council members.

The Security Council,Recalling all its previous relevant resolutions con-

cerning the conflicts in the former Yugoslavia, includ-ing resolutions 1031(1995) of 15 December 1995,1035(1995) of 21 December 1995, 1088(1996) of 12 De-cember 1996, 1144(1997) of 19 December 1997, 1168

(1998) of 21 May 1998, 1174(1998) of 15 June 1998,1184(1998) of 16 July 1998, 1247(1999) of 18 June 1999and 1305(2000) of 21 June 2000,

Reaffirming its commitment to the political settlementof the conflicts in the former Yugoslavia, preservingthe sovereignty and territorial integrity of all Statesthere within their internationally recognized borders,

Underlining its commitment to supporting implemen-tation of the General Framework Agreement for Peacein Bosnia and Herzegovina and the annexes thereto(collectively the “Peace Agreement”),

Emphasizing its appreciation to the High Representa-tive for the Implementation of the Peace Agreement onBosnia and Herzegovina, the Commander and person-nel of the multinational Stabilization Force, the SpecialRepresentative of the Secretary-General and the per-sonnel of the United Nations Mission in Bosnia andHerzegovina, including the Commissioner and per-sonnel of the International Police Task Force, the Or-ganization for Security and Cooperation in Europe,and the personnel of other international organizationsand agencies in Bosnia and Herzegovina for their con-tributions to the implementation of the Peace Agree-ment,

Noting that the States in the region must play a con-structive role in the successful development of thepeace process in Bosnia and Herzegovina, and notingespecially the obligations of the Republic of Croatiaand the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia in this regardas signatories to the Peace Agreement,

Welcoming, in this regard, the positive steps taken bythe Governments of the Republic of Croatia and theFederal Republic of Yugoslavia to strengthen theirbilateral relations with Bosnia and Herzegovina, as wellas their increasing cooperation with all relevantinternational organizations in implementing the PeaceAgreement,

Emphasizing that a comprehensive and coordinatedreturn of refugees and displaced persons throughoutthe region continues to be crucial to lasting peace,

Recalling the declarations of the Ministerial meet-ings of the Peace Implementation Conference,

Noting the reports of the High Representative, in-cluding his latest report of 13 March 2001,

Having considered the report of the Secretary-Generalof 7 June 2001, and welcoming the Mandate Imple-mentation Plan of the Mission,

Determining that the situation in the region continuesto constitute a threat to international peace and secu-rity,

Determined to promote the peaceful resolution ofthe conflicts in accordance with the purposes and prin-ciples of the Charter of the United Nations,

Recalling the relevant principles contained in theConvention on the Safety of United Nations and Asso-ciated Personnel of 9 December 1994 and the statementby its President of 9 February 2000,


Acting under Chapter VII of the Charter,

I1. Reaffirms once again its support for the General

Framework Agreement for Peace in Bosnia and Herze-



govina and the annexes thereto (collectively the “PeaceAgreement”), as well as for the Dayton Agreement onImplementing the Federation of Bosnia and Herze-govina of 10 November 1995, calls upon the parties tocomply strictly with their obligations under thoseAgreements, and expresses its intention to keep the im-plementation of the Peace Agreement and the situa-tion in Bosnia and Herzegovina under review;

2. Reiterates that the primary responsibility for thefurther successful implementation of the Peace Agree-ment lies with the authorities in Bosnia and Herze-govina themselves and that the continued willingnessof the international community and major donors toassume the political, military and economic burden ofimplementation and reconstruction efforts will be de-termined by the compliance and active participation byall the authorities in Bosnia and Herzegovina in imple-menting the Peace Agreement and rebuilding a civil so-ciety, in particular in full cooperation with the Interna-tional Tribunal for the Prosecution of PersonsResponsible for Serious Violations of InternationalHumanitarian Law Committed in the Territory of theFormer Yugoslavia since 1991, in strengthening jointinstitutions and in facilitating returns of refugees anddisplaced persons;

3. Reminds the parties once again that, in accord-ance with the Peace Agreement, they have committedthemselves to cooperate fully with all entities involvedin the implementation of this peace settlement, as de-scribed in the Peace Agreement, or which are otherwiseauthorized by the Security Council, including the In-ternational Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia, as itcarries out its responsibilities for dispensing justiceimpartially, and underlines that full cooperation byStates and entities with the International Tribunal in-cludes, inter alia, the surrender for trial of all personsindicted by the Tribunal and provision of informationto assist in Tribunal investigations;

4. Emphasizes its full support for the continued role ofthe High Representative for the Implementation of thePeace Agreement on Bosnia and Herzegovina in moni-toring the implementation of the Peace Agreementand giving guidance to and coordinating the activitiesof the civilian organizations and agencies involved inassisting the parties to implement the Peace Agree-ment, and reaffirms that the High Representative is thefinal authority in theatre regarding the interpretationof annex 10 on civilian implementation of the PeaceAgreement and that in case of dispute he may give hisinterpretation and make recommendations, and makebinding decisions as he judges necessary on issues aselaborated by the Peace Implementation Council inBonn on 9 and 10 December 1997;

5. Expresses its support for the declarations of theministerial meetings of the Peace ImplementationCouncil;

6. Recognizes that the parties have authorized themultinational force referred to in paragraph 10 belowto take such actions as required, including the use ofnecessary force, to ensure compliance with annex 1-Aof the Peace Agreement;

7. Reaffirms its intention to keep the situation in Bos-nia and Herzegovina under close review, taking intoaccount the reports submitted pursuant to paragraphs18 and 25 below, and any recommendations those re-ports might include, and its readiness to consider the

imposition of measures if any party fails significantlyto meet its obligations under the Peace Agreement;

II8. Pays tribute to those Member States which partici-

pated in the multinational Stabilization Force estab-lished in accordance with its resolution 1088(1996),and welcomes their willingness to assist the parties tothe Peace Agreement by continuing to deploy a multi-national Stabilization Force;

9. Notes the support of the parties to the PeaceAgreement for the continuation of the StabilizationForce, set out in the declaration of the ministerial meet-ing of the Peace Implementation Council in Madrid on16 December 1998;

10. Authorizes the Member States acting through orin cooperation with the organization referred to in an-nex 1-A of the Peace Agreement to continue for a fur-ther planned period of 12 months the StabilizationForce as established in accordance with resolution1088(1996) under unified command and control inorder to fulfil the role specified in annexes 1-A and 2of the Peace Agreement, and expresses its intentionto review the situation with a view to extending thisauthorization further as necessary in the light of devel-opments in the implementation of the Peace Agree-ment and the situation in Bosnia and Herzegovina;

11. Also authorizes the Member States acting underparagraph 10 above to take all necessary measures toeffect the implementation of and to ensure compliancewith annex 1-A of the Peace Agreement, stresses thatthe parties shall continue to be held equally responsiblefor compliance with that annex and shall be equallysubject to such enforcement action by the StabilizationForce as may be necessary to ensure implementation ofthat annex and the protection of the Force, and notesthat the parties have consented to the Force taking suchmeasures;

12. Authorizes Member States to take all necessarymeasures, at the request of the Stabilization Force,either in defence of the Force or to assist the Force incarrying out its mission, and recognizes the right of theForce to take all necessary measures to defend itselffrom attack or threat of attack;

13. Authorizes the Member States acting under para-graph 10 above, in accordance with annex 1-A of thePeace Agreement, to take all necessary measures toensure compliance with the rules and procedures es-tablished by the Commander of the Stabilization Force,governing command and control of airspace over Bos-nia and Herzegovina with respect to all civilian andmilitary air traffic;

14. Requests the authorities in Bosnia and Herze-govina to cooperate with the Commander of the Stabi-lization Force to ensure the effective management ofthe airports of Bosnia and Herzegovina, in the light ofthe responsibilities conferred on the Force by annex1-A of the Peace Agreement with regard to the airspaceof Bosnia and Herzegovina;

15. Demands that the parties respect the security andfreedom of movement of the Stabilization Force and ofother international personnel;

16. Invites all States, in particular those in the re-gion, to continue to provide appropriate support andfacilities, including transit facilities, for the MemberStates acting under paragraph 10 above;



17. Recalls all the agreements concerning the statusof forces as referred to in appendix B to annex 1-A ofthe Peace Agreement, and reminds the parties of theirobligation to continue to comply therewith;

18. Requests the Member States acting through or incooperation with the organization referred to in annex1-A of the Peace Agreement to continue to report to theCouncil, through the appropriate channels and at leastat monthly intervals;

* *Reaffirming the legal basis in the Charter of the

United Nations on which the International Police TaskForce was given its mandate in resolution 1035(1995),

III19. Decides to extend the mandate of the United

Nations Mission in Bosnia and Herzegovina, which in-cludes the International Police Task Force, for an addi-tional period terminating on 21 June 2002, and also de-cides that the Task Force shall continue to be entrustedwith the tasks set out in annex 11 of the Peace Agree-ment, including the tasks referred to in the conclusionsof the London, Bonn, Luxembourg, Madrid and Brus-sels Peace Implementation Conferences and agreed bythe authorities in Bosnia and Herzegovina;

20. Requests the Secretary-General to keep theCouncil regularly informed and to report at least everysix months on the implementation of the mandate ofthe Mission as a whole;

21. Reiterates that the successful implementation ofthe tasks of the International Police Task Force rests onthe quality, experience and professional skills of its per-sonnel, and once again urges Member States, with thesupport of the Secretary-General, to ensure the provi-sion of such qualified personnel;

22. Reaffirms the responsibility of the parties tocooperate fully with, and to instruct their respectiveresponsible officials and authorities to provide theirfull support to, the International Police Task Force onall relevant matters;

23. Reiterates its call upon all concerned to ensurethe closest possible coordination between the HighRepresentative, the Stabilization Force, the Missionand the relevant civilian organizations and agencies soas to ensure the successful implementation of the PeaceAgreement and of the priority objectives of the civilianconsolidation plan, as well as the security of Interna-tional Police Task Force personnel;

24. Urges Member States, in response to demon-strable progress by the parties in restructuring their lawenforcement institutions, to intensify their efforts toprovide, on a voluntary-funded basis and incoordination with the International Police Task Force,training, equipment and related assistance for localpolice forces in Bosnia and Herzegovina;

25. Requests the Secretary-General to continue tosubmit to the Council reports from the High Represen-tative, in accordance with annex 10 of the Peace Agree-ment and the conclusions of the Peace ImplementationConference held in London on 4 and 5 December 1996,and later Peace Implementation Conferences, on theimplementation of the Peace Agreement and in par-ticular on compliance by the parties with their commit-ments under that Agreement;


Report of Secretary-General (November). Inhis November report on UNMIBH [S/2001/1132 &Corr.1], the Secretary-General said that the num-ber of police officers granted provisionalauthorization to exercise police powers had risento 15,491 (6,625 in Republika Srpska, 8,229 in theFederation, 312 in Brcko District and the remain-der in State institutions). Full certification wouldbegin in early 2002 and be completed late thatyear. However, UNMIBH had identified a signifi-cant number of personnel serving in law enforce-ment positions without proper authorization.Moreover, de-authorized officers were often re-tained on the payroll or moved to administrativepositions outside UNMIBH’s authority or to pub-lic companies. Only rarely had local officials ini-tiated disciplinary or criminal proceedings.

Under UNMIBH monitoring, local police con-ducted the majority of basic training courses,while UNMIBH conducted the first managementtraining course for mid-level and senior-levelpolice personnel and completed training pro-grammes in a number of specialized areas. Train-ing in hazardous materials and in anti-terrorismmeasures continued. With SFOR, UNMIBH devel-oped a practical curriculum for joint training inriot control. In July, it established the SpecialTrafficking Operations Programme to addresshuman trafficking, under which 90 victims hadso far been assisted and seven individuals con-victed. However, overall progress in combatingthat illegal trade was being hampered by weak-nesses in the legal system.

Under the police commissioner project, ad in-terim commissioners had been appointed in theFederation’s Ministry of the Interior and six ofits cantons, and in Republika Srpska’s Ministryof the Interior. However, the related ongoingproject introducing necessary amendments tothe Laws on Internal Affairs at the cantonal leveland in Republika Srpska, in order to create anon-political police service, faced obstruction inthe mixed Croat-Bosniac Canton 6 and in threeCroat-majority cantons.

To improve internal management andaccountability, UNMIBH introduced a discipli-nary code that the State Border Police hadalready adopted and that would serve as a modelfor Republika Srpska. It also carried out a pilotaudit of one canton, to be followed by compre-hensive audits of all law enforcement institutionsin 2002, with a view to developing modalities forpolice force restructuring.

Under UNMIBH’s minority recruitment pro-grammes, 934 provisionally authorized minoritypolice (11.3 per cent of a total 8,229) were workingin the Federation and 211 (3.2 per cent of a total6,625) in Republika Srpska by November. The



State Border Service and the Brcko District po-lice services were totally multi-ethnic. A positivestep towards further minority police deploymentto Srebrenica was the appointment of a Bosniacas Deputy Station Commander at the newlyopened Srebrenica police station.

The slow provision of donated vehicles and thelack of adequate funding had delayed deploy-ment of the State Border Service field offices andmobile support units. At UNMIBH’s request, theInternational Monetary Fund (IMF) had agreedto give priority to funding the Service in 2002 do-nor appeals. A joint Entity Task Force, createdunder MCMPM auspices, had developed a na-tional anti-terrorist plan, following the 11 Sep-tember 2001 terrorist attacks in the United States(see p. 60). The Service had put into effect tighterborder controls and had drafted amendments tothe Law on Immigration and Asylum to furtherassist in counter-terrorism activities. In the inter-national fight against crime, UNMIBH facilitatedthe preparation of a draft law, currently beforethe Bosnia and Herzegovina Presidency, to createa State Information Protection Agency.

The Secretary-General observed that UNMIBHcontinued to make progress towards completingits core mandate by December 2002, as envisagedin its Mandate Implementation Plan [YUN 2000,p. 345]; thereafter, continued monitoring andassistance necessary to preserve what had beenachieved could be undertaken by a police missionone fourth the size of UNMIBH’s currentstrength, with regional actors assuming responsi-bility for it. Accordingly, he had instructed hisSpecial Representative to cooperate fully withthe organizations assessing requirements for afollow-on police mission. An early decision onthe matter was important to ensure timely plan-ning and a smooth transition. UNMIBH was alsoparticipating in discussions on streamlining theinternational presence in Bosnia and Herzego-vina (see below).

Later developments. In a later report [S/2001/618], the Secretary-General stated that, in Decem-ber, UNMIBH launched a nationwide systemsanalysis to complete the restructuring of keyareas of internal police administration, involvingthe development of a manual of law enforcementstandards and procedures and local self-assessment of compliance with them; on-site as-sessment by IPTF; the establishment of localpolice Change Management Teams within eachlaw enforcement agency to consult with UNMIBHon the formulation of recommendations; and theimplementation of the Teams’ short- and long-term recommendations.

Future UNMIBH and international civilian presence

Security Council consideration (September).The Secretary-General’s Special Representativeand UNMIBH Coordinator told the SecurityCouncil on 21 September [meeting 4379] that UN-MIBH was making good headway on its core man-date, notwithstanding the difficulties it faced. Ithad completed 30 out of 64 projects under theMandate Implementation Plan [YUN 2000, p. 345],28 were ongoing and eight were in the planningstage. However, as long as the international com-munity continued its piecemeal approach to theBalkans, opportunities to close a tragic decade ofwar and instability would be missed. He advo-cated streamlining the structure and activities ofthe current international presence in Bosnia andHerzegovina, based on an agreed internationalstrategic plan authorized and supported by theCouncil. Streamlining should therefore be basedon certain elements, among them a comprehen-sive 2002-2005 Dayton Implementation Plan,with benchmarks and time lines endorsed by keyinternational bodies—the United Nations, thePeace Implementation Council (PIC), the EU,OSCE and NATO—and guaranteed multi-yearfunding of the agreed programmes. In the me-dium term, activities for the core programmes—rule of law, refugee return, institution-buildingand economic development—should be function-ally consolidated so that one organization wouldhave primary responsibility for each programmeand be held accountable for its execution. SFORshould be included in the process.

In view of the scheduled completion of UN-MIBH’s core mandate in December 2002, urgentdecisions were required for its downsizing andliquidation and to enable the successor organiza-tions to plan the future mission.

In that regard, a post-2002 intrusive police-monitoring mission would be needed to ensurethat UNMIBH’s achievements were not lost andthat the international community’s ongoingwork was not compromised. The Special Repre-sentative proposed two options: a stand-alonepolice-monitoring mission or a comprehensiverule-of-law mission. The first would ensure theintensive monitoring of local police planningand performance in respect of returnee security,public order and human rights, the maintenanceof internal and regional coordination andcooperation, continued minority recruitment,and that police structures were not compromised.That suggested a mission of between 450 and 500international police personnel. The second op-tion would bring together under one roof the po-lice, the judiciary and the penal system, consis-tent with the principle of one organization andone responsibility, which would facilitate the in-



troduction of a more efficient “pillar” structurefor the organization of the international effort inBosnia and Herzegovina. Peace implementationby the international community would continueto be a collective endeavour among the five keyorganizations, but with clearer mandates and re-sponsibilities.

Security Council consideration (December).At the Security Council’s 5 December meeting[meeting 4433], the Assistant Secretary-General forPeacekeeping Operations, Hedi Annabi, up-dated information on UNMIBH operations andplans for a post-UNMIBH mission. He said that, ofthe Mandate Implementation Plan’s 66 specificprojects, 43 had been completed and 23 were on-going, indicating that UNMIBH was on track tocomplete its mandate in December 2002. At thesame time, important political and operationalchallenges still lay ahead. Some projects, includ-ing those for the removal of police officers basedon their wartime record, faced political opposi-tion; legislation for the police commissioner proj-ect was still opposed by nationalist parties,mainly in Croat-dominated cantons; and volun-tary redeployment of minority police officers re-mained slow and difficult. Other projects, such asthe State Border Service, or the training of riot-control units, depended on securing additionalfinancial assistance. In addition, projects thatwere designed to establish ongoing mechanismsand structures, such as those for minority recruit-ment or for inter-entity and regional policecooperation, would require nurturing in apost-UNMIBH setting and continued monitoringand assistance.

Mr. Annabi noted the Secretary-General’s be-lief that regional actors should assume responsi-bility for a follow-up mission with the capacity topreserve UNMIBH’s accomplishments, bring tofruition those ongoing projects that would be leftby UNMIBH and combine under one roof respon-sibilities for the police, the judiciary and the pe-nal system. He assessed that that task could becarried out by a mission one fourth the strengthof UNMIBH, to include some 450 police officers.

He said the United Nations welcomed the ini-tial steps taken by the High Representative, theEU and OSCE in planning a post-UNMIBH inter-national police-monitoring presence. The Spe-cial Representative was cooperating fully withthose organizations. The issue was also being dis-cussed at the PIC Steering Board meeting cur-rently in progress in Brussels, Belgium. TheCouncil would be kept informed of develop-ments (see below).

Consideration by PIC Steering Board. At itsmeeting in Stockholm, Sweden, on 21 June, thePIC Steering Board reviewed progress in the im-

plementation of the 1995 Peace Agreement [YUN1995, p. 544], discussing, among other issues, thestreamlining of current international civilian im-plementation structures in Bosnia and Herze-govina. To facilitate the process, it agreed on astrictly functional and phased approach thatshould be fully transparent.

Accordingly, at its 6 December meeting inBrussels, the Board endorsed the High Repre-sentative’s draft action plan for such streamlin-ing, which called for policy coordination taskforces on the rule of law, institution-building,economic policy, and return and reconstruction,as well as for a situation group. At the top of thecoordinating structure was a cabinet of leadagencies chaired by the High Representative.The plan also integrated mechanisms to imple-ment the concept of partnership between the in-ternational community and the newly electedBosnia and Herzegovina authorities at variouslevels, the main one being a consultative partner-ship forum. The Office of the High Representa-tive subsequently refined the plan to include anassessment of matching multi-year funding re-quirements and options for the follow-on policemission, for presentation to the Board’s nextmeeting, scheduled for 28 February 2002.

UNMIBH financingIn June, the General Assembly considered the

Secretary-General’s reports on the financial per-formance of UNMIBH for the period 1 July 1999to 30 June 2000 [A/55/683] and the proposed bud-get for its maintenance and that of UNMOP (seep. 324) and the UN liaison offices in Belgradeand Zagreb for the period 1 July 2001 to 30 June2002 [A/55/752], together with ACABQ’s relatedcomments and recommendations [A/55/874/Add.5].


On 14 June [meeting 103], the General Assembly,on the recommendation of the Fifth Committee[A/55/965], adopted resolution 55/268 withoutvote [agenda item 148].

Financing of the United Nations Missionin Bosnia and Herzegovina

The General Assembly,Having considered the reports of the Secretary-

General on the financing of the United Nations Mis-sion in Bosnia and Herzegovina and the related reportsof the Advisory Committee on Administrative andBudgetary Questions,

Recalling Security Council resolution 1035(1995) of21 December 1995, by which the Council establishedthe United Nations Mission in Bosnia and Herze-govina for an initial period of one year, and Councilresolution 1305(2000) of 21 June 2000, by which theCouncil extended the mandate of the Mission until 21June 2001,



Recalling also Security Council resolution 1335(2001)of 12 January 2001, in which the Council authorized theUnited Nations military observers to continue to moni-tor the demilitarization of the Prevlaka peninsula until15 July 2001,

Recalling further its decision 50/481 of 11 April 1996on the financing of the Mission and its subsequentresolutions and decisions thereon, the latest of whichwas resolution 54/273 of 15 June 2000,

Reaffirming the general principles underlying thefinancing of United Nations peacekeeping operations,as stated in General Assembly resolutions 1874(S-IV) of27 June 1963, 3101(XXVIII) of 11 December 1973 and55/235 of 23 December 2000,

Noting with appreciation that voluntary contributionshave been made to the Mission,

Mindful of the fact that it is essential to provide theMission with the necessary financial resources to en-able it to fulfil its responsibilities under the relevantresolutions of the Security Council,

1. Takes note of the status of contributions to theUnited Nations Mission in Bosnia and Herzegovina asat 30 April 2001, including the contributions outstand-ing in the amount of 78.1 million United States dollars,representing 9 per cent of the total assessed contribu-tions from the inception of the Mission to the periodending 21 June 2001, notes that some 17 per cent of theMember States have paid their assessed contributionsin full, and urges all other Member States concerned,in particular those in arrears, to ensure payment oftheir outstanding assessed contributions;


3. Urges all other Member States to make every pos-sible effort to ensure payment of their assessed contri-butions to the Mission in full and on time;

4. Expresses concern at the delay experienced by theSecretary-General in deploying and providing ade-quate resources to some recent peacekeeping missions,in particular those in Africa;



7. Reiterates its request to the Secretary-General tomake the fullest possible use of facilities and equip-ment at the United Nations Logistics Base at Brindisi,Italy, in order to minimize the costs of procurement forthe Mission;


9. Requests the Secretary-General to take all neces-sary action to ensure that the Mission is administeredwith a maximum of efficiency and economy;

10. Also requests the Secretary-General, in order toreduce the cost of employing General Service staff, tocontinue efforts to recruit local staff for the Missionagainst General Service posts, commensurate with therequirements of the Mission;

11. Decides to appropriate the amount of 144,676,630dollars gross (135,728,725 dollars net) for the mainte-nance of the Mission for the period from 1 July 2001 to30 June 2002, inclusive of the amount of 4,234,303 dol-lars gross (3,716,018 dollars net) for the supportaccount for peacekeeping operations and the amountof 442,327 dollars gross (397,207 dollars net) for theUnited Nations Logistics Base, to be apportionedamong Member States at a monthly rate of 12,056,385dollars gross (11,310,727 dollars net) in accordance withthe levels set out in General Assembly resolution55/235, as adjusted by the Assembly in its resolution55/236 of 23 December 2000, and taking into accountthe scale of assessments for the years 2001 and 2002, asset out in its resolution 55/5 B of 23 December 2000,subject to the decision of the Security Council to ex-tend the mandate of the Mission beyond 30 June 2001;

12. Decides also that, in accordance with the provi-sions of its resolution 973(X) of 15 December 1955,there shall be set off against the apportionment amongMember States, as provided for in paragraph 11 above,their respective share in the Tax Equalization Fund ofthe estimated staff assessment income of 8,947,905 dol-lars approved for the Mission for the period from 1 July2001 to 30 June 2002;

13. Decides further that, for Member States that havefulfilled their financial obligations to the Mission,there shall be set off against the apportionment, as pro-vided for in paragraph 11 above, their respective sharein the unencumbered balance of 25,990,381 dollarsgross (24,826,081 dollars net) in respect of the periodending 30 June 2000, in accordance with the composi-tion of groups set out in paragraphs 3 and 4 of GeneralAssembly resolution 43/232 of 1 March 1989 and ad-justed by the Assembly in subsequent relevant resolu-tions and decisions for the ad hoc apportionment ofpeacekeeping appropriations, the latest of which wereresolution 52/230 of 31 March 1998 and decisions54/456 to 54/458 of 23 December 1999 for the period1998-2000, and taking into account the scale of assess-ments for the year 2000, as set out in its resolutions52/215 A of 22 December 1997 and 54/237 A of 23 De-cember 1999;

14. Decides that, for Member States that have not ful-filled their financial obligations to the Mission, theirshare of the unencumbered balance of 25,990,381 dol-lars gross (24,826,081 dollars net) in respect of the pe-riod ending 30 June 2000 shall be set off against theiroutstanding obligations in accordance with the schemeset out in paragraph 13 above;

15. Emphasizes that no peacekeeping mission shallbe financed by borrowing funds from other activepeacekeeping missions;

16. Encourages the Secretary-General to continueto take additional measures to ensure the safety andsecurity of all personnel under the auspices of theUnited Nations participating in the Mission;

17. Invites voluntary contributions to the Mission incash and in the form of services and supplies accepta-ble to the Secretary-General, to be administered, as ap-propriate, in accordance with the procedure and prac-tices established by the General Assembly;

18. Decides to include in the provisional agenda ofits fifty-sixth session the item entitled “Financing ofthe United Nations Mission in Bosnia and Herze-govina”.



On 12 December [A/56/698], the Secretary-General submitted the UNMIBH financial per-formance report for the period from 1 July 2000to 30 June 2001.

The General Assembly decided, on 24 Decem-ber, that the item on the financing of UNMIBHwould remain for consideration during itsresumed fifty-sixth (2002) session (decision56/464) and that the Fifth Committee shouldcontinue to consider the item at that session (de-cision 56/458).

International Police Task ForceDuring 2001, the IPTF component of UNMIBH

remained below its authorized strength of 2,057due to difficulties faced by police-contributingcountries in meeting the requirements of allpeacekeeping missions. As at 31 December, its ac-tual strength stood at 1,674. The overall mandatecompletion target was predicated on maintainingIPTF strength at 1,850 until July 2002.

Led by Commissioner Vincent Coeurderoy(France), IPTF continued to assist in the restruc-turing and reform of the police services in theFederation and to monitor local police. To thatend, it launched in February a comprehensiveco-location project that extended to legal, per-sonnel, finance and budget departments.

Civil affairsThe High Representative reported in March

[S/2001/219] that, following the November 2000elections in Bosnia and Herzegovina [YUN 2000,p. 349], lengthy delays in establishing the Parlia-mentary Assembly and the Council of Ministershampered the functioning of State institutions.Forming a State Government also proved diffi-cult. The House of Representatives rejected thenomination of a Croat, Bozidir Matic, as Chair-man of the new Council of Ministers. Nonethe-less, the Alliance for Change, a post-election coa-lition of moderate non-nationalist parties, madeimportant gains that eventually led to the forma-tion, on 22 February, of the new Council, chairedby Mr. Matic. HDZ, which had chosen to boycottthe election implementation process and pre-vented the selection of cantonal delegates to theHouse of Peoples of the Federation and of Bos-nia and Herzegovina, agreed, following the HighRepresentative’s intervention, to implement theelection results in the cantonal assemblies it con-trolled. However, unhappy with the Constitu-tional Court’s decision that it had no jurisdictionover the Provisional Election Commission and itsdecision-making body, the Election Appeals Sub-commission, HDZ vowed to continue its boycott ofthe Federation House of Peoples. On 9 February,

the High Representative issued a legal opinion,stating that both the House of Peoples and thecantonal assemblies could be constituted bythose delegates who had taken their seats, andthat boycotting parties and individuals had noright to block the functioning of those bodies.

On 11 January, the High Representative issueda decision restructuring the constitutional com-missions in the Federation and the RepublikaSrpska Parliaments. The commissions wouldpropose amendments to the constitutions of bothentities and provisionally protect the constituentpeoples and others against discrimination.

In July [S/2001/723], the High Representativefurther reported that, on 27 March, the Bosniaand Herzegovina House of Representativeselected Beriz Belkic and Jozo Krizanovic as theBosniac and Croat members, respectively, of theBosnia and Herzegovina Presidency; the Houseof Peoples confirmed the election on 30 March.The new Council of Ministers had begunfunctioning, making progress in implementingits work programme. However, legislative activi-ties and the implementation process were regu-larly challenged and obstructed by RepublikaSrpska authorities on the grounds that the Coun-cil’s legislative agenda invaded Republika Srpskacompetencies. Progress in the Bosnia and Herze-govina Parliamentary Assembly was less satisfac-tory, as it had passed no new legislation of majorimportance. In the House of Representatives,holding together the Alliance for Change coali-tion was proving difficult; the HDZ delegates, onthe other hand, had ended their several months’boycott.

On 12 March, the Alliance for Change coali-tion formed the Federation’s first non-nationalist Government. However, the new Gov-ernment was challenged by the HDZ leadershipand the “Croat National Assembly”, which, on3 March, voted to establish the unconstitutional“Croat Self-Rule in Bosnia and Herzegovina”. Inlate March, HDZ radicals in Mostar tried butfailed to oust that city’s Mayor, considered an ob-stacle to the establishment of a separate Croat en-tity. The “Croat National Assembly” also rejectedthe Federation Government. On 13 March, HDZofficials ordered the Croat components of theFederation Army to disband; on 28 March, Croatofficers and soldiers walked out of their barracks.On 16 May, the Federation Defence Minister andsome Bosnia and Herzegovina Croat Generalsbrokered a tentative agreement giving Croat sol-diers one month to return to their barracks.

In February, the High Representative imposedbinding arbitration on Republika Srpska and theFederation to resolve their dispute over the de-lineation of the inter-entity boundary line in



the Bobrinja suburb of Sarajevo. The Arbitratorissued the award on 24 April.

As reported by the High Representative inSeptember [S/2001/868], the Chairman of theCouncil of Ministers resigned on 22 June, due tothe failure of the House of Representatives toadopt the Election Law. He was replaced on 18July by Foreign Minister Zlatko Lagumdzija ofthe Social Democratic Party. The High Repre-sentative continued to deal with the issue of theso-called Croat Self-Rule, by chipping away atHDZ’s financial resources, while assuring the Bos-nia and Herzegovina Croats that the inter-national community was aware of and responsiveto their legitimate concerns. One result wasthat a significant but indeterminate number ofBosnian Croat officers and soldiers had renewedtheir contracts with the Federation Army by the15 June deadline.

On 23 August, the Bosnia and HerzegovinaParliamentary Assembly finally passed the Elec-tion Law, paving the way for the formation of anElection Commission.

To develop a relationship on shared responsi-bility between the Office of the High Representa-tive and the Council of Ministers, a ConsultativePartnership Forum was established for the dis-cussion and resolution of urgent issues, mainlyrelated to the 2000 PIC agenda for acceleratingthe Peace Agreement’s implementation [YUN2000, p. 338]. The Forum held its first meeting on2 August. The High Representative also under-took to consult with civil society representativesthrough a separate consultative structure calledthe Civic Forum. On 17 July, he imposed harmo-nizing amendments to both entities’ laws on pri-vatization and socially-owned apartments, toeliminate provisions in the Republika Srpska lawthat disadvantaged returnees in the privatizationprocess and to remove the Federation’s rule re-quiring two years’ occupancy following reposses-sion prior to purchasing a pre-war apartment.On 13 July, the Presidency officially transmittedto NATO Bosnia and Herzegovina’s wish to jointhe Partnership for Peace Programme. Under theauspices of the High Representative, Bosniac andCroat representatives signed an agreement on2 August reuniting the municipalities of GornjiVakuf and Uskoplje.

In a later report [S/2002/209], the High Repre-sentative stated that, at the HDZ Party Congress inMostar on 6 October, Ante Jelavic, whom he hadremoved as party president (see p. 330), ran un-opposed and was re-elected president, as weremost of the vice-presidents who were removed atthe same time. Nevertheless, significant changeshad occurred to make the so-called Croat/HDZissue less dangerous for peace implementation:

the imposition of a Provisional Administrator inHercegovacka Banka (the financial backbone ofthe illegal Bosnia and Herzegovina Croat struc-tures) (see p. 344); the loss of financial and politi-cal support from Croatia; and the policy of theAlliance Government of dismantling parallel in-stitutions. By returning to the Federation Houseof Representatives on 28 November, HDZ had im-plicitly acknowledged that the self-rule projectwas untenable. Moreover, the successful imple-mentation of the agreements on the unificationof Gornji Vakuf (Bosniac) and Uskoplje (Croat)and on the integration of the Croat-majority mu-nicipality of Zepce into the Bosniac-majority can-ton of Zenica-Doboj, the unification of the Pen-sion Fund in the Federation, progress in thedivided city of Mostar and the Alliance Govern-ment’s outreach to the Croat stronghold of Her-zegovina, all indicated that the old bipolar worldof ethnic politics was slowly moving to a morefunctional approach. At the third Congress ofthe main nationalist Bosniac party, the Party ofDemocratic Action (Sarajevo, 13 October), AlijaIzetbegovic stepped down as a party president; hewas succeeded by Sulejman Tihic, DeputySpeaker of the Republika Srpska National As-sembly.

The Federation Law on Citizenship was finallyadopted in September, thereby enabling citizensof the former Yugoslavia who had taken up per-manent residence in Bosnia and Herzegovina be-fore 1998 and were eligible for Bosnia and Herze-govina citizenship to exercise that right.

Responding to the PIC Steering Board’s call inOctober for the Bosnia and Herzegovina authori-ties to accelerate the pace of preparation for thegeneral elections scheduled for 5 October 2002,the High Representative, on 16 November, ap-pointed the four national members of the Bosniaand Herzegovina Election Commission to workwith its three international members, whom hehad appointed on 27 September.

Republika Srpska issuesThe High Representative, reporting in March

[S/2001/219] on issues related specifically to Re-publika Srpska, the Serb-majority entity of theRepublic of Bosnia and Herzegovina, stated thatimplementation of the election results in that en-tity had advanced relatively quickly. MladenIvanic of the moderate Party of Democratic Pro-gress was appointed Prime Minister on 12 Janu-ary and formed a “Government of experts” freeof senior Serb Democratic Party (SDS) figures,which, with the support of several other parties,had a comfortable majority in the entity’s parlia-ment. In his June report [S/2001/723], the HighRepresentative stated that the Prime Minister



had managed to stabilize the socio-economicsituation by improving tax collection and fiscaldiscipline. Important constitutional progress wasmade in April as the reshaped ConstitutionalCommission agreed on draft amendments to theRepublika Srpska Constitution. Unfortunately,the reconstruction of mosques demolished dur-ing the war was set back when cornerstone-layingceremonies for new mosques in Trebinje andBanja Luka were disrupted by violent protestsand had to be postponed. Subsequently, the HighRepresentative made several demands of Repub-lika Srpska: an investigation into the violence;immediate changes of leadership in the Ministryof Interior; public condemnation and an apologyby top officials; the reconvening of the ceremo-nies; and the establishment of a multi-ethnic Re-form and Reconciliation Committee under thePresident’s auspices. Most of those demands hadbeen complied with.

On 5 March, Republika Srpska and FRY signedan agreement on special parallel relations, asprovided for in the Peace Agreement, the imple-mentation of which was to be supervised by theOffice of the High Representative. The agree-ment was ratified on 7 June by the RepublikaSrpska National Assembly, despite the opposi-tion of some Bosniac and Croat members of theConstitutional Commission who claimed that theagreement should be between Bosnia and Herze-govina and FRY. The High Representative’s Sep-tember report [S/2001/868] noted that the agree-ment had given rise to two annexes, one ondefence issues and the other on sports. However,since the procedures specified in article 9 of theagreement were not complied with, the annex ondefence issues had no legal effect. Acknowledg-ing the suspension of the annex, both partiesagreed on a way ahead on the issue. The Office ofthe High Representative had also reviewed theannex on sports and proposed holding a meetingto discuss amendments to it.

In September, the Republika Srpska NationalAssembly passed the draft Law on Cooperationwith the International Tribunal for the FormerYugoslavia (ICTY). However, the entity’s co-operation with ICTY had yet to yield any specificresults, the High Representative later reported[S/2002/209]. Not a single indicted war criminalhad been apprehended, and Republika Srpskaofficials had let it be known that the most-wantedBosnian Serb indictees, Radovan Karadzic andRatko Mladic, would have to be arrested by theinternational community alone.

The socio-economic situation in RepublikaSrpska remained gloomy, as the many strikes byteachers and medical workers and protests bypensioners illustrated. Little had been done to

advance the reconciliation process among thethree constituent peoples. The Reconciliationand Reform Committee, set up after the May out-break of violence in Banja Luka and Trebinje(see above), had met only once. Although SDStook tentative steps towards reform during itsCongress on 24 December, its new platform re-mained devoid of a clear commitment to the Stateof Bosnia and Herzegovina.

Brcko DistrictIn July [S/2001/723], the High Representative re-

ported his continued satisfaction with develop-ments in the Brcko District since its establish-ment in 2000 [YUN 2000, p. 350]. The entitiescomprising Bosnia and Herzegovina (theBosniac-Croat Federation and Republika Srpska)and the District government were enacting ajoint housing reconstruction programme for re-turning displaced persons, with an anticipated500 housing units reconstructed during 2001.Under the Property Law Implementation Pro-gramme, the District was reinstating 100 proper-ties a month on average. A modern judicial sys-tem, established on 1 April and consisting of abasic court, an appellate court, a legal aid centreand a judicial commission, was in place and func-tioning well. A transparent budget was adoptedin April and, with improved revenue collection,the District was financially self-sustainable. Ingeneral, the entity governments had been sup-portive of the District and had appointed liaisonofficers to facilitate dialogue and communicationamong them. In September [S/2001/868], the HighRepresentative observed that the commence-ment of reconstruction of the destroyed WhiteMosque in the Brcko town centre was an encour-aging sign of increasing inter-ethnic tolerance.

In a later report [S/2002/209], he stated that re-organization of the District government was com-pleted by the end of 2001, together with the hir-ing and rehiring of public employees in an open,competitive process.

Refugee/displaced person returnsIn 2001, the Office of the United Nations High

Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) registeredthe return of 92,061 persons to their pre-warhome areas where they were in the ethnic minor-ity—a 36.5 per cent rise from the final minorityreturn figure of 67,445 in 2000. A promisingincrease in cooperation had emerged betweenthe Bosnia and Herzegovina entities, particularlyin information exchange on returnees and prop-erty repossession, and in the initiation of entity-funded reconstruction projects [S/2002/209].



The High Representative reported that, inJune [S/2001/868], Croatia and international rep-resentatives in that country established a legalworking group aimed at removing impedimentsto cross-border returns. He was encouraged bythe adoption, under the Regional Return Initia-tive of the Stability Pact for South-EasternEurope [YUN 1999, p. 398], of an Agenda for Re-gional Action providing for a framework to facili-tate cross-border returns and the identificationof lasting solutions for refugees yet to return totheir pre-war homes.

Human rightsThe High Representative reported in July

[S/2001/723] that the 1997 Mostar “Liska Street” in-cident [YUN 1997, p. 307] was under criminal inves-tigation by Mostar judicial authorities, as rec-ommended by the Bosnia and HerzegovinaOmbudsman. The Office of the High Represen-tative was developing policies and strategies toremedy discriminatory practices in health careand access to utilities and employment. Itcontinued to monitor implementation of theBosniac-Croat Federation labour laws relating tore-employment or compensation for those dis-missed during the war and to work towards estab-lishing an equitable employment market. TheOffice also helped to facilitate a system allowingreturnee pensioners to receive their pensions intheir place of return, drafted the Bosnia andHerzegovina Plan of Action to Combat Traffick-ing in Human Beings, which was pending beforeParliament, and assisted in reviewing draft legis-lation on minority rights and gender equality. InMarch, the boundaries of the Potocari site, desig-nated by the High Representative in 2000 [YUN2000, p. 353] for the burial and commemoration ofthe victims of the 1995 Srebrenica massacre [YUN1995, p. 529], were identified and marked. TheFoundation for the Srebrenica/Potocari Memo-rial and Cemetery was created and registeredand had agreed on the design and location for astone to mark the site.

Implementation of the Human Rights Cham-ber’s decisions had increased from 33 per cent inlate 1999 to 73 per cent by the end of 2001, notedthe High Representative in a later report [S/2002/209]. The Federation registered significant pro-gress in implementing occupancy rights andcompensation awards. While Republika Srpskashowed progress by paying monetary compensa-tion in some 10 cases, its overall implementationrate was far from satisfactory.

As to social, economic and gender rights, theOffice of the High Representative assisted in pre-paring Fair and Equal Employment Principlesand in revising the Fair Employment Practices

Strategy Policy Paper, both of which articulatedstandards for employment practices and out-lined mechanisms to ensure compliance with in-clusive, non-discriminatory hiring practices. Italso contributed to finalizing the Inter-EntityAgreement on Health Care for insured personsin Bosnia and Herzegovina, which was signed on3 December.

In collaboration with ICTY, the Office contin-ued to pressure the Bosnia and Herzegovinaauthorities, especially those of Republika Srpska,into full cooperation with ICTY. The High Rep-resentative said he was considering having a teamof experts address what needed to be done if fu-ture domestic war crimes were to be tried in thesoon-to-be-established Bosnia and HerzegovinaCourt. An appropriate strategy was under formu-lation in response to the ICTY Prosecutor’s pro-posal to the Security Council on 27 November[meeting 4429] to remit ICTY cases to a special courtin Bosnia and Herzegovina during or followingcompletion of ICTY’s mandate. That would en-sure that ICTY concerns with the Bosnia and Her-zegovina judicial system relating to war crimesprosecutions were addressed and that domesticwar crimes prosecutions met the highest profes-sional standards and were expedited.

Judicial reformThe High Representative issued a decision on

14 March [S/2001/723] providing the IndependentJudicial Commission (IJC), established in 2000[YUN 2000, p. 351], with a comprehensive mandateregarding the promotion of the rule of law andjudicial reform. An internal directive clarifiedthe scope of administrative competencies andpowers between his Office and IJC. Headquar-tered in Sarajevo, with field offices in BanjaLuka, Mostar, Sarajevo and Tuzla, and a fifth tobe opened in Bihac, IJC had started implement-ing its strategic plan and identified areas of par-ticular importance to the strengthening of therule of law: the review of laws on the appoint-ment of judges and prosecutors; criminal andcivil procedure reform; the review of legislationon the enforcement of civil judgements; andcourt administration and management. It hadalso begun to monitor and guide the work of thenational commissions and councils established toimprove the recruitment of judges and prosecu-tors and to conduct a comprehensive review of allthose currently serving.

In July [S/2001/868], the High Representativeapproved IJC’s Strategy Paper for 2001-2002. Itsmajor priorities were: completion of the reviewof judges and prosecutors; reform of the judi-ciary appointment process; reform of courtadministration and management; and revision of



legislation in civil procedure and enforcement ofjudgements. Also in July, the two entities of Bos-nia and Herzegovina signed a memorandum ofunderstanding regulating the appointment pro-cess for judges and prosecutors throughout thecountry. On 3 August, the High Representativeimposed amendments to the Federation Law onJudicial and Prosecutorial Service to eliminatepolitical obstruction, streamline the appoint-ment and dismissal processes and strengthen therole of the Federation commissions dealing withthe nomination of candidates for judicial andprosecutorial service.

Economic reform and reconstructionThe High Representative stated, in July

[S/2001/723], that his Office was devoting a greatdeal of attention and resources to the major pri-orities of the privatization and restructuringof public utilities and the creation of a favour-able investment climate. In Republika Srpska,through a voucher offer that ran from November2000 to 15 March 2001, citizens and 13 privatiza-tion investment funds were offered 55 per cent ofState equity in 830 enterprises. Of the 49 millionvouchers issued, over 84 per cent were utilized. Ina later report [S/2002/209], the High Representa-tive said that, for the first time, three of the 50largest enterprises in Republika Srpska were soldsuccessfully to international investors. The saleof the remaining State-owned capital in everycompany was ongoing. In the Federation, thefirst public offering of shares was completed on28 March; 542 enterprises were offered to certifi-cate holders, with a subscription of 4.25 billionkonvertible marka (KM). The second round wascompleted by the end of the year, with one or twomore rounds to follow. A new Directorate of Pri-vatization was established.

The Office of the High Representative,through the International Advisory Group onTaxation, accelerated the process of tax reform.An agreement on the harmonization of salestaxes was concluded between the two entity gov-ernments under the IMF project on the subject,which ended in April. Agreement was alsoreached for the Brcko District to harmonize itssales tax law with those of the entities by August.A harmonized income tax law was expected to bein place throughout Bosnia and Herzegovina byJanuary 2002.

The report of the Foreign Investment Advi-sory Service on Bosnia and Herzegovina outlin-ing investment impediments and recommenda-tions for improving the situation was officiallypresented in Sarajevo and Banja Luka on 29 and30 June, respectively.

In the transport sector, the Railway Public Cor-poration was legally registered in both entities. A61 million euro railway recovery loan was signedon 11 June for the reconstruction of 750 kilometresof main track in Bosnia and Herzegovina. TheHigh Representative’s Office organized on 4 Mayan international conference on the Bosnia andHerzegovina rail transport situation, which rec-ommended drastic reorganization. As a tangible signof recovery, international passenger service on theSarajevo–Banja Luka–Zagreb and Doboj–BanjaLuka–Zagreb–Ljubljana railway lines reopened on10 June, after a nine-year hiatus. The Federationand Republika Srpska were in negotiation with theEuropean Investment Bank for a 60 million euroroad improvement loan, while the World Bank waspreparing a new road management and safetyproject worth $30 million. Bosnia and Herzego-vina signed an agreement with Central EuropeanAir Traffic Services on 14 September and a con-tract with Croatia Control Limited to provide airtraffic control services to the country effective 27December. Deployment of the State Border Serv-ice was completed at the Banja Luka and Mostarairports. Recently passed transport legislation in-cluded a Federation law creating (from two oldcompanies) the new Railways of the Bosnia andHerzegovina Federation and a State law providingfor State-level licensing and regulation of interna-tional and inter-entity truck and bus transport.

In the telecommunications sector, the HighRepresentative issued a 2 March decision estab-lishing the Communications Regulatory Agency.The World Bank offered technical assistancefor the sector’s restructuring, privatization andother transition measures relating to postalservices, radio transmission infrastructure ande-commerce.

In the energy sector, the State’s Commissionon Public Corporations agreed on 17 April tomove forward with the analysis and design of newpublic corporations for gas transportation, powertransmission, radio transmission infrastructureand posts. The World Bank and the EuropeanBank for Reconstruction and Development ap-proved a $230 million loan for a power genera-tion and distribution project, conditional on theadoption by the Council of Ministers of a Stateelectricity law providing for a regulatory commis-sion for electricity transmission, an independentservice operator and a single transmission com-pany. That condition was fulfilled and the proj-ect was under way.

Anti-corruption and transparency issuesThe High Representative reported in July

[S/2001/723] that the emergence of so-called “CroatSelf-Rule” (see p. 339) and its proclamation that it



would take over Federation revenues forced him totake action against the financial centre of that ille-gal parallel structure by placing the Croat-controlled Hercegovacka Banka under his provi-sional administration. The takeover of the bank on6 April was resisted by HDZ-organized riots, duringwhich staff of the High Representative’s Officeand other international and local staff were in-jured, threatened and taken hostage. The bankwas eventually taken over on 18 April with SFORbacking. Although an investigation was initiatedby the Federation, the High Representative trans-ferred jurisdiction for the investigation and prose-cution to the Cantonal Court of Sarajevo becauseof well-grounded suspicion of local police involve-ment and doubts about the impartiality of thelocal prosecutors and judges. The bank’s provi-sional administrator was faced with lack of man-agement and shareholder cooperation, thus slow-ing down the consolidation of accounts and theinvestigative process.

Due to the lack of transparency and continuingsuspicion of corruption in the public financesystem, the High Representative appointed a Spe-cial Auditor to audit and report on the conditionof government finances. As a result of the report’sconfirmation that the system was susceptible tofraud and corruption and lacked appropriate con-trol mechanisms, the High Representative’s Officewas developing a strategy to reform administrativeaccounting procedures and to strengthen the Su-preme Audit Institution (SAI), and treasury andparliamentary control mechanisms.

In September [S/2001/868], the High Represen-tative stated that, with the assistance of theUnited States Treasury, his Office had presentedto both entity governments a strategy for restruc-turing the Financial Police Agency, a critical pil-lar of an independent and effective investigativemechanism against high-level corruption, fraudand money-laundering.

The High Representative subsequently indi-cated that, following the SAI comprehensive auditearly in the year, charges were filed againstformer and serving officials of Republika Srpskain five cases involving the misappropriation ofsome KM 300,000 (150,000 euros) in governmentfunds [S/2002/209]. He also reported that, on6 November, he issued a decision amending theFederation Law on Banks to allow provisionalbank administrators to make payouts of up to KM5,000 before completing their financial reports.That would enable the provisional administratorof Hercegovacka Banka to start paying in Decem-ber those small depositors whose savings hadbeen frozen since April.

Media issuesThe continuing restructuring of the public

broadcasting system (PBS) of Bosnia and Herze-govina saw the simultaneous launch on 7 May ofPBS radio (broadcasting over the whole territory)and Federation radio, giving the country, for thefirst time since the disintegration of the formerYugoslavia, a Statewide broadcasting capability.Subject to funding, work would continue to ex-tend the radio signal’s reach to 85 per cent of thepopulation, from its current coverage of 72 percent. The Communications Regulatory Agencycontinued to evaluate broadcasters. By Septem-ber, 126 had qualified for full licences. The eval-uation was expected to be concluded by year’send, and consultations had begun to ensurethat opportunities for new licences met citizens’needs. A working group had drafted a law for Re-publika Srpska Radio-Television. The Law onFederation Radio-Television was being amendedand a PBS State law was in the drafting stage. On27 October, the new Federation TV was launchedand significant measures were taken to enfran-chise Croats by improving signal coverage and de-veloping a Croat component. The top managersfor the State-level PBS had been appointed andthe High Representative’s Broadcasting Agentwas working closely with them to create a PBS forthe entire country that was financially viable andjournalistically professional.

The draft Law on Freedom of Access to Infor-mation, prepared by an expert group in 2000[YUN 2000, p. 352], was adopted by the State and en-tity governments. In June, the Federation Parlia-ment adopted the draft Defamation Act.

Military aspects

Stabilization ForceUnder the command of NATO, the multina-

tional Stabilization Force (SFOR), also known asOperation Joint Guard, continued in 2001 tooversee the implementation of the military as-pects of the 1995 Peace Agreement. Its activitiesfrom 13 November 2000 to 31 October 2001 wererecorded in nine reports [S/2001/16, S/2001/290,S/2001/437, S/2001/542, S/2001/688, S/2001/820, S/2001/911, S/2001/1001, S/2001/1167], submitted by the NATOSecretary-General through the UN Secretary-General to the Security Council, in accordancewith Council resolution 1088(1996) [YUN 1996,p. 310]. Activities during the remainder of 2001 werecovered in later reports [S/2002/17, S/2002/154].

The strength of SFOR fell from 22,000 in De-cember 2000 to some 18,000 in December 2001.The troops, deployed in Bosnia and Herzegovinaand Croatia, were contributed by all NATO mem-



bers and 15 non-NATO countries. The Council,by resolution 1357(2001) of 21 June (see p. 333),authorized the continuation of SFOR for a furtherperiod of 12 months.

During the year, SFOR continued to conductreconnaissance and surveillance, by means ofground and air patrols, to: monitor the borderwith FRY and the entity armed forces (EAF); con-duct weapons storage site inspections; providesupport to the international organizations oper-ating in Bosnia and Herzegovina, including theOffice of the High Representative; and collectweapons and ammunition. In addition, it as-sisted the local police and IPTF in providing a safeand secure environment in the Sarajevo suburbof Dobrinja before and after the international ar-bitrator’s final ruling on the disposition of theinter-entity boundary line; conducted operationsto ensure a safe and secure environment through-out Bosnia and Herzegovina to counter the desta-bilizing effects of Croat action to create a thirdentity (see p. 339); and supported IPTF and localpolice in their efforts to quell mob violence andmaintain police order. Other major activities in-cluded an information campaign to reassure thepopulation and deter support for terrorist acts. Itdiscovered two underground bunkers containingmilitary equipment and ammunition near HanPijesak, north-east of Sarajevo.

The SFOR/OSCE Joint Restructuring SteeringBoard, on 13 March in Sarajevo, presented to theentities the master plan for restructuring EAF.The Federation and the Joint Presidency en-dorsed the Common Defence Policy Paper, a keyelement in thatrestructuring,andestablishedsev-eral working groups. In the meantime, SFOR wasverifying the reported 15 per cent troop reductionof EAF in 2000. It continued to support UNHCRefforts to encourage the return of Bosnian Serbsliving in Republika Srpska to their home areas.

Federal Republic of Yugoslavia

The year 2001 saw a number of positive devel-opments in the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia(FRY) and in its province of Kosovo. In earlyMarch, NATO informed the Secretary-General ofits decision, in anticipation of the ultimate aboli-tion of the ground safety zone—the buffer zonebetween Kosovo and Serbia proper—to allow thecontrolled return of FRY forces into the zone,which took place between March and May.

Also during that period, the United NationsInterim Administration in Kosovo (UNMIK) be-gan to lay the foundations for Kosovo’s interim

period of self-government, as envisaged in Secu-rity Council resolution 1244(1999) [YUN 1999,p. 353]. The main achievement in that effort wasthe promulgation on 16 May by the Special Rep-resentative of the Secretary-General and Head ofUNMIK of the Constitutional Framework for Pro-visional Self-Government, which determined thenew provisional government institutions andtheir powers and responsibilities. That paved theway for the Kosovo-wide elections on 17 Novem-ber, in which all communities participated. Sincenone of the contending parties gained enoughAssembly seats to govern alone, negotiations be-gan for the formation of a coalition Government.Accordingly, UNMIK assisted in the establishmentof the necessary provisional institutions in ac-cordance with the Constitutional Frameworkand engaged all communities in the transitionalprocess, aimed at the progressive transfer of pub-lic administration to local control. UNMIK also, incooperation with the EU, OSCE and UNHCR,stepped up measures relating to the reform ofKosovo’s police and justice system, economic re-form and reconstruction, the return of refugeesand displaced persons and the improvement ofsecurity, in particular along the border with thethe former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia. Insupport of UNMIK’s efforts, the Council had senta mission to Kosovo in June to convey a strongmessage to its local leaders and all concerned toreject violence and promote inter-ethnic recon-ciliation.

In September, the Secretary-General informedthe Council of the constructive cooperation ofthe new FRY authorities with the internationalcommunity to bring peace and stability to theBalkan region and expressed his belief that FRYhad complied with Council resolution 1160(1998)[YUN 1998, p. 369]. Accordingly, on 10 September,the Council lifted all sanctions imposed againstFRY and dissolved the committee it had estab-lished to monitor them.

Situation in Kosovo

The United Nations continued to work to-wards the full implementation of Security Coun-cil resolution 1244(1999) [YUN 1999, p. 353], whichset out the modalities for a political solution tothe crisis in the FRY province of Kosovo, as wellas resolutions 1160(1998) [YUN 1998, p. 369], 1199(1998) [ibid., p. 377], 1203(1998) [ibid., p. 382] and1239(1999) [YUN 1999, p. 349]. The civilian aspectsof resolution 1244(1999) were being imple-mented by UNMIK and the military aspects by theinternational security presence (KFOR).



Ground safety zone and southern Serbia

In 2001, the security situation in the groundsafety zone (GSZ) (the buffer zone between Kosovoand the rest of Serbia) and in southern Serbia,first brought to the Security Council’s attentionin December 2000 [YUN 2000, p. 378], continued todeteriorate. On 27 January [S/2001/86], FRY re-ported to the Council that, on the previous day,Albanian terrorists attacked an army unit on theBujanovac-Presevo road in the vicinity of GomjaSusaja village, near Bujanovac, outside the GSZ. Asoldier was seriously wounded and later died.FRY said those activities were aimed at endanger-ing security, sowing terror among the civilians inthe Bujanovac, Presevo and Medvedja munici-palities in southern Serbia and provoking theYugoslav police and army. It called for an urgentCouncil meeting so that measures could be takento find the perpetrators and bring them to jus-tice.

FRY also requested the Council to ensure thatthe provisions of its statement S/PRST/2000/40[YUN 2000, p. 380] were fully implemented and thatthe GSZ regime was fully respected.

Security Council consideration (January).The Council, during informal consultations ofthe whole on 30 January, was briefed by theAssistant Secretary-General for PeacekeepingOperations on the situation in the Presevo Valley,including the foregoing incident [A/56/2]. Hestated that, between 18 and 28 January, there wasa notable increase in small-scale attacks on FRYforces by elements of the Liberation Army of Pre-sevo, Medvedja and Bujanovac (UCPMB) and asplinter group (the ethnic Albanian armedgroups). Eighteen attacks on FRY forces were re-ported in the central and northern parts of theGSZ. The fighting created a flow of internally dis-placed persons into Kosovo. Although KFOR con-tinued to conduct proactive operations to inter-dict and prevent armed groups from crossinginto the GSZ, tension in the area was rising.

In a statement to the press on behalf of theCouncil, the President said that the Council con-demned the attacks and stressed the need tobring the perpetrators to justice. The Council re-called the call made in its December 2000 state-ment [YUN 2000, p. 380] for the immediate and com-plete cessation of violence, the dissolution ofethnic Albanian extremist groups and the imme-diate withdrawal from the GSZ of all non-residents engaged in extremist activities. Wel-coming FRY’s commitment to work towards apeaceful settlement, the Council also called onethnic Albanian leaders in southern Serbia towork with the FRY Government to achieve apeaceful settlement. It welcomed the measures

taken by KFOR and called on it to continue to ad-dress the problem.

Security Council consideration (February).On 13 February [meeting 4277], the Under-Secretary-General for Peacekeeping Operationsreported to the Council that there had been in-creased clashes, illegal checkpoints and trainingactivities in the GSZ. UNMIK and KFOR continuedto take action against persons and activities insideKosovo known to support the ethnic Albanianfighters using the GSZ as a staging area. Theywere also working in selected areas along the Ko-sovo side of the administrative boundary to con-trol more effectively the movements of individ-uals attempting to support ethnic Albanianfighters. KFOR had over 100 suspected ethnicAlbanian fighters in detention.

Discussions were continuing with FRY and Ser-bia and with ethnic Albanian leaders on haltingthe displacement of persons and on encouragingreturns to the Presevo area. An inter-agency teamof representatives from the United Nations De-velopment Programme, UNHCR, the Office forthe Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs, theUnited Nations Children’s Fund and the Officeof the United Nations High Commissioner forHuman Rights had been sent to the region to as-sess basic humanitarian needs in the Presevo Val-ley area.

Addressing the Council, the FRY representativesaid his Government had recently adopted athree-phase plan for resolving the crisis in theBujanovac, Presevo and Medvedja municipali-ties. Also known as the Covic Plan, it included theestablishment of the State sovereignty and terri-torial integrity of Serbia and FRY in that part oftheir territory, the preservation and developmentof the region’s multi-ethnic character, respect forall civil and human rights of the ethnic Albaniancommunity, protection of the basic interests ofSerbs and of their personal property and secu-rity, and the building of a multi-ethnic demo-cratic society, with the viable economic develop-ment of the three municipalities. In the firstphase, already under way, an appeal had beensent to the ethnic Albanian community to refrainfrom any terrorist acts during negotiations, withFRY’s army and police undertaking only defen-sive activity. The second phase, to be preceded bythe reduction or total elimination of the GSZ,would include the permanent cessation of all ter-rorist acts, the disarmament of terrorists and dis-mantling of fortifications, followed by the with-drawal of military and police forces; regularmixed local police and military units would re-main. Those who had not taken part in violent ac-tion up to the end of the second phase would notbe prosecuted.



In the third phase, full security and peace inthe region would be established, enabling theethnic Albanian community to be integrated intothe political, State and social systems and to havetheir human rights respected. That integrationwould reflect the local ethnic composition in theState institutions, economy and social activity, en-tailing appropriate representation on the execu-tive boards of municipalities and in the Govern-ment of Serbia, the elimination of all forms ofhuman rights violations through more effectivecontrol of police and other government bodiesand free access for accredited human rights or-ganizations.

Communication. The EU, on 15 February[S/2001/153], welcomed the plan adopted by FRYand Serbia on 8 February, which had been pre-sented to it by Serbia’s Deputy Prime MinisterNebojsa Covic on 15 February as a comprehensiveresponse to the crisis. The EU looked forward tothe implementation by Serbia and FRY of meas-ures to fully integrate the ethnic Albanian com-munity as soon as possible, and expected the eth-nic Albanian community in southern Serbia todesignate representatives to engage in construc-tive dialogue with Serbia and FRY. That impliedan immediate cessation of violence by armed ex-tremist Albanian groups in the GSZ.

NATO decisionOn 8 March [S/2001/214], the NATO Secretary-

General informed the UN Secretary-Generalthat, following the previous week’s fact-findingmission to southern Serbia and visits of a NATOpolitical-military team to Skopje, FYROM, theNorth Atlantic Council (NAC) had decided on anumber of steps regarding the GSZ to be imple-mented in the near future, together withconfidence-building measures, including aceasefire to be agreed between FRY and Serbianand ethnic Albanian representatives, and the ini-tiation of direct negotiations between the parties.NAC confirmed NATO’s intention ultimately toabolish the GSZ, but reaffirmed that the KFORCommander should retain authority over it andthe air safety zone under the terms of the 1999military-technical agreement [YUN 1999, p. 356]. Asa first step in a phased and conditioned reduc-tion of the GSZ, NAC authorized the Commanderto allow the controlled return of FRY forces intothe GSZ sector along Serbia’s border with FYROM(Sector C (East)). Further controlled return shouldcontinue rapidly thereafter along the northernboundary of Kosovo with Serbia proper (SectorA), including the strip of the FRY border with Al-bania (Sector C (West)). That part of the GSZ inthe municipality of Medvedja (Sector D) could bereleased at the same time as Sector A or later.

Further returns of FRY/Serbian forces wereauthorized on 22 March [S/2001/267] to Sectors Aand C (West) of the GSZ, subject to FRY’s agree-ment to the specific conditions set by the KFORCommander on 24 March; on 11 April [S/2001/360] to Sector D with effect from 12 April; and on14 May [S/2001/497] to Sector B with effect from 24May. The return to Sector B completed thephased and conditioned reduction of the GSZ.NAC also noted the FRY/Serbia proposals on keycapacity-building measures contained in the“Outline of the Plan for the Joint Security ForcesEntry into the GSZ Sector Bravo” and further as-surances made by Serbia’s Deputy Prime Minis-ter in his letters of 4 and 13 May.

Ceasefire agreementDuring the Security Council’s meeting on 16

March [meeting 4296], the FRY representative in-formed the Council of the agreement on a cease-fire in the GSZ in southern Serbia and the agree-ment between FRY and KFOR on the entry ofYugoslav forces into that part of the GSZ border-ing FYROM. FRY considered that conditions hadbeen created for the full implementation of theCouncil’s repeated requests to end the violenceand to have armed Albanian groups disarmed,disbanded and withdrawn from the GSZ. Steps to-wards a gradual and complete elimination of theGSZ would contribute to a comprehensive imple-mentation of the FRY/Serbia plan for a resolutionof the crisis (see p. 346).

The Council, in statement S/PRST/2001/8(see p. 350) of the same date, welcomed the cease-fire agreement and called for strict compliancewith its provisions. It also welcomed FRY’s planfor southern Serbia and NATO’s decision toauthorize the controlled return of FRY forces tothe GSZ.

Other developmentsCommunication. The EU, in a 22 May state-

ment on the demobilization of ethnic Albanianarmed groups in the Presevo Valley [S/2001/539],welcomed the commitment by representatives ofethnic Albanian armed groups to full demobili-zation in southern Serbia, signed on 21 May byUCPMB Commander Shefket Musliu. The EUurged all concerned to fully respect that commit-ment and to hand over their weapons to KFOR andreturn to civilian life. It encouraged FRY/Serbianauthorities and ethnic Albanian representativesto continue talks to consolidate implementationof confidence-building measures, including theearly establishment of a multi-ethnic police force.



UN Interim Administration Mission in Kosovo

The United Nations Interim AdministrationMission in Kosovo, established in June 1999 [YUN1999, p. 357], set up, for the purpose of executing itstasks, what were referred to as pillars, concernedwith interim administration (led by the UnitedNations), institution-building (led by OSCE), eco-nomic reconstruction (led by the EU), humanita-rian affairs (led by UNHCR), and police and jus-tice (formally launched by the United Nationson 21 May). UNMIK was headed by the SpecialRepresentative of the Secretary-General, HansHaekkerup (Denmark), who replaced BernardKouchner (France) on 13 January.

Upon assuming office, the new Special Rep-resentative laid out the following priorities forUNMIK: to establish a legal framework for provi-sional self-government in Kosovo as a precondi-tion for the holding of Kosovo-wide elections; todevelop further an effective law enforcement andjudicial system; and to advance economic recon-struction. The Special Representative would fos-ter regular dialogue with FRY and Serbia andopen an UNMIK office in Belgrade to contributeto the implementation of those priorities. In ad-dition, UNMIK continued to address a number ofserious challenges related to the security of allKosovo communities, to the ongoing struggle toestablish durable and universal law and order,and to the preparation of joint administrativestructures.

UNMIK’s efforts were facilitated and advancedby the series of regulations that the Special Rep-resentative issued during the year. In that con-nection, the Secretary-General submitted to theSecurity Council in March [S/2001/218/Add.1] thetexts of regulations 2000/62-69 and 2001/1-4and, in October [S/2001/926/Add.1], those of regu-lations 2001/23 and 2001/24.

Security Council consideration (January, Feb-ruary, March). The Council met on 18 Januaryand 13 February to consider the implementationof its resolutions relating to the situation in Ko-sovo. On 18 January [meeting 4258], the Under-Secretary-General for Peacekeeping Operationsupdated the Council on UNMIK’s progress in dis-charging its priority tasks, as identified by thenew Special Representative. He also briefed theCouncil on the return of Albanian Kosovars de-tained in FRY, the situation in the Presevo Valleyand the problem of depleted uranium.

In a further briefing to the Council on 13 Feb-ruary [meeting 4277], the Under-Secretary-Generalreported that the elaboration of the key princi-ples for discussions on the legal framework for aprovisional self-government was in progress.When completed, UNMIK would begin consulta-tions with local interlocutors and the interna-

tional community on mechanisms for the trans-fer of governmental powers. OSCE estimated thatpreparations for province-wide elections wouldtake eight months. Therefore, decisions on keyelements of the legal framework had to be com-pleted by April for elections to take place in 2001.Progress had already been made in updatingvoter lists. Meanwhile, UNMIK had begun to re-structure the Joint Interim Administrative Struc-ture (JIAS) to take account of the 2000 municipalelection results [YUN 2000, p. 367] and to preparefor a smooth transition to a locally managedstructure. In the continued implementation ofthose results, 18 of Kosovo’s 30 municipalitieshad appointed their chief executive officers andseven had set up their boards of directors.

To enhance the rule of law, UNMIK had underconsideration a more unified judicial, police andcivil administration coordination structure. Toimprove the quality of the judiciary, it had begunassessing the performance of 400 local judgesand prosecutors who had been urgently ap-pointed when UNMIK started. On the police side,UNMIK established the Police Organized CrimeIntelligence Unit and 3,138 cadets had gradu-ated from the Kosovo Police Service School.

The democratic changes in FRY and Serbiaproper [YUN 2000, p. 384] provided an opportunityfor a more constructive relationship with Bel-grade. In that regard, the establishment of anUNMIK office there to facilitate dialogue hadbeen agreed in principle. Negotiations were con-tinuing with FRY on detainees and missing per-sons from Kosovo, as well as on a prepared am-nesty bill, which UNMIK said should be extendedto all Kosovo Albanian detainees.

UNMIK was working to improve economicregulation and decrease Kosovo’s economic isola-tion by encouraging direct foreign investment.Plans were being made to restore the viability ofthe Trepca industrial complex [YUN 2000, p. 377]. Anumber of policy issues were being considered,as well as issues of interim management, owner-ship and debt claims, environmental damage rec-onciliation, restructuring and worker retraining,and the establishment of appropriate mininglaws.

As to security issues, recent demonstrations insouth Mitrovica, sparked by the death of a KosovoAlbanian youth in a 29 January grenade attack,became the focus for protests by Kosovo Alba-nians wanting to show that they did not trustKFOR to provide them with the necessary security.While the protests drew little reaction from theKosovo Serbs, threats against the Kosovo Alba-nian minority in north Mitrovica were reported.To defuse tensions, the Special Representativeand the KFOR Commander visited Mitrovica to



hold discussions with the local Albanian andSerb leaders. A joint declaration was signed bythe Special Representative, the KFOR Com-mander, the Mitrovica Municipal Assembly andlocal political representatives, calling for en-hanced security and expansion of the zone ofconfidence to ensure freedom of movement forresidents, the return of displaced persons andthe establishment of functioning political struc-tures. However, representatives of all local Serbfactions signed a statement of non-concurrence,arguing that the plan excluded Kosovo Serbs andthat expansion of the zone of confidence wasonly for north Mitrovica.

Another security concern related to tension inthe Presevo Valley and in southern Serbia (seep. 346). Besides an increase in attacks on KosovoSerbs and their property in Prizren, Mitrovica,Gnjilane and Pristina, pressure on Kosovo Serbsto sell their property remained high, particularlyin mixed municipalities. Dialogue had begunwith FRY, Serbian and Kosovo Serb and KosovoAlbanian political and community leaders onthe envisioned framework for Serb returns toKosovo.

On the question of depleted uranium, a draftreport on its effects, prepared by a World HealthOrganization assessment team, concluded thatits threat to public health and the environmentwas minimal. It recommended an informationcampaign to encourage public reporting of dis-coveries of depleted-uranium rounds, improvedmedical health data and an effective informationsystem on the health situation in Kosovo to helpmonitor all of its aspects, including with respectto depleted uranium.

On 6 March [meeting 4286], the Security Councilheld a private meeting with the participation ofFRY’s Prime Minister, Zoran Zizic, to exchangeviews on the Kosovo situation and on the imple-mentation of resolution 1244(1999). In a state-ment to the press [A/56/2], the President said thatCouncil members welcomed the Special Repre-sentative’s ongoing efforts to implement fullyresolution 1244(1999), including the develop-ment of an institutional framework for the provi-sional self-governing institutions of Kosovo.They called on all parties to support UNMIK inbuilding a stable and multi-ethnic democracy inKosovo and to ensure suitable conditions forKosovo-wide elections for those institutions assoon as feasible, including through the registra-tion of all habitual residents of Kosovo, the re-turn of refugees and adequate security for all.

Council members also welcomed the contin-ued improvement of relations between the FRYGovernment and UNMIK and KFOR, and sup-ported the early opening of an UNMIK office in

Belgrade. They stressed the importance of sub-stantial dialogue between Kosovo politicalleaders and the FRY Government.

Council members called for an end to all actsof violence in Kosovo, in particular those ethni-cally motivated, and urged all Kosovo politicalleaders to condemn those acts and to increaseefforts to create inter-ethnic tolerance. They wel-comed the adoption of an amnesty law in FRY,and stressed the importance of the immediaterelease of all Kosovo Albanian prisoners heldwithout charge or on political grounds as aconfidence-building measure.

They further welcomed the efforts under-taken, in particular by the EU and NATO, to sup-port FRY in solving the problems in southern Ser-bia (see p. 347).

Report of Secretary-General (March). TheSecretary-General, reporting in March onUNMIK [S/2001/218], stated that the current politi-cal situation among Kosovo Albanians was char-acterized by tensions between the two major par-ties, the Democratic League of Kosovo (LDK),which had a majority in 24 municipalities, andthe Democratic Party of Kosovo (PDK), which hada majority in three. Tensions arose from the twoparties’ inability to reach agreement on co-governance, highlighting the continuing mis-trust between them. Nevertheless, they wereunited in their desire for Kosovo-wide electionsin 2001 and in their condemnation of the most re-cent violence against Kosovo Serbs.

The Kosovo Serb community was likewise di-vided. The recent change of government in Bel-grade [YUN 2000, p. 384] contributed to a furtherdecrease in the influence of the Serb NationalCouncil–Gracanica in central Kosovo and of theSerb National Council in north Mitrovica. Al-though the former continued to participate inUNMIK’s Kosovo-wide institutions, its standingamong the Kosovo Serb community had dimin-ished. On the other hand, particularly in the Mi-trovica region, those forces associated with theDemocratic Opposition of Serbia (DOS) had con-solidated. Triggered by the violent events in Mi-trovica in January and February (see p. 350), thepositions of some Kosovo Serb leaders had hard-ened, with the creation of a self-styled “Commit-tee for the Defence of Mitrovica”. UNMIK hadmade an intense effort to re-engage Kosovo Serbleaders in the Mitrovica region on key issuesaffecting their communities.

To ensure the representative nature of the pro-vincial institutions, UNMIK had been examiningways to reform JIAS.

Persistent instances of ethnically and politi-cally motivated violence continued to pose athreat to the fulfilment of UNMIK’s mandate. In



late January and early February, violent protestsby the Kosovo Albanian population in southMitrovica resulted in the burning of KFOR andUNMIK police vehicles. To put an end to the dem-onstrations, UNMIK and KFOR persuaded KosovoAlbanian leaders to sign a joint declaration andplan of action. In Prizren and Pristina, violencebetween Kosovo Serbs and Kosovo Albanians wason the rise. On 24 January, in Velika Hoca, nearOrahovac municipality (Prizren region), six Ko-sovo Serb–owned houses were damaged by mortarfire. In early February, several attacks on KosovoSerb homes and churches occurred, including anexplosion that destroyed an Orthodox churchwest of Gnjilane on 7 February, as well as a num-ber of attacks against Kosovo Serb houses, manyof them potential dwellings for Kosovo Serbreturnees, and cultural sites in the Gnjilane,Prizren and Pristina regions. A spate of more se-rious attacks targeting Kosovo Serbs occurred inmid-February, the worst being the 16 February at-tack near Podujevo on a KFOR-escorted convoy ofcivilian buses en route from Nis in Serbia properto Gracanica near Pristina [S/2001/145].

Further Security Council consideration. At a16 March Security Council meeting [meeting 4296],which had before it the Secretary-General’sMarch report, the Special Representative statedthat, in order to accelerate the process of defin-ing a legal framework, he had established on6 March a working group of international andKosovar legal experts, including representativesof the major ethnic groups, to elaborate the struc-ture of the future institutions of provisional self-government in Kosovo. The group would indi-cate clearly those powers and competencies to betransferred and those to remain under his con-trol, but would not address the question of sover-eignty. Nor would the legal framework address orin any way prejudge the final political settlementon Kosovo’s status. The Special Representativeregretted the withdrawal of the group’s KosovoSerb member.

The Special Representative further reportedthat FRY’s Parliament had passed an amnesty law,covering, however, only a small number of theKosovo Albanian detainees, of whom close to 500remained imprisoned in Serbia. He called onBelgrade to transfer all detainees to UNMIK for areview of their cases according to internationalstandards. To further the normalization process,the Special Representative said two clear mes-sages from Belgrade were needed: one to the Ko-sovo Albanians, that Belgrade’s new democraticGovernment was prepared to take the steps nec-essary to normalize relations between it and Pris-tina; and another to the Kosovo Serbs, that theirfuture lay in Kosovo and that they should there-

fore participate in the structures established togovern the area.

According to the Special Representative, ex-tremist actions in FYROM (see p. 368) were desta-bilizing the situation in the region. Although theproblem was an internal one, it was important forKFOR and UNMIK to support FYROM in its effortsto solve it, including sealing off the border.

The Special Representative stated later in themeeting that he would welcome a visit by theSecurity Council to Kosovo, which should helpin addressing the implementation of resolution1244(1999).



The Security Council welcomes the briefing bythe Special Representative of the Secretary-Generalon progress in the implementation of its resolution1244(1999) of 10 June 1999.

The Council commends the Special Representa-tive of the Secretary-General and the commander ofthe Kosovo Force for their ongoing efforts to imple-ment fully resolution 1244(1999), undertaken underdifficult circumstances, and welcomes the priorityareas of work identified by the Special Representa-tive of the Secretary-General.

The Council welcomes the establishment of aworking group under the authority of the SpecialRepresentative of the Secretary-General aimed at de-veloping a legal framework for provisional insti-tutions for democratic and autonomous self-government in Kosovo and stresses the need for allethnic groups to be represented in the work of thisgroup. It underlines the need to keep the Govern-ment of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia in-formed on the process. It calls on all parties to sup-port the efforts of the United Nations Mission inKosovo to build a stable multi-ethnic democratic so-ciety in Kosovo and to ensure suitable conditions forKosovo-wide elections. It stresses the importance ofa number of steps being taken for the holding ofthese elections: the establishment of the legal frame-work, in particular the definition of the functionsand powers of the elected bodies; the development ofan integrated voter registry which should includethe refugees and internally displaced persons; fullinvolvement of all the communities in the ballot; anda high security environment for the voting.

The Council welcomes close contact between theGovernment of the Federal Republic of Yugoslaviaand the Mission and the international security pres-ence, in particular the steps taken towards the open-ing of a Mission office in Belgrade, which will facili-tate these consultations. It stresses the importance ofsubstantial dialogue between Kosovo political lead-ers and the Government of the Federal Republic ofYugoslavia.

The Council calls for an end to all acts of violencein Kosovo, in particular those which are ethnically



motivated and urges all political leaders in Kosovo tocondemn these acts and to increase their efforts tocreate inter-ethnic tolerance. It reiterates the impor-tance of resolving the problem of the missing and de-tainees and notes that this would be a majorconfidence-building measure. It welcomes the ini-tial steps taken by the Government of the FederalRepublic of Yugoslavia in this regard.

The Council remains concerned about the secu-rity situation in certain municipalities in southernSerbia as a result of the violent actions of ethnic Al-banian armed groups. It welcomes the ceasefireagreements signed on 12 March 2001 and calls forstrict compliance with their provisions. It stressesthat a peaceful settlement of this crisis can only beachieved through substantial dialogue. It commendsthe continued restraint of the authorities of the Fed-eral Republic of Yugoslavia and Serbia. The SecurityCouncil welcomes the plan of the Government of theFederal Republic of Yugoslavia for southern Serbiaand supports its initiative to find a peaceful and du-rable solution through a process of dialogue andconfidence-building measures. It expresses the opin-ion that the swift implementation of confidence-building measures would be an important elementin a peaceful settlement, and underlines the impor-tance of continued political and financial supportfor this process by the international community.

The Council welcomes the decision taken by theNorth Atlantic Treaty Organization to authorize thecommander of the international security presence toallow the controlled return of forces of the FederalRepublic of Yugoslavia to the Ground Safety Zone asdefined in the military-technical agreement signedin Kumanovo on 9 June 1999, referred to in annex IIof resolution 1244(1999), as a first step in a phasedand conditioned reduction of the Ground SafetyZone.

The Council reiterates its strong support for theformer Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia as set out inthe statement of its President of 7 March 2001. Itstrongly condemns the continuing extremist vio-lence in parts of the former Yugoslav Republic ofMacedonia, supported from outside the country,which constitutes a threat to the stability and secu-rity of the entire region, and underlines the impor-tance of maintaining the territorial integrity of theformer Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia and allother States in the region. It supports efforts by theGovernment of the former Yugoslav Republic ofMacedonia to cooperate with the North AtlanticTreaty Organization and other international organi-zations to end this violence in a manner consistentwith the rule of law.

The Security Council will remain actively seizedof the matter.

Communications. On 19 April [S/2001/382], FRYreported that, the previous day, a bomb activatedby remote control went off in front of the officesof the Committee of the Yugoslav Governmentfor Cooperation with UNMIK in Pristina, killingone person and wounding three others. On thesame date [S/2001/386], the FRY President, VojislavKostunica, expressed his exasperation over the

incident, which, he said, was further evidence ofthe extremely poor security situation in Kosovo,particularly affecting the few remaining non-Albanians, and of the failure of UNMIK and KFORto fulfil their tasks in accordance with SecurityCouncil resolution 1244(1999). He recalled thatat his 30 March meeting with the Secretary-General, he had pointed out the escalation of ter-rorism among Albanian extremists, who hadbeen reinforced and, to all appearances, encour-aged or at least incited by insufficient UNMIK andKFOR measures.

Serbia’s National Assembly, by a 4 May resolu-tion [S/2001/443], stated that, two years after the es-tablishment of civil and security presences, thesecurity situation in Kosovo and Metohija was be-coming increasingly serious. The return of ex-pelled persons was more uncertain than ever, andthe daily life of the remaining Serbs and othernon-Albanians was uncertain and risky. Inter-national representatives were working more forthe adoption of regulations on interim self-governance than on ensuring the population’ssafety and security. The National Assembly de-manded that UNMIK conduct an investigationwithin a month into the fate of all abducted andmissing persons and inform their families aswell as the public about the results. It appealedto all international human rights institutions tointensify their efforts to ascertain the fate of1,300 abducted and missing Serbs and other non-Albanians.

The establishment of customs points at the ad-ministrative boundary of Kosovo and Metohijawith central Serbia caused added concern andviolated resolution 1244(1999) (see p. 363). TheAssembly fully supported the population’s resist-ance to that gross breach of Yugoslav customslaws and Serbia’s tax legislation.

Moreover, the basic text of the draft legalframework for provisional self-government forKosovo, as prepared by UNMIK, did not provideeven minimum guarantees for protecting therights of Serbs and other non-Albanian commu-nities. It was unacceptable to adopt any “legalframework for provisional self-government forKosovo”, or to contemplate the holding of elec-tions, without the prior fulfilment of all obliga-tions stemming from paragraph 9 of resolution1244(1999), particularly those relating to the fulldemilitarization of the so-called Kosovo Libera-tion Army and other armed groups, as well as tothe establishment of a safe environment in whichdisplaced persons could return to their homes inconditions of full public safety and order.

The National Assembly demanded that theworking group on the elaboration of the legalframework adopt Serbia’s amendments ensuring



the maintenance of a multi-ethnic Kosovo andMetohija within Serbia and FRY and guarantee-ing the rights of ethnic communities, and the es-tablishment of an interim system of consensualdemocracy in which national and ethnic differ-ences were institutionally safeguarded.

Constitutional Frameworkfor Provisional Self-Government

The Secretary-General, in his June report onUNMIK activities [S/2001/565], informed the Secu-rity Council that the joint working group consti-tuted on 6 March had, over a nine-week period,elaborated a constitutional framework for Koso-vo’s provisional self-government. Represented inthe group were the three Albanian political par-ties, a Kosovo Serb member and a Bosniac repre-senting other minorities, in addition to a civil so-ciety representative, an independent expert andseven international members, including thechairman. The final document reflected thelarge measure of agreement reached in thegroup, including comprehensive provisions onthe structure and powers of the legislature, thejudiciary and the executive branch. Five issues onwhich there had been no agreement (the title ofthe document, the request for a directly electedPresident, a Constitutional Court, a referendumand a sunset clause spelling out the time periodof provisional self-government) were resolvedby the Special Representative, in consultationwith the Secretary-General. On 16 May, the Spe-cial Representative signed into law Regulation2001/9 on the Constitutional Framework for Pro-visional Self-Government and established, on 18May, the Steering Group on Issues of Implemen-tation of the Constitutional Framework to coor-dinate the efforts of five working groups dealingwith implementation.

The Constitutional Framework provided for a120-seat Assembly based on proportional repre-sentation, with the first 100 seats reserved for allregistered parties and 10 seats each for KosovoSerbs and other communities. A seven-memberpresidency of the Assembly would guide its work.The Assembly would elect a President, who in turnwould nominate a Prime Minister. The Frame-work contained extensive safeguards for the pro-tection of communities and human rights, in-cluding: an extensive list of guaranteed rights ofcommunities and their members in such areas aslanguage, education, employment, media andpublic services, with a reservation giving the Spe-cial Representative the power to intervene to pro-tect those rights; strong human rights provisions,including one on the right of all refugees and dis-placed persons to return to their homes and to re-

cover their property, and another requiring thatcompetent institutions had to facilitate returns;the creation of a Committee on the Rights andInterests of Communities in the Assembly withguaranteed and equal representation of commu-nities and special rights to review proposed legis-lation to ensure that the communities’ rights andinterests were adequately addressed and to en-able the Special Representative strictly to moni-tor the legislative process; guaranteed set-asideseats for Kosovo Serbs and other communities inthe Assembly to ensure adequate representation,as well as guaranteed representation of all com-munities in the Assembly presidency and otherbodies, including main and functional commit-tees; full control and authority by the SpecialRepresentative over the judiciary, including thepower to determine the assignment of interna-tional judges and prosecutors to cases so as to en-sure the fair administration of justice, particu-larly in sensitive cases involving communities;and broad authority for the Special Representa-tive to intervene and correct any actions of theprovisional institutions of self-government thatwere inconsistent with resolution 1244(1999), in-cluding the power to veto Assembly legislationwhere necessary.

The Framework also provided for the follow-ing mechanisms to address Kosovo Serb con-cerns: a procedure enabling the Assembly’s com-munity members to object to legislation they feltviolated their “vital interests” and to initiate aspecial process to avoid adoption of legislationwithout prior scrutiny by a panel in which a rep-resentative of the Special Representative and acommunity representative would have a major-ity; a requirement that the Ombudsperson givepriority to allegations of discrimination againstcommunities and their members and allegationsof violations of community rights; preambularlanguage reaffirming the commitment to thesafe return of refugees and displaced personsand to freedom of movement; and preambularlanguage stressing the importance of a free, safeand open political environment for members ofthe communities.

The Secretary-General said that key to the suc-cess of the Constitutional Framework was localacceptance of the document. In the main, reac-tions to its signing among Kosovo Albanian mem-bers of the Interim Administrative Council wereencouraging. Ibrahim Rugova and Ramush Ha-radinaj, leaders of LDK and the Alliance for theFuture of Kosovo, respectively, expressed theirsupport for the document, despite the exclusionof certain key requests that they intended to pur-sue. However, the PDK president, Hashim Thaci,said the document would hold hostage the aim of



Kosovo’s people, which was political indepen-dence. According to local media reports, the FRYauthorities and the Kosovo Serbs considered theFramework “unacceptable”. On 14 May, the Spe-cial Representative appeared on local televisionto announce the promulgation of the Constitu-tional Framework and 17 November as the datefor Kosovo-wide elections.

Communications. The EU, on 16 May [S/2001/538], welcomed the promulgation of the Constitu-tional Framework and the announcement of adate for elections. The EU urged all individualsand communities to participate in the electionsand to refrain from violence in the process lead-ing to them.

FRY, on 5 June [S/2001/563], informed the Secu-rity Council that, while it supported the estab-lishment of provisional institutions of self-government and was ready to cooperate fullywith the United Nations, UNMIK and the SpecialRepresentative, it had serious concerns and res-ervations regarding the Constitutional Frame-work and the holding of general elections, stress-ing that certain of the Framework’s elementsdisregarded the principle of respect for FRY’s ter-ritorial integrity and sovereignty. In particular, itomitted any express reference to Kosovo and Me-tohija as being part of FRY and Serbia—an unac-ceptable omission; the term “constitutional” inthe title implied that the document was a consti-tution of a State, which it was not nor could it be;references to “the people of Kosovo” could nei-ther bear nor imply any connection with the no-tion of “peoples” or the principle of “equal rightsand self-determination of peoples” as containedin the UN Charter or in the Declaration on Prin-ciples of International Law concerning FriendlyRelations and Cooperation among States in ac-cordance with the Charter of the UN, adopted byGeneral Assembly resolution 2625(XXV) [YUN1970, p. 789]; and the provisions on the President ofKosovo and Metohija and his/her responsibili-ties “in the field of external relations”, as well asthe related provisions concerning certain respon-sibilities of provisional institutions, were con-trary to the letter and the spirit of resolution1244(1999). As a part of FRY and Serbia, Kosovoand Metohija was represented in internationalrelations by the FRY Government, or by the Spe-cial Representative to the extent allowed underthat resolution. The reference to “the will of thepeople” in the Framework’s preamble had to beinterpreted without prejudice to the respect forthe principle of sovereignty and territorial integ-rity and should be understood as including thewill of all citizens of Serbia and FRY, expressed di-rectly or through their elected representatives.

In addition, the Framework did not containsufficient institutional guarantees for the pro-tection of rights and interests of national commu-nities. It was premature to transfer judicialresponsibilities to provisional institutions ofself-government, since conditions for a truly in-dependent and impartial judiciary did not exist;therefore, judicial affairs should have remainedwithin the reserved powers of the Special Repre-sentative. Also, any reference to the Kosovo Pro-tection Corps [YUN 2000, p. 364] was unacceptable.

FRY emphasized its support in principle for theelections, provided the conditions necessary forthe holding of truly all-inclusive, free and fairelections existed well before the election date.

Report of Secretary-General (June). Report-ing on the political situation in his June report onUNMIK [S/2001/565], the Secretary-General saidthat the political engagement of the Kosovo Serbcommunity remained a major challenge for UN-MIK, rendered more difficult by the branding ofthe Constitutional Framework as “unacceptable”by FRY authorities and by the continuing divi-sions within the community itself. In the Mitro-vica region, the self-styled Political Committeefor the Defence of Kosovska Mitrovica, formed inFebruary, had gained influence, with radical Ko-sovo Serb leaders seizing on the issue of UNMIKtax collection points along the northern adminis-trative boundary line (see p. 363) to furtherharden the stance of the Kosovo Serb communityin the region. The ensuing roadblocks and thelinkage made between the tax collection pointsand the Constitutional Framework made pro-gress on the issues in the divided city of Mitrovicaand on Kosovo Serb cooperation with UNMIKvery difficult. Faced with those difficulties, UN-MIK made efforts to re-engage Kosovo Serb lead-ers in the Mitrovica region and to encourage FRYto use its influence in that regard. To that end,the Secretary-General met with FRY PresidentKostunica in New York on 8 May, resulting insome recent positive indications, including en-couragement by FRY authorities of Kosovo Serbparticipation in civil registration and an agree-ment on tax collection points.

Continuing instances of ethnically and politi-cally motivated violence, as well as organizedcrime, remained of great concern. Tensions inthe Mitrovica, Gnjilane and Pristina regions hadincreased, as had targeted attacks on specific in-dividuals, particularly of the Kosovo Serb com-munity. There was a severe limitation on free-dom of movement as a result of the temporarysuspension of UNHCR-operated bus lines and theinterruption of train services. The single mostdisturbing and extreme act of violence was the 18April bomb attack in the centre of Pristina (see



p. 351). Kosovo Albanian leaders were swift tocondemn that attack, reflecting their relativelyrecent readiness to condemn such terrorist acts.Violence against the international communitywas on the rise. Openly aggressive behaviour to-wards law enforcement and security personnelhad become commonplace, taking the form ofthreats and assaults against members of the Ko-sovo Police Service, UNMIK police and KFOR. On11 April, a Russian KFOR soldier was fatally shotin the Kamenica area.

The Mitrovica region continued to be a focalpoint for violence and civil disobedience withinthe Kosovo Serb community. Following the arrestby UNMIK police of three Kosovo Serbs on 14March, the level of violence escalated, resultingin the injury of 21 UNMIK police officers anddamage to seven police vehicles and severalhouses. UNMIK police temporarily suspendedpatrols in northern Mitrovica, resuming them inearly May with KFOR assistance. The blockades ofcritical road junctions in the largely KosovoSerb–controlled northern municipalities of Le-posavic, Zubin Potok, Zvecan and north Mitro-vica from mid-April to early May further exacer-bated the situation in the region. On 24 May, theSpecial Representative promulgated regulation2001/10 on the prohibition of unauthorized bor-der/boundary crossings, making crossing at loca-tions other than at authorized border or bound-ary crossings a criminal offence.

In an effort to minimize the effect on Kosovo ofthe instability in the region, UNMIK fosteredclose cooperation with neighbouring States. Inthat context, the Special Representative met withAlbanian representatives on 15 and 16 April andagain on 16 May, as well as with FYROM authori-ties on 7 May.

An outbreak of inter-ethnic violence in FYROMand the resulting month-long closure of its bor-der with Kosovo until 3 April adversely affectedthe political and security situation in Kosovo andseverely limited UNMIK’s freedom of movementand the delivery of essential supplies.

Although UNMIK was concerned over thephased re-entry into the GSZ of the joint Yugoslavforces, particularly the last phased re-entry intosector B effective 24 May (see p. 347), all phasedredeployments went smoothly. Under considera-tion were programmes for the social rehabilita-tion of former UCPMB fighters to avoid furtheractivity should they remain unemployed. To re-duce the possibility of their becoming engaged inthe ongoing conflict in FYROM, KFOR was also in-creasing its efforts at the border with that coun-try.

Communication. In an 8 June press release[S/2001/601], the Russian Federation stated that,

since the adoption of resolution 1244(1999), theoverall situation in Kosovo had remained tense.Despite the massive international presence there,an unacceptably high level of violence persisted,and ethnic Albanian extremists and separatistscontinued to intimidate and force out Serbs andother non-Albanians, and persisted in aggravat-ing the situation in southern Serbia and FYROM.

UNMIK and KFOR efforts to ensure safe livingconditions for all communities and to achieve sta-bility had so far failed to bring about the expectedresults. The UNMIK leadership had taken deci-sions and actions without properly clearing themwith the Yugoslav leadership; it neither took fullaccount of the lawful interests of the Serb andother Kosovo communities, nor respected FRY’ssovereignty and territorial integrity, in particularthe promulgation by UNMIK’s head of the Consti-tutional Framework for Provisional Self-Govern-ment in Kosovo and his announcement of theholding of province-wide elections in November.

The Russian Federation was convinced thatthe Kosovo problem could be settled only on thebasis of the strict and full implementation ofresolution 1244(1999); it intended to do every-thing possible to contribute to that goal.

Security Council missionA Security Council mission on the implemen-

tation of resolution 1244(1999) visited Kosovo,FRY, from 16 to 18 June [S/2001/600]. Organizedpursuant to the Council’s 15 May decision[S/2001/482], the mission was to: find ways to en-hance support for the implementation of theresolution; observe the situation on the groundand UNMIK’s operations, including the difficultchallenges facing it; look at the impact of theregional situation on UNMIK’s work; convey astrong message to local leaders and all othersconcerned about the need to reject all violence,ensure public safety and order, promote stability,safety and security, inter-ethnic reconciliationand inclusion, support the full and effective im-plementation of resolution 1244(1999) and fullycooperate with UNMIK to those ends; and reviewongoing implementation of the prohibitions im-posed by the Council in resolution 1160(1998)[YUN 1998, p. 369].

The mission comprised the Permanent Repre-sentatives to the United Nations of Bangladesh(head of mission), China, Colombia, France, Ire-land, Jamaica, Mauritius, Norway, the RussianFederation, Tunisia, the United Kingdom andthe United States, a Counsellor of Mali andMinister-Counsellors of Singapore and Ukraine.

The mission held discussions with: the SpecialRepresentative and other related UN, OSCE andEU officials; a representative group of Kosovo



women; members of the Yugoslav Committee onKosovo and the Kosovo Serb representative in thejoint working group on the drafting of the Con-stitutional Framework; the UN regional adminis-tration in Mitrovica and, separately, Kosovo Alba-nian and Kosovo Serb representatives; theRussian Federation President, who was visitingthe region; the KFOR Commander; and the FRYPresident, Foreign Minister and Interior Minis-ter.

The mission found that, in the two years sinceits inception, UNMIK had made considerable pro-gress in implementing resolution 1244(1999), al-though much remained to be done. At the cur-rent critical stage of its mandate, the continuedeffectiveness of UNMIK required a major efforton its part and by KFOR and UNMIK police,backed up by the Council and by a sustained in-put of resources from the international commu-nity.

While the mission was left in no doubt thatstrong reservations existed about the difficultiesinvolved in advancing preparations for the Ko-sovo elections on the basis of the ConstitutionalFramework, it recognized that the status quo wasunacceptable and that a political process had tobe taken forward in accordance with resolution1244(1999). In underscoring that elections wouldenhance the democratic process in Kosovo andthe region’s stability, the mission stressed that se-cure conditions for holding them should be en-sured. The participation of all communities inthe elections, as well as the return of refugees anddisplaced persons so that they might also partici-pate, should be encouraged.

The mission supported UNMIK’s efforts to cre-ate a multi-ethnic Kosovo and emphasized theneed to remove current obstacles to it, such as in-adequate physical, social and economic security,and lack of freedom of movement and equal ac-cess to public services. It welcomed the SpecialRepresentative’s establishment of the new UN-MIK police and justice pillar (see p. 348) and leg-islation to combat organized crime, illegal weap-ons possession and terrorism. It noted theconsequent additional resources required forjustice and policing, an Assistant Secretary-General position to head the new pillar, increas-ing the number of international judges andprosecutors and additional detention facilities. Itrecommended that KFOR regularly provide de-tailed information on weapons seized so as to en-able the Security Council Committee establishedpursuant to resolution 1160(1998) to pursue pos-sible violations.

The mission also recommended that intensi-fied efforts be exerted towards resolving the issueof missing and detained persons (see p. 351). It

supported the development of a comprehensivestrategy to resolve the complex situation in Mi-trovica, and emphasized the need for multi-ethnic initiatives in the social, economic and reli-gious areas to start rebuilding confidencebetween the communities.

The mission underlined the responsibility ofthe Kosovo leadership for creating conditionsconducive to improving inter-communal rela-tions and promoting reconciliation. It conveyedto all community leaders that the responsibilitylay with them clearly and openly to reject vio-lence, extremism and terrorism, and that the ma-jority should ensure respect for the rights of theminority communities. It advised the Kosovo Al-banian leadership to be more forthcoming withregard to improving the treatment of the minor-ity communities. In turn, minority communitiesshould realize that there was no alternative to es-tablishing a multi-ethnic society. The missionacknowledged that those communities had legiti-mate grievances, which it urged UNMIK andKFOR to address, but believed that participationwas the only viable future for all communities.The Kosovo Serb community, in particular,should integrate into the structures being set upby UNMIK, rather than attempt to set up parallelones. UNMIK should enhance its dialogue withthe FRY authorities, whose influence in Kosovowas key in the implementation of resolution1244(1999). Further efforts to ensure full imple-mentation of that resolution remained a highpriority of the Council.

The mission’s report was presented to theCouncil on 19 June [meeting 4331] and debated on22 June [meeting 4335], during the Council’s con-sideration of the Secretary-General’s June reporton UNMIK (see p. 353).

Further developmentsSecurity Council consideration (July, August,

September). The Security Council, at its meet-ings on 26 July [meeting 4350] and 28 August [meet-ing 4359] and a private meeting on 17 September[meeting 4373], continued to review the political andsecurity developments in Kosovo and the effectson it of the security situation in FYROM.

At the July meeting, the Under-Secretary-General for Peacekeeping Operations informedthe Council that, in terms of implementing theConstitutional Framework, UNMIK was continu-ing to determine its provisions and to prepare forthe transfer of authority after the elections. Spe-cifically, UNMIK’s focus was on the developmentof the institutions of the executive branch, as theywere not spelled out in the Constitutional Frame-work, and on the support and oversight UNMIKwas to provide to those institutions. Preparations



for the transition had stressed the “Kosovariza-tion” of senior management and the capacity-building of local staff in administration, pro-curement, market management policy, budgetand finance.

The Under-Secretary-General also touched onrelations with Belgrade, which, he said, contin-ued to intensify. The appointment of Serbia’sDeputy Prime Minister as the Coordinator forKosovo added a new dimension to that relation-ship. Those relations were being complicated,however, by the increasingly direct activity of theauthorities of FRY and Serbia in Kosovo, includ-ing attempts by the Federal Committee for Ko-sovo to establish its own executive functions andbusiness registration activities in Kosovo, as wellas the opening of regional offices without UNMIKconsent. An additional complicating factor wasthe humanitarian convoy organized on 14 July bythe Kosovo Albanian party, PDK.

In his briefing of the Council at the Augustmeeting, the Under-Secretary-General said thatUNMIK was finalizing the structure of the institu-tions of provisional self-government, in whichthe JIAS departments would be streamlined into amore manageable number of government minis-tries. To build political consensus on the futurestructures, the Special Representative consultedthe local leadership, who had expressed supportfor the streamlining. Along with preparations atthe central level, the consolidation of municipalstructures continued, with further efforts to de-volve authority to municipalities. He informedthe Council that relations with Belgrade had im-proved. A step forward was the 15 August meet-ing between the Special Representative, the KFORCommander and Serbia’s Deputy Prime Minis-ter, at which the Special Representative reiter-ated the need to implement resolution1244(1999)in all of Kosovo and to ensure that no parallel se-curity and administrative structures were inplace, especially in Mitrovica and northern Ko-sovo. UNMIK was currently exploring administra-tive ways to improve working relations with FRY’sJoint Coordination Centre for Kosovo. In keep-ing with the parties’ agreement to meet regularly,they held another meeting near Pristina on 21August.

At the private meeting on 17 September,the Council was briefed by Serbia’s DeputyPrime Minister, who was also head of FRY’sCoordination Centre for Kosovo. He expressedconcern about the continuing violence in Kosovo,the very small number of displaced persons re-turning to the province and the certification ofextremist parties. He appealed for cooperationbetween UNMIK and FRY authorities along the

lines of the cooperation developed between KFORand Yugoslav authorities in the GSZ (see p. 347).

Communication. On 25 July [S/2001/740], theFRY Foreign Minister, in a letter addressed to theSpecial Representative, complained that the“Guidelines for visits of government officials andpolitical entity representatives from the FederalRepublic of Yugoslavia” to Kosovo, adopted byUNMIK and conveyed to him on 17 July, werelikely to impede rather than facilitate visits ofgovernment officials and political party repre-sentatives. The formalities required, includingconditions for approval and periods for the sub-mission of requests for visits, contained seriousrestrictions that implied relations between sover-eign States, which were clearly inappropriate forvisits by individuals from the rest of FRY to Ko-sovo and Metohija, an integral part of FRY and itsconstituent Republic of Serbia. Those measureswere not conducive to fruitful cooperation withthe international community. The Foreign Min-ister asked the Special Representative to recon-sider the Guidelines, and expressed FRY’s readi-ness to settle that and other matters by anagreement on cooperation with, and on the statusof, UNMIK.

Report of Secretary-General (October). In hisOctober report on UNMIK [S/2001/926], theSecretary-General noted that, despite PDK’s ini-tial reticence in respect of the ConstitutionalFramework, all major Kosovo Albanian politicalforces appeared to have lent their support to im-portant political and security initiatives and cru-cial legislation to combat terrorism and organ-ized crime.

On the sensitive issue of the Framework for Re-turn of Kosovo Serbs, the stated preference of theKosovo Albanian members of the Interim Ad-ministrative Council was for that return processto start after the November elections. In publicstatements, however, they acknowledged the roleof the Kosovo Serb community in Kosovo’s fu-ture, marking a significant departure from thepreviously held position of the main politicalparties. They moreover joined UNMIK in callingon the Kosovo Serb community to register andparticipate in the November elections and agreedthat special measures had to be taken to protectthe Kosovo Serb community and guarantee itspresence in Kosovo.

The political engagement of the Kosovo Serbcommunities was an ongoing challenge, as theirpolitical entities continued to look to Belgradefor sponsorship and direction. The communitiesremained divided and reluctant to participate inthe administrative structures. Progress in incor-porating minority communities in the municipalassemblies and related structures was mixed, al-



though recent advances were noted, particularlythe assumption of seats in the Pristina MunicipalAssembly by three Kosovo Serb appointees.

Ethnically motivated violence against Kosovominority communities continued, including anincrease in the number of attacks at the begin-ning of August and of September. Nevertheless,freedom of movement of minority communitiesincrementally improved, following UNMIK’s fullassumption of operational responsibility for thebus lines, hitherto sponsored by UNHCR, and forthe “freedom of movement” trains between keyKosovo communities. The number of incidentsinvolving the use of weapons remained alarming.UNMIK and KFOR continued to eliminate unau-thorized weapons in Kosovo and, in a Kosovo-wide operation, KFOR continued to confiscateweapons and seek out suspected members ofarmed groups. Following a number of apparentlypolitically motivated criminal incidents, includ-ing the attempted assassination of an LDK politi-cian in Srbica (Mitrovica region), UNMIK re-established the Political Violence Task Force tocoordinate response to any such future attempts.

UNMIK worked with KFOR to reduce the im-pact on FYROM of ethnic Albanian armed groupsoperating from Kosovo and to sever possible tiesbetween radical elements in Kosovo and the so-called National Liberation Army operating in FY-ROM (see p. 372). More than 1,200 people hadbeen detained and processed under regulation2001/10 on the prohibition of unauthorized bor-der/boundary crossings. KFOR reported no evi-dence of any involvement of the Kosovo Protec-tion Corps in FYROM. UNHCR estimated that26,000 refugees from FYROM remained in Ko-sovo as at 30 September, mainly in the Gnjilaneregion. UNMIK was increasingly concerned aboutthe potential impact on inter-ethnic relations ofethnic Albanian refugees from FYROM taking upresidence in Kosovo. It feared that the presenceof thoserefugees in theGnjilaneandPrizrenregions,where the majority were interspersed amongmixed and minority communities, could affectareas being considered for minority returns.

Substantial progress had been made in thepreparations for the transfer of authority to theinstitutions of provisional self-government. On13 September, the Special Representative prom-ulgated regulation 2001/19 on the ExecutiveBranch, setting out the functions and competen-cies of the ministries of the provisional self-government. Work was under way to streamlinethe 20 JIAS departments into 10 ministries, cover-ing the executive functions listed in chapter 5 ofthe Constitutional Framework. The regulationalso defined the functions and responsibilities ofthe senior civil service of the provisional institu-

tions of self-government and laid out generalprinciples for its establishment, including a re-quirement that its composition should generallyreflect the participation of Kosovo’s various com-munities in the Assembly.

UNMIK continued preparations for the elec-tions to the Kosovo Assembly. Voter and civil reg-istrations were conducted from 30 July to 22September. New Kosovo Albanian registrantstotalled 23,940, while new minority communityregistrants (mainly Kosovo Serbs) totalled 69,349.In Serbia proper, 98,380 people registered, and5,873 in Montenegro. Mail-in registration ap-plications numbered 58,456. The institution-building pillar estimated that over 170,000 newregistrants from non-Albanian Kosovo commu-nities had registered, some 150,000 of whomwere Kosovo Serbs.

To encourage participation of all communitiesin the electoral process and in the ensuing insti-tutions of provisional self-government, theinstitution-building pillar established a specialtask group with five mobile teams to reach out toKosovo Serbs and communities of internally dis-placed persons currently living in and outsideKosovo. A call on Kosovo Serbs to register byFRY’s President and by Serbia’s Prime Minister atthe end of August gave momentum to the pro-cess, triggering an average daily registration of3,000 to 4,000 Kosovo Serbs.

Between 22 June and 20 July, 33 political enti-ties applied for certification, of which 25 had sofar been certified by the Central Election Com-mission. An estimated 12,000 to 14,000 candi-dates were expected to run for office. The Com-mission had adopted electoral rules covering therole of municipal election commissions, thestatus of observers during the electoral process,the issue of candidate registration and equitablemedia access for political entities. The Commis-sion had also determined that one third of thecandidates in the first two thirds of the registra-tion list should be women. The institution-building pillar re-established the Political PartyConsultative Forum, which had proved effectivein disseminating election information for the2000 municipal elections [YUN 2000, p. 367]. OSCEcontinued its educational project, “Voters’ voices”,to hear voters’ concerns about Kosovo-wideissues.

SECURITY COUNCIL ACTION (October)

On 5 October [meeting 4388], following consulta-tions among Security Council members, thePresident made statement S/PRST/2001/27 onbehalf of the Council:

The Security Council welcomes the report of theSecretary-General and commends the Special Rep-



resentative of the Secretary-General and the com-mander of the international security presence(KFOR) for their ongoing efforts to implement fullyresolution 1244(1999).

The Council welcomes the elections to be held on17 November as a basis for the establishment of dem-ocratic self-governing institutions as specified inthe Constitutional Framework for Provisional Self-Government, under which the people of Kosovo,Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, will enjoy substan-tial autonomy in accordance with resolution 1244(1999). It emphasizes the responsibility of Kosovo’selected leaders to respect fully the final status provi-sions of resolution 1244(1999). It reaffirms its com-mitment to the full implementation of resolution1244(1999), which remains the basis for buildingKosovo’s future.

The Council supports the continuing efforts bythe United Nations Mission in Kosovo and KFOR toimprove public security, including through the con-fiscation of weapons and the package of legislationto combat violence, and to facilitate the return of dis-placed Serbs and members of other communities. Itcalls on Kosovo Albanian leaders to actively supportthese efforts to promote security and return, and tocombat extremism, including terrorist activities. Itfurther calls on all Kosovo leaders to publicly con-demn violence and ethnic intolerance. It calls onthem to exert all their influence and assume their re-sponsibility for actively ensuring that the campaignand the elections are peaceful, democratic and inclu-sive. It stresses the need for proper organization andadequate security for the elections on 17 November,and welcomes continuing steps taken in that regard.

The Council calls on all women and men of Ko-sovo to vote in the elections of 17 November. This willprovide for the broadest possible representation ofviews in the institutions of the provisional self-government. The Council commends the authoritiesof the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, particularlyPresident Kostunica, for their encouragement to theKosovo Serb community to register, which confirmsthe multi-ethnic character of Kosovo, and calls onthem to also actively encourage the fullest possibleparticipation in the vote. It underlines the impor-tance, for the Kosovo Serb community, to integrate inthe structures set up by the Mission. It encouragesthe further development of a constructive dialoguebetween UNMIK and the authorities of the FederalRepublic of Yugoslavia.

The Security Council will remain actively seizedof the matter.

Communications. FRY’s President, in a 6 No-vember letter [S/2001/1051], drew the Secretary-General’s attention to the FRY-UNMIK joint docu-ment known as the Common Document, signedthe previous day, defining issues and cooperationbetween FRY and UNMIK for the consistent andcomprehensive implementation of resolution1244(1999). The President noted that the Docu-ment included agreement on provisions relatedto the judiciary and to the police in the Serb-majority areas, without which the Document

would not have been complete. The Presidentsaid he was convinced that implementation of theDocument, together with the establishment ofthe related high-ranking working group, wouldensure better communication and open institu-tional cooperation between UNMIK, FRY and Ser-bia to resolve accumulated problems in Kosovoand Metohija, in compliance with resolution1244(1999) and FRY’s territorial integrity and sov-ereignty. He also referred to his and Serbia’s callon Kosovo Serbs to take part in the 17 Novemberelections, which he believed was in their best in-terest.

In a 6 November statement [S/2001/1081], the EUwelcomed the 3 November call on Kosovo Serbsto participate in the 17 November elections andthe signing on 5 November of the UNMIK-FRYjoint document.

SECURITY COUNCIL ACTION (November)

On 9 November [meeting 4409], following con-sultations among Security Council members, thePresident made statement S/PRST/2001/34 onbehalf of the Council:

The Security Council welcomes the progressmade in preparing the Kosovo-wide elections on 17November 2001 and calls on the Special Representa-tive of the Secretary-General and all parties con-cerned to continue to strive for full implementationof resolution 1244(1999) of 10 June 1999. It furthercalls upon all women and men of Kosovo, FederalRepublic of Yugoslavia, to vote.

The Council welcomes the helpful role played bythe President of the Federal Republic of Yugoslaviaand the Governments of the Federal Republic ofYugoslavia and the Republic of Serbia in recom-mending Kosovo Serb participation in the elections.Participation will allow them to take part in shapingKosovo’s multi-ethnic future.

The Council welcomes the signing on 5 November2001 of the UNMIK-FRY Common Document by theSpecial Representative of the Secretary-General andthe Special Representative of the President of theFederal Republic of Yugoslavia and the Governmentof the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia and theGovernment of the Republic of Serbia. This docu-ment is consistent with resolution 1244(1999) andthe Constitutional Framework for Provisional Self-Government in Kosovo.

The Council reaffirms the statement of its Presi-dent of 5 October 2001. It encourages the further de-velopment of a constructive dialogue between theUnited Nations Interim Administration Mission inKosovo and the authorities of the Federal Republicof Yugoslavia. It emphasizes the responsibility of theprovisional institutions of self-government and allconcerned to respect fully the final status provisionsof resolution 1244(1999). It underlines its continuedcommitment to the full implementation of resolu-tion 1244(1999), which remains the basis for buildingKosovo’s future.



Transitional arrangementsThe Special Representative, reporting to the

Security Council on 5 October [meeting 4387], saidthat UNMIK was moving into a determining phaseof interim administration in Kosovo. After theNovember elections, its role of direct administra-tive responsibility would evolve into one of over-sight. UNMIK would transfer many of its interimadministrative responsibilities to the provisionalinstitutions of self-government, but would con-tinue closely to monitor and support those insti-tutions to ensure compliance with resolution1244(1999), the Constitutional Framework andother relevant UNMIK regulations. During thatperiod, its overarching mandate would remainthe same, as would the Special Representative’sultimate authority.

In accordance with UNMIK regulation2001/19, ten ministries would compose the Execu-tive Branch of the provisional self-government(see p. 357). One of the ministers would comefrom the Kosovo Serb community and one fromthe non-Albanian community. To lay the ground-work for the transfer of responsibility to the min-istries, the JIAS departments were merged intotransitional administrative departments, whosecomposition reflected the distribution of respon-sibilities set out in regulation 2001/19. From 3October until the certification of the generalelections, UNMIK would continue to consolidatethe transitional administrative departments,while preparing for their separation into provi-sional self-government ministries and reservedUNMIK structures. Also on 3 October, the func-tion of “Co-heads” ceased and all Co-heads weregiven leave with pay until 17 November.

As part of the transition, the Kosovo Transi-tional Council concluded its activities on 2 Octo-ber, but the Interim Administrative Councilwould continue to operate until the date of thetransfer of powers to the provisional institutions.Functional responsibility for the administrationof Kosovo would be divided between UNMIK andthe provisional institutions of self-government.The transfer once made, the UNMIK structuresand the provisional institutions of self-government would become separate and distinctentities. The future Assembly, however, would beable to pass legislation only within the trans-ferred areas of responsibility.

The Executive Branch would consist of the Of-fice of the Prime Minister and the Ministries ofFinance and Economy; Trade and Industry; Edu-cation, Science and Technology; Culture, Youthand Sports; Health, Environment and SpatialPlanning; Labour and Social Welfare; Transportand Communications; Public Services; and Agri-culture, Forestry and Rural Development. The

Ministers would be political appointees selectedby the Prime Minister and confirmed by the As-sembly. They would be responsible for settingpolicy and political direction for the Ministriesbut would not exercise direct administrative con-trol over them. The Ministers would be assistedby up to five political appointees, one or more ofwhom would serve as a Vice-Minister, to whomthe Minister could delegate authority in the lat-ter’s absence. Although most structures associ-ated with JIAS would be absorbed into the Minis-tries, some, such as law enforcement, thejudiciary and emergency preparedness, wouldremain under UNMIK’s immediate control.

International staff members would be placedin the reserved and transferred structures. In theformer, they would implement reserved func-tions, in line with resolution 1244(1999) andchapter 8 of the Constitutional Framework. Inaddition, a number of international staff mem-bers would be seconded to the provisional institu-tions of self-government, mostly to the Ministries,to oversee and monitor compliance with resolu-tion 1244(1999), the Constitutional Frameworkand key UNMIK regulations. To that end, a seniorinternational officer would sit next to each Min-ister to oversee, monitor and advise the Minister.

Other international staff members would sit inactual line management positions within theMinistry, where they would implement certaintransferred functions for a limited time underthe authority of the local Minister. They wouldgradually exchange their functional responsibili-ties for a purely advisory and oversight role asadditional qualified Kosovo civil servants wereidentified and recruited.

Although there would be a clear functionaland organizational separation between UNMIKand the provisional institutions of self-government, procedures would be in place toensure that the Assembly and the Governmentfully respected resolution 1244(1999) and theConstitutional Framework for Provisional Self-Government.

Kosovo-wide electionsThe Assistant Secretary-General for Peace-

keeping Operations, in his briefing of the Secu-rity Council on 27 November [meeting 4430], saidthat the period leading up to the elections wasrelatively calm and free of violence. All partiescarried out rallies throughout Kosovo that werepeaceful and that largely adhered to the electoralrules.

Eligible voters totalled 1,250,318 (1,108,787 inKosovo, 105,159 in Serbia and Montenegro and36,372 by mail), of whom an estimated 150,000were Kosovo Serbs. More than 1,300 candidates



from 26 political parties contested the elections,including 60 from the Kosovo Serb Return Coali-tion. The signing of the UNMIK-FRY CommonDocument (see p. 358) largely made it possiblefor that Coalition to decide to participate in theelections and to provide its list of candidates.FRY’s and Serbia’s 3 November endorsement ofKosovo Serb participation in the elections alsohelped. At the same time, it was agreed that amemorandum of understanding would be signedwith the respective commissariats for refugees,enabling UNMIK’s OSCE-led institution-buildingpillar to carry out technical preparations forthe elections in Serbia and Montenegro in con-junction with the International Organization forMigration (IOM).

The election for the Assembly went smoothly.There were 13,286 local observers from all com-munities, as well as several hundred others fromthe Belgrade-based Centre for Free Elections andDemocracy. The overall turnout was 64.3 percent of Kosovo’s 1.25 million registered voters,with an estimated 65 per cent in primarily KosovoAlbanian areas and about 46 per cent in non-Albanian areas. Kosovo Serb participation waspatchy, with a higher turnout in the enclaves thanin northern Mitrovica.

On 24 November, the Special Representativecertified the final results of the vote as follows:the Democratic League of Kosovo (LDK) received45.65 per cent (359,851 votes); the DemocraticParty of Kosovo (PDK), 25.7 per cent (202,622votes); the Return Coalition, 11.34 per cent(89,388 votes); and the Alliance for the Future ofKosovo (AAK), 7.83 per cent (61,688 votes).

Seven smaller political parties, includingthree from the minority communities, receivedenough votes to obtain one seat each in the As-sembly: the VATAN Coalition, a coalition of Bosni-acs and Gorani; the National Movement for theLiberation of Kosovo (LKCK); the Turkish Peo-ple’s Party of Kosovo (KDTP); the Christian Dem-ocratic Party of Kosovo (PSHDK); the Justice Party(PD); the People’s Movement of Kosovo (LPK); andthe New Democratic Initiative of Kosovo (IRDK), anew Egyptian political party.

On the basis of those results, 14 parties wouldbe represented in the Assembly, 11 through directelections and 3 with set-aside seats. LDK would beallocated 47 seats; PDK 26; the Return Coalition22, which included the 10 seats set aside for theKosovo Serb community in the ConstitutionalFramework; AAK 8; VATAN 4, including 3 set-asideseats; KDTP 3, including 2 set-aside seats; the Ash-kali Albanian Democratic Party 2 set-aside seats;IRDK 2, including 1 set-aside seat; LKCK 1; LPKand PD 1; PSHDK 1; and 1 set-aside each for the

United Roma Party of Kosovo and the BosniacParty of Democratic Action of Kosovo.

The Assistant Secretary-General said it wasclear from the results that no party would be ableto govern alone, since 61 seats in the Assemblywere required for a majority. Negotiations hadtherefore begun on coalition-building.

The Council, in a 19 November press state-ment by its President [S/2002/160], welcomed the17 November elections, which were held in peace-ful and orderly conditions and with a good turn-out of all communities. It was an important stepin the implementation of resolution 1244(1999)and would make possible the establishment ofdemocratic institutions of self-government. TheCouncil recalled the responsibility of Kosovo’selected leaders to respect that resolution fully, inparticular its final status provisions, and to com-ply with the Constitutional Framework, whichwould contribute to building a democratic, plu-ralist and prosperous future for all of Kosovo’scommunities.

Establishment of provisionalinstitutions of self-government

In a later report on UNMIK [S/2002/62], theSecretary-General stated that, since no partygained enough seats in the Assembly to governalone, attention was focused on forming a coali-tion. The main efforts concentrated on a power-sharing arrangement between the three main Ko-sovo Albanian parties. On 7 December, UNMIKarranged a meeting between Mr. Rugova, leaderof LDK, and Mr. Thaci, leader of PDK. Represen-tatives of foreign Governments also hosted meet-ings with the main party representatives in theAssembly.

On 10 December, the Assembly held its inau-gural session, at which both the seven-memberpresidency of the Assembly and the President ofKosovo were to be elected; the latter would thennominate a Prime Minister for endorsement bythe Assembly. However, PDK did not submit can-didates for the two presidency seats reserved forit, and the Assembly elected only its President,Nexhet Daci of LDK, and four other members(one from LDK, two from the Kosovo Serb ReturnCoalition and one from the United Roma Party).On 13 December, the Assembly met again to electthe President of Kosovo. The only candidate wasMr. Rugova, who received 49 votes—well short ofthe 80 votes required.

The Secretary-General also reported thatsecurity and freedom of movement for Kosovominority communities remained a serious con-cern. On 1 December, KFOR and UNMIK policelaunched the largest simultaneous weaponssearch operation, involving 3,000 soldiers from



all five multinational brigades, which resulted inthe arrest of 12 people and the seizure of an as-sorted range of weaponry.

Sectoral developments

Kosovo minority communitiesThe number of persons returning to Kosovo

continued to decline. In January, IOM assistedsome 430 persons to return voluntarily, while theUNMIK border police reported that some 530 per-sons had been forcibly returned. The Frameworkon Return of Kosovo Serbs, adopted in Januaryby the Joint Committee on Returns of KosovoSerbs in Gracanica, outlined measures for estab-lishing conditions conducive to safe and sustain-able return, such as the provision of basic servicesand effective policing. Consultations on theFramework had begun with Kosovo Albanianpolitical and community leaders, as well as withhuman rights activists, religious leaders andjournalists. To further create conditions condu-cive to returns, the Joint Committee adopted anaction plan for the 10 most advanced potential re-turn locations in Kosovo, which was set in motionby local working groups. The first organized re-turns began on a small scale, with the voluntaryreturn on 13 August of 53 Kosovo Serbs to theOsojane Valley (Pec region), one of the 10 sitesidentified in the action plan, followed by the re-turn of 30 more internally displaced persons on22 August. More returns to Osojane followed andmore were expected. Mixed returns began at theend of August in the Leshtar area near Kamenica(Gnjilane region). UNHCR, with funding fromthe European Agency for Reconstruction and bi-lateral donors, was providing temporary shelterand basic needs while the returnees recon-structed their houses. Work also continued tofacilitate the potential return of members of theKosovo Roma, Ashkali and Egyptian communi-ties.

However, the non-Albanian communities, par-ticularly the Kosovo Serbs, continued to sufferdisproportionately from major crimes and ethni-cally motivated acts of intimidation, eroding theconfidence of minority communities and under-mining the Special Representative’s efforts to in-clude all of Kosovo’s inhabitants in the currentadministrative structures and in the future self-government. Some progress was made in incor-porating Kosovo minority communities at themunicipal level. Most Kosovo Turks, Roma, Ash-kali, Egyptians and Bosniacs had taken up theirreserved seats in the municipal assemblies andhad been generally accepted by their Kosovo Al-banian colleagues. The participation of KosovoSerbs, however, had been uneven at best.

To coordinate UNMIK’s approach towards en-gaging the Kosovo Serb community, several pri-ority initiatives were being pursued to addressthat community’s day-to-day concerns, includingthe allocation of revenues from taxes collected inKosovo to minority communities; the implemen-tation of employment-generating projects; im-proved public services and utilities; integrationof the 24 local community offices as part of thelocal administration structure to ensure equal ac-cess to public services; and the provision of moreeducational and health facilities, as well as socialwelfare benefits. In addition, the OSCE-ledinstitution-building pillar had established theSmall Investment Minorities Fund for particu-larly vulnerable minority groups, which focusedon income-generating projects or projects re-lated to health, education and culture.

Multi-ethnic capacity-building was also pro-moted through the Kosovo Police Service, where15 per cent of the cadets were from minority com-munities. In addition, Kosovo Albanians and Ko-sovo Serbs were cooperating in fire and rescueservices and in demining activities. At the end ofApril, the first two Kosovo Serbs, alongside twoKosovo Turks, were inducted into the Kosovo Pro-tection Corps.

A major advance on the issue of missing per-sons was the establishment on 19 June of theUNMIK/FRY contact groups on missing personsand detainees, which had since met twice monthlyin Pristina and Belgrade. Their work resulted inincreased Kosovo Serb participation in the judi-cial system and support for the UNMIK recruit-ment campaign in Serbia proper for judges andprosecutors; the development of mechanisms tocoordinate administrative and operational sup-port for defence counsels, witnesses and familymembers; the assistance of Serbian forensic pa-thologists in the confirmation of post-mortemresults; the production of a consolidated list ofmissing Kosovo Serbs and other minorities; andthe development of protocols for joint verificationand forensic teams and for the cross-boundaryrepatriation of identified remains. Another keydevelopment was the signing of a memorandumof understanding between UNMIK and the Inter-national Commission for Missing Persons on 24July to begin the process of DNA testing to facili-tate the identification of missing persons.

Investigations continued on a number of massgraves in Serbia proper, believed to contain theremains of Kosovo Albanians. UNMIK had beenprovided with some details on the graves’ con-tents and on recent post-mortem findings.

Regarding the problem of Kosovo Albaniandetainees in Serbia proper, discussions were inprogress on the possible handing over of their



cases to UNMIK for judicial review. Talks were alsoin progress with the Belgrade authorities aboutKosovo Serb detainees in Kosovo, addressing con-cerns of bias, miscarriage of justice and security.

The main strategy to deal with educationissues focused on building a sustainable KosovoSerb education system, with full recognition ofthe structures under the Constitutional Frame-work and maintaining strong ties with educa-tional reforms in Serbia. A delegation headed bythe international joint head of the Department ofEducation visited Belgrade to discuss issues relat-ing to Kosovo Serb schools, teachers’ contractsand curricula. The core curriculum would allowthe Kosovo Serb community to retain its specialsyllabus for general and vocational education.The language issue had also come close to a prac-ticable solution: Albanian would be offered as anoption in Kosovo Serb schools, but would not becompulsory.

Judicial system and rule of law

A major focus of UNMIK efforts was on improv-ing the quality and functioning of the judiciaryin Kosovo. The credentials and performance ofcurrent judges and prosecutors were undergoingrigorous assessment, while screening of pro-spective candidates continued. The institution-building pillar had begun taking steps towardsthe provision of advocacy and legal aid. A work-ing group was set up to coordinate plans to sys-tematize and expand legal aid and guarantee mi-nority access to it. The problem of access to thejudiciary was compounded by difficulties in re-cruiting non-Albanian Kosovo judges and prose-cutors, especially in the light of security threatsagainst those groups. The ombudsperson institu-tion was fully operational and currently investi-gating cases pertaining to employment disputes,to violations of property rights, social rights andequal access to public services, and to discrimina-tory practices.

The institution-building pillar, UNMIK policeand the Department of Justice were jointly en-deavouring to bring the practices and proceduresof the Kosovo law enforcement and judicialauthorities in line with international humanrights standards. It established a working groupwith the Department of Justice to implement therecommendations set out in its Six-month Re-view of the Criminal Justice System. A review ofthe criminal code, juvenile law and commerciallegislation in Kosovo was under way. The KosovoLaw Centre was cooperating with the Universityof Pristina Law Faculty in the implementation ofacademic reform and development of the lawcurriculum.

The creation of the new police and justice pil-lar (see p. 348) coincided with robust measuresby UNMIK to bolster the legislative basis for prose-cuting serious crime, including terrorism andorganized crime. On 24 May, the Special Repre-sentative signed regulation 2001/10 on the prohi-bition of unauthorized border/boundary cross-ings, which came into effect on 4 June, togetherwith regulation 2001/7 on the authorization ofpossession of weapons in Kosovo, following amonth-long amnesty. Other initiatives includedthe elaboration of legislation to combat terror-ism, the creation of more robust mechanisms fordetaining alleged criminals, and implementationof systems to make the criminal prosecution in-stitutions more just.

Key to UNMIK efforts to improve the justice sys-tem were its activities, through the ProsecutionServices and Court Administration (PSCA), to co-ordinate and implement local judiciary reform.Currently employed in local courts and othernon-correctional judicial institutions were 325local judges, with 51 prosecutors plus a further617 lay judges and about 1,000 operational sup-port staff. PSCA developed a comprehensiveinspection system to ensure the judiciary’sindependence and impartiality. Administrativedirection 2001/4, issued on 11 May, establishedthe Judicial Inspection Unit to conduct inspec-tions, audits and investigations within the judi-cial system.

On the legislative front, three key regulationswere signed on measures against organizedcrime, on cooperative witnesses and on the pro-tection of injured parties and witnesses in crimi-nal proceedings. Work started on refurbishing awitness protection office; a witness protectiondirector was appointed, who had begun develop-ing a witness protection programme. Progresswas also made in forming the Kosovo OrganizedCrime Bureau. On 25 August, regulation 2001/18on the establishment of a detention review com-mission for extrajudicial detention based on ex-ecutive orders was promulgated, providing amechanism for the review of extrajudicial deten-tions based on such orders, additional proce-dural protection and enhanced transparency.

The Department of Justice continued itsrecruitment efforts to increase the number of in-ternational judicial personnel, currently com-prising eight international judges and six inter-national prosecutors. An additional four judgesand four prosecutors were under recruitmentand, in August, an international prosecutor wasappointed to the Office of the Public Prosecutor.

To raise the quality of the domestic judicialsystem, the Kosovo Judicial and ProsecutorialCouncil began the first disciplinary hearings in



mid-September against local judges and prosecu-tors, stemming from investigations by the Judi-cial Inspection Unit. Progress was also made inthe selection of judges and prosecutors, estab-lishment of codes of conduct, judicial evaluationsand the bar examination.

A more complex prison infrastructure was de-veloping: five detention centres and two prisonswere in operation and housed 664 inmates. Thequick-build detention facility project to providean additional 200 beds was proceeding, togetherwith the refurbishment of Dubrava prison, pro-viding another 300 beds. The construction of aspecial secure unit at Dubrava prison for high-risk prisoners was nearing completion. TheDepartment of Justice had also begun imple-menting basic programmes in education andvocational training in the Lipljan and Dubravaprisons. Two urgent priorities were the develop-ment of a parole and probation service andaddressing the needs of mentally ill inmates.

Communication. On 26 April [S/2001/428], theEU issued a statement welcoming the decision bySerbia’s Supreme Court to release 145 KosovoAlbanians of the so-called Djakova/Djakovicagroup, sentenced in May 2000 to prison terms ofbetween seven and 13 years for acts of terrorismallegedly carried out during the NATO campaignin 1999. The EU expected Serbia to complete thereview of the remaining cases as rapidly as possi-ble in order to correct the injustices of theMilosevic era.

Economic reconstruction and developmentThrough the UNMIK economic reconstruction

pillar, Kosovo’s emergency reconstruction needshad been largely met, so that emphasis beganshifting towards developing economic sustain-ability. International donors, led by the EU andits member States, the United States and Japan,continued to support Kosovo’s developmentdrive. The 2001 Kosovo consolidated budgetsought 700 million deutsche mark (DM) in newcommitments to fund public reconstruction andinvestment programme activity, of which someDM 381 million had been committed by the end ofMarch.

Meanwhile, domestically generated revenueincreased as tax collection improved. That wasachieved through UNMIK’s tax policy, notified toFRY in February, under which tax collectionpoints were set up on 15 April along Kosovo’s bor-ders and boundary lines, where a 15 per centsales tax was levied on all saleable goods (exceptwheat, flour, fruit and vegetables) and an excisetax on alcohol, cigarettes and fuel. A 10 per centcustoms duty was also levied, except for goodsoriginating in FYROM and the rest of FRY. Despite

efforts to explain the legality and necessity of thetax collection points to the public, the KosovoSerb population interpreted their emplacementas compromising FRY’s sovereignty and SecurityCouncil resolution 1244(1999). At the end ofMay, FRY authorities, in a joint statement signedwith UNMIK’s economic reconstruction pillar,agreed to the tax collection points along the ad-ministrative boundary line in northern Kosovo.By October, 90 per cent of the official commer-cial traders were reporting to tax collection of-fices in Mitrovica, approaching the level of com-pliance in the rest of Kosovo. Businesses innorthern Kosovo were also registering with UN-MIK to pay tax. As part of the strategy for creatinga sustainable tax system for Kosovo, a 15 per centvalue added tax (VAT) on most goods and servicesto replace the previous sales tax of the same ratecame into effect in July. As donor funding ta-pered off, VAT would become the main tax in Ko-sovo and was expected to support growth in theexport sector.

In the private sector, efforts were made to at-tract investment and foster industry throughcommercialization projects. Some 58 commer-cialization tenders had been issued, for abouthalf of which bids had been received. Extra in-vestment had come into Kosovo as a result of thecommercialization process. The economic recon-struction pillar made progress in creating a bank-ing sector. The Banking and Payments Authorityof Kosovo approved two new branches for theNew Bank of Kosovo in Orahovac (Prizren re-gion) and Djakovica (Pec region). On 1 Septem-ber, the Micro Enterprise Bank opened a branchin the “Confidence Zone” in Mitrovica.

Progress was also made in the communicationsand transportation sectors. Under a project toupgrade the communications network, transmis-sion links were restored in many municipalities.A new digital telephone exchange, with a capac-ity of 23,000 lines, was installed in Pristina andthe extension of the mobile network was continu-ing. Improvements in the transportation andcommunications infrastructure had also facili-tated economic development and interaction be-tween the different areas. Pristina airport wasundergoing expansion and improvement of serv-ices. The experimental Pristina-Pec passengertrain service had become permanent and freightrail traffic between FYROM and Kosovo had beenrunning with increased frequency and payload.Work was also ongoing to improve Kosovo’spower supply.

UNMIK policeAt the end of 2001, UNMIK’s police strength

stood at 4,465 from 24 countries, out of the 1999



authorized strength of 4,718 [YUN 1999, p. 360]. Itspriorities remained to increase success in solvingserious crimes, in particular ethnically and politi-cally motivated crimes. Work continued to reducenon-critical policing functions to allow an in-creased concentration of resources on core policepriorities. Greatly helping that effort was theentry into force on 25 April of legislation on theoperation of security service providers, whichwould free up UNMIK police resources.

With the launching in May of the police andjustice pillar, the UNMIK police and the Depart-ment of Judicial Affairs were realigned into asingle structure. That structure, headed by aDeputy Special Representative, who assumedduty on 16 August, had as its objectives to: con-solidate a law and order structure that was re-sponsive to peacekeeping and peace-building ob-jectives and contributed to the promotion of therule of law institutions in Kosovo; maintain effec-tive international control and oversight over po-lice and justice activities during the transition pe-riod; increase the short-term impact of law andorder efforts through enhanced coordination ofinformation and work; enable effective policeand judicial response against destabilizing seri-ous criminal activity in Kosovo; and establish anunbiased judicial process through initial interna-tional participation and reform of the judicialsystem.

The police and justice pillar would oversee theplanned expansion of the Kosovo Police Service(KPS) from the current target of 4,000 police offi-cers to a total of 6,000 by the end of 2002. The fo-cus of training activities would shift from basictraining to more supervisory and special train-ing, anticipating the handover strategy of super-visory responsibility by UNMIK police to the KPSofficers.

Communications. On 16 March [S/2001/238],Zimbabwe, a police-contributing country to UN-MIK, informed the Security Council Presidentthat the United Kingdom had constrained Zim-babwe’s efforts to deliver arms and ammunitionto its civilian police in Kosovo, because BritishAirways, the only airline flying to Kosovo, re-fused to transport them. The reason given for theairline’s refusal was that it was consistent with theBritish Government’s current policies on theGovernment of Zimbabwe. Zimbabwe felt thatUN peacekeeping operations should not be heldhostage to bilateral relations between MemberStates. It asked that the Secretary-General bringthe matter to the attention of relevant UNauthorities with a view to its speedy resolution.

The United Kingdom replied on 20 March[S/2001/260] that that was the first time it hadheard of the matter. Its investigation revealed

that British Airways, a private company totally in-dependent of the British Government, hadinformed Zimbabwe of its inability to carry theequipment in question because of the UnitedKingdom embargo on arms exports to Zimbabweand concerns over their transport across London,but had suggested alternative carriers. TheUnited Kingdom said it was unlikely that its armsembargo would have applied in that case, and itsActing High Commissioner, when informed ofthe matter, had advised that it appeared to be aminor, practical problem and he was ready tofind a solution if contacted. No subsequent con-tact was made by Zimbabwe’s Foreign Ministry orpolice. The United Kingdom remained open todiscussing the matter directly with the Zimbabweauthorities and in no way wished to obstruct Zim-babwe’s participation in UNMIK.

UNMIK financingIn June, the General Assembly considered the

Secretary-General’s report on UNMIK financialperformance for the period 10 June 1999 to 30June 2000 [A/55/724], the proposed budget forUNMIK’s maintenance for the period 1 July 2001to 30 June 2002 and ACABQ’s related observationsand recommendations [A/55/874/Add.6]. On 14June [meeting 103], the Assembly, on the recom-mendation of the Fifth Committee [A/55/663/Add.1], adopted resolution 55/227 B without vote[agenda item 133].

Financing of the United Nations InterimAdministration Mission in Kosovo


General on the financing of the United NationsInterim Administration Mission in Kosovo and the re-lated reports of the Advisory Committee on Adminis-trative and Budgetary Questions,

Bearing in mind Security Council resolution 1244(1999) of 10 June 1999 regarding the establishment ofthe United Nations Interim Administration Mission inKosovo,

Recalling its resolution 53/241 of 28 July 1999 on thefinancing of the Mission and its subsequent resolutionsthereon, the latest of which was resolution 55/227 A of23 December 2000,

Acknowledging the complexity of the Mission,Reaffirming the general principles underlying the

financing of United Nations peacekeeping operationsas stated in General Assembly resolutions 1874(S-IV) of27 June 1963, 3101(XXVIII) of 11 December 1973 and55/235 of 23 December 2000,

Noting with appreciation that voluntary contributionshave been made to the Mission by certain Govern-ments,

Mindful of the fact that it is essential to provide theMission with the necessary financial resources to en-able it to fulfil its responsibilities under the relevantresolution of the Security Council,



1. Takes note of the status of contributions to theUnited Nations Interim Administration Mission in Ko-sovo as at 30 April 2001, including the contributionsoutstanding in the amount of 202.4 million UnitedStates dollars, representing 24 per cent of the total as-sessed contributions from the inception of the Missionto the period ending 30 June 2001, notes that some 20per cent of the Member States have paid their assessedcontributions in full, and urges all other MemberStates concerned, in particular those in arrears, to en-sure payment of their outstanding assessed contribu-tions;



4. Urges all other Member States to make every pos-sible effort to ensure payment of their assessed contri-butions to the Mission in full and on time;




8. Reiterates its request to the Secretary-General tomake the fullest possible use of facilities and equip-ment at the United Nations Logistics Base at Brindisi,Italy, in order to minimize the costs of procurement forthe Mission;

9. Endorses the conclusions and recommendationscontained in the report of the Advisory Committee onAdministrative and Budgetary Questions, in particularparagraph 9, and requests the Secretary-General toensure their full implementation;

10. Expresses concern about the high level of unliqui-dated obligations in the Mission as at 30 June 2000;

11. Requests the Secretary-General to improve thetimeliness and accuracy of the expenditure data for theMission;

12. Approves, on an exceptional basis, the special ar-rangements for the Mission with regard to the applica-tion of article IV of the financial regulations of theUnited Nations, whereby appropriations required inrespect of obligations owed to Governments providingformed units and/or logistic support to the Missionshall be retained beyond the period stipulated under fi-nancial regulations 4.3 and 4.4, as set out in the annexto the present resolution;

13. Requests the Secretary-General to take all neces-sary action to ensure that the Mission is administeredwith a maximum of efficiency and economy;

14. Also requests the Secretary-General, in order toreduce the cost of employing General Service staff, tocontinue efforts to recruit local staff for the Missionagainst General Service posts, commensurate with therequirements of the Mission;

15. Decides to appropriate the amount of413,361,800 dollars gross (385,256,870 dollars net) forthe maintenance of the Mission for the period from1 July 2001 to 30 June 2002, inclusive of the amount of12,098,009 dollars gross (10,617,193 dollars net) for thesupport account for peacekeeping operations and theamount of 1,263,791 dollars gross (1,134,877 dollarsnet) for the United Nations Logistics Base, to be appor-tioned among Member States in accordance with thelevels set out in General Assembly resolution 55/235, asadjusted by the Assembly in its resolution 55/236 of 23December 2000, the scale of assessments for the year2001 to be applied against a portion thereof, that is,206,680,900 dollars gross (192,628,435 dollars net),which is the amount pertaining to the period ending 31December 2001, and the scale of assessments for theyear 2002 to be applied against the balance, that is,206,680,900 dollars gross (192,628,435 dollars net) forthe period from 1 January to 30 June 2002;

16. Decides also that, in accordance with the provi-sions of its resolution 973(X) of 15 December 1955,there shall be set off against the apportionment amongMember States, as provided for in paragraph 15 above,their respective share in the Tax Equalization Fund ofthe estimated staff assessment income of 28,104,930dollars approved for the Mission for the period from1 July 2001 to 30 June 2002;

17. Decides further that, for Member States that havefulfilled their financial obligations to the Mission,there shall be set off against the apportionment, as pro-vided for in paragraph 15 above, their respective shareof the unencumbered balance of 65,272,000 dollarsgross (57,860,300 dollars net) in respect of the periodending 30 June 2000, in accordance with the composi-tion of groups as set out in paragraphs 3 and 4 of Gen-eral Assembly resolution 43/232 of 1 March 1989 andas adjusted by the Assembly in subsequent relevantresolutions and decisions for the ad hoc apportion-ment of peacekeeping appropriations, the latest ofwhich were resolution 52/230 of 31 March 1998 and de-cisions 54/456 to 54/458 of 23 December 1999 for theperiod 1998-2000, and taking into account the scale ofassessments for the year 2000, as set out in its resolu-tions 52/215 A of 22 December 1997 and 54/237 A of 23December 1999;

18. Decides that, for Member States that have not ful-filled their financial obligations to the Mission, theirshare of the unencumbered balance of 65,272,000 dol-lars gross (57,860,300 dollars net) in respect of the pe-riod ending 30 June 2000 shall be set off against theiroutstanding obligations in accordance with the schemeset out in paragraph 17 above;


20. Encourages the Secretary-General to continue totake additional measures to ensure the safety and secu-rity of all personnel under the auspices of the UnitedNations participating in the Mission;

21. Invites voluntary contributions to the Mission incash and in the form of services and supplies accepta-ble to the Secretary-General, to be administered, as ap-propriate, in accordance with the procedure and prac-tices established by the General Assembly;

22. Decides to include in the provisional agenda ofits fifty-sixth session the item entitled “Financing of



the United Nations Interim Administration Mission inKosovo”.

ANNEXSpecial arrangements with regard to the application of

article IV of the financial regulations of the United Nations1. At the end of the twelve-month period provided

for in financial regulation 4.3, any unliquidated obliga-tions of the financial period in question relating togoods supplied and services rendered by Governmentsfor which claims have been received or which are cov-ered by established reimbursement rates shall be trans-ferred to accounts payable; such accounts shall remainrecorded in the Special Account for the United NationsInterim Administration Mission in Kosovo until pay-ment is effected.

2. In addition:(a) Any other unliquidated obligations of the finan-

cial period in question owed to Governments for provi-sion of goods and services rendered but not yet veri-fied, as well as other obligations owed to Governments,for which claims have not yet been received shall re-main valid for an additional period of four years fol-lowing the end of the twelve-month period provided forin financial regulation 4.3;

(b) Claims received during this four-year period aswell as approved verification reports shall be treated asprovided for under paragraph 1 of the present annex,if appropriate;

(c) At the end of the additional four-year period,any unliquidated obligations shall be cancelled and thethen remaining balance of any appropriations retainedtherefor shall be surrendered.

The Assembly further decided on 24 Decem-ber that the item on UNMIK financing would re-main for consideration during its resumed fifty-sixth (2002) session (decision 56/464) and thatthe Fifth Committee should consider the item atthat session (decision 56/458).

International security presence (KFOR)

During the year, the Secretary-General sub-mitted to the Security Council, in accordancewith resolution 1244(1999) [YUN 1999, p. 353], re-ports on the activities of KFOR, also known as Op-eration Joint Guardian, covering the period 23November 2000 to 31 October 2001 [S/2001/52,S/2001/205, S/2001/333, S/2001/465, S/2001/578, S/2001/707, S/2001/832, S/2001/910, S/2001/1002, S/2001/1131].Two later reports covered activities during the re-mainder of the year [S/2002/122, S/2002/183]. As at31 December, the force, which operated underNATO leadership, comprised 38,500 troops fromall NATO countries, as well as from non-NATOcountries.

KFOR continued to uncover and confiscate sig-nificant amounts of weapons, ammunition andexplosives, ranging from rifles to rockets andmines, during search operations. As at December,the total number of weapons destroyed under theweapons destruction programme stood at 10,132.The programme, temporarily suspended to allow

repairs to be made to the destruction facility, wasscheduled to resume in January 2002. KFOR con-tinued to support UNMIK in the restoration of lawand order. From mid-April, KFOR had to dealwith public disorder in Mitrovica and northernKosovo, in reaction to the implementation of theUNMIK excise and sales tax collection policy (seep. 363). On 18 May, it carried out jointly with UN-MIK a search operation in Pec that resulted in thearrest of 26 persons and the confiscation of largeamounts of weapons, documents and computerhardware and software. KFOR forces continued toprovide appropriate control of Kosovo’s internalboundaries, external borders and recognizedcrossing points. In reinforcing its presence alongthe border with FYROM, KFOR interdicted themovement of personnel and weapons into andout of the northern part of FYROM and betweenAlbania and Kosovo. At the end of August, KFORestablished mobile weapons collection teamsclose to the border with FYROM to collect weap-ons and screen suspected members of the Na-tional Liberation Army.

On 17 August, the KFOR Commander signedtemporary operating procedures with FRY set-ting conditions for future cooperation andcoordination on ending the conflict in the GSZ,following the North Atlantic Council’s decisionon the relaxation of the Zone (see p. 347). KFORalso supported UNMIK and OSCE during theKosovo-wide elections on 17 November.

KFOR continued to provide regular assistanceon request to international organizations andnon-governmental organizations (NGOs) through-out Kosovo and to provide framework security insupport of UNMIK police operations targetingorganized crime, prostitution and smuggling. Inaddition, it continued to support safe conditionsfor minority returns. On 9 May, the KFOR Com-mander promulgated a directive, “KFOR and KPC(Kosovo Protection Corps)—Partners for the Fu-ture”, setting out guidelines for the future rela-tionship between them.

Sanctions against FRY

On 14 June [S/2001/592], FRY requested the Se-curity Council to terminate the prohibitions re-lating to the shipment of arms imposed against itby resolution 1160(1998) [YUN 1998, p. 369]. It saidthat, since all the reasons that had led to the im-position of the prohibitions specified in para-graph 8 of that resolution no longer existed, FRYexpected a favourable review of its request.

On 6 September [S/2001/849], the Secretary-General informed the Council that, since theadoption of resolution 1160(1998), the politicaland security situation in the region had changed



considerably. The new FRY authorities were coop-erating constructively with the internationalcommunity in efforts to bring peace and stabilityto the Balkan region. The Council, in statementS/PRST/2001/8 (see p. 350), had welcomed theclose contact between FRY and UNMIK and KFORand stressed the importance of dialogue betweenKosovo political leaders and FRY. Accordingly, hebelieved that FRY had complied with the provi-sions of resolution 1160(1998); the Council mighttherefore wish to reconsider the prohibitions inparagraph 8 of that resolution.


On 10 September [meeting 4366], the SecurityCouncil unanimously adopted resolution 1367(2001), based on a draft [S/2001/854] prepared inconsultations among Council members.

The Security Council,Recalling its resolutions 1160(1998) of 31 March 1998,

1199(1998) of 23 September 1998 and 1203(1998) of 24October 1998, and reaffirming, in particular, its reso-lutions 1244(1999) of 10 June 1999 and 1345(2001) of 21March 2001,

Noting with satisfaction that the conditions listed inparagraph 16 (a) to (e) of its resolution 1160(1998) havebeen satisfied,

Noting, in that respect, the letter of the Secretary-General dated 6 September 2001,

Noting further the difficult security situation alongKosovo’s administrative boundary and parts of theborder of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia and em-phasizing the continuing authority of the Secretary-General’s Special Representative as head of the inter-national civil presence and of the Commander of theinternational security presence (KFOR) to restrict andstrictly control the flow of arms into, within and out ofKosovo, pursuant to resolution 1244(1999),

Acting under Chapter VII of the Charter of theUnited Nations,

1. Decides to terminate the prohibitions establishedby paragraph 8 of resolution 1160(1998);

2. Decides further to dissolve the Committee estab-lished by paragraph 9 of resolution 1160(1998).

Sanctions Committee final report. In October,the Chairman of the Security Council Commit-tee established pursuant to resolution 1160(1998)(Sanctions Committee) submitted a final reportcovering the Committee’s activities from 1 Janu-ary to 10 September 2001 [S/2001/931].

According to the report, the Committee hadapproved Bulgaria’s request to export 2,000 tonsper month of industrial explosives to several min-ing companies in FRY. Switzerland brought to theCommittee’s attention the case of an arms ship-ment to FRY reported in the Chinese press, stat-ing that criminal proceedings had been con-ducted by the Geneva authorities and two personswere arrested on 13 July 2000 and charged. TheCommittee approved under the no-objection

procedure a request by the United Kingdom totransfer demining equipment to humanitariandemining organizations working for UNMIK.

The Committee drew attention to the Coun-cil’s mission to Kosovo in June (see p. 354) and itsrequest that KFOR provide detailed informationon weapons seized to enable the Committee topursue any possible violations. The Secretary-General informed NATO’s Secretary-General ofthat request but no such information had beenprovided to the Committee by 10 September.

The Committee received no reports on actualviolations or alleged violations of sanctions meas-ures from States and relevant regional and inter-national organizations. It sought and receivedadditional information on the case of violationsunder investigation by the Geneva authorities.Reports on the activities of KFOR and the Stabili-zation Force in Bosnia and Herzegovina con-tained no information on violations.

Other issues

Arrest of Slobodan Milosevic

The Secretary-General, in a press statement on2 April [SG /SM/7761], said that the arrest of Slobo-dan Milosevic, former FRY President, was an im-portant step in the healing process in the Balkansand commended the FRY authorities for that deci-sive action. The Secretary-General noted that theFRY authorities had an obligation to cooperatewith the International Tribunal for the FormerYugoslavia (ICTY) and urged them immediatelyto discuss with the Tribunal how that cooperationcould be extended.

In a press release issued on 28 June [SG/SM/7870], the Secretary-General welcomed the de-cision of the FRY authorities to transfer Mr. Mi-losevic to ICTY in The Hague, saying it was a vic-tory for accountability over impunity. He hopedthat that day would mark a true break with thepast and the beginning of a new spirit of co-existence throughout the former Yugoslavia. (Forfurther details, see PART FOUR, Chapter II.)

Relations with Montenegro

The European Council, at its meeting in Stock-holm, Sweden (23-24 March) [S/2001/305], amongits concluding statements, called on Montenegroand FRY/Serbian authorities to agree on new con-stitutional arrangements within the federalframework through an open and democratic pro-cess in order to contribute to stability in the re-gion.

The EU, in a 23 April statement [S/2001/415],welcomed the orderly conduct of the 22 Aprilparliamentary elections in Montenegro, FRY, and



looked forward to the formation of a Govern-ment that would continue the path of democraticreform. The EU urged the new MontenegrinGovernment to resume dialogue with Belgradewithout delay towards an agreed definition offederal relations. The successful outcome ofthat dialogue, which should exclude any unilat-eral action, would enable the EU to continue itspolitical, economic and financial support toMontenegro.

Former Yugoslav

Republic of Macedonia

The situation along the border of the FRY prov-ince of Kosovo with the former Yugoslav Repub-lic of Macedonia (FYROM), which had beenbrought to the Security Council’s attention in2000 [YUN 2000, p. 384], escalated in 2001 as armedAlbanian insurgent groups launched attacks onFYROM forces across the border. In the FYROMcapital of Skopje, on 23 February [A/56/60-S/2001/234], FRY President Vojislav Kostunica andFYROM President Boris Trajkovski signed the“Agreement for the delineation of the borderlinebetween the Republic of Macedonia and the Fed-eral Republic of Yugoslavia” demarcating theborder between their two countries.

The EU, in a 28 February statement of its Presi-dency [S/2001/203], urged all parties to respect theborder demarcation agreement and reiterated itsstrong attachment to the principle of inviolabilityof borders, including FYROM’s territorial integ-rity. It also expressed concern about the recentescalation of violence in the border region be-tween FRY/Kosovo and FYROM, particularly inthe village of Tanusevci.

The Tanusevci incident, involving the land-mine and sniper killing of three FYROM soldiers,was reported to the Council by FYROM in a4 March letter [S/2001/191], calling for an urgentCouncil meeting and KFOR action to clear the Ko-sovo border area near Tanusevci. FYROM’s Presi-dent, at a meeting that included the Prime Min-ister, the Speaker of the Parliament, the am-bassadors of EU and NATO countries and OSCErepresentatives, also proposed that NATO and theEU support his request for immediate KFOR ac-tion, as well as public support for FYROM’s self-defence and preservation of its territorial integ-rity and sovereignty. It was the intention of FY-ROM’s Foreign Minister to present to the Councilmeeting an action plan for the cessation of vio-lence and lasting stabilization on the Kosovo sec-

tion of the border with FRY and to prevent aspillover of violence into FYROM.

Action plan

FYROM’s Minister for Foreign Affairs, inbriefing the Security Council on 7 March [meet-ing 4289], said that in the past few weeks, his coun-try had been confronted with a serious problemcaused by unidentified extremist militant groupsstationed on its northern border, which had oc-cupied the village of Tanusevci from where theyhad been continuously provoking armed inci-dents; on 4 March, three FYROM soldiers werekilled.

The extremists had not put forth their de-mands or requests, and were holding the local Al-banian population hostage, and, as the borderbelt with Kosovo was inhabited mostly by ethnicAlbanians, they were also affecting the inter-ethnic relations in FYROM. Tanusevci was a seri-ous warning that the FYROM border area with Ko-sovo could be used constantly for provoking thosekinds of incidents, thus threatening the peace, se-curity and stability of FYROM and the entire re-gion.

FYROM was undertaking numerous activities tofind a peaceful solution in close cooperation withthe international community, and had under-taken a measured security response to the prov-ocations. KFOR activities in the initial stage werenot as effective as necessary, thus causing addi-tional problems for the operations of FYROM’ssecurity forces. However, those cooperation diffi-culties had been overcome.

To resolve the situation, the Governmentadopted an action plan to prevent a spillover ofthe conflict from both sides of the border. Spe-cifically, the plan proposed full observance ofCouncil resolution 1244(1999) [YUN 1999, p. 353];the immediate establishment of a ground safetyarea along the entire Kosovo side of the FYROM-Yugoslav border by KFOR and willing countries;the undertaking of urgent actions by KFOR forstrict compliance of the provisions related to themovement of military and paramilitary forma-tions, arms shipments and a ban on the move-ment and gathering of larger groups in the groundsafety zone; strengthening the coordination ofactivities between FYROM’s armed forces andKFOR, disarming paramilitary extremist groupsand bringing them to justice; and creating condi-tions for the return of the inhabitants of Ta-nusevci to their homes. The action plan also pro-posed that the FYROM Government strengthenthe existing measures along the border and un-dertake additional ones to prevent a spillover ofthe conflict, especially by reinforcing police con-trol with new border police units.



The seriousness of the problem and the timingof its occurrence demanded prompt preventiveaction, the Foreign Minister said. The Councilshould be aware that the incident in Tanusevcishould be seen in the broader context of the Bal-kan region and its transformation into a peace-ful, stable, democratic and prosperous Europeanregion. He called on the Council to support themeasures proposed so as to reaffirm the precon-ditions for a peaceful and democratic develop-ment of the Balkans, with inviolable, stable andtransparent borders.



The Security Council welcomes the participationof the Foreign Minister of the former Yugoslav Re-public of Macedonia in its meeting on 7 March 2001and carefully listened to him.

The Council strongly condemns recent violenceby ethnic Albanian armed extremists in the north ofthe former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, in par-ticular the killing of three soldiers of the armedforces of the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedo-nia in the area of Tanusevci. The Council regrets thatthe violence continues and calls for an immediateend to it.

The Council expresses its deep concern at thoseevents, which constitute a threat to the stability andsecurity not only of the former Yugoslav Republic ofMacedonia but also of the entire region. It calls on allpolitical leaders in the former Yugoslav Republic ofMacedonia and Kosovo, Federal Republic of Yugo-slavia, who are in a position to do so to isolate theforces behind the violent incidents and to shouldertheir responsibility for peace and stability in the re-gion.

The Council underlines the responsibility of theGovernment of the former Yugoslav Republic of Ma-cedonia for the rule of law in its territory. It supportsactions by the Government of the former YugoslavRepublic of Macedonia to address the violence withan appropriate level of restraint and to preserve thepolitical stability of the country and foster harmonybetween all ethnic components of the population.

The Council recalls the need to respect the sover-eignty and territorial integrity of the former Yugo-slav Republic of Macedonia. In this context it em-phasizes that the border demarcation agreement,signed in Skopje on 23 February 2001, and ratified bythe Parliament of the former Yugoslav Republic ofMacedonia on 1 March 2001, must be respected byall.

The Council welcomes the steps taken by the in-ternational security presence (KFOR) to control theborder between Kosovo, Federal Republic of Yugo-slavia, and the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedo-nia in accordance with the military-technical agree-ment signed in Kumanovo on 9 June 1999. Itwelcomes the ongoing dialogue between the Govern-

ment of the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedoniaand KFOR on practical steps to address the immedi-ate security situation and to prevent crossing of theborder by extremists as well as possible violations ofresolution 1160(1998) of 31 March 1998. It welcomesthe efforts of all relevant international organizationsin cooperation with the Government of the formerYugoslav Republic of Macedonia to promote stabil-ity and to create conditions for a return of the in-habitants to their homes.

The Council will continue to follow the develop-ments on the ground closely, and requests to bebriefed regularly on the outcome of the efforts re-ferred to above.

EU communications. On 8 March [S/2001/211],Sweden transmitted to the Secretary-General adeclaration by the EU Presidency condemningthe ethnic Albanian extremist attacks on 4 Marchnear Tanusevci and calling for such acts to stopimmediately. It also called on all FYROM politicalleaders to isolate the forces behind such attacksand shoulder their responsibility for peace andstability in the region. The EU reiterated itsstrong attachment to the principle of the inviola-bility of borders, including FYROM’s territorialintegrity and sovereignty.

In a further statement issued on 9 March[S/2001/217], the EU said that its Political and Secu-rity Committee had discussed FYROM’s actionplan for ending the violence and ensuring lastingstability on its border with FRY, and supported itspolicy of restraint, while preserving the coun-try’s political stability and fostering harmonyand cooperation among all ethnic groups. Itcalled on all neighbouring countries and interna-tional organizations active in the area to examinewhat support they could provide. The EU under-lined the role played by KFOR, the EU and itsmonitoring mission, as well as the OSCE SpilloverMonitor Mission to Skopje, especially in moni-toring along FYROM’s border.

NATO action. On 8 March [S/2001/214], theNATO Secretary-General informed the UNSecretary-General that, following a fact-findingmission by his Personal Representative, as well asvisits of a NATO political-military team to Skopje,the North Atlantic Council (NAC) had, on thesame day, taken a number of decisions concern-ing the ground safety zone in southern Serbia(see p. 347) and FYROM. Concerning FYROM, NACwelcomed the recent measures taken by the KFORCommander, but charged its military authoritieswith identifying additional measures to enhancesecurity along the FYROM border with Kosovo,FRY. NAC was also considering the findings ofthe Advisory Mission on Border Security, whichrecently returned from Skopje, as well as furtherbilateral and multilateral assistance to the Gov-ernment. It promised to further study ways of



showing political support to the FYROM Govern-ment, in the light of the recommendations byNATO’s Deputy Assistant Secretary-General forPolitical Affairs, who recently visited Skopje.NAC would also meet with FYROM’s Foreign Min-ister on 9 March, at his request, during which ithoped to address FYROM’s concerns and to en-courage continuation of its measured response tothe situation at its northern border.

Security Council consideration. The SecurityCouncil, in statement S/PRST/2001/8 of 16March on Kosovo (see p. 350), reiterated itsstrong support for FYROM, as expressed by theCouncil President in his statement on 7 March(see p. 369). It condemned the continuing ex-tremist violence and supported FYROM’s effortsto cooperate with NATO and other internationalorganizations to end that violence.

Communications. On 20 March [S/2001/251],FYROM transmitted to the Secretary-General theconclusions of its Assembly following discussionof the current security situation from 16 to 18March. The Assembly, noting the deterioratingsecurity situation, said that FYROM’s authorities,its Assembly, Government and defence-securitystructures would undertake adequate measuresto secure peace and stability in the country andthe security of all its citizens, as well as urgentmeasures to impede further escalation of thesituation. It appealed to international organiza-tions to continue their unconditional support forFYROM in preserving its stability, territorial in-tegrity and sovereignty, and to provide that assist-ance without the presence of military forces fromneighbouring countries on its territory. It calledon all political parties to refrain from any de-structive scenarios and to direct their activities tothe service of the State and to peace, stability anddemocracy. It condemned the statements madein support of violence. The Assembly also askedfor KFOR’s greater presence and strong engage-ment along the whole stretch of the northernborder and indicated its intention immediately tointensify the broad political dialogue through itsinstitutions with all relevant political bodies inthe country to facilitate the settlement of all prob-lems.

Albania’s Foreign Minister, in a 20 Marchstatement [S/2001/249] issued in his capacity asChairman-in-Office of the South-East EuropeanCooperation Process, expressed concern aboutdevelopments in FYROM and reaffirmed his fullsupport for the safeguard of that country’s sover-eignty and territorial integrity. He appreciatedthe self-restraint of the FYROM Government andthe constructive attitude of all Albanian politicalparties in dealing with the crisis, and encouragedthem to advance ethnic coexistence through in-

stitutional solution of the existing problems. TheChairman-in-Office demanded the immediatecessation of the armed actions, stating that any le-gitimate demand of the Albanian communityshould be resolved peacefully and democrati-cally.


On 21 March [meeting 4301], the Security Coun-cil unanimously adopted resolution 1345(2001),based on a draft [S/2001/256] prepared in consulta-tions among Council members.

The Security Council,Recalling its resolutions 1160(1998) of 31 March 1998,

1199(1998) of 23 September 1998, 1203(1998) of 24October 1998, 1239(1999) of 14 May 1999 and 1244(1999) of 10 June 1999 and the statements by its Pres-ident of 19 December 2000 (S/PRST/2000/40),7 March 2001 (S/PRST/2001/7) and 16 March 2001(S/PRST/2001/8),

Welcoming the steps taken by the Government of theformer Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia to consolidatea multi-ethnic society within its borders, and express-ing its full support for the further development of thisprocess,

Also welcoming the plan put forward by the Govern-ment of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia to resolvepeacefully the crisis in certain municipalities in south-ern Serbia, and expressing encouragement for the im-plementation of political and economic reforms de-signed to reintegrate the ethnic Albanian population asfull members of civil society,

Welcoming international efforts, including those ofthe United Nations Interim Administration Mission inKosovo, the international security presence in Kosovo(KFOR), the European Union, the North Atlantic TreatyOrganization, and the Organization for Security andCooperation in Europe in cooperation with the Gov-ernments of the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedo-nia, the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia and otherStates, to prevent the escalation of ethnic tensions inthe area,

Further welcoming the contribution of the EuropeanUnion to a peaceful solution to the problems in certainmunicipalities in southern Serbia, its decision substan-tially to increase the presence of the European UnionMonitoring Mission there on the basis of its existingmandate, and its wider contribution to the region,

Welcoming the cooperation between the North Atlan-tic Treaty Organization and the authorities of theformer Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia and the Fed-eral Republic of Yugoslavia in addressing the securityproblems in parts of the former Yugoslav Republic ofMacedonia and certain municipalities in southern Ser-bia,

1. Strongly condemns extremist violence, includingterrorist activities, in certain parts of the former Yugo-slav Republic of Macedonia and certain municipalitiesin southern Serbia, Federal Republic of Yugoslavia,and notes that such violence has support from ethnicAlbanian extremists outside these areas and consti-tutes a threat to the security and stability of the widerregion;



2. Reaffirms its commitment to the sovereignty andterritorial integrity of the Federal Republic of Yugosla-via, the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia andthe other States of the region, as set out in the HelsinkiFinal Act;

3. Reiterates its strong support for the full imple-mentation of resolution 1244(1999);

4. Demands that all those who are currently engagedin armed action against the authorities of those Statesimmediately cease all such actions, lay down their weap-ons and return to their homes;

5. Supports the Government of the former YugoslavRepublic of Macedonia and the Federal Republic ofYugoslavia in their efforts to end the violence in a man-ner consistent with the rule of law;

6. Underlines the need for all differences to be re-solved by dialogue among all legitimate parties;

7 Further underlines the requirement for all partiesto act with restraint and full respect for internationalhumanitarian law and human rights;

8. Welcomes the efforts of the Government of Alba-nia to promote peace in the region and isolate extrem-ists working against peace, and encourages it and allStates to take all possible concrete steps to prevent sup-port for extremists, taking also into account resolution1160(1998);

9. Calls upon Kosovo Albanian political leaders, andleaders of the ethnic Albanian communities in theformer Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, southernSerbia and elsewhere, publicly to condemn violenceand ethnic intolerance and to use their influence to se-cure peace, and calls upon all those who have contactwith the extremist armed groups to make clear thatthey have no support from any quarter in the interna-tional community;

10. Welcomes the efforts of KFOR to implement reso-lution 1244(1999) in cooperation with the authoritiesof the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia and theFederal Republic of Yugoslavia, and calls upon KFOR tocontinue further to strengthen its efforts to prevent un-authorized movement and illegal arms shipmentsacross borders and boundaries in the region, to confis-cate weapons within Kosovo, Federal Republic of Yugo-slavia, and to continue to keep the Council informed inaccordance with resolution 1160(1998);

11. Calls upon States and appropriate internationalorganizations to consider how they can best give practi-cal help to efforts in the region further to strengthendemocratic, multi-ethnic societies in the interests of alland to assist the return of displaced persons in theareas in question;

12. Calls upon all States in the region to respecteach other’s territorial integrity and to cooperate onmeasures that foster stability and promote regionalpolitical and economic cooperation in accordance withthe Charter of the United Nations, the basic principlesof the Organization for Security and Cooperation inEurope and the Stability Pact for South-East Europe;

13. Decides to monitor developments on the groundcarefully and remain actively seized of the matter.

EU communications. The EU, in a 3 May state-ment [S/2001/442], condemned the renewed actsof violence by ethnic Albanian extremists inFYROM’s northern region, including the killing

of two soldiers, the occupation of several villagesand the taking of hostages. It called on the ex-tremists to stop the violence, release the hostagesand withdraw immediately. The EU supportedthe inter-ethnic dialogue recently launched byFYROM authorities and urged ethnic Albanianleaders in Kosovo, FRY, and Albania’s politicalleaders to condemn unambiguously those acts ofterrorism and to use their influence to preventviolence.

On 11 May [S/2001/498], the EU welcomed theagreement on a broad coalition Government inFYROM, expressed hope that the new Govern-ment would serve as a solid platform for han-dling the hard political decisions that lay aheadand assured it of EU support in that difficult task.

In a further statement issued on 26 July [S/2001/751], the EU condemned the violation of the cease-fire in FYROM and appealed for its restoration.It enjoined the parties to relaunch negotiationsand to show a spirit of compromise. It reiteratedits support for a new mission to Skopje by theEU High Representative (the EU President), whowould be accompanied by the NATO Secretary-General and the OSCE Chairman-in-Office.

Framework Agreement

On 13 August, President Boris Trajkovski ofFYROM and the leaders of the country’s fourmain political parties signed the “FrameworkAgreement in the former Yugoslav Republic ofMacedonia”.

The Agreement laid out the principles basic toa modern democratic FYROM: the rejection of theuse of violence to pursue political aims; the pres-ervation of the State’s sovereignty and territorialintegrity and the multi-ethnic character of its so-ciety; the evolution of its Constitution so as tomeet citizens’ needs and conform with interna-tional standards; and the development of localself-government.

The Agreement provided for: the cessationof hostilities, an unconditional ceasefire, the vol-untary disarmament and disbandment of eth-nic Albanian armed groups, and the parties’acceptance of those conditions under whichNATO would operate in the country; the devel-opment of a decentralized Government; non-discrimination and equal treatment for all, to beembodied in laws, particularly those regulatingemployment in public administration; specialparliamentary procedures for the adoption oflegislation; the Macedonian language as thecountry’s official language and in internationalrelations, with specific rules on the use of othernative languages, in addition to Macedonian, ineducation and in units of local self-government;rules regarding the expression of identity in



terms of State and local emblems; and timetablesfor the implementation of the constitutionalamendments (within 45 days of the Agreement’ssignature), the legislative modifications andconfidence-building measures, contained in an-nexes A, B and C, respectively, to the Agreement.

On the date of the Agreement’s signature, theEU issued a statement [S/2001/802] welcoming theevent as representing a crucial stage in FYROM’songoing political process. It urged all parties toabide by the Agreement and to take all the meas-ures for its speedy implementation. It reiterated itscall for the scrupulous observance of the ceasefireand expressed readiness to convene a donors’ con-ference soon after the Agreement’s constitutionaland legislative provisions had been adopted bythe Parliament. It indicated that a reconstructionand rehabilitation programme to help in imple-menting the reforms was in preparation.


On 13 August [meeting 4356], following consulta-tions among Security Council members, thePresident made statement S/PRST/2001/20 onbehalf of the Council:

The Security Council welcomes the signing of theFramework Agreement in the former Yugoslav Re-public of Macedonia by President Trajkovski and theleaders of four political parties on 13 August 2001.The Council calls for the full and immediate imple-mentation of the Agreement, which promotes thepeaceful and harmonious development of civil soci-ety while respecting the ethnic identity and the inter-ests of all Macedonian citizens.

The Council calls for the full implementation ofits resolution 1345(2001) and reaffirms the sover-eignty and territorial integrity of the former Yugo-slav Republic of Macedonia.

The Council calls again on all those concerned, in-cluding on leaders of ethnic Albanian communitiesin the region, publicly to condemn violence and eth-nic intolerance and to use their influence to securepeace. It reiterates its call to all who have contactwith extremist groups to make clear to them that theyhave no support from any quarter in the interna-tional community. The Council condemns the on-going violence by extremists and calls on all partiesto respect the ceasefire. The Council rejects any at-tempt to use violence including the use of landminesto undermine the Framework Agreement, which hasbeen negotiated by the democratically elected politi-cal leadership of the former Yugoslav Republic ofMacedonia.

The Council supports the actions of the Presidentand Government of the former Yugoslav Republic ofMacedonia aimed at resolving the crisis, and assur-ing a stable and democratic future for all of the citi-zens of the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia,including through continued dialogue with the fullrepresentation of all legitimate political parties tostrengthen democracy and preserve the multi-ethnic

character of Macedonian society and the stability ofthe country.

The Council welcomes the efforts of the EuropeanUnion, the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe and the North Atlantic TreatyOrganization in support of the Framework Agree-ment. It also calls on the international community toconsider how best to assist the Government of theformer Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia in facilitat-ing its full implementation.

The Council will continue to follow closely devel-opments on the ground.

During the Council’s consideration on 28August [meeting 4359] of the situation in the FRYprovince of Kosovo, the FYROM representativesaid that the signing of the Framework Agree-ment was a significant step towards a peacefuloutcome of the political and security crisis in hiscountry and noted that the Secretary-Generalhad underlined UN readiness to assist in imple-menting it.

Drawing the Council’s attention to the securitydimension of the Agreement related to develop-ments in Kosovo, he referred to recent UNMIKand KFOR activities along the border with Kosovoas contributing to a more efficient control of ille-gal border traffic and infiltration into FYROM.He stressed that, for the Agreement’s securitycomponent to be effective, a complete cessationof the activities of ethnic Albanian insurgency in-stigators and supporters from Kosovo, includingmembers of the Kosovo Protection Corps (KPC),had to be ensured. He reiterated his country’sexpectation that UNMIK and KFOR would put astop to the infiltration and to all mobilization ac-tivities of former KPC fighters, including theirjoining the so-called National Liberation Armyoperating in FYROM. That was of particular im-portance for the success of the ongoing NATO op-eration in FYROM to disarm ethnic Albaniangroups and to ensure their complete, voluntarydisbandment.

Further developments

On 21 September [S/2001/897], FYROM trans-mitted to the Security Council the separate lettersit had addressed to NATO and OSCE. By theformer, FYROM thanked NATO for its response toFYROM’s efforts to find a way out of its currentcrisis provoked by Albanian terrorists and illegalarmed groups. Their disarmament and elimina-tion were the foremost steps in the normalizationof the country. FYROM would host an OSCE andEU monitoring mission and would support a lightpresence of NATO in the country upon the con-clusion of its Operation Essential Harvest, to pro-vide additional security for the mission. The mo-



dalities for such a security presence could bespecified in a memorandum of understanding.

In its letter to OSCE, FYROM indicated itsdecision of 11 September to enhance the OSCESpillover Monitor Mission to Skopje by increas-ing the number of monitors so as to assist theGovernment with the Framework Agreement’simplementation, in particular with its confidence-building measures. As a priority, FYROM requesteda rapid deployment of OSCE monitors and policeadvisers in sufficient numbers to provide a visiblepresence throughout the sensitive areas. It in-vited OSCE also to assist in other areas, especiallythe programmes of police training, media andinter-ethnic relations, as set out in the Agree-ment. It would further welcome OSCE involve-ment, through its Office for Democratic Institu-tions and Human Rights, in the conduct of theforthcoming censuses and elections in FYROM.


On 26 September [meeting 4381], the SecurityCouncil unanimously adopted resolution 1371(2001), based on a draft [S/2001/902] prepared inconsultations among Council members.

The Security Council,Recalling its resolutions 1244(1999) of 10 June 1999

and 1345(2001) of 21 March 2001 and the statementsby its President of 7 March 2001 (S/PRST/2001/7), 16March 2001 (S/PRST/2001/8) and 13 August 2001(S/PRST/2001/20),

Welcoming the steps taken by the Government of theformer Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia to consolidatea multi-ethnic society within its borders, and express-ing its full support for the further development of thisprocess,

Welcoming in this regard the signing of the Frame-work Agreement at Skopje on 13 August 2001 by thePresident of the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedo-nia and the leaders of four political parties,

Welcoming international efforts, including those ofthe Organization for Security and Cooperation inEurope, the European Union and the North AtlanticTreaty Organization, in cooperation with the Govern-ment of the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedoniaand other States, to prevent the escalation of ethnic ten-sions in the area and to facilitate the full implementa-tion of the Framework Agreement, thus contributing topeace and stability in the region,

Welcoming the letter from the Permanent Represen-tative of the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia tothe President of the Security Council of 21 September2001,

1. Reaffirms its commitment to the sovereignty andterritorial integrity of the former Yugoslav Republic ofMacedonia and other States of the region;

2. Calls for the full implementation of resolution1345(2001);

3. Supports the full and timely implementation ofthe Framework Agreement, rejects the use of violencein pursuit of political aims and stresses that only peace-ful political solutions can assure a stable and demo-

cratic future for the former Yugoslav Republic ofMacedonia;

4. Welcomes the efforts of the European Union andthe Organization for Security and Cooperation inEurope to contribute to the implementation of theFramework Agreement, in particular through the pres-ence of international observers;

5. Endorses the efforts of Member States and rele-vant international organizations to support the imple-mentation of the Framework Agreement and stronglysupports in that regard the establishment of a multina-tional security presence in the former Yugoslav Repub-lic of Macedonia at the request of its Government tocontribute towards the security of the observers, and in-vites the Government of the former Yugoslav Republicof Macedonia to keep the Council informed;

6. Demands that all concerned ensure the safety ofinternational personnel in the former Yugoslav Repub-lic of Macedonia;

7. Welcomes the efforts of the United Nations In-terim Administration Mission in Kosovo and the inter-national security presence to implement fully resolu-tion 1244(1999), in particular by further strengtheningits efforts to prevent unauthorized movement andillegal arms shipments across borders and boundaries,to confiscate illegal weapons within Kosovo, FederalRepublic of Yugoslavia, and to keep the Councilinformed;


Communications. In a 9 October statement[S/2001/978], the EU expressed concern about theinsufficient progress made by FYROM in imple-menting the Framework Agreement. The EU ex-pected all democratic forces in the country tocontinue to engage fully and constructively in theparliamentary process and appealed to the Par-liament to approve all of the Agreement’s consti-tutional and legislative provisions. It was waitingfor the Government to find an effective solutionto the problem of amnesty for the rebels and forthe return of the security forces to be coordi-nated with the international community’s repre-sentatives. The EU stressed that its assistance inthe reforms being carried out by the FYROMauthorities was conditional upon the satisfactoryconclusion of the parliamentary process of con-stitutional revision. In that regard, it noted thatthe conditions for the convening of a donors’conference had not yet been fulfilled.

The EU appreciated UN support for a multina-tional security presence in FYROM and welcomedNATO’s decision to authorize the deployment ofthe Operation Amber Fox force to provide thatpresence and contribute to the security of the in-ternational monitors deployed by OSCE and theEU, whose number would be increased.

On 16 November [A/56/640-S/2001/1094], follow-ing adoption of the amendments to the FYROMConstitution, FYROM’s President issued a state-ment welcoming those changes, saying the coun-try had a great deal of work before it: immediate



re-establishment of the State’s sovereignty andrule of law throughout the country; the return ofdisplaced persons to their homes before the win-ter; the reconstruction of their homes and repairof the infrastructure; the return of children toschool; and initiating the process of healing andof overcoming differences. The President calledon the international community to fulfil its com-mitments, including support for and involve-ment in the return of the security forces to thecrisis regions. He also called for the early organi-zation of the donors’ conference. He welcomedthe United States characterization of acts ofarmed provocation by Albanian groups in FYROMas acts of terrorism and called on all who consid-ered violence as a solution to the problems to laydown their arms and to reintegrate into the com-munity.

Georgia

During 2001, the Special Representative of theSecretary-General and Head of the UnitedNations Observer Mission in Georgia (UNOMIG),with the assistance of the Russian Federation inits capacity as facilitator, the Group of Friendsof the Secretary-General (France, Germany,Russian Federation, United Kingdom, UnitedStates) and OSCE, continued efforts to engage theGeorgian and Abkhaz parties in negotiations to-wards a comprehensive settlement of their con-flict, including a definition of the political statusof Abkhazia as a sovereign entity within the Stateof Georgia. The long-awaited paper on the BasicPrinciples for the Distribution of Competencesbetween Tbilisi (Georgia’s Government) andSukhumi (the Abkhaz leadership), intended toserve as the basis for substantial negotiations, wasfinalized in mid-December and transmitted tothe parties. Adamant in its rejection of any sug-gestion that Abkhazia was within the State ofGeorgia, the Abkhaz party was not prepared toreceive the paper. Consequently, the peace pro-cess remained stalled.

The successful holding of the third meetingon confidence-building measures between Geor-gia and Abkhazia in Yalta, Ukraine, in Marchyielded the Yalta Declaration and a Programmeof Action on Confidence-building Measures.While those documents held promise of helpingto narrow down the parties’ divergent positions,by year’s end, no significant implementation ofthe commitments and proposals they containedhad been made. Furthermore, neither the par-ties’ commitments on the voluntary return of

refugees and displaced persons nor the recom-mendations of the 2000 joint assessment missionto the Gali district had been fulfilled. As noted bythe Secretary-General, the parties neglected ac-tive work within the mechanisms of the UN-ledGeneva peace process [YUN 1997, p. 365], in particu-lar the Coordinating Council, thus threatening todefeat the purpose of that negotiating forum.

The month of October was marked by theshooting down of a UN helicopter on its way toresume patrolling in the upper Kodori Valley, aswell as by large-scale hostilities in the conflictzone. Nonetheless, the Special Representativeand UNOMIG, with the support of the CollectivePeacekeeping Force of the Commonwealth of In-dependent States (CIS peacekeeping force), re-mained steadfast in the discharge of their man-dates and in their determination to de-escalatehostilities and stabilize the situation in that zone.The Security Council strongly supported thoseefforts and, recognizing the contributions ofUNOMIG to the peace process in Georgia, ex-tended its mandate twice during the year, thesecond time until 31 January 2002.

UN Observer Mission in Georgia

The United Nations Observer Mission inGeorgia (UNOMIG), established by SecurityCouncil resolution 858(1993) [YUN 1993, p. 509],continued to monitor and verify compliance withthe 1994 Agreement on a Ceasefire and Separa-tion of Forces (Moscow Agreement) [YUN 1994,p. 583] and to fulfil other tasks as mandated byresolution 937(1994) [ibid., p. 584]. Monitoring in-volved daily ground and regular helicopter pa-trols. UNOMIG operated in close collaborationwith the CIS peacekeeping force that had been inthe zone of conflict, at the request of the parties,since 1994 [ibid., p. 583]. The Council extendedUNOMIG’s mandate twice during the year, thefirst time until 31 July 2001 and the second until31 January 2002.

UNOMIG’s main headquarters was located inSukhumi (Abkhazia, Georgia), with some admin-istrative headquarters in Pitsunda, a liaison of-fice in the Georgian capital of Tbilisi and teambases and a sector headquarters in both the Galiand Zugdidi sectors. A team base in the KodoriValley was manned by observers operating fromSukhumi.

UNOMIG was headed by the Secretary-General’s Special Representative for Georgia,Dieter Boden (Germany), who was assisted by theChief Military Observer, Major General AnisAhmed Bajwa (Pakistan). As at 31 December2001, it had a strength of 106 military observers.



Activities

Report of Secretary-General (January). In hisJanuary 2001 report [S/2001/59] describing thesituation in Abkhazia, Georgia, and UNOMIGoperations there from October to the end of2000, summarized in 2000 [YUN 2000, p. 397], theSecretary-General, observing that the continuedlack of progress on the fundamental issue of thefuture political status of Abkhazia within theState of Georgia could jeopardize the wholepeace process, called on both sides to musterenough political will to overcome the impasse.He appealed in particular to the Abkhaz side todemonstrate more flexibility and willingness toaddress the core political questions of the con-flict and called for the early finalization of thedraft document on basic principles for the distri-bution of competences between Tbilisi andSukhumi [ibid., p. 391] and for its presentation tothe parties by the Special Representative and theGroup of Friends of the Secretary-General,whose consensus position was deemed essential.The Secretary-General called on the two sides toenable the dignified, safe and secure return ofpeople to the Gali district, and urged them to im-plement the recommendations of the 2000 jointassessment mission to that district [ibid., p. 397].Together with the Resident Coordinator andHumanitarian Coordinator, UNOMIG would ex-plore possibilities for increasing humanitarianaid to the population, including the allocation ofa sum in the UNOMIG budget for limited ad hocassistance.

Stressing that both sides bore primary respon-sibility for the security of UNOMIG’s military andcivilian personnel, the Secretary-General ap-pealed to the Government of Georgia to bring tojustice the perpetrators of the hostage-taking in-cidents of October 1999 [YUN 1999, p. 382] and ofJune [YUN 2000, p. 392] and December 2000 [ibid.,p. 397]. He said the Government also needed tocreate the necessary security conditions in theupper Kodori Valley to allow UNOMIG to carryout its mandate fully in that area. Convinced ofUNOMIG’s crucial role in stabilizing the zone ofconflict and in furthering the negotiation pro-cess, he recommended that the UNOMIG man-date be extended for a further six-month period,until 31 July.

Communication. On 29 January [S/2001/89],Georgia informed the Security Council about re-cent violations by the Abkhaz separatists of the1994 Agreement on a Ceasefire and Separationof Forces [YUN 1994, p. 583]. The first violation tookplace on 25 January, when unidentified gunmenopened fire on a civilian gasoline transportationtruck in the village of Chuburkhindgi, killingone civilian and seriously injuring two others,

one of whom was kidnapped by the gunmen, whoretreated with the truck to Abkhaz-controlledterritory. The second violation took place on 26January, when an anti-tank rocket was launchedfrom Abkhaz-controlled territory on the leftbank of the Inguri River towards Georgian-controlled territory, hitting a moving car near theCIS peacekeepers’ checkpoint No. 301; the car ex-ploded, seriously injuring four civilians.

SECURITY COUNCIL ACTION (January)

On 31 January [meeting 4269], the Security Coun-cil unanimously adopted resolution 1339(2001),based on a draft [S/2001/93] prepared in consulta-tions among Council members.

The Security Council,Recalling all its relevant resolutions, in particular

resolution 1311(2000) of 28 July 2000, and the state-ment of its President of 14 November 2000 (S/PRST/2000/32),

Having considered the report of the Secretary-Generalof 18 January 2001,

Recalling the conclusions of the Lisbon and Istanbulsummits of the Organization for Security andCooperation in Europe regarding the situation inAbkhazia, Georgia,

Stressing that the continued lack of progress on keyissues of a comprehensive settlement of the conflict inAbkhazia, Georgia, is unacceptable,

Deeply concerned that, although currently mostlycalm, the general situation in the conflict zone remainsvery volatile,

Noting the holding of the twelfth session of the Co-ordinating Council of the Georgian and Abkhaz sideson 23 January 2001,

Recalling the relevant principles contained in theConvention on the Safety of United Nations and Asso-ciated Personnel adopted on 9 December 1994,

Welcoming the important contributions that theUnited Nations Observer Mission in Georgia and thecollective peacekeeping force of the Commonwealth ofIndependent States continue to make in stabilizing thesituation in the conflict zone, noting that the workingrelationship between the Mission and the collectivepeacekeeping force has remained very close, andstressing the importance of close cooperation betweenthem in the performance of their respective mandates,

1. Welcomes the report of the Secretary-General of18 January 2001;

2. Strongly supports the sustained efforts of theSecretary-General and his Special Representative, withthe assistance of the Russian Federation, in its capacityas facilitator, as well as of the Group of Friends of theSecretary-General and of the Organization for Secu-rity and Cooperation in Europe, to promote the stabili-zation of the situation and the achievement of a com-prehensive political settlement, which must include asettlement of the political status of Abkhazia within theState of Georgia;

3. Strongly supports, in particular, the intention ofthe Special Representative to submit, in the near fu-ture, the draft paper containing specific proposals tothe parties on the question of the distribution of con-



stitutional competences between Tbilisi and Sukhumias a basis for meaningful negotiations;

4. Stresses the need to accelerate work on the draftprotocol on the return of the refugees to the Galiregion and measures for economic rehabilitation, aswell as on the draft agreement on peace and guaranteesfor the prevention and for the non-resumption of hos-tilities;

5. Calls upon the parties, in particular the Abkhazside, to undertake immediate efforts to move beyondthe impasse and to engage in negotiations on the corepolitical questions of the conflict and all other out-standing issues in the United Nations–led peace pro-cess;

6. Welcomes the readiness of the Government ofUkraine to host the third meeting on confidence-building measures, welcomes also the commitment ofboth sides to the conflict to meet in Yalta in March 2001,and notes the important contribution a successful con-ference would make to the peace process;

7. Reaffirms the unacceptability of the demographicchanges resulting from the conflict, and reaffirms alsothe inalienable right of all refugees and displaced per-sons affected by the conflict to return to their homes insecure and dignified conditions, in accordance with in-ternational law and as set out in the QuadripartiteAgreement on the Voluntary Return of Refugees andDisplaced Persons of 4 April 1994;

8. Urges the parties, in this context, to addressurgently and in a concerted manner, as a first step, theundefined and insecure status of spontaneous return-ees to the Gali district, which remains an issue of seri-ous concern;

9. Expresses its satisfaction with the joint assessmentmission to the Gali district, carried out under the aegisof the United Nations, and looks forward to the carefulconsideration of the mission’s recommendations re-garding human rights, law enforcement and educa-tion;

10. Condemns all violations of the Moscow Agree-ment of 14 May 1994 on a Ceasefire and Separation ofForces, and notes with particular concern the Abkhazmilitary exercise conducted in November 2000;

11. Deplores the rise in criminality and activities ofarmed groups in the conflict zone, which constitutes amajor destabilizing factor affecting the overall situa-tion, calls upon the parties to increase their efforts atcurbing them and to cooperate in good faith using themeans provided by the Coordinating Council mecha-nism, condemns the recent killings of civilians andAbkhaz militiamen, and calls upon both sides, in par-ticular the Georgian side, to investigate these incidentsand bring to justice those responsible;

12. Condemns the abduction of two military observ-ers of the United Nations Observer Mission in Georgiaon 10 December 2000, recalls that the Georgian and theAbkhaz sides bear the primary responsibility for the se-curity of the Mission, the collective peacekeeping forceof the Commonwealth of Independent States and otherinternational personnel, and appeals to them to bringto justice the perpetrators of the hostage-taking inci-dents of October 1999, June 2000 and December 2000;

13. Calls upon the parties to ensure security andfreedom of movement of the United Nations and otherinternational personnel;

14. Welcomes the fact that the Mission is keeping itssecurity arrangements under constant review in orderto ensure the highest possible level of security for itsstaff;

15. Decides to extend the mandate of the Mission fora new period terminating on 31 July 2001, subject to areview by the Council of the mandate of the Mission inthe event of any changes that may be made in the man-date or in the presence of the collective peacekeepingforce, and expresses its intention to conduct a thoroughreview of the operation at the end of its current man-date, in the light of steps taken by the parties to achievea comprehensive settlement;

16. Requests the Secretary-General to continue tokeep the Council regularly informed and to reportthree months from the date of the adoption of the pres-ent resolution on the situation in Abkhazia, Georgia,and requests also the Secretary-General to provide for abriefing within three months on the progress of thepolitical settlement, including on the status of the draftpaper his Special Representative intends to submit tothe parties as referred to in paragraph 3 above;

17. Decides to remain actively seized of the matter.

Prior to the vote on the resolution, Georgiamade a statement to the effect that the introduc-tion of a new operative paragraph—paragraph4—might jeopardize the upcoming third meetingon confidence-building measures and put theentire peace process on hold. The draft protocoland the draft agreement on peace guarantees re-ferred to in that paragraph were unacceptable.The draft agreement, which it labelled dubiousin many respects, was neither referred to in theSecretary-General’s report nor discussed by theCouncil. Furthermore, it was not convinced thatparagraph 4 as proposed would not be inter-preted as exerting Council pressure on a MemberState to enter into a peace agreement with a sepa-rate region, thus setting a dangerous precedentfrom the standpoint of international law. Stressshould be placed, rather, on the need to acceler-ate work on the return of refugees and internallydisplaced persons to the Gali district, on the re-gion’s economic rehabilitation and on guaran-tees for the non-resumption of hostilities.

Communications. By a 27 February statement[S/2001/196], Georgia’s Foreign Ministry statedthat the Abkhaz regime’s decision to hold self-styled local elections on 10 March was illegal andtheir results should be declared void. More thanhalf the region’s population had been expelled;the security and safety of the remaining Geor-gians were under constant threat, their basic hu-man rights were regularly violated and free ex-pression of the people’s will was non-existent. Itrecalled the Security Council’s reiteration inresolution 1287(2000) [YUN 2000, p. 387] that it con-sidered unacceptable and illegitimate the hold-ing of the self-styled referendum and elections inAbkhazia, Georgia. It further stated its belief



that those unlawful elections created additionalobstacles to the peace process, counteracted thegood will of the Georgian Government and peo-ple, and undermined the international commu-nity’s efforts to find a peaceful resolution, withfull respect for the sovereignty and territorial in-tegrity of Georgia.

In a 19 March letter to the Council [S/2001/245],Georgia’s President, Eduard Shevardnadze,noted that the deadlocked peace process inAbkhazia had led to the eviction of tens of thou-sands of people from their homes. He stated thatfurther efforts should be directed towards reach-ing an agreement on the political status ofAbkhazia, with full respect for Georgia’s sover-eignty and territorial integrity, and towards theunconditional and dignified return of all refu-gees and internally displaced persons to theirhomes. To those ends, Georgia proposed that theUnited Nations draft a document setting forththe basic principles on the distribution of con-stitutional competences between Tbilisi andSukhumi, to be debated and approved by the Se-curity Council prior to its presentation to the twosides as a basis for further negotiations; and thatdecisive action be taken to ensure fulfilment ofthe Abkhaz regime’s primary responsibility to se-cure the unconditional return of displaced per-sons, while asserting that there could be no link-age between the issue of Abkhazia’s politicalstatus and the inalienable right of refugees anddisplaced persons to return home.

Ukraine, on 17 March [S/2001/242], transmittedto the Secretary-General the final documents ofthe third meeting on confidence-building meas-ures between Georgia and Abkhazia (Yalta, 15-16March), held under UN auspices within theframework of the Geneva peace process [YUN 1997,p. 365]. One was the Yalta Declaration, by whichthe two sides reaffirmed their commitments tothe non-use of force in resolving their disputesand to create the conditions necessary for the safereturn of refugees and internally displaced per-sons to their homes, the first phase being to theGali district within the old borders. They askedthe Special Representative to appeal to theUnited Nations, the Group of Friends of theSecretary-General, OSCE and CIS to guaranteethe implementation of those commitments. Thetwo sides further reaffirmed their commitmentto observe their ceasefire accords and to preventthreats to the life and security of UNOMIG and CISpeacekeeping personnel.

The second document was a Programme ofAction on confidence-building measures, towhich was annexed a list of 15 specific measuresin various fields, for the implementation ofwhich they would provide organizational and

technical support and create reporting channelsand a database to record progress.

Ukraine, on 19 March [S/2001/247], referred tothe foregoing meeting as having created a goodplatform for the conflicting sides to reach accord.

SECURITY COUNCIL ACTION (March)

The Security Council met twice on 21 Marchregarding the outcome of the third Georgia-Abkhaz meeting on confidence-building meas-ures. The first Council meeting was held in pri-vate [meeting 4299], at which Ukraine briefed theCouncil on the subject.

At the second meeting [meeting 4300], followingconsultations among Council members, thePresident made statement S/PRST/2001/9 onbehalf of the Council:

The Security Council welcomes the successfulholding of the third meeting on confidence-building measures between the Georgian andAbkhaz sides in Yalta on 15 and 16 March 2001 andthe resumption of dialogue between them, and notesthe documents signed there. It hopes that actionflowing from the Yalta meeting will lead to a narrow-ing of the positions of the two sides and stimulatefurther constructive dialogue aimed at achieving acomprehensive political settlement of the conflict,including a settlement of the political status ofAbkhazia within the State of Georgia and other keyissues. The Council underlines the contribution thatconfidence-building measures can bring to thepeace process and commends the efforts by the Gov-ernment of Ukraine in ensuring the success of theYalta meeting.

The Council reaffirms its support for the effortsby the Special Representative of the Secretary-General to enhance contacts at all levels between theGeorgian and Abkhaz sides, in close cooperationwith the Russian Federation, in its capacity as facili-tator, the Group of Friends of the Secretary-Generaland the Organization for Security and Cooperationin Europe.

The Council encourages the two sides to engagewith renewed commitment in the peace process. TheCouncil notes the stated willingness of the two sidesto ensure favourable conditions for the continuationof the peace process, their stated commitment to thenon-use of force and their stated determination tointensify efforts in order to create the necessary cli-mate for the voluntary return of internally displacedpersons and refugees in secure and dignified condi-tions. The Council also notes the important contri-bution that the United Nations Observer Mission inGeorgia and the collective peacekeeping force of theCommonwealth of Independent States continue tomake in stabilizing the situation in the zone of con-flict.

The Council underlines the unacceptability of theholding of self-styled local elections in Abkhazia,Georgia, on 10 March 2001, which it deems illegiti-mate and unhelpful. The organization of these elec-tions represents an additional obstacle to the at-



tempts to reach a comprehensive settlement of theconflict based on international law.

The Council stresses the importance of negotia-tions on the core political questions of the conflict.In this regard, it looks forward to the briefing to beprovided by the Secretary-General on the progress ofthe political settlement, including on the status ofthe draft paper his Special Representative intends tosubmit to the two sides, as referred to in paragraph16 of its resolution 1339(2001) of 31 January 2001.

The Council will remain actively seized of the mat-ter and reaffirms its commitment to advancing thepeace process.

Report of Secretary-General (April). In April[S/2001/401], the Secretary-General reported thatno progress was achieved either on the funda-mental issue of Abkhazia’s future political statuswithin the State of Georgia or on reaching agree-ment among the Group of Friends on the draftpaper concerning the distribution of compe-tences between Tbilisi and Sukhumi, considereda prerequisite for presenting the text as a basis fornegotiations. Moreover, in a 12 March letter, theAbkhaz leader, Vladislav Ardzinba, repeated hisrejection of any discussion on the status questionon the basis of an eventual draft paper. Neverthe-less, key aspects of the question were addressed ata seminar (Pitsunda, Georgia, 12-13 February),which gave the Abkhaz and Georgian sides an op-portunity to argue their positions on statehoodand self-determination.

Referring to the third meeting on confidence-building measures, the Secretary-General ob-served that good-faith implementation by the twosides of their commitments would mark a quali-tatively new stage in the confidence-buildingcomponent of the peace process and would give astrong impetus to the settlement effort.

The Coordinating Council, chaired by theSpecial Representative, held its twelfth session(Sukhumi, 12 January). The two sides continuedto use that Council’s Working Groups I and III toexpand direct bilateral contacts on security andeconomic issues. With UNHCR support, effortswere under way to revive Working Group II onrefugees and internally displaced persons, butthe Abkhaz side withdrew its agreement to parti-cipate in the scheduled April session of the Coor-dinating Council due to a serious deterioration inrelations brought about by that month’s violentevents (see below).

The Abkhaz de facto authorities held “localelections” on 10 March, which the Special Repre-sentative, in a public statement, characterized asunacceptable and illegitimate. Similar state-ments were issued by the Council of Europe,OSCE and the Russian Federation’s Ministry ofForeign Affairs. An exchange of letters tookplace between UNOMIG and the Abkhaz side con-

cerning the violation of UNOMIG’s freedom ofmovement in November 2000, when the Abkhazside prohibited the overflight of territory underits control [YUN 2000, p. 397].

As to UNOMIG operations, the Secretary-General reported that the Special Representativeobtained adequate security assurances from theGeorgian authorities for patrolling in the upperKodori Valley, which had been suspended follow-ing the December 2000 abduction of UNOMIGmilitary observers [ibid.]. Based on those assur-ances and under revised UNOMIG security regu-lations, the Chief Military Observer decided toresume helicopter patrols over the Kodori Valleyon 13 April. UNOMIG was also ready to resumeground patrols in the lower Valley in cooperationwith the CIS peacekeeping force.

The overall situation in the conflict zone, par-ticularly in the Gali region, remained volatile: 45shooting incidents, 12 killings, 9 abductions, 8mine blasts and 40 robberies were recorded.None directly targeted UNOMIG personnel. In re-sponse to a number of January clashes betweenAbkhaz and Georgian armed groups and attackstargeting the CIS peacekeeping force, UNOMIGincreased patrols and defused tensions throughits Joint Fact-finding Group and regular weeklyquadripartite meetings with the two sides,UNOMIG and the CIS peacekeeping force. Marchsaw incidents of recently laid landmines, as wellas two bomb attacks on “election” day in the Galidistrict.

During April, a CIS vehicle was ambushed.An anti-tank mine was discovered on the beachsome 400 metres from UNOMIG headquartersin Sukhumi, which a United Kingdom–baseddemining NGO dismantled. To stop an escalatingcycle of violence between armed groups from thetwo sides that had been triggered by an ambushfrom the Georgian side on the main road northof Gali, the Special Representative, on 16 April,convened a meeting of the two sides at the mainbridge over the Inguri River. In a signed Proto-col, they agreed to verify the physical conditionof all persons held, to transfer them to the cus-tody of official structures and to hand over thebodies of those killed. In subsequent consulta-tions with the two sides and separate meetingswith Georgia’s President and the Abkhaz de facto“Prime Minister”, Anri Jergenia, the SpecialRepresentative urged them to implement theProtocol. The Abkhaz side had since reported toUNOMIG sightings of several armed groups cross-ing the ceasefire line into Abkhaz-controlled ter-ritory.

Faced with an increasing threat from land-mines, UNOMIG enhanced its security measuresto include the use of heavier mine- and ballistic-



protected vehicles. In that regard, the Chief Mili-tary Observer took up with both sides the discov-ery of armour-piercing small arms ammunitionat the site of the April firefights. UNOMIG intro-duced new security regulations for its staff in theZugdidi sector in response to warnings from theSecurity Services there of possible abductions orhostage-taking by anti-Government groups.

Despite the continuing grave humanitariansituation in Abkhazia, humanitarian agenciescontinued to provide for much of the popula-tion’s acute food and medical needs and to con-duct mine clearance and small-scale rehabili-tation programmes. UNHCR resumed limitedoperations in the Gali district, distributing build-ing materials, school kits and hygiene parcels toschools serving returnee children. The work ofNGOs continued to be hampered by border-crossing restrictions in the region.

The human rights situation in Abkhazia con-tinued to be precarious. The killing in August2000 of a legal assistant to the United NationsHuman Rights Office in Sukhumi [YUN 2000,p. 395] remained unsolved. Nevertheless, that Of-fice continued to monitor the practices of law en-forcement agencies during pre-trial detentionand criminal trials; to provide advisory services tothe local population, mostly in cases involving theviolation of ownership and property rights; andto conduct human rights education and trainingprogrammes. Particular attention was paid to thesituation in the Gali district.

The Secretary-General observed that the atti-tude of blanket rejection adopted by the Abkhazside was short-sighted and counterproductive.He appealed to all concerned to clear the way forthe start of meaningful talks aimed at definingthe status of Abkhazia within the State of Geor-gia. He called on the two sides to implement with-out delay the recommendations of the 2000 jointassessment mission to the Gali district [ibid., p. 397],which were being finalized in consultation withthe participating organizations, as well as their obli-gations under the 16 April 2001 Protocol, in par-ticular the Georgian side’s commitment to takeeffective measures to stop the activities of illegalarmed groups crossing into the Gali district fromthe Georgian-controlled side of the ceasefireline. The Secretary-General stated that violationsof UNOMIG’s freedom of movement and the fail-ure to bring to justice the perpetrators of thehostage-taking incidents that had targetedUNOMIG were not acceptable.

Communication. Georgia, in a 16 April state-ment [S/2001/377], while noting the positive devel-opments aimed at reaching a settlement to theconflict in Abkhazia, Georgia, expressed con-cern over the recent violent events in the Gali dis-

trict: the renewed activity of Abkhaz armedgroups; a bus explosion that killed one civilian; amine explosion that severely injured five chil-dren; the detainment of five civilians, two ofwhom were murdered; and the capture of a fish-ing boat with its five fishermen on the groundsthat the boat was “in violation of Abkhaz territo-rial waters”. Georgia thus called on the UnitedNations, the Group of Friends of the Secretary-General, OSCE, the Council of Europe, CIS andother international organizations to take imme-diate steps to improve the situation and not allowthe escalating hostilities to jeopardize the peaceprocess.

SECURITY COUNCIL ACTION (April)

The Security Council met twice on 24 April toconsider the agenda item on the situation inGeorgia. At the first meeting [meeting 4313], held inprivate, the Council heard a briefing by the Spe-cial Representative of the Secretary-General andHead of UNOMIG; at the second [meeting 4314], thePresident, following consultations among Coun-cil members, made statement S/PRST/2001/12on behalf of the Council:

The Security Council welcomes the briefingprovided by the Special Representative of theSecretary-General, on 24 April 2001, in accordancewith paragraph 16 of its resolution 1339(2001) of 31January 2001. It welcomes also the presence of theMinister for Special Affairs of Georgia at its meet-ing.

The Council stresses that the continued lackof progress on key issues of a comprehensive settle-ment of the conflict in Abkhazia, Georgia, is unac-ceptable. It underlines the decisive importance ofearly negotiations on the core political questions ofthe conflict. It strongly supports, in this context,the efforts of the Special Representative of theSecretary-General to promote the achievement of acomprehensive political settlement based on theresolutions of the Security Council, which must in-clude a settlement of the political status of Abkhaziawithin the State of Georgia.

The Council strongly supports, in particular, theintention of the Special Representative to submit, inthe near future, his draft paper containing specificproposals to the parties on the question of the distri-bution of constitutional competences between Tbi-lisi and Sukhumi. It calls on all those concerned touse their influence with a view to facilitating thisprocess.

The Council welcomes the intention of the SpecialRepresentative to submit the draft paper to the par-ties soon, as a starting point for negotiation, and notas an attempt to impose or dictate any possible solu-tion. It calls upon the parties constructively to acceptthe paper in this light and work towards a mutuallyacceptable settlement.

The Council will remain actively seized of the mat-ter and reaffirms its commitment to advancing thepeace process.



Communication. Belarus, on 20 June [S/2001/618], informed the Security Council of the 1 Junedecision of the Council of Heads of State of theCommonwealth of Independent States to extendthe mandate of the CIS peacekeeping force in theconflict zone in Abkhazia, Georgia, until 31 De-cember 2001.

Report of Secretary-General (July). TheSecretary-General reported in July [S/2001/713]that, through the efforts of the Special Represen-tative and the UNOMIG Chief Military Observer,the Georgian and Abkhaz sides, on 11 May,handed over the remains of those killed in theApril firefights and exchanged all detainees. Thelessening of tensions that followed allowed theseventh session of the Coordinating Council’sWorking Group I on security matters to be held(Sukhumi, 10 July) under the chairmanship ofthe Chief Military Observer. In a joint statement,the sides resolved to work together in a spirit ofmutual trust in order to avoid further breaches ofthe 1994 Moscow Agreement [YUN 1994, p. 583], toreduce criminal activity and to bring criminals tojustice.

On 8 and 9 July, two serious incidents in theGulripshi area resulted in six people dead andtwo taken hostage outside UNOMIG’s area of re-sponsibility. In a 12 July statement, the Abkhazside accused the Georgian side of involvement inthose incidents. It cancelled its participation inthe upcoming Coordinating Council session andrefused to take part in a planned 16 July seminaron “State-legal aspects” of the settlement of theconflict—a follow-up to the February Pitsundaseminar (see p. 378)—to be held under the aus-pices of the Council of Europe.

Work on the issue of the future status ofAbkhazia within the State of Georgia intensifiedfollowing Security Council statement S/PRST/2001/12 (see p. 379). The Group of Friends, inclose consultation with the Special Representa-tive, had accelerated the finalization of the draftpaper on the distribution of competences be-tween Tbilisi and Sukhumi. The Special Repre-sentative visited Moscow in mid-July, where hemet with high-ranking representatives of theRussian Federation, in its capacity as facilitator.The Abkhaz authorities reiterated their well-known position that any discussion of Abkhazia’spolitical status was obsolete given its 1999 “Acton State Independence of the Republic ofAbkhazia” [YUN 1999, p. 373].

Despite the unstable security situation in thezone of conflict, a steady return of internally dis-placed persons to the Gali region continued. Inearly May, the Special Representative submittedto the two sides the report of the 2000 joint assess-ment mission to the Gali district [YUN 2000, p. 397];

both sides informally indicated that the reportwas an objective representation of the situationand expressed willingness to discuss the imple-mentation of its recommendations. On 15 June,in a major step towards confidence-building, theAbkhaz side handed over to the Georgian side theremains of the 15 Georgian soldiers killed incombat near Sukhumi in 1993.

UNOMIG continued its ground patrols fromSukhumi and the two sector headquarters in Galiand Zugdidi, along with its helicopter patrols.For security reasons, patrolling remained sus-pended in the upper Kodori Valley. A detailed re-gime for patrolling that region had been agreedupon between the Chief Military Observer andGeorgia’s Minister of Defence and was to beimplemented as soon as the security situationallowed.

A series of hostage-taking incidents started inearly April, and extensive UNOMIG efforts wererequired to bring the two sides together at thehighest political level to prevent further escala-tion of the situation. Two Abkhaz delegates re-fused to attend the meetings of the Joint Fact-finding Group due to the failure of the Georgianauthorities to take adequate measures to preventthe activities of illegal armed groups in the Galiregion and to provide essential evidence in someinvestigation cases, which constituted a breach ofthe 2000 protocol for the joint investigation ofviolations of the Moscow Agreement [YUN 2000,p. 387]. Following the joint statement signed dur-ing the seventh session of Working Group I, how-ever, both sides expressed readiness to strengthentheir cooperation with the Joint Fact-findingGroup, which had concluded its investigations inthree cases: the 25 January fuel truck ambush;the 26 January anti-tank missile attack (seep. 375); and the April mine explosion in whichfive children were injured (see p. 379).

On 6 May, an Abkhaz customs officer driving avehicle was stopped and taken by a group ofarmed men to the Georgian side of the ceasefireline. A meeting of the two sides, facilitated byUNOMIG and chaired by its Chief Military Ob-server, was held on 11 May at the main bridgeover the Inguri River. That meeting led to thesigning of a protocol in which the Georgian sideagreed to consider evidence gathered by theAbkhaz side against three Georgians suspectedof murder. It was also agreed that UNOMIG wouldverify the protocol’s implementation. Immedi-ately following the meeting, an exchange of hos-tages took place.

The reporting period saw the repeated viola-tion of the Moscow Agreement. During a JuneNATO/Partnership for Peace military exercise,hosted by Georgia’s armed forces and conducted



in the Kulevi military manoeuvre area, UNOMIG’sfreedom of movement in that site was restricted.Georgian armoured personnel carriers and heli-copters were observed operating in the restrictedweapons zone. On 23 June, two Abkhaz ar-moured vehicles entered the restricted weaponszone during a military exercise and, on 7 July, aGeorgian armoured personnel carrier was seenin the security zone. UNOMIG lodged protestswith both sides for all those violations. The Geor-gian law enforcement agencies had begun acriminal case against two individuals suspectedof involvement in the hostage-taking of UN ob-servers, and measures were under way to arrestothers involved.

A disturbing tendency by the two sides to re-strict the movement of UNOMIG personnel haddeveloped, thereby hindering UNOMIG’s abilityto fulfil its mandate. A serious instance of ob-struction occurred on 30 April, when Abkhazmilitary personnel aimed a grenade launcher at aUNOMIG helicopter circling an Abkhaz observa-tion post. On 14 June, the Georgian side pre-vented UNOMIG military observers from enteringpart of the restricted weapons zone. The nextday, the same side advised UNOMIG against con-ducting helicopter flights over parts of its areaof responsibility due to the ongoing militaryexercises; the situation was rectified followingUNOMIG’s protest.

On 30 April, the UNOMIG Zugdidi liaison teamwas detained for about four hours by a demon-stration of some 100 internally displaced personswaiting to receive allowances from the ZugdidiPost Bank. The demonstrators demanded thatthe team contact the Minister for Distribution ofAllowances to request that he negotiate withthem. The team was released upon the arrival ofthe police and local authorities, but the demon-strators threatened to destroy UNOMIG’s Zugdidisector headquarters on 11 May if they had notreceived their allowances by 10 May. DespiteUNOMIG’s repeated requests, Georgian authori-ties failed to take measures to safeguard againstthat threat. On 11 May, quick police response to ademonstration outside the sector headquartersforestalled any damage.

With respect to the continued serious humani-tarian situation in Abkhazia, Georgia, UNHCRinitiated community-based rehabilitation of 14schools requiring urgent attention in the upperand lower Gali regions and planned to expand itsassistance to others. Despite the deplorable con-ditions found at many schools, they were at-tended by nearly 4,000 pupils in the 2000/01school year. The rehabilitation of selected dis-pensaries and water purification systems wouldalso be considered in 2001.

Violations of the right to life, the right to physi-cal integrity and the right to liberty and securityof person remained major issues of concern tothe United Nations Human Rights Office inAbkhazia. The Office reported new cases of evic-tions and violations of the right to property,along with complaints about religious persecu-tion. The number of abductions had markedlyincreased. The human rights situation remainedparticularly precarious in the Gali region, wherethe joint assessment mission had recommendedthe opening of a human rights branch office[YUN 2000, p. 397].

Encouraged by progress achieved within theGroup of Friends on streamlining its positionwith regard to the draft paper on the distributionof competences, the Secretary-General appealedto the Group to complete that process with thecooperation of the Special Representative andsaid that the Abkhaz side should reconsider itsposition not to address the status question. Hesaid both sides should work together to clarify the8 and 9 July incidents (see p. 380), release thehostages and bring the perpetrators to justice. Hefurther urged them to resume their work in theCoordinating Council as soon as possible.

The Secretary-General called on both sides tofulfil their commitments under the 1994 Quadri-partite Agreement on the voluntary return ofrefugees and displaced persons [YUN 1994, p. 581]with renewed determination; invited them to im-plement the Yalta Programme of Action (seep. 377); and appealed for their full compliancewith the Moscow Agreement. The Secretary-General concluded his report by recommendingthat UNOMIG’s mandate be extended until 31January 2002.

Communication. On 24 July [S/2001/733], Geor-gia expressed serious concern regarding the dis-ruption by the Abkhaz side of the thirteenthGeorgian-Abkhaz Coordinating Council sessionscheduled for 17 July in Tbilisi. It said that suchactions, designed to halt the peace process, werebecoming routine. At the seventh session ofWorking Group I, the Georgian side had againunderscored the need to create a joint actionmechanism for the improvement of security con-ditions in the region. However, the Abkhaz siderejected all previous agreements and Georgianinitiatives. Georgia claimed that returnees werebeing subjected to continuous violations of theirfundamental rights by criminal elements and bythe so-called law enforcement agencies of the ille-gitimate regime. Georgia also appealed for theresumption of dialogue between the sides.



SECURITY COUNCIL ACTION (July)

On 31 July [meeting 4353], the Security Councilunanimously adopted resolution 1364(2001),based on a draft [S/2001/747] prepared in consulta-tions among Council members.

The Security Council,Recalling all its relevant resolutions, in particular

resolution 1339(2001) of 31 January 2001, and the state-ments by its President of 21 March 2001 (S/PRST/2001/9) and 24 April 2001 (S/PRST/2001/12),

Having considered the report of the Secretary-Generalof 19 July 2001,

Recalling the conclusions of the Lisbon and Istanbulsummits of the Organization for Security andCooperation in Europe regarding the situation inAbkhazia, Georgia,

Stressing that the continued lack of progress on keyissues of a comprehensive settlement of the conflict inAbkhazia, Georgia, is unacceptable,

Deeply concerned by the interruption of negotiatingactivities following the killings and hostage-taking inci-dents in April and May 2001 in the district of Gali, on8 and 9 July 2001 in the Gulripshi area and again on 22July 2001 in Primorsk,

Expressing its regrets at the cancellation of the thir-teenth session of the Coordinating Council of theGeorgian and Abkhaz sides, initially scheduled for 17July 2001, due to the withdrawal of the Abkhaz sidefollowing those incidents,

Recalling the relevant principles contained in theConvention on the Safety of United Nations and Asso-ciated Personnel adopted on 9 December 1994,

Welcoming the important contributions that theUnited Nations Observer Mission in Georgia and thecollective peacekeeping force of the Commonwealth ofIndependent States continue to make in stabilizing thesituation in the zone of conflict, noting that the work-ing relationship between the Mission and the collectivepeacekeeping force has remained very close, andstressing the importance of close cooperation betweenthem in the performance of their respective mandates,

Noting the invitation of the Georgian Governmentfor the Security Council to dispatch a mission to theregion,

1. Welcomes the report of the Secretary-General of19 July 2001;

2. Regrets the deterioration of the situation in thezone of conflict due to the ongoing violence, hostage-taking incidents, the rise in criminality and the activi-ties of illegal armed groups in the conflict zone, whichconstitutes a constant threat to the peace process;

3. Strongly supports the sustained efforts of theSecretary-General and his Special Representative, withthe assistance of the Russian Federation, in its capacityas facilitator, as well as of the Group of Friends of theSecretary-General and of the Organization for Secu-rity and Cooperation in Europe, to promote the stabili-zation of the situation and the achievement of a com-prehensive political settlement, which must include asettlement of the political status of Abkhazia within theState of Georgia;

4. Recalls the intention of the Special Represen-tative to submit the draft paper on the question of thedistribution of constitutional competences betweenTbilisi and Sukhumi as a basis for meaningful negotia-

tions, and not as an attempt to impose or dictate anyspecific solution to the parties;

5. Stresses the importance of early submission tothe parties of the paper as a starting point and signifi-cant catalyst for negotiations on a comprehensive polit-ical settlement, and deeply regrets that the Special Rep-resentative of the Secretary-General has not been in aposition to do so;

6. Stresses also the need to accelerate work on thedraft protocol on the return of the refugees to the Galiregion and measures for economic rehabilitation, aswell as on the draft agreement on peace and guaranteesfor the prevention and for the non-resumption of hos-tilities;

7. Calls upon the parties, in particular the Abkhazside, to undertake immediate efforts to move beyondthe impasse and to engage into negotiations on the corepolitical questions of the conflict and all other out-standing issues in the United Nations–led peace pro-cess;

8. Welcomes the documents signed at the Yalta meet-ing on confidence-building measures in March 2001,and urges the Georgian and Abkhaz sides to imple-ment the proposals agreed in those documents in a pur-poseful and cooperative manner;

9. Calls upon the parties to resume their work in theCoordinating Council and its relevant mechanisms assoon as possible;

10. Urges the parties to work together, throughmore effective use of existing arrangements within theCoordinating Council mechanisms, in order to clarifythe incidents of 8, 9 and 22 July 2001, bring about therelease of the hostages still being held and bring theperpetrators to justice;

11. Reaffirms the unacceptability of the demo-graphic changes resulting from the conflict, and reaf-firms also the inalienable right of all refugees and in-ternally displaced persons affected by the conflict toreturn to their homes in secure and dignified condi-tions, in accordance with international law and as setout in the Quadripartite Agreement of 4 April 1994;

12. Further urges the parties, in this context, to ad-dress urgently and in a concerted manner, as a firststep, the undefined and insecure status of spontaneousreturnees to the Gali district, which remains an issue ofserious concern;

13. Welcomes measures undertaken by the Govern-ment of Georgia, the United Nations DevelopmentProgramme, the Office of the United Nations HighCommissioner for Refugees, the Office for theCoordination of Humanitarian Affairs and the WorldBank to improve the situation of refugees and inter-nally displaced persons to develop their skills and to in-crease their self-reliance with full respect for their in-alienable right to return to their homes in secure anddignified conditions;

14. Recalls with satisfaction the joint assessment mis-sion to the Gali district, carried out under the aegis ofthe United Nations, and looks forward to a discussionby the parties of practical steps to implement the mis-sion’s recommendations;

15. Deplores all violations of the Moscow Agreementof 14 May 1994 on a Ceasefire and Separation of Forces,and notes with particular concern the military exer-cises conducted by both parties in June and July 2001 inviolation of the Moscow Agreement;



16. Expresses its concern at the disturbing tendencyby the parties to restrict the freedom of movement ofthe United Nations Observer Mission in Georgia,thereby hindering the ability of the Mission to fulfilits mandate, urges both sides to return immediately tofull compliance with the Moscow Agreement, which re-mains a cornerstone of the United Nations peaceeffort, and calls upon the parties to ensure the securityand freedom of movement of United Nations andother international personnel;

17. Recalls that the Georgian and the Abkhaz sidesbear the primary responsibility for the security of theMission, the collective peacekeeping force of the Com-monwealth of Independent States and other interna-tional personnel and for full compliance with all secu-rity arrangements agreed between them to precludeany further aggravation of the situation, and urgesboth parties to bring to justice the perpetrators of allhostage-taking incidents, particularly the abductionof two military observers of the Mission in the KodoriValley on 10 December 2000;

18. Reminds the Georgian side in particular to up-hold its commitment to put a stop to the activities ofillegal armed groups crossing into Abkhazia, Georgia,from the Georgian-controlled side of the ceasefire line;

19. Welcomes the fact that the Mission is keeping itssecurity arrangements under constant review in orderto ensure the highest possible level of security for itsstaff;

20. Decides to extend the mandate of the Mission fora new period terminating on 31 January 2002, subjectto a review by the Council of the mandate of the Mis-sion in the event of any changes that may be made in themandate or in the presence of the collective peace-keeping force of the Commonwealth of IndependentStates, and expresses its intention to conduct a thor-ough review of the operation at the end of its currentmandate, in the light of steps taken by the parties toachieve a comprehensive settlement;

21. Requests the Secretary-General to continue tokeep the Council regularly informed and to reportthree months from the date of the adoption of the pres-ent resolution on the situation in Abkhazia, Georgia,and requests also the Secretary-General to provide for abriefing within three months on the progress of thepolitical settlement, including on the status of the draftpaper his Special Representative intends to submit tothe parties as referred to in paragraph 4 above;


Communication. In a 16 July statement [S/2001/762], transmitted on 1 August, Georgia drew theinternational community’s attention to the in-creasingly dangerous scale of the illegal exploita-tion of natural resources and other properties inthe territory controlled by the separatist regimein Abkhazia, Georgia. It claimed that the Abkhazseparatist leadership continued, for the purposeof personal enrichment, to break up and plunderindustrial and agricultural complexes and sellthem to foreign entities, and that it misappropri-ated medical/resort facilities and adjacent terri-tories. The international community and theGovernment of Georgia had unequivocally as-

serted on numerous occasions that the separatistregime’s decisions regarding the utilization ofreal estate or any other property in the territoryof Abkhazia were illegal and void. The scale ofnatural resources exploitation in Abkhazia vio-lated Georgia’s sovereign rights and caused seri-ous damage to the environment. The felling ofcertain varieties of trees and forests protectedunder Georgia’s endangered species list causedirreversible damage to the entire region’s uniqueecosystems. Georgia appealed to the interna-tional community and the global environmentsociety to take steps to halt the irresponsible ex-ploitation of the natural resources in Abkhazia,Georgia.

Security Council consultations. Following in-formal consultations on 8 October, the SecurityCouncil issued a press statement [S/2001/1298]strongly condemning the shooting down on thatdate of a UNOMIG helicopter near the Kodori Val-ley in Abkhazia, killing four UN observers, twolocal staff and three crew members. The Counciloffered its condolences to the bereaved families,and called for a speedy investigation into the inci-dent and for bringing the perpetrators to justice.It underlined the importance of keeping securityarrangements under constant review to ensurethe highest possible level of security for UNOMIGpersonnel. It recalled that providing appropriatesecurity conditions for UNOMIG’s functioning atall times was the primary responsibility of bothsides, pursuant to relevant Council resolutionsand to their mutual obligations, including underthe Yalta Declaration.

In further informal Council consultations on12 and 29 October, the Secretariat gave a briefingon developments surrounding the incident. Theremains of all nine victims had been recovered;UNOMIG had restricted movement in the regionand drawn up preliminary staff relocationplans should they be needed. The investigationteam, constituted on 14 October, was headed byUkraine, the helicopter’s country of registration.Its preliminary findings suggested that the crashhad been caused by the impact of a surface-to-airmissile fired from a portable launcher, probablyby an armed infiltrator.

Report of Secretary-General (October). In anOctober report [S/2001/1008], the Secretary-General said the UNOMIG helicopter shot downon 8 October (see above) in the Gulripshi districtof Abkhazia, Georgia, was on its way to resumepatrolling in the upper Kodori Valley. The inci-dent, he noted, marked a new low point in thesituation in Georgia, which had been deteriorat-ing in the past six months, adding that both sideshad contributed to the current deplorable stateof affairs. They had neglected essential political



work within the mechanisms of the Geneva peaceprocess, particularly the Coordinating Council;disregarded the implementation of agreed proto-cols; and failed to contain a situation with a clearpotential for armed clashes. Since direct politicalcontacts between the two sides had been reducedto a minimum, the efforts of the Special Repre-sentative and the Chief Military Observer sincemid-August had focused on crisis managementrather than on the promotion of a political settle-ment. The Special Representative was attemptingthrough high-level political contacts with the twosides to re-establish dialogue between them andto revitalize existing negotiating mechanisms.

In August, the Russian Federation presentednew proposals for the draft paper on distributionof competences between Tbilisi and Sukhumithat suggested the inclusion of security guaran-tees. Following a series of meetings between theSpecial Representative and the Group of Friendsin New York, Moscow and Tbilisi, it was furthersuggested that security guarantees be dealt withon a parallel track, based on the Yalta Declaration(see p. 377). The Group of Friends had yet toreach agreement on the basic paper for negotia-tions on the future political status of Abkhaziawithin the State of Georgia. A 1 August letterfrom the Abkhaz de facto “Prime Minister”repeated the Abkhaz leadership’s refusal to par-ticipate in any negotiations based on such a pa-per, claiming “State-legal relations” betweenAbkhazia and Georgia had broken off when theUnion of Soviet Socialist Republics was still in ex-istence.

The thirteenth session of the CoordinatingCouncil, rescheduled for 9 October in Tbilisi,was postponed for the third time by the SpecialRepresentative due to insufficient political willon either side to engage in serious dialogue andto an increasing tendency to hold the peace pro-cess hostage to political demands. The imple-mentation of agreed projects had almost come toa standstill, although some preparatory workwithin the framework of the Coordinating Coun-cil continued (see below).

On 18 October, the Abkhaz de facto “PrimeMinister” publicly suggested a closer associationbetween Abkhazia and the Russian Federation.Russian officials at the highest levels, however,reaffirmed their commitment to Georgia’s terri-torial integrity. Earlier, on 11 October, Georgia’sParliament adopted a resolution to replace theCIS peacekeeping force with an internationalpeacekeeping mission without specifying its mo-dalities.

Turning to UNOMIG’s operations, theSecretary-General reported that, following ab-ductions and counter-abductions in July and

August, the Special Representative chaired an ex-traordinary ministerial meeting of both sides on14 August, during which the parties agreed to lo-cate, take into protective custody and return allabducted persons, and to combat illegal activitiesin the security zone. The first hostages were re-leased two days later. The two sides increasedtheir cooperation in the Joint Fact-findingGroup, and participation by all parties in theGroup’s investigations markedly improved.

On 18 and 19 August, clashes between armedirregulars and Abkhaz security forces near theupper Kodori Valley, outside UNOMIG’s area ofresponsibility, resulted in the death of four ir-regulars. According to local authorities in Tbi-lisi, the Abkhaz forces used two helicopters and ajet aircraft in the fighting, leading to Georgianaccusations of Russian involvement. On 22August, the Abkhaz de facto “Prime Minister”claimed that 700 armed irregulars were massedon the Georgian side of the ceasefire line, in thenorthern part of UNOMIG’s area of responsibil-ity, poised to invade. The Abkhaz authorities re-sponded with a partial military mobilization. Todefuse tensions, UNOMIG’s Chief Military Ob-server held meetings with top-level officials inTbilisi and Sukhumi and received assurancesthat Georgia would prevent armed groups fromcrossing the ceasefire line. He further facilitateda meeting between the Abkhaz de facto “PrimeMinister” and the Georgian Minister of SpecialAffairs on 24 August in Sukhumi, followed by di-rect telephone contact between the former andGeorgia’s President. The armed irregulars ap-peared to withdraw from their positions and theAbkhaz authorities called off their partial mobil-ization. They also expressed readiness to returnto the Coordinating Council.

Working Group I on security matters convenedon 11 September in Tbilisi, during which theparties reaffirmed their commitment to the1994 Moscow Agreement and recommendedthat: UNOMIG and the CIS peacekeeping forceshould resume regular patrols in the Kodori Val-ley; in the case of suspected summary executionduring detention, UNOMIG medical personnelshould be granted immediate access to conductindependent examination of the bodies; theGeorgian side should report on criminal pro-ceedings against the persons handed over tothem on 11 May (see p. 381); both sides shouldlocate persons still missing according to the 14August protocol; and both sides should exchangewritten information about cases for investigationby the Joint Fact-finding Group during theweekly quadripartite meetings.

The situation worsened anew in the secondweek of September, when Georgian armed ir-



regulars, together with fighters from the NorthCaucasus of predominantly Chechen origin,were in or near the Georgian-controlled upperKodori Valley, as reported to UNOMIG by theAbkhaz side, at the same time that the Georgianauthorities informed of the movement of threeAbkhaz armoured vehicles to the Abkhaz-controlled lower Kodori Valley. A specialUNOMIG helicopter patrol confirmed the pres-ence of a field howitzer and two armoured per-sonnel carriers at the Abkhaz checkpoint. At aUNOMIG-facilitated meeting on 28 September inTbilisi, Georgia’s President and the Abkhaz defacto “Prime Minister” agreed to take steps toavert new fighting in and around the Kodori Val-ley. The Georgian side reportedly pledged to dis-perse the armed irregulars; the Abkhaz sidepledged restraint in dealing with those irregu-lars, except in cases of criminal or unlawful ac-tivities, and appealed to the Group of Friends tohelp prevent new hostilities and provide securityguarantees as requested in the Yalta Declaration.The Special Representative repeatedly urgedGeorgian officials to provide the necessary secu-rity guarantees for the resumption of UNOMIGpatrols in the upper Kodori Valley.

Despite those undertakings, armed irregularsattacked an Abkhaz checkpoint in the village ofGeorgievskoe in the Abkhaz-controlled lower Ko-dori Valley on 3 and 4 October. One Abkhaz sol-dier and four civilians were killed, with five oth-ers reported missing. The Special Representativeand the Chief Military Observer immediatelyheld a series of meetings with senior governmentofficials in Tbilisi to halt the escalation of vio-lence. On 6 October, unknown irregulars at-tacked the Abkhaz security post in Tagiloni, nearthe ceasefire line; no casualties resulted. The as-sailants fled to the Georgian side of the ceasefireline.

Following the 8 October shooting down of theUNOMIG helicopter, the Special Representativetravelled to Sukhumi to oversee rescue effortsand to meet with the Abkhaz leadership. On9 October, he urged the Abkhaz de facto “PrimeMinister” to exercise restraint and not allow thefighting to spread to the upper Kodori Valley.The Abkhaz leadership and Georgia’s Presidentagreed to meet on the condition that the onlyissue to be addressed would be the de-escalationand the end of the ongoing fighting. Meanwhile,12 local residents were killed in the village ofNaa in continued fighting. On 9 October, twounidentified fighter aircraft attacked the villagesof Georgievskoe and Chiena in the Abkhaz-controlled lower Kodori Valley and, later, twoother aircraft bombed the village of Omarisharain the Georgian-controlled upper Kodori Valley.

On 11 October, the Abkhaz side used artilleryand airpower to drive the irregulars out of thelower valley, and, on 17 October, the Abkhaz sidewas again reported to have used helicopters andplanes extensively against retreating irregularsabout 10 kilometres from the border with theRussian Federation. The Georgian side againvoiced suspicion of Russian involvement.

The Special Representative met with Georgia’sPresident on 11 October to urge him to meet withthe Abkhaz de facto “Prime Minister” to avoidlarger-scale hostilities, but no response had beenreceived. The Georgian side was also urged not tosend reinforcements or supplies into the area offighting. Since 9 October, UNOMIG’s Sukhumiheadquarters and the Gali sector had beenplaced on high alert; operational patrolling fromthose sectors was suspended, but resumed on 18October after the fighting had largely ended.Casualty estimates, in addition to civilians andUN staff, put those killed at 60 armed elementsand about 16 Abkhaz troops; taken prisoner byAbkhaz forces were 10 irregulars.

Levels of crime remained high in the zone ofconflict, especially in lower Gali. In some areason the Abkhaz-controlled side of the ceasefireline, joint patrolling by Abkhaz militia, local resi-dents and the CIS peacekeeping force helped re-duce the level of lawlessness, and joint patrollingby Georgian police, local residents and the CISpeacekeeping force led to similar reductions onthe Georgian side.

Due to the fighting in the Kodori Valley areaand the volatile situation in Gali, many NGOs sus-pended their activities after 8 October. UNHCRexpanded its school rehabilitation programme to22 schools in the Gali district, as well as threeschools in the Ochamchira district on a self-helpbasis; however, it still could not operate in themore remote and dangerous areas, such as Pri-morsk, where humanitarian needs were particu-larly urgent and only UNOMIG patrols had access.Restrictions on border crossings continued tohamper international NGOs, thus complicatingthe delivery of assistance and emergency evacua-tion planning.

Widespread organized crime, lack of effectivelaw enforcement and the continuing stalemateregarding language policy in schools in the pre-dominantly Georgian-speaking Gali district hadadversely affected the return of displaced per-sons to their homes. Reports of human rights vio-lations included harassment on ethnic and reli-gious grounds, violations of fair trial standardsand arbitrary and illegal detentions. The UnitedNations Human Rights Office handled individ-ual complaints and monitored court sessions anddetention facilities.



As a follow-up to the November 2000 joint as-sessment mission to the Gali district [YUN 2000,p. 397], Georgian and Abkhaz representatives andparticipants of the mission, on 24 September, ex-plored ways to implement the mission’s recom-mendations (see p. 380). Specific attention wasgiven to progress in the return of displaced per-sons to the Gali district, human rights, public se-curity and language of instruction. The issue oflanguage was also taken up during a 20 Septem-ber joint visit to the Gali district by the Georgianand Abkhaz Ministers of Education.

In his observations, the Secretary-General re-minded both sides of their obligation to providefor the safety and security of UN personnel andto make it their top priority, emphasizing thatperpetrators of criminal acts targeted againstUNOMIG had to be brought to justice. He notedthat the parties had neglected active work withinthe Geneva peace process mechanisms [YUN 1997,p. 365] and warned that the cancellation on threeoccasions of the Coordinating Council’s thir-teenth session over the past six months, twice atthe Abkhaz side’s request, threatened to defeatthe purpose of that negotiating forum. Since themechanisms had been set up to serve the parties’own security, especially in times of crises, heurged their immediate return to full participa-tion in the Coordinating Council and in all itsworking groups.

The Secretary-General regretted the absenceofmeaningfulnegotiationsonthefuturepoliticalstatus of Abkhazia within the State of Georgia, aswell as on the issue of facilitating the safe, secureand dignified return of the refugees and inter-nally displaced persons to their homes. He notedthat the promising Programme of Action onconfidence-building measures had come to astandstill. In addition, he reminded the parties oftheir obligation to comply with the MoscowAgreement, theprotocolsagreedwithin theCoor-dinating Council framework and the commit-ments made during the weekly quadripartitemeetings.

Security Council consideration. On 30 Octo-ber, the Council held a private meeting [meeting4400], during which the Special Representative,the Minister of Special Affairs of Georgia and therepresentative of Belgium held a constructivediscussion on the situation in Georgia.

Further report of Secretary-General. In a laterreport [S/2002/88], the Secretary-General statedthat the Special Representative, in consultationwith the Group of Friends, was able to finalize inmid-December the paper on the “Basic Princi-ples for the Distribution of Competences be-tween Tbilisi and Sukhumi”, which was to be pre-sented to the Georgian and Abkhaz parties as a

basis for substantive negotiations on the futurestatus of Abkhazia within the State of Georgia. Inpreparation for those negotiations, the SpecialRepresentative held consultations in Sukhumiand Tbilisi; the Special Envoy of the Russian Fed-eration also visited Sukhumi. At those consulta-tions, the Abkhaz de facto “Prime Minister” re-jected any suggestion that Abkhazia was “withinthe State of Georgia” and was not prepared to re-ceive the letter transmitting the paper.

A major stumbling block had been the deploy-ment since October of Georgian troops in the Ko-dori Valley because of the fighting and bombard-ments in the area. The Abkhaz side affirmed itsunwillingness to discuss any subject with theGeorgian side as long as those forces remained.The Special Representative repeatedly urged theGeorgian side to withdraw its troops in compli-ance with the 1994 Moscow Agreement; theGroup of Friends undertook a similar démarcheon 14 December.

In the wake of the October hostilities in the Ko-dori Valley (see p. 385), contacts between the sidescame practically to a standstill. No meetings with-in theCoordinatingCouncil frameworkwereheldand no progress could be made on the implemen-tation of the recommendations of the 2000 jointassessmentmission to theGalidistrict.The lackofmovement was partly attributable to internal de-velopments on both sides. The dismissal of theGeorgian Government on 1 November effectivelyimmobilized the executive until mid-December.In Sukhumi, the Abkhaz leader was incapacitatedbyillnessandthedefacto“PrimeMinister”facedano-confidence vote in the Parliament on 31 Octo-ber, which he overcame by 28 votes to 7.

UNOMIG continued regular patrolling in itsarea of responsibility, except in the Georgian-controlled upper Kodori Valley, and, on 20 De-cember, with the CIS peacekeeping force, re-sumed joint ground patrols in the Abkhaz-controlled lower Kodori Valley, which had beensuspended owing to the October hostilities.

The Abkhaz side took responsibility for the 27to 31 October air raids on the Marukh pass, nearthe Russian border, which had rendered the arearelatively calm although unstable. On 10 Novem-ber, an Abkhaz official was killed and another se-riously wounded in an attack on the Tagiloni cus-toms post on the Abkhaz side of the ceasefireline. On 17 November, an armed group am-bushed a CIS peacekeeping force patrol north-east of Zugdidi, injuring one soldier. On 29 De-cember, an armed group attacked the head ofPirveli Gali administration, who returned fire,killing one of the assailants. On three occasionsin the second half of December, CIS peace-



keeping force checkpoints came under smallarms fire, injuring two soldiers.

As in the past, crime escalated in the Gali areawith the beginning of the mandarin harvest,highlighting the weakness of law enforcementthere. Abductions continued on both sides of theceasefire line. Direct negotiations between Geor-gian and Abkhaz local authorities resulted inan exchange, on 15 and 31 December, of fourAbkhaz and the remains of two for the remains offive Georgians. The Abkhaz side still held at leastfour civilians and five fighters taken prisoner inOctober.

Two mine incidents in the Gali region involv-ing local civilians, and two in the Kodori Valleyinvolving CIS patrols, led UNOMIG to suspend itspatrolling in those sites until mine searches wereundertaken by the CIS patrols. Restrictions werealso imposed in the Zugdidi sector following thediscovery of two containers with radioactive ma-terials near Potskhoztseri at the end of Decem-ber.

UNHCR had almost completed the rehabilita-tion of 24 schools in the Gali district and providedassistance to elderly displaced persons in Sukhumi.In November, the United Nations DevelopmentProgramme (UNDP) and the German Govern-ment signed an agreement whereby UNDP wouldimplement a telecommunications rehabilitationprogramme, which would serve displaced per-sons and returnees on both sides of the ceasefireline, extend links to Sukhumi and connect Tbilisiand the upper Kodori Valley. The Georgian andAbkhaz sides jointly identified the programmeneeds under the auspices of Working Group IIIof the Coordinating Council on socio-economicissues, for which the German Governmentgranted an initial contribution of $150,000.

From 12 to 16 December, the United NationsHuman Rights Office in Abkhazia conducted ahuman rights training seminar for de factoAbkhaz law enforcement agencies. Violation ofthe right to freedom of speech had been of seri-ous concern, in particular a harassment cam-paign against the editor of a weekly publicationand members of her family.

Financing

On 14 June [meeting 103], the General Assembly,having considered the Secretary-General’s re-ports on UNOMIG’s financial performance forthe period 1 July 1999 to 30 June 2000 [A/55/682],the proposed budget for the Mission’s mainte-nance from 1 July 2001 to 30 June 2002 [A/55/768]and ACABQ’s comments and recommendationsthereon [A/55/874/Add.4], adopted without vote,on the recommendation of the Fifth Committee[A/55/968], resolution 55/267 [agenda item 144].

Financing of the United NationsObserver Mission in Georgia


General on the financing of the United Nations Ob-server Mission in Georgia and the related reports of theAdvisory Committee on Administrative and BudgetaryQuestions,

Recalling Security Council resolution 854(1993) of6 August 1993, by which the Council approved the de-ployment of an advance team of up to ten UnitedNations military observers for a period of three monthsand the incorporation of the advance team into aUnited Nations observer mission if such a mission wasformally established by the Council,

Recalling also Security Council resolution 858(1993)of 24 August 1993, by which the Council decided to es-tablish the United Nations Observer Mission in Geor-gia, and the subsequent resolutions by which the Coun-cil extended the mandate of the Observer Mission, thelatest of which was resolution 1339(2001) of 31 January2001,

Recalling further its decision 48/475 A of 23 Decem-ber 1993 on the financing of the Observer Mission andsubsequent resolutions and decisions thereon, the lat-est of which was resolution 54/271 of 15 June 2000,

Reaffirming the general principles underlying thefinancing of United Nations peacekeeping operations,as stated by the General Assembly in its resolutions1874(S-IV) of 27 June 1963, 3101(XXVIII) of 11 Decem-ber 1973 and 55/235 of 23 December 2000,

Noting with appreciation that voluntary contributionshave been made to the Observer Mission,

Mindful of the fact that it is essential to provide theObserver Mission with the necessary financial re-sources to enable it to fulfil its responsibilities underthe relevant resolutions of the Security Council,

1. Takes note of the status of contributions to theUnited Nations Observer Mission in Georgia as at 30April 2001, including the contributions outstanding inthe amount of 19.8 million United States dollars, repre-senting 14 per cent of the total assessed contributionsfrom the inception of the Observer Mission to the pe-riod ending 30 June 2001, notes that some 16 per centof the Member States have paid their assessed contribu-tions in full, and urges all other Member States con-cerned, in particular those in arrears, to ensure pay-ment of their outstanding assessed contributions;


3. Urges all other Member States to make every pos-sible effort to ensure payment of their assessed contri-butions to the Observer Mission in full and on time;






7. Reiterates its request to the Secretary-General tomake the fullest possible use of facilities and equip-ment at the United Nations Logistics Base at Brindisi,Italy, in order to minimize the costs of procurement forthe Observer Mission;


9. Requests the Secretary-General to take all neces-sary action to ensure that the Observer Mission is ad-ministered with a maximum of efficiency and econ-omy;

10. Also requests the Secretary-General, in order toreduce the cost of employing General Service staff, tocontinue efforts to recruit local staff for the ObserverMission against General Service posts, commensuratewith the requirements of the Mission;

11. Decides to appropriate to the Special Account forthe United Nations Observer Mission in Georgia theamount of 27,896,341 dollars gross (26,175,806 dollarsnet) for the maintenance of the Observer Mission forthe period from 1 July 2001 to 30 June 2002, inclusiveof the amount of 816,452 dollars gross (716,517 dollarsnet) for the support account for peacekeeping opera-tions and the amount of 85,289 dollars gross (76,589dollars net) for the United Nations Logistics Base;

12. Decides also to apportion among Member Statesthe amount of 2,324,695 dollars gross (2,181,317 dollarsnet) for the period from 1 to 31 July 2001 in accordancewith the levels set out in General Assembly resolution55/235, as adjusted by the Assembly in its resolution55/236 of 23 December 2000, and taking into accountthe scale of assessments for the year 2001, as set out inits resolution 55/5 B of 23 December 2000;

13. Decides further that, in accordance with the provi-sions of its resolution 973(X) of 15 December 1955,there shall be set off against the apportionment amongMember States, as provided for in paragraph 12 above,their respective share in the Tax Equalization Fund ofthe estimated staff assessment income of 143,378 dol-lars approved for the Observer Mission for the periodfrom 1 to 31 July 2001;

14. Decides to apportion among Member States theamount of 25,571,646 dollars gross (23,994,489 dollarsnet) for the period from 1 August 2001 to 30 June 2002,at a monthly rate of 2,324,695 dollars gross (2,181,317dollars net), in accordance with paragraph 12 above,and taking into account the scale of assessments for theyears 2001 and 2002, as set out in General Assemblyresolution 55/5 B, subject to the decision of the Secu-rity Council to extend the mandate of the ObserverMission beyond 31 July 2001;

15. Decides also that, in accordance with the provi-sions of its resolution 973(X), there shall be set offagainst the apportionment among Member States, asprovided for in paragraph 14 above, their respectiveshare in the Tax Equalization Fund of the estimatedstaff assessment income of 1,577,157 dollars approvedfor the period from 1 August 2001 to 30 June 2002;

16. Decides further that, for Member States that havefulfilled their financial obligations to the ObserverMission, there shall be set off against the apportion-ment, as provided for in paragraphs 12 and 14 above,their respective share of the unencumbered balance of

5,996,479 dollars gross (5,775,479 dollars net) inrespect of the period ending 30 June 2000, of which2,324,695 dollars gross (2,181,317 dollars net) pertainsto the period from 1 to 31 July 2001 and 3,671,784 dol-lars gross (3,594,162 dollars net) pertains to the periodfrom 1 August 2001 to 30 June 2002, in accordance withthe composition of groups as set out in paragraphs 3and 4 of General Assembly resolution 43/232 of 1March 1989 and adjusted by the Assembly in subse-quent relevant resolutions and decisions for the ad hocapportionment of peacekeeping appropriations, thelatest of which were resolution 52/230 of 31 March1998 and decisions 54/456 to 54/458 of 23 December1999 for the period 1998-2000, and taking into accountthe scale of assessments for the year 2000, as set out inits resolutions 52/215 A of 22 December 1997 and54/237 A of 23 December 1999;

17. Decides that, for Member States that have not ful-filled their financial obligations to the Observer Mis-sion, their share of the unencumbered balance of5,996,479 dollars gross (5,775,479 dollars net) for theperiod ending 30 June 2000, of which 2,324,695 dollarsgross (2,181,317 dollars net) pertains to the period from1 to 31 July 2001 and 3,671,784 dollars gross (3,594,162dollars net) pertains to the period from 1 August 2001to 30 June 2002, shall be set off against their outstand-ing obligations in accordance with the scheme set outin paragraph 16 above;


19. Encourages the Secretary-General to continue totake additional measures to ensure the safety and secu-rity of all personnel under the auspices of the UnitedNations participating in the Observer Mission;

20. Invites voluntary contributions to the ObserverMission in cash and in the form of services and suppliesacceptable to the Secretary-General, to be adminis-tered, as appropriate, in accordance with the proce-dure and practices established by the General Assem-bly;

21. Decides to include in the provisional agenda of itsfifty-sixth session the item entitled “Financing of theUnited Nations Observer Mission in Georgia”.

The Assembly decided, on 24 December, thatthe item on UNOMIG financing would remain forconsideration at its resumed fifty-sixth (2002)session (decision 56/464) and that the itemwould be considered by the Fifth Committee atthat session (decision 56/458).

Also in December [A/56/721 & Corr.1], theSecretary-General submitted the UNOMIG finan-cial performance report for the period 1 July2000 to 30 June 2001.

Georgia–Russian Federation

On 29 October [S/2001/1022], Georgia claimedviolation of its airspace and bombing of its terri-tory on 28 and 29 October by warplanes from theRussian Federation. Georgia’s repeated de-mands for an explanation and joint investigationinto previous such violations had had no re-



sponse. It therefore appealed to the SecurityCouncil and the world community to assess thesituation and take steps to prevent aggressionagainst Georgia.

On 15 November [A/56/633-S/2001/1085], theRussian Federation noted that it had fulfilled thekey obligations specified in its 17 November 1999joint statement with Georgia concerning the mo-dalities for fulfilling the conditions laid downin the adapted Treaty on Conventional ArmedForces in Europe (CFE) and for regulating mili-tary bilateral ties. The remaining Russian weap-ons and equipment in Georgia subject to the CFETreaty were withdrawn before 31 December 2000or partially disposed of on the spot in conditionsof transparency and under international moni-toring. The disbandment and withdrawal of Rus-sian military bases at Vaziani and Gudauta werecompleted in November in accordance with bilat-eral Georgia–Russian Federation agreements.The departure of Russian military personnelfrom the Gudauta base, located within theGeorgian-Abkhaz conflict area, was protestedby Abkhazia’s population, who considered theirpresence a security guarantee in times of armedconflict. The facilities left behind were currentlyin use by the CIS peacekeeping force for its opera-tions, which were under UNOMIG monitoring.Moscow and Tbilisi had yet to reach an agree-ment regarding the Russian military bases at Ba-tumi and Akhalkalaki and other military facili-ties within Georgia; meanwhile, account shouldbe taken of the considerable preparatory ar-rangements to be made for the return of the serv-icemen at those bases to the Russian Federation.

Georgia reported further violations of its air-space on 28 November [A/56/664-S/2001/1124] bytwo Russian military jets that overflew the Kodorigorge, and, on the previous night, by six jets thatpenetrated 50 kilometres into Georgia’s airspace,bombing the territory adjacent to Birkani village,in the Akmeta district, as well as by military heli-copters that carried out several air strikes onGeorgian territory near the Chechnya and In-gushetia sections of the Georgia–Russian Federa-tion border, including the outskirts of six villagesin the area. Calling those violations undisguisedaggression, Georgia warned that, if not sup-pressed, they could exacerbate the instability inthe Caucasus. It was imperative for the interna-tional community to raise its voice against the vio-lation of internationally accepted principles ofpeaceful coexistence. It demanded that the Rus-sian Federation cease its repeated acts of aggres-sion against Georgia, which reserved its right totake adequate steps as provided by internationallaw.

Armenia-Azerbaijan

In 2001, Armenia and Azerbaijan were nocloser to reaching a settlement of the armed con-flict between them, which had erupted in 1992[YUN 1992, p. 388] over the Nagorny-Karabakh re-gion in Azerbaijan. The Minsk Group of OSCE(France, the Russian Federation and the UnitedStates) continued efforts to advance the peaceprocess. In that context, the United States, oneof the co-chairs of the Minsk Group, convened ameeting of the parties in Florida. Both sidesaddressed communications to the Secretary-General during the year regarding developmentsin the conflict. Nagorny Karabakh’s communica-tions were transmitted by Armenia.

Communications. On 4 April [A/56/62-S/2001/334], Azerbaijan transmitted to theSecretary-General a statement by its President,Heydar Aliyev, made at a meeting (Key West,Florida, 3 April) with the United States Secretaryof State, Colin Powell, the Presidents of Armeniaand Azerbaijan and co-chairs of the MinskGroup. President Aliyev said it was the first timethe OSCE Minsk Group had convened with thePresidents of Armenia and Azerbaijan and otherparticipants to discuss the question of the peace-ful settlement of the Armenian-AzerbaijaniNagorny-Karabakh conflict. He hoped the meet-ing would play a positive role in resolving the 12-year conflict.

The President outlined the reasons preventinga settlement of the conflict, tracing its historyfrom 1921. He recalled the direct meetings be-tween the Presidents of Armenia and Azerbaijanthat began in April 1999 on the initiative of theUnited States in a search for mutually acceptablecompromises, pointing out that, at the end of thatyear, they were close to doing so. Armenia, how-ever, reneged on the agreement reached. Unfor-tunately, as a result of those meetings, the co-chairs of the Minsk Group had adopted a wait-and-see position and had based their activities onthe principle “What the Presidents agree uponwill be acceptable to OSCE”.

Azerbaijan did not consider the Presidents’meetings as replacing the activities of the co-chairs of the Minsk Group, but as mutually com-plementary to ensure progress in the negotia-tions towards a final settlement of the conflict.Azerbaijan remained committed to peace andthe observance of the 1994 ceasefire regime [YUN1994, p. 577], and would continue to strive for a com-plete and peaceful settlement of the conflict.The President called on the co-chairs of the



Minsk Group to step up efforts to halt the armedconflict and establish stable peace.

Azerbaijan also requested that the item “Thesituation relating to Nagorny Karabakh” be re-tained on the list of matters of which the SecurityCouncil was seized [S/2001/422].

In response, the “Minister for Foreign Affairsof Nagorny Karabakh”, in a 30 April letter trans-mitted by Armenia [A/56/64-S/2001/431], sub-mitted a memorandum outlining Nagorny Kara-bakh’s version of the region’s history in order toprevent a one-sided interpretation of past eventsand to establish an objective historical basis in thesearch for a settlement to the conflict. The “Re-public of Nagorny Karabakh” had refrainedfrom discussing the problems of the past in thebelief that it was unproductive and that both sidesshould concentrate on building a peaceful andstable future for the region.

On 16 May [A/56/75-S/2001/489], Azerbaijan re-jected references to “Nagorny Karabakh” as acountry and any attempt to disseminate withinthe United Nations the notion of Nagorny Kara-bakh as an independent entity. Armenia’s circu-lation of the memorandum above was testimonyto its direct participation in the conflict and to itsaggressive and annexationist plans towards Azer-baijan.

By a 31 August statement [S/2001/844], theChairman of the Milli Mejlis (Parliament) of Az-erbaijan reported that “elections” were to be heldon 5 September for local self-government bodiesin the so-called “Nagorno-Karabakh Republic”.The “elections”, aimed at “legitimizing” the so-called “Nagorno-Karabakh Republic”, contra-dicted the principles and norms of internationallaw, the Constitution and laws of Azerbaijan andcommonly accepted moral norms and values;they were null and void and had no legal conse-quences. It was another act of political provoca-tion that would negatively affect the ongoing ne-gotiations on the peaceful settlement of theNagorny-Karabakh problem, in particular themediation efforts of the Minsk Group.

The Chairman urged the international com-munity not to remain indifferent to the fact thatthe occupation forces in Nagorny Karabakh wereflagrantly defying the sovereignty and territorialintegrity of the Republic of Azerbaijan. Hecalled on the Parliamentary Assembly of theCouncil of Europe, the Inter-ParliamentaryUnion, the OSCE Parliamentary Assembly, theParliamentary Assembly of the Black Sea Eco-nomic Cooperation, the CIS Inter-ParliamentaryAssembly and the Parliamentary Union of theMember States of the Organization of the IslamicConference, as well as the European Parliamentand the North Atlantic Assembly, to condemn the

act of political provocation and to support thejust cause of Azerbaijan.

Cyprus

The year 2001 saw a significant breakthroughin UN efforts, through the Secretary-General’smission of good offices, in preparing the ground-work for meaningful negotiations towards a com-prehensive settlement of the Cyprus question.For the first time, the President of Cyprus, Glaf-cos Clerides, and the Turkish Cypriot leader,Rauf R. Denktas, agreed to begin direct talkswithout preconditions until a comprehensive set-tlement was achieved. Those talks were sched-uled to begin in January 2002 in Cyprus.

The United Nations Peacekeeping Force inCyprus (UNFICYP) continued to assist in the resto-ration of normal conditions and in humanitarianfunctions. No progress was made during the yearin removing the restrictions imposed in 2000 onUNFICYP by the Turkish Cypriot authorities andTurkish forces. The Security Council twice ex-tended the UNFICYP mandate, the second timeuntil 15 June 2002.

By decision 55/491 of 7 September, the Gen-eral Assembly included in the draft agenda of itsfifty-sixth (2001) session the item entitled “Ques-tion of Cyprus”. On 24 December, by decision56/464, it decided that the item would remainfor consideration during its resumed fifty-sixth(2002) session.

Incidents

Communications. Throughout 2001, theSecretary-General received numerous lettersfrom the Government of Cyprus and from theTurkish Cypriot authorities containing chargesand countercharges, protests and accusations,and explanations of position regarding the ques-tion of Cyprus. The letters from the “Turkish Re-public of Northern Cyprus” were transmitted byTurkey.

In communications dated between 30 Januaryand 2 November, Cyprus alleged massive viola-tions of its national airspace and unauthorizedintrusions into Nicosia’s flight information re-gion by Turkish military aircraft, while thosefrom the “Representative of the Turkish Repub-lic of Northern Cyprus” claimed, in refutation,the existence of two independent States in Cy-prus and that the flights took place within thesovereign airspace of the “Turkish Republic ofNorthern Cyprus” [A/55/755-S/2001/96, A/55/776-S/2001/119, A/55/854-S/2001/272, A/55/893-S/2001/343,



A/55/990-S/2001/599, A/55/1025-S/2001/765, A/55/476-S/2001/972, A/55/525-S/2001/1044].

In other communications, Cyprus, on 13 Feb-ruary [A/55/782-S/2001/133], responding to aDecember 2000 letter from Turkey [A/55/715-S/2000/1231], described events that had led to Secu-rity Council resolution 186(1964) [YUN 1964, p. 165]and affirmed the continued operation of the1960 Constitution of Cyprus, subject to necessarytemporary modifications. Cyprus also protestedwhat it called the illegal visit of Turkey’s Ministerfor Foreign Affairs to the Turkish occupied areasof Cyprus between 16 and 18 April [A/55/909-S/2001/395].

The “Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus”gave its own position on various aspects of theCyprus situation and drew attention to state-ments made by the representatives of what itcalled the Greek Cypriot administration in sev-eral UN bodies, which it described as containingmisrepresentations [A/55/1004-S/2001/645, A/56/504-S/2001/1006, A/55/790-E/2001/6, A/55/865-S/2001/229,A/55/976-S/2001/548, A/55/987-S/2001/576, A/56/669-S/2001/1139, A/56/690-S/2001/1165, A/56/700-S/2001/1187, A/56/755-S/2001/1256]. Both sides also madeclaims and counterclaims regarding: the arrestand sentencing of a Greek Cypriot, PanicosTsiakourmas, and the arrest of a TurkishCypriot, Omer Gazi Tekogul [A/55/737-S/2001/58,A/55/895-S/2001/345, A/55/922-S/2001/427, A/55/932-S/2001/457, A/55/993-S/2001/628]; the issue of the ex-cavations at the archaeological site of Salamis[A/55/1026-S/2001/778, A/55/1032-S/2001/853]; the 10October judgement in the case of Cyprus v. Turkeyby the European Court of Human Rights [A/55/986-S/2001/575, A/55/1012-S/2001/678 & Corr.1, A/55/1030-S/2001/824]; and the application of Cyprus formembership in the EU [A/55/899-S/2001/356,A/56/451-S/2001/953, A/56/669-S/2001/1186, A/56/723-S/2001/1222]. On the last issue, the United King-dom, on 5 November [A/56/612-S/2001/1059], dis-agreed with Turkey’s assertions that Cyprus’s ap-plication for EU membership was illegal and thatthe United Kingdom was obliged by the terms ofthe 1960 Treaty of Guarantee to veto that applica-tion.

Good offices mission

Proximity talks

The Secretary-General’s Special Adviser onCyprus, Alvaro de Soto, continued efforts during2001 to convene the sixth round of proximitytalks, scheduled for January, in Geneva, betweenthe two Cyprus parties, led by Cyprus PresidentGlafcos Clerides and Turkish Cypriot leaderRauf R. Denktas, to prepare for meaningful

negotiations towards a comprehensive settle-ment. In his May report on UNFICYP [S/2001/534],the Secretary-General reported that Mr. de Sototravelled to the island in January for meetingswith the two leaders, as well as to Greece and Tur-key. Mr. Denktas had asked that no date be set forproximity talks. However, the Special Advisercontinued to consult with a number of Govern-ments and organizations and was proceedingwith preparations so as to be of assistance to theparties when appropriate.

The Secretary-General later reported that hehad met with Mr. Denktas in Salzburg, Austria,on 28 August [S/2001/1122], while his Special Ad-viser returned to Cyprus, remaining there from29 August to 5 September. On 4 September, theSpecial Adviser conveyed to Mr. Clerides and Mr.Denktas the Secretary-General’s invitation to re-sume the search for a comprehensive settlementin a new and reinvigorated phase of his good of-fices, beginning with separate meetings with thetwo leaders in New York on 12 September. Thatinvitation was accepted by Mr. Clerides, but de-clined by Mr. Denktas.

Security Council consideration. On 26 Sep-tember [S/2001/976], the Security Council Presi-dent issued a press statement in which the Coun-cil expressed disappointment at the unjustifieddecision by the Turkish side to decline theSecretary-General’s invitation and reaffirmedthat progress could be made only at the nego-tiating table. The Council encouraged theSecretary-General and his Special Adviser to con-tinue their efforts in accordance with resolution1250(1999) [YUN 1999, p. 388] and gave full supportto those efforts. It urged all concerned to cooper-ate with the Secretary-General and his SpecialAdviser and to show confidence in their judge-ment.

Communications. Mr. Denktas, “President ofthe Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus”, in a10 September letter transmitted by Turkey on9 October [A/56/461-S/2001/959], informed theSecretary-General that he had declined to attendthe proposed New York talks because he consid-ered them premature. He reiterated that theGreek Cypriot’s rejection of the Secretary-General’s 12 September 2000 statement [SG/SM/7546], setting out his understanding of the statusof the parties to the negotiations, had left nocommon ground for engaging in meaningfultalks. The treatment of the Greek Cypriot side byall concerned as the legitimate Government ofCyprus and frequent statements to the effect that,“agreement or not”, Cyprus would be accepted asan EU member, left no will or wish on the part ofthe Greek Cypriot leadership to share anythingwith the Turkish Cypriot side. Those develop-



ments had undermined the chances of success ofthe Secretary-General’s mission of good offices.While convinced of the imperative to prepare theground for meaningful negotiations, Mr. Denk-tas needed proof that the ground was really pre-pared so that the parties would not engage in yetanother futile exercise. For those reasons, he wasinsisting on “common ground” with respect tothe objective (the establishment of a new partner-ship) and guiding principles (the equal status ofthe parties and that neither could represent theother or the whole of Cyprus) before starting anew phase of reinvigorated and meaningful ne-gotiations. Thus, securing a commitment fromthe two parties that the purpose of the UN-facilitated talks was the establishment of a newpartnership based on the equal status of bothwould prepare the ground for the proposed rein-vigorated phase of the talks.

The EU, in a 23 October statement on Cyprus[S/2001/1017], supported the Council President’s26 September statement (see p. 391), in particularthe disappointment expressed at the Turkishside’s refusal to take part in the 12 Septembermeeting. It backed the Secretary-General’sefforts to resume, without preconditions, thesearch for a comprehensive and lasting settle-ment and called on all parties involved to cooper-ate in the process for achieving a political settle-ment before the end of negotiations for theaccession of Cyprus to the EU.

Agreement on direct talksTurkey, on 14 November [A/56/622-S/2001/1077],

transmitted a 12 November letter from Mr. Denk-tas, enclosing a paper entitled “Objectives andbasic parameters of a Cyprus settlement”, whichformed the basis of his position during the 28August meeting with the Secretary-General (seep. 391). According to Mr. Denktas, those parame-ters were in line with the ideas and principles thathad emerged from the Secretary-General’s goodoffices mission and reflected the realities of theisland, as well as the objective of establishing anew partnership between the two parties.

The Secretary-General reported in November[S/2001/1122] that, following a proposal made di-rectly to Mr. Clerides by Mr. Denktas for a face-to-face meeting without preconditions on theisland, the two agreed through an exchange ofletters to meet on 4 December in the UnitedNations Protected Area, in the presence of theSpecial Adviser.

On 10 December [S/2001/1162], the Secretary-General informed the Security Council that, atthe 4 December meeting, the two leaders agreedthat: the Secretary-General, in the exercise of hisgood offices mission, would invite them to direct

talks to be held in Cyprus in mid-January 2002 onUN premises, with no preconditions; all issueswould be on the table; negotiations would con-tinue in good faith until a comprehensive settle-ment was achieved; and nothing would be agreeduntil everything was agreed. In transmitting theagreement to the Council, the Secretary-Generalindicated that the talks would begin on 16 Janu-ary 2002.

The Council, in a 12 December press state-ment by its President [SC/7237], welcomed theagreement reached by the two leaders to begin di-rect talks and other positive developments andhoped that progress would be achieved resultingin a comprehensive settlement. The Council gaveits full support to the Secretary-General’s mis-sion of good offices and encouraged him and hisSpecial Adviser to continue to be of assistance tothe parties.

Continuation of good offices missionThe Secretary-General, on 31 May [S/2001/556],

drew the Security Council’s attention to the factthat efforts related to his mission of good officesin Cyprus would continue at least throughout2001. In furtherance of that mission, his SpecialAdviser would continue to be assisted by a smallteam. He asked the Council President to alertCouncil members to the importance of continu-ing support for his efforts in discharging his mis-sion. The Council took note of the Secretary-General’s letter on 5 June [S/2001/557].

The Secretary-General, on 5 December [S/2001/1182], informed the Council that the efforts relat-ing to his mission would continue at leastthroughout 2002, which the Council took note ofon 12 December [S/2001/1183].

UNFICYP

The United Nations Peacekeeping Force inCyprus, established by Security Council resolu-tion 186(1964) [YUN 1964, p. 165], continued in 2001to monitor the ceasefire lines between the Turk-ish and Turkish Cypriot forces on the northernside and the Cypriot National Guard on thesouthern side of the island; to maintain the mili-tary status quo and prevent a recurrence of fight-ing; and to undertake humanitarian and eco-nomic activities. In the absence of a formalceasefire agreement, the military status quo, asrecorded by UNFICYP in 1974, remained thestandard by which the Force judged whetherchanges constituted violations of the status quo.

UNFICYP, under the overall authority of theActing Special Representative and Chief of Mis-sion, Zbigniew Wlosowicz, continued to keep thearea between the ceasefire lines, known as the



buffer zone, under constant surveillance througha system of observation posts, and through air,vehicle and foot patrols.

During 2001, Alvaro de Soto continued as theSecretary-General’s Special Adviser on Cyprus.On 6 December [S/2001/1184], the Secretary-General informed the Council of his intention toappoint Major General Jin Ha Hwang (Republicof Korea) as Force Commander, to succeed MajorGeneral Victory Rana (Nepal), whose tour ofduty would end on 15 December. The Councilnoted that intended appointment on 12 Decem-ber [S/2001/1185].

As at 31 December, UNFICYP, under the com-mand of Major General Jin Ha Hwang, com-prised 1,196 troops and 35 civilian police.

Activities

Report of Secretary-General (May). TheSecretary-General, in his report covering devel-opments and UNFICYP activities from 28 Novem-ber 2000 to 29 May 2001 [S/2001/534], said that, ex-cept for a few minor incidents, the situation alongthe ceasefire line remained calm. Air violationsin the UN buffer zone had decreased from 47during the last reporting period [YUN 2000, p. 404]to 33. Since December 2000, the National Guardhad developed two major defensive works on itsceasefire line just outside the UN buffer zonenear Pyla. In response, the Turkish forces con-structed two berms and dug 120 metres of a newtrench between existing positions at a Turkishforces post. Despite repeated UNFICYP demands,the Turkish forces had refused to return that postto the status quo ante and had recently added abarbed wire fence to the north of that position.Reinforced concrete firing positions were alsobeing installed along much of the NationalGuard ceasefire line.

Crossings of the maritime security lines (theseaward extensions of the median line of thebuffer zone) continued as well. Restrictions im-posed on UNFICYP by Turkish Cypriot authori-ties and Turkish forces in 2000 [ibid.] remained inforce, including violation of the military statusquo by the Turkish forces/Turkish Cypriot secu-rity forces in the village of Strovilia. Restrictionsimposed along the Famagusta-Dherinia roadcontinued to prevent UNFICYP from monitoringthe whole of the fenced area of Varosha, limitingUNFICYP’s observation to areas visible from staticobservation posts and from a short patrol routewell away from the fence. Within Varosha, Turk-ish forces continued renovations of some build-ings and flew flags on one of them in violation ofthe military status quo. Some tension developedin April in the mixed village of Pyla in the bufferzone as a result of the raising of Turkish and

Turkish Cypriot flags in several locations, in vio-lation of the agreement reached among the twocommunities in the village and UNFICYP.

UNFICYP assisted civilian activities in thebuffer zone, by, for example, facilitating work toimprove the water supply to the north and escort-ing farmers working on their land. In April, italso facilitated a visit by some 250 Greek Cypriotsto a church in the buffer zone near Varisha,north-west of Lefka, to mark Saint George’s Day.UNDP, through the United Nations Office forProject Services (UNOPS), continued to imple-ment its programme to promote good will byencouraging Greek and Turkish Cypriots to worktogether in preparing and implementing proj-ects of mutual concern, notably in public health,environment, sanitation, water, urban renova-tion, preservation of cultural heritage, naturalresources and education.

The Secretary-General remarked that the con-ditions under which UNFICYP operated re-mained difficult owing to the restrictions im-posed on it by the Turkish Cypriot authoritiesand Turkish forces. He considered the presenceof UNFICYP essential for the maintenance of theceasefire on the island and recommended thatthe Council extend its mandate for a further sixmonths, until 15 December 2001.

Communications. In letters to the Secretary-General between February and June, the Govern-ment of Cyprus, representatives of the “TurkishRepublic of Northern Cyprus” and Turkey con-tinued to debate the legal necessity for approvalby both sides of the extension of UNFICYP’smandate [A/55/784-S/2001/136, A/55/866-S/2001/307,A/55/949-S/2001/507, A/55/970-S/2001/541, A/55/1003-S/2001/644].


On 15 June [meeting 4328], the Security Councilunanimously adopted resolution 1354(2001).The draft [S/2001/581] was prepared in consulta-tions among Council members.

The Security Council,Welcoming the report of the Secretary-General of 30

May 2001 on the United Nations operation in Cyprus,in particular the call to the parties to assess and addressthe humanitarian issue of missing persons with dueurgency and seriousness,

Noting that the Government of Cyprus has agreedthat in view of the prevailing conditions in the island itis necessary to keep the United Nations PeacekeepingForce in Cyprus beyond 15 June 2001,




1. Reaffirms all its relevant resolutions on Cyprus, inparticular resolutions 1251(1999) of 29 June 1999 andsubsequent resolutions;

2. Decides to extend the mandate of the UnitedNations Peacekeeping Force in Cyprus for a further pe-riod ending 15 December 2001;

3. Requests the Secretary-General to submit a re-port, by 1 December 2001, on the implementation ofthe present resolution;

4. Urges the Turkish Cypriot side and Turkishforces to rescind the restrictions imposed on 30 June2000 on the operations of the United Nations Peace-keeping Force in Cyprus, and to restore the militarystatus quo ante at Strovilia;


Report of Secretary-General (November). InNovember [S/2001/1122], the Secretary-General re-ported fewer incidents along the ceasefire lines.However, the restrictions imposed on UNFICYPoperations continued, including the violation ofthe military status quo in Strovilia. Patrols toVarosha, which were prevented under those re-strictions, resumed in September but under es-cort by Turkish Cypriot security forces. Thenumber of air violations remained about thesame, and crossings of the maritime securitylines totalled about 250 crossings by Turkishforces of the western line and some 3,000 in theeast near Famagusta from the south. Incursionsin the buffer zone by Greek Cypriot hunters in-creased significantly in November with the be-ginning of the winter hunting season.

The National Guard continued to develop andstrengthen the two defensive positions (seep. 393) just outside the buffer zone south of Pyla,reportedly to compensate for the minefield link-ing the two positions, which was being demined.The Turkish forces, for their part, reinforcedtheir observation post adjacent to Pyla.

UNFICYP helped to facilitate monthly meet-ings of political party representatives from bothsides, media gatherings, music rehearsals and abusiness forum at Ledra Palace. It continued itshumanitarian support to 427 Greek Cypriots and165 Maronites in the northern part of the islandand those Turkish Cypriots in the southern partwho had made themselves known to UNFICYP. Italso facilitated the rotation of teachers at theGreek elementary school in Rizokarpaso in theKarpas peninsula. UNFICYP support of civilianactivities in the buffer zone continued, includingfarming, liaison with local representatives tosolve water problems, coordinating maintenancework on utilities, extending the Klimos river wallin Sector 2 to prevent flooding and reconstruc-tion of a 73-bed hospital in Paralimni in Sector 4.UNFICYP also designated land in the buffer zonewest of Nicosia for civilian use, mainly for hous-ing. In Pyla, it brokered an agreement between

Greek and Turkish Cypriot village leaders onroad safety measures.

Efforts continued in overcoming obstacles toenable the Committee on Missing Persons to re-sume its activities, including specific proposalsby the leaders of both sides concerning the Com-mittee’s work. Meanwhile, the Government ofCyprus continued to implement its unilateralprogramme of exhumation and identification ofhuman remains.

The Secretary-General recommended that theCouncil extend the UNFICYP mandate for a fur-ther six months, until 15 June 2002.


On 14 December [meeting 4436], the SecurityCouncil unanimously adopted resolution 1384(2001). The draft [S/2001/1190] was prepared inconsultations among Council members.

The Security Council,Welcoming the report of the Secretary-General of 30

November 2001 on the United Nations operation inCyprus, in particular the call to the parties to assess andaddress the humanitarian issue of missing personswith due urgency and seriousness,

Noting that the Government of Cyprus has agreedthat in view of the prevailing conditions in the island itis necessary to keep the United Nations PeacekeepingForce in Cyprus beyond 15 December 2001,


1. Reaffirms all its relevant resolutions on Cyprus, inparticular resolution 1251(1999) of 29 June 1999 andsubsequent resolutions;

2. Decides to extend the mandate of the UnitedNations Peacekeeping Force in Cyprus for a furtherperiod ending on 15 June 2002;

3. Requests the Secretary-General to submit a re-port, by 1 June 2002, on the implementation of thepresent resolution;

4. Urges the Turkish Cypriot side and Turkishforces to rescind the restrictions imposed on 30 June2000 on the operations of the United Nations Peace-keeping Force in Cyprus, and to restore the militarystatus quo ante at Strovilia;


Financing

On 14 June [meeting 103], the General Assembly,having considered the Secretary-General’s re-port on UNFICYP’s financial performance for theperiod 1 July 1999 to 30 June 2000 [A/55/739], theproposed budget for UNFICYP’s maintenance forthe period 1 July 2001 to 30 June 2002 [A/55/788]and ACABQ’s comments and recommendationsthereon [A/55/874/Add.3], adopted, on the recom-mendation of the Fifth Committee [A/55/969],resolution 55/266 without vote [agenda item 143].



Financing of the United NationsPeacekeeping Force in Cyprus


General on the financing of the United Nations Peace-keeping Force in Cyprus and the related reports of theAdvisory Committee on Administrative and BudgetaryQuestions,

Recalling Security Council resolution 186(1964) of4 March 1964, by which the Council established theUnited Nations Peacekeeping Force in Cyprus, and thesubsequent resolutions by which the Council extendedthe mandate of the Force, the latest of which was reso-lution 1331(2000) of 13 December 2000,

Recalling also its resolution 54/270 of 15 June 2000on the financing of the Force,

Reaffirming the general principles underlying thefinancing of United Nations peacekeeping operationsas stated in General Assembly resolutions 1874(S-IV) of27 June 1963, 3101(XXVIII) of 11 December 1973 and55/235 of 23 December 2000,

Noting with appreciation that voluntary contributionshave been made to the Force by certain Governments,

Noting that voluntary contributions were insufficientto cover all the costs of the Force, including those in-curred by troop-contributing Governments prior to 16June 1993, and regretting the absence of an adequateresponse to appeals for voluntary contributions, in-cluding that contained in the letter dated 17 May 1994from the Secretary-General to all Member States,

Mindful of the fact that it is essential to provide theForce with the necessary financial resources to enableit to fulfil its responsibilities under the relevant resolu-tions of the Security Council,

1. Takes note of the status of contributions to theUnited Nations Peacekeeping Force in Cyprus as of 30April 2001, including the contributions outstanding inthe amount of 20.3 million United States dollars, rep-resenting some 10.7 per cent of the total assessed con-tributions from 16 June 1993 to the period ending 15June 2001, notes that some 15.3 per cent of the MemberStates have paid their assessed contributions in full,and urges all other Member States concerned, in par-ticular those in arrears, to ensure payment of their out-standing assessed contributions;



4. Urges all other Member States to make every pos-sible effort to ensure payment of their assessed contri-butions to the Force in full and on time;



7. Also emphasizes that all peacekeeping missionsshall be provided with adequate resources for the effec-

tive and efficient discharge of their respective man-dates;

8. Reiterates its request to the Secretary-General tomake the fullest possible use of facilities and equip-ment at the United Nations Logistics Base at Brindisi,Italy, in order to minimize the costs of procurement forthe Force;


10. Requests the Secretary-General to take all neces-sary action to ensure that the Force is administeredwith a maximum of efficiency and economy;

11. Also requests the Secretary-General, in order toreduce the cost of employing General Service staff, tocontinue efforts to recruit local staff for the Forceagainst General Service posts, commensurate with therequirements of the Force;

12. Decides to appropriate to the Special Account forthe United Nations Peacekeeping Force in Cyprus theamount of 42,389,220 dollars gross (40,697,146 dollarsnet) for the maintenance of the Force for the periodfrom 1 July 2001 to 30 June 2002, inclusive of theamount of 1,240,621 dollars gross (1,088,767 dollarsnet) for the support account for peacekeeping opera-tions and the amount of 129,599 dollars gross (116,379dollars net) for the United Nations Logistics Base,a one-third share of this amount, equivalent to13,565,715 dollars, to be funded through voluntarycontributions from the Government of Cyprus, and anamount of 6.5 million dollars from the Government ofGreece, subject to the review by the Security Councilwith regard to the question of termination or continua-tion of the Force;

13. Decides also, taking into consideration the fund-ing through voluntary contributions from the Govern-ment of Cyprus of a one-third share of the cost of theForce, equivalent to 13,565,715 dollars, and of 6.5 mil-lion dollars from the Government of Greece, to appor-tion among Member States the amount of 22,323,505dollars gross (20,631,431 dollars net), the said amountto be apportioned at a monthly rate of 1,860,292 dol-lars gross (1,719,286 dollars net) in accordance with thelevels set out in General Assembly resolution 55/235, asadjusted by the Assembly in its resolution 55/236 of 23December 2000, and taking into account the scale of as-sessments for the years 2001 and 2002, as set out in itsresolution 55/5 B of 23 December 2000, subject to thereview by the Security Council with regard to the ques-tion of termination or continuation of the Force;

14. Decides further that, in accordance with the provi-sions of its resolution 973(X) of 15 December 1955,there shall be set off against the apportionment amongMember States, as provided for in paragraph 13 above,their respective share in the Tax Equalization Fund ofthe estimated staff assessment income of 1,692,074 dol-lars approved for the Force for the period from 1 July2001 to 30 June 2002;

15. Decides that, taking into consideration the fund-ing through voluntary contributions from the Govern-ment of Cyprus of a one-third share of the cost of theForce, equivalent to 14,630,809 dollars, and of 6.5 mil-lion dollars from the Government of Greece, for Mem-ber States that have fulfilled their financial obligations



to the Force, there shall be set off against the apportion-ment, as provided for in paragraph 13 above, theirrespective share of the amount of 280,800 dollars gross(261,400 dollars net) of the unencumbered balance of523,400 dollars gross (504,000 dollars net) in respect ofthe period ending 30 June 2000, in accordance with thecompositions of groups set out in paragraphs 3 and 4 ofGeneral Assembly resolution 43/232 of 1 March 1989,as adjusted by the Assembly in its subsequent relevantresolutions and decisions for the ad hoc apportion-ment of peacekeeping appropriations, the latest ofwhich were resolution 52/230 of 31 March 1998 and de-cisions 54/456 to 54/458 of 23 December 1999 for theperiod 1998-2000, and taking into account the scale ofassessments for the year 2000, as set out in its resolu-tions 52/215 A of 22 December 1997 and 54/237 A of 23December 1999;

16. Decides also that, for Member States that have notfulfilled their financial obligations to the Force, theirshare of the unencumbered balance of 280,800 dollarsgross (261,400 dollars net) in respect of the period end-ing 30 June 2000 shall be set off against their outstand-ing obligations in accordance with the scheme set outin paragraph 15 above;

17. Decides further that 168,000 dollars shall be re-turned to the Government of Cyprus and 74,600 dol-lars shall be returned to the Government of Greece;

18. Decides to continue to maintain as separate theaccount established for the Force for the period prior to16 June 1993, invites Member States to make voluntarycontributions to that account, and requests theSecretary-General to continue his efforts in appealingfor voluntary contributions to the account;


20. Encourages the Secretary-General to continue totake additional measures to ensure the safety and secu-rity of all personnel under the auspices of the UnitedNations participating in the Force;

21. Invites voluntary contributions to the Force incash and in the form of services and supplies accepta-ble to the Secretary-General, to be administered, asappropriate, in accordance with the procedures andpractices established by the General Assembly;

22. Decides to include in the provisional agenda ofits fifty-sixth session the item entitled “Financing ofthe United Nations Peacekeeping Force in Cyprus”.

On 24 December, the Assembly decided thatthe item on UNFICYP’s financing would remainfor consideration at its resumed fifty-sixth (2002)session (decision 56/464) and that the FifthCommittee would continue consideration of theitem at that session (decision 56/458).

Other issues

Cooperation with OSCE

In response to General Assembly resolution55/179 [YUN 2000, p. 408], the Secretary-General

submitted a June report [A/56/125] describingcooperation between the United Nations and theOrganization for Security and Cooperation inEurope (OSCE).

During the year, a number of meetings tookplace between the United Nations and OSCE, in-cluding attendance by the OSCE Secretary-General at the fourth high-level meeting withheads of regional organizations in February on“Cooperation for peace-building” (see p. 56) andparticipation in the annual high-level tripartitemeeting of the United Nations, OSCE and theCouncil of Europe (Vienna, February) on thesubject of good governance.

The United Nations and OSCE continuedto practise a division of labour based on theircomparative advantages: the United Nations re-tained the lead in Abkhazia, Georgia, and inTajikistan; OSCE had the lead in the Republic ofMoldova, South Ossetia, Georgia, and in theresolution of the conflict in and around theNagorny-Karabakh region of Azerbaijan. Spe-cific efforts were also made to improve consulta-tion and cooperation in the field and between therespective headquarters, resulting in enhancedcoordination aimed at making better use of inter-national resources in the interests of the coun-tries being assisted. The report listed specificcooperation activities by UN departments andprogrammes.


On 21 December [meeting 91], the General As-sembly adopted resolution 56/216 [draft: A/56/L.66 & Add.1] by recorded vote (123-0-4) [agenda item21 (i)].

Cooperation between the United Nationsand the Organization for Security and

Cooperation in EuropeThe General Assembly,Recalling the framework for cooperation and co-

ordination between the United Nations and the Con-ference on Security and Cooperation in Europe, whichwas signed on 26 May 1993, as well as its resolutions oncooperation between the two organizations,

Recalling also the principles embodied in the Hel-sinki Final Act and in the declaration at the 1992 Hel-sinki Summit by the heads of State or Government ofthe participating States of the Conference on Securityand Cooperation in Europe of their understandingthat the Conference is a regional arrangement in thesense of Chapter VIII of the Charter of the UnitedNations and as such provides an important linkbetween European and global security,

Acknowledging the increasing contribution of theOrganization for Security and Cooperation in Europeto the establishment and maintenance of internationalpeace and security in its region through activities inearly warning and preventive diplomacy, includingthrough the activities of the High Commissioner on



National Minorities, crisis management and post-conflict rehabilitation, as well as arms control and dis-armament,

Recalling the Charter for European Security adoptedat the Summit in Istanbul, Turkey, in November 1999,which reaffirms the Organization for Security andCooperation in Europe as a primary organization forthe peaceful settlement of disputes within its regionand as a key instrument for early warning, conflict pre-vention, crisis management and post-conflict rehabili-tation,

Recalling also the special ties between the Organiza-tion for Security and Cooperation in Europe and theMediterranean Partners for Cooperation, as well as be-tween that organization and the Asian Partners forCooperation, Japan, the Republic of Korea and Thai-land, which have been enhanced further in 2001,

Underlining the continued importance of enhancedcooperation and coordination between the UnitedNations and the Organization for Security andCooperation in Europe,

1. Welcomes the report of the Secretary-General;2. Notes with appreciation the further improvement

of cooperation and coordination between the UnitedNations and its agencies and the Organization for Se-curity and Cooperation in Europe, including at thelevel of activities in the field;

3. Welcomes, in this context, the meetings of theSecretary-General of the United Nations with theChairman-in-Office and the Secretary-General of theOrganization for Security and Cooperation in Europe,the participation of the Chairman-in-Office at a meet-ing of the Security Council in January 2001, the partici-pation of the Director-General of the United NationsOffice at Geneva in a meeting of the Ministerial Coun-cil of the Organization for Security and Cooperation inEurope, which was held in Bucharest on 3 and 4 De-cember 2001, and the participation of high-levelUnited Nations representatives in meetings of the Or-ganization for Security and Cooperation in Europe;

4. Encourages further efforts of the Organizationfor Security and Cooperation in Europe to foster secu-rity and stability in its region through early warning,conflict prevention, crisis management and post-conflict rehabilitation, as well as through continuedpromotion of democracy, the rule of law, human rightsand fundamental freedoms;

5. Welcomes the documents of the meeting of theMinisterial Council in Bucharest confirming the deter-mination of the participating States of the Organiza-tion for Security and Cooperation in Europe tostrengthen and deepen their cooperation with a view toprotecting their citizens from new challenges to theirsecurity while safeguarding the rule of law, individualliberties and the right to equal justice under the law;

6. Commends the adoption of the decision and Ac-tion Plan on Terrorism, whereby participating Statespledged to reinforce and develop bilateral and multi-lateral cooperation among themselves, with the UnitedNations and with other international and regional or-ganizations in order to combat terrorism in all its formsand manifestations, wherever and by whomever com-mitted, to contribute to the fulfilment of internationalobligations as enshrined, inter alia, in Security Councilresolution 1373(2001) of 28 September 2001, to act inconformity with the purposes and principles of the

Charter of the United Nations, and to become partiesto all twelve United Nations conventions and protocolsrelated to terrorism as soon as possible;

7. Notes the review of the structures of the Organi-zation for Security and Cooperation in Europe, under-taken at the initiative of the Romanian Chairmanship,with the goal of strengthening its efficiency, and theadoption of decisions to foster its role as a forum forpolitical dialogue on issues of security and cooperationin Europe which promotes a more effective use of themeans and mechanisms of the Organization for Secu-rity and Cooperation in Europe to counter threats andchallenges to security and stability in its region;

8. Welcomes the decisions to strengthen cooperationin the economic and environmental sphere and to en-hance the role of the Organization for Security andCooperation in Europe in police-related activities;

9. Also welcomes the documents of the MinisterialCouncil meeting in Bucharest on enhancing the effec-tiveness of the human dimension meetings of the Or-ganization for Security and Cooperation in Europe,promoting tolerance and non-discrimination, combat-ing trafficking in human beings, improving the situa-tion of Roma and Sinti, and on promoting equal op-portunities for women and men and the continuedclose cooperation between the Organization for Secu-rity and Cooperation in Europe, the Office of theUnited Nations High Commissioner for Refugees andthe Office of the United Nations High Commissionerfor Human Rights;

10. Notes with appreciation the active involvement ofthe Organization for Security and Cooperation inEurope in Albania, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Croatia,the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia and the formerYugoslav Republic of Macedonia and its commitmentto continue to contribute substantially to conflict pre-vention, crisis management, and post-conflict stabiliza-tion in the region, thereby fostering peace and stabilityin the area;

11. Welcomes the establishment and the work of theMission of the Organization for Security andCooperation in Europe to the Federal Republic ofYugoslavia to assist further progress in the consolida-tion of democracy, the strengthening of the rule of lawand respect for human rights and fundamental free-doms, including the rights of persons belonging tonational minorities;

12. Expresses its appreciation for the contribution bythe Organization for Security and Cooperation inEurope to implementing Security Council resolution1244(1999) of 10 June 1999, in particular for its sub-stantial role in the preparation and organization of theKosovo-wide election on 17 November 2001, in view ofthe consolidation of stability and prosperity in Kosovo,Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, on the basis of sub-stantial autonomy, respecting the sovereignty and terri-torial integrity of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia,pending a final settlement, in accordance with resolu-tion 1244(1999);

13. Salutes the commitment of participating Statesof the Organization for Security and Cooperation inEurope to the sovereignty, territorial integrity and uni-tary character of the former Yugoslav Republic ofMacedonia and their offer to assist and supportstrongly the full and timely implementation of theFramework Agreement concluded on 13 August 2001,



including the programmes on police training andreform, media and inter-ethnic relations;

14. Supports the priorities of the work of the Organi-zation for Security and Cooperation in Europe for thecontinuous development of civil society and for in-creasing local ownership of the reform process in Bos-nia and Herzegovina;

15. Commends the efforts to improve thecoordination and efficiency of international engage-ment in the field of civilian implementation of the Day-ton/Paris peace accords, as well as a timely decision onthe best options for the succession of the UnitedNations International Police Task Force to allow for asmooth and comprehensive transition;

16. Underlines the importance of regional co-operation as a means of fostering good-neighbourly re-lations, stability and economic development, welcomesthe implementation of the Stability Pact for South-Eastern Europe under the auspices of the Organizationfor Security and Cooperation in Europe as an im-portant long-term and comprehensive initiative topromote good-neighbourly relations, stability andeconomic development, and also welcomes thecommitment of participating States of the Organiza-tion for Security and Cooperation in Europe to contrib-ute further to the goals of the Stability Pact;

17. Notes the efforts undertaken in 2001 by the Re-public of Moldova and the mediators of the Organiza-tion for Security and Cooperation in Europe, the Rus-sian Federation and Ukraine towards negotiation for acomprehensive political settlement of the Transdnies-trian issue, based on full respect of the sovereignty andterritorial integrity of the Republic of Moldova, wel-comes the fulfilment by the Russian Federation, aheadof the agreed time, of the commitments undertaken atthe summit of the Organization for Security andCooperation in Europe held in Istanbul, Turkey, in1999 on the withdrawal and disposal of the equipmentlimited by the Treaty on Conventional Armed Forces inEurope located in the Transdniestrian region of theRepublic of Moldova by the end of 2001, and encour-ages the timely fulfilment of other commitments con-cerning the Republic of Moldova undertaken by theparticipating States of the Organization for Securityand Cooperation in Europe in Istanbul in 1999;

18. Welcomes the developments in the peace processin the Tshkhinvali region/South Ossetia, Georgia, andthe steps to reduce the quantities of small arms andlight weapons in that region, as well as the progressmade in 2001 towards meeting the commitments madein Istanbul on the future of Russian forces in Georgia,including the closure of the Russian base at Vazianiand the withdrawal of the equipment from the Russianbase at Gudauta, encourages the implementation of theother Istanbul commitments, and with regard toAbkhazia, Georgia, calls for the resumption of a con-structive dialogue aimed at achieving a comprehensivesettlement, including a definition of the political statusof Abkhazia as a sovereign entity within the State ofGeorgia;

19. Acknowledges the significant contribution to sta-bility and confidence in the region made by the bordermonitoring operation of the Organization for Securityand Cooperation in Europe along the border betweenGeorgia and the Chechen Republic of the Russian Fed-eration;

20. Notes with satisfaction the engagement of the Or-ganization for Security and Cooperation in Europe to-wards cooperation with the five participating States ofCentral Asia, which has continued to grow in all dimen-sions, thus contributing to stability and prosperity inthe region, as well as the commitment of the Organiza-tion for Security and Cooperation in Europe to assist inaddressing specific threats to stability and security forthe Central Asian participating States, and appreciatesthe valuable contribution of the Bishkek InternationalConference on enhancing security and stability in Cen-tral Asia, held on 13 and 14 December 2001, to address-ing those problems, which are shared concerns amongthe participating States of the Organization for Secu-rity and Cooperation in Europe;

21. Fully supports the activities of the Organizationfor Security and Cooperation in Europe to achieve apeaceful solution to the conflict in and around theNagorny-Karabakh region of the Republic of Azerbai-jan, and welcomes cooperation between the UnitedNations and the Organization for Security andCooperation in Europe in this regard;

22. Expresses deep concern at the failure to achieve asettlement of the Nagorny-Karabakh conflict despitethe intensified dialogue between the parties and the ac-tive support of the Co-Chairmen of the Minsk Groupof the Organization for Security and Cooperation inEurope, reaffirms that the prompt resolution of thatprotracted conflict will contribute to lasting peace, se-curity, stability and cooperation in the South Caucasusregion, reiterates the importance of continuing thepeace dialogue, calls upon the sides to continue theirefforts to achieve an early resolution of the conflictbased on the norms and principles of international law,encourages the parties to explore further measuresthat would enhance mutual confidence and trust, in-cluding the release of prisoners of war, welcomes thecommitment of the parties to the ceasefire and toachieving a peaceful and comprehensive settlement,and encourages the parties to continue their efforts,with the active support of the Co-Chairmen, to reach ajust and enduring settlement;

23. Decides to include in the provisional agenda ofits fifty-seventh session the item entitled “Cooperationbetween the United Nations and the Organization forSecurity and Cooperation in Europe”, and requests theSecretary-General to submit to the General Assemblyat its fifty-seventh session a report on cooperation be-tween the United Nations and the Organization for Se-curity and Cooperation in Europe in implementationof the present resolution.RECORDED VOTE ON RESOLUTION 56/216:

In favour: Albania, Algeria, Andorra, Argentina, Austria, Azerbaijan,Bahamas, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Belgium, Benin, Bhutan, Bolivia, Bosniaand Herzegovina, Brazil, Brunei Darussalam, Bulgaria, Burkina Faso,Cambodia, Canada, Chile, China, Colombia, Costa Rica, Côte d’Ivoire,Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Djibouti, Dominica, Ecuador,Egypt, El Salvador, Equatorial Guinea, Eritrea, Estonia, Ethiopia, Finland,France, Gabon, Georgia, Germany, Ghana, Greece, Grenada, Guate-mala, Hungary, Iceland, India, Indonesia, Iran, Ireland, Israel, Italy,Jamaica, Japan, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Kenya, Kuwait, Latvia, Lebanon,Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malay-sia, Maldives, Malta, Mauritius, Mexico, Monaco, Mongolia, Morocco,Mozambique, Myanmar, Namibia, Nepal, Netherlands, New Zealand,Nicaragua, Norway, Oman, Pakistan, Panama, Papua New Guinea, Para-guay, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Portugal, Qatar, Republic of Korea,Republic of Moldova, Romania, Russian Federation, San Marino, SaudiArabia,Senegal,Singapore,Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain,SriLanka,Sudan,Suriname, Sweden, Syrian Arab Republic, Thailand, The former Yugo-slav Republic of Macedonia, Togo, Tunisia, Turkey, Uganda, Ukraine,



United Kingdom, United States, Uruguay, Venezuela, Yemen, Yugosla-via, Zambia.

Against: None.Abstaining: Armenia, Belarus, South Africa, United Republic of Tan-

zania.

Before the adoption of the resolution, a re-corded vote (34-1-85) was taken on an amend-ment adding paragraph 21, introduced by Azer-baijan [A/56/L.67], stating specifically thatNagorny Karabakh was a region of Azerbaijan.

Cooperation with the Council of Europe

In response to resolution 55/3 [YUN 2000, p. 410],the Secretary-General submitted an August re-port on cooperation between the United Nationsand the Council of Europe [A/56/302].

The Secretary-General reported that co-operation continued through direct contact be-tween the secretariats of the two organizations,the Council’s observer status in the General As-sembly and the cooperation agreements betweenthe Council and various UN specialized agenciesand bodies, and meetings of the Secretaries-General of the two organizations. He highlightedspecific cooperation activities between the Coun-cil and UN programmes and the Secretariat.

The Secretary-General observed that both or-ganizations continued to have shared intereststhat lent themselves to cooperation in such areasas conflict prevention, post-conflict peace-building and confidence-building measures forincreasing tolerance and understanding betweenpeople belonging to different ethnic groups, es-pecially those within countries in crisis. He rec-ommended that such cooperation be reported tothe Assembly every other year, the next report tobe submitted to its fifty-eighth (2003) session,and that the item be included in that session’sprovisional agenda.


On 7 December [meeting 80], the General As-sembly adopted resolution 56/43 [draft: A/56/L.31& Add.1] without vote [agenda item 21 (c)].

Cooperation between the United Nationsand the Council of Europe

The General Assembly,Recalling the Agreement between the Council of

Europe and the Secretariat of the United Nationssigned on 15 December 1951 and the Arrangement onCooperation and Liaison between the secretariats ofthe United Nations and the Council of Europe of 19November 1971,

Acknowledging the contribution of the Council ofEurope to the protection and strengthening of democ-racy, human rights and fundamental freedoms and therule of law on the European continent, including its ac-tivities against racism and intolerance, the promotion

of gender equality, social development and a commoncultural heritage,

Acknowledging also that, with its significant expertisein the field of human rights, democratic institutionsand the rule of law, the Council of Europe is contribut-ing to conflict prevention, confidence-building andlong-term post-conflict peace-building through politi-cal, legal and institutional reform,

Stressing the importance of adherence to the stand-ards and principles of the Council of Europe and itscontribution to the solution of conflicts throughout thewhole of Europe,

Acknowledging the contribution of the Council ofEurope to the development of international law, interalia, international criminal law,

Noting the increasing openness of the Council ofEurope, through its legal instruments, to the participa-tion of States of other regions,

1. Welcomes the report of the Secretary-General;2. Notes with appreciation the further improvement

of cooperation and coordination between the UnitedNations and its agencies and the Council of Europe,both at the level of headquarters and in the field;

3. Welcomes the increasingly close cooperation be-tween the Council of Europe, the Office of the UnitedNations High Commissioner for Human Rights andthe Office of the United Nations High Commissionerfor Refugees;

4. Welcomes also the efforts of the Council of Europeto assist States in the ratification and implementationof the Rome Statute of the International CriminalCourt, in particular the most recent meeting, held inStrasbourg, France, on 13 and 14 September 2001;

5. Expresses its appreciation to the Council of Europefor its contribution to the World Conference againstRacism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and Re-lated Intolerance, held in Durban, South Africa, from31 August to 8 September 2001;

6. Welcomes the contribution of the Council ofEurope to the preparations for the special session of theGeneral Assembly on children, to be held in 2002;

7. Commends strongly the contribution of the Councilof Europe to international action against terrorism, asdefined by the Committee of Ministers of the Councilin the conclusions of its session of 7 and 8 November2001 in Strasbourg, taking into account Security Coun-cil resolutions 1368(2001) of 12 September 2001 and1373(2001) of 28 September 2001, including the intensi-fication of legal cooperation to combat terrorism;

8. Welcomes the participation of the Council ofEurope in the implementation of Security Councilresolution 1244(1999) of 10 June 1999, in itscooperation with the United Nations Interim Adminis-tration Mission in Kosovo, notably with regard to thereform of the judiciary, the promotion and protectionof human rights, including the rights of minorities,property rights, population registration, childhoodand youth programmes, education policies and theprotection and restoration of cultural heritage;

9. Commends the role of the Council of Europe inthe capacity-building programme of the UnitedNations Interim Administration Mission in Kosovo, es-pecially with regard to the electoral process in prep-aration for the Kosovo Assembly elections on 17 No-vember 2001;



10. Welcomes the activities of the Council of Europeaimed at fulfilling the role assigned to it, under theGeneral Framework Agreement for Peace in Bosniaand Herzegovina, with regard to the protection andpromotion of human rights, and judicial and prisonreform;

11. Welcomes also the major contribution of theCouncil of Europe to the Stability Pact for South-Eastern Europe, launched at the initiative of the Euro-pean Union, and to the development of regional proj-ects to support its aims;

12. Welcomes further the active role of the Council ofEurope in the tripartite meetings between the UnitedNations, the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe and the Council of Europe;

13. Requests the Secretary-General to continue ex-ploring, with the Chairman of the Committee of Min-isters and the Secretary-General of the Council ofEurope, possibilities for further enhancement ofcooperation, information exchange and coordinationbetween the United Nations and the Council ofEurope;

14. Decides to include in the provisional agenda of itsfifty-seventh session the sub-item entitled“Cooperation between the United Nations and theCouncil of Europe”, and requests the Secretary-General to submit to the General Assembly at its fifty-seventh session a report on cooperation between theUnited Nations and the Council of Europe in imple-mentation of the present resolution.

Strengthening of security and cooperationin the Mediterranean

In response to General Assembly resolution55/38 [YUN 2000, p. 411], the Secretary-Generalsubmitted in July [A/56/153] replies received fromAlgeria, Mexico and Sweden, on behalf of the EU,to his note verbale requesting their views on waysto strengthen security and cooperation in theMediterranean region.


On 29 November [meeting 68], the General As-sembly, on the recommendation of the First (Dis-armament and International Security) Commit-tee [A/56/541], adopted resolution 56/29 withoutvote [agenda item 79].

Strengthening of security and cooperationin the Mediterranean region

The General Assembly,Recalling its previous resolutions on the subject, in-

cluding resolution 55/38 of 20 November 2000,Reaffirming the primary role of the Mediterranean

countries in strengthening and promoting peace, secu-rity and cooperation in the Mediterranean region,

Bearing in mind all the previous declarations andcommitments, as well as all the initiatives taken by theriparian countries at the recent summits, ministerialmeetings and various forums concerning the questionof the Mediterranean region,

Recognizing the indivisible character of security inthe Mediterranean and that the enhancement of

cooperation among Mediterranean countries with aview to promoting the economic and social develop-ment of all peoples of the region will contribute signifi-cantly to stability, peace and security in the region,

Recognizing also the efforts made so far and the deter-mination of the Mediterranean countries to intensifythe process of dialogue and consultations with a view toresolving the problems existing in the Mediterraneanregion and to eliminating the causes of tension and theconsequent threat to peace and security, and theirgrowing awareness of the need for further joint effortsto strengthen economic, social, cultural and environ-mental cooperation in the region,

Recognizing further that prospects for closer Euro-Mediterranean cooperation in all spheres can be en-hanced by positive developments worldwide, in par-ticular in Europe, in the Maghreb and in the MiddleEast,

Reaffirming the responsibility of all States to contrib-ute to the stability and prosperity of the Mediterra-nean region and their commitment to respecting thepurposes and principles of the Charter of the UnitedNations, as well as the provisions of the Declaration onPrinciples of International Law concerning FriendlyRelations and Cooperation among States in accordancewith the Charter of the United Nations,

Noting the peace negotiations in the Middle East,which should be of a comprehensive nature and repre-sent an appropriate framework for the peaceful settle-ment of contentious issues in the region,

Expressing its concern at the persistent tension andcontinuing military activities in parts of the Mediterra-nean that hinder efforts to strengthen security andcooperation in the region,

Taking note of the report of the Secretary-General,1. Reaffirms that security in the Mediterranean is

closely linked to European security as well as to interna-tional peace and security;

2. Expresses its satisfaction at the continuing effortsby Mediterranean countries to contribute actively tothe elimination of all causes of tension in the regionand to the promotion of just and lasting solutions tothe persistent problems of the region through peace-ful means, thus ensuring the withdrawal of foreignforces of occupation and respecting the sovereignty,independence and territorial integrity of all countriesof the Mediterranean and the right of peoplesto self-determination, and therefore calls for full ad-herence to the principles of non-interference, non-intervention, non-use of force or threat of use offorce and the inadmissibility of the acquisition of ter-ritory by force, in accordance with the Charter andthe relevant resolutions of the United Nations;

3. Commends the Mediterranean countries for theirefforts in meeting common challenges through coordi-nated overall responses, based on a spirit of multilat-eral partnership, towards the general objective of turn-ing the Mediterranean basin into an area of dialogue,exchanges and cooperation, guaranteeing peace, sta-bility and prosperity, and encourages them to strength-en such efforts through, inter alia, a lasting multilateraland action-oriented cooperative dialogue among Statesof the region;

4. Recognizes that the elimination of the economicand social disparities in levels of development andother obstacles, as well as respect and greater under-



standing among cultures in the Mediterranean areawill contribute to enhancing peace, security andcooperation among Mediterranean countries throughthe existing forums;

5. Calls upon all States of the Mediterranean regionthat have not yet done so to adhere to all the multilater-ally negotiated legal instruments related to the field ofdisarmament and non-proliferation, thus creating thenecessary conditions for strengthening peace andcooperation in the region;

6. Encourages all States of the region to favour thenecessary conditions for strengthening the confidence-building measures among them by promoting genuineopenness and transparency on all military matters, byparticipating, inter alia, in the United Nations systemfor the standardized reporting of military expendi-tures and by providing accurate data and informationto the United Nations Register of Conventional Arms;

7. Encourages the Mediterranean countries tostrengthen further their cooperation in combating ter-rorism in all its forms and manifestations, taking intoaccount the relevant resolutions of the United Nations,and in combating international crime and illicit armstransfers and illicit drug production, consumption andtrafficking, which pose a serious threat to peace, secu-rity and stability in the region and therefore to the im-provement of the current political, economic and socialsituation and which jeopardize friendly relationsamong States, hinder the development of internationalcooperation and result in the destruction of humanrights, fundamental freedoms and the democraticbasis of pluralistic society;

8. Requests the Secretary-General to submit a reporton means to strengthen security and cooperation in theMediterranean region;

9. Decides to include in the provisional agenda of itsfifty-seventh session the item entitled “Strengtheningof security and cooperation in the Mediterraneanregion”.

Stability and development inSouth-Eastern Europe

On 23 February [A/55/809-S/2001/172], theformer Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia (FYROM)submitted to the Secretary-General the text of theSummit Declaration of the Heads of State andGovernment of South-East European Countriesat their fourth meeting (Skopje, 23 February) andthe Action Plan for Regional EconomicCooperation.

On 10 October [A/56/466], Bulgaria trans-mitted the Declaration of Solidarity adopted bythe heads of State of Albania, Bulgaria, Croatia,Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Romania, Slovakia,Slovenia and FYROM during the Summit meetingof NATO candidate countries (Sofia, 5 October).


On 29 November [meeting 68], the General As-sembly, on the recommendation of the FirstCommittee [A/56/530], adopted resolution 56/18without vote [agenda item 68].

Maintenance of international security—good-neighbourliness, stability and

development in South-Eastern EuropeThe General Assembly,Recalling the purposes and principles of the Charter

of the United Nations and the Final Act of the Confer-ence on Security and Cooperation in Europe, signed atHelsinki on 1 August 1975,

Recalling also the United Nations Millennium Decla-ration,

Recalling further its resolutions 48/84 B of 16 Decem-ber 1993, 50/80 B of 12 December 1995, 51/55 of 10 De-cember 1996, 52/48 of 9 December 1997, 53/71 of 4 De-cember 1998, 54/62 of 1 December 1999 and 55/27 of20 November 2000,

Convinced of the necessity of enhancing the overallconflict prevention and resolution capability of theUnited Nations system and other relevant regionalorganizations to prevent the outbreak of conflicts,

Emphasizing the crucial importance of the full imple-mentation of Security Council resolution 1244(1999)of 10 June 1999 on Kosovo, Federal Republic of Yugo-slavia, and stressing, inter alia, the role and responsibil-ity of the United Nations Interim Administration Mis-sion in Kosovo, supported by the Organization forSecurity and Cooperation in Europe and the EuropeanUnion, and of the Kosovo Force in that regard, as wellas the importance of the implementation of SecurityCouncil resolutions 1345(2001) of 21 March 2001 and1371(2001) of 26 September 2001,

Commending the significant progress made by thepeople and the authorities of the Federal Republic ofYugoslavia towards establishing democracy and the im-portant steps taken to cooperate with the InternationalTribunal for the Prosecution of Persons Responsiblefor Serious Violations of International HumanitarianLaw Committed in the Territory of the Former Yugo-slavia since 1991,

Recalling the Stability Pact for South-EasternEurope, and stressing the importance of the imple-mentation of its objectives, with emphasis on regionalcooperation,

Noting the importance of the activities of interna-tional organizations, such as the European Union, theOrganization for Security and Cooperation in Europeand the Council of Europe, as well as the contributionof the Central European Initiative and the Black SeaEconomic Cooperation, for the implementation of theStability Pact,

Welcoming the normalization of relations amongall States of the Balkan region, and noting, in thisrespect, the Agreement for the delineation of theborderline between the former Yugoslav Republic ofMacedonia and the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia,signed at Skopje on 23 February 2001, as well as there-establishment of diplomatic relations between Alba-nia and the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia,

Welcoming also the agreement of 29 June 2001 on suc-cession issues among the States successors to the formerSocialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia,

Welcoming further the signing of stabilization and as-sociation agreements and/or European agreements be-tween the countries of the region and the EuropeanUnion and its member States,

Reiterating the importance of the South-East Euro-pean Cooperation Process and its contribution to secu-



rity, stability and good-neighbourly relations inSouth-Eastern Europe, and recalling in particular theSummit Declaration and the Action Plan for RegionalEconomic Cooperation, adopted by the heads of Stateand Government of the participating and observercountries of the South-East European CooperationProcess at Skopje on 23 February 2001,

Emphasizing the crucial importance of strengtheningregional efforts in South-Eastern Europe on arms con-trol, demining, disarmament and confidence-buildingmeasures, and concerned that, in spite of the ongoingefforts, the illicit trade in small arms and light weaponsin all its aspects persists,

Mindful of the importance of national and interna-tional activities of all relevant organizations aimed atthe creation of peace, security, stability, democracy,cooperation and economic development and the ob-servance of human rights and good-neighbourliness inSouth-Eastern Europe,

Taking note of the Declaration of Solidarity adoptedby the heads of State participating in the Summit Meet-ing of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization candi-date countries held at Sofia on 5 October 2001,

Reaffirming its determination that all nations shouldlive together in peace with one another as good neigh-bours,

1. Reaffirms the need for full observance of theCharter of the United Nations;

2. Calls upon all States, the relevant internationalorganizations and the competent organs of the UnitedNations to respect the principles of territorial integrityand sovereignty of all States and the inviolability of in-ternational borders, to continue to take measures in ac-cordance with the Charter and the commitments of theOrganization for Security and Cooperation in Europeand through further development of regional arrange-ments, as appropriate, to eliminate threats to interna-tional peace and security and to help to prevent con-flicts in South-Eastern Europe, which can lead to theviolent disintegration of States;

3. Reaffirms the urgency of consolidating South-Eastern Europe as a region of peace, security, stability,democracy, cooperation and economic developmentand for the promotion of good-neighbourliness andthe observance of human rights, thus contributing tothe maintenance of international peace and securityand enhancing the prospects for sustained develop-ment and prosperity for all peoples in the region as anintegral part of Europe, and recognizes the role of theUnited Nations, the Organization for Security andCooperation in Europe and the European Union inpromoting regional disarmament;

4. Calls upon all participants in the Stability Pact forSouth-Eastern Europe, as well as all concerned interna-tional organizations, to continue to support the effortsof the States of South-Eastern Europe towards regionalstability and cooperation so as to enable them to pursuesustainable development and integration into Euro-pean structures;

5. Calls upon all States and relevant internationalorganizations to contribute to the full implementationof Security Council resolution 1244(1999) on Kosovo,Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, as well as Council reso-lutions 1345(2001) and 1371(2001);

6. Rejects the use of violence in pursuit of politicalaims, and stresses that only peaceful political solutions

can assure a stable and democratic future for South-Eastern Europe;

7. Welcomes the signing of the Framework Agree-ment at Ohrid, the former Yugoslav Republic of Mace-donia, on 13 August 2001, and supports its full andtimelyimplementationbythepartiestotheAgreement;

8. Stresses the importance of good-neighbourlinessand the development of friendly relations amongStates, and calls upon all States to resolve their disputeswith other States by peaceful means, in accordancewith the Charter;

9. Urges the strengthening of relations among theStates of South-Eastern Europe on the basis of respectfor international law and agreements, in accordancewith the principles of good-neighbourliness and mu-tual respect;

10. Recognizes the efforts of the international com-munity, and welcomes in particular the assistance al-ready provided by the European Union, other con-tributors and the Stability Pact for South-EasternEurope in promoting the long-term process of demo-cratic and economic development of the region;

11. Stresses that the rapprochement of the South-Eastern European States with the European Union willfavourably influence the security, political and eco-nomic situation in the region, as well as good-neighbourly relations among the States;

12. Stresses also the importance of regional effortsaimed at preventing conflicts that endanger the main-tenance of international peace and security and, in thisregard, notes with satisfaction the role of the Multina-tional Peace Force for South-Eastern Europe;

13. Emphasizes the importance of continuous re-gional efforts and intensified dialogue in South-Eastern Europe aimed at arms control, disarmamentand confidence-building measures as well as strength-ening cooperation and undertaking appropriate meas-ures at the national, subregional and regional levels toprevent and suppress acts of terrorism;

14. Welcomes the adoption, on 18 July 2001, of theConcluding Document of the negotiations under arti-cle V of annex 1.B to the General Framework Agree-ment for Peace in Bosnia and Herzegovina;

15. Recognizes the seriousness of the problem ofanti-personnel mines in some parts of South-EasternEurope, welcomes, in this context, the efforts of the in-ternational community in support of mine action, andencourages States to join and support these efforts;

16. Urges all States to take effective measures againstthe illicit trade in small arms and light weapons in all itsaspects and to help programmes and projects aimed atthe collection and safe destruction of surplus stocks ofsmall arms and light weapons, and stresses the impor-tance of closer cooperation among States, inter alia, incrime prevention, combating terrorism, illicit trade inpeople, organized crime, drug trafficking and money-laundering;

17. Calls upon all States and the relevant interna-tional organizations to communicate to the Secretary-General their views on the subject of the present reso-lution;

18. Decides to include in the provisional agenda ofits fifty-seventh session the item entitled “Maintenanceof international security—good-neighbourliness, sta-bility and development in South-Eastern Europe”.



Documents

cdn.un.orgcdn.un.org/unyearbook/yun/chapter_pdf/2001YUN/2001_P1_CH5.pdf · Chapter V Political and security questions Europe and the Mediterranean In2001,therewereencouragingsignsthatanum-ber